RV6 vs. RV7

N

Non Compos Mentis

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
319
Display Name
Display name:
Non Compos Mentis
What specific changes were made when Van's upgraded the 6 to the 7?

Is the RV7 much better than the 6?

Just kicking some ideas around.

.....and try to remember, kids-
This is about the airplanes, not about the "typical" RV pilot's judgement and skills.
 
The -7 is a pre-punched kit meaning the average builder can build a more dimensionally accurate airplane.

Beyond that, the 7 has slightly more span, a slightly taller and longer cabin (but not wider) and the -7 has a higher gross weight which translates to more useful load. Also, the -7 has 42 gallons of fuel capacity vs the -6's 38 gallons.

The RV-6 will have a slightly sportier control feel.
 
Kyle hit the highlights. I'd invite you to join us over on Van's Air Force, www.vansairforce.net to learn more about all things RV.
 
kyleb said:
The -7 is a pre-punched kit meaning the average builder can build a more dimensionally accurate airplane.

Beyond that, the 7 has slightly more span, a slightly taller and longer cabin (but not wider) and the -7 has a higher gross weight which translates to more useful load. Also, the -7 has 42 gallons of fuel capacity vs the -6's 38 gallons.

The RV-6 will have a slightly sportier control feel.
Click to expand...

The -7 also had a slightly redesigned tail and heavier control skins to solve some cracking issues, IIRC.
 
Thanks, guys.

It seems as asking prices for completed airplanes For Sale are quite a bit different between the 6 and the 7. Not sure if the airplanes are that much better, or if it's primarily because 7s tend to have fancier avionics since so much more is available today for the homebuilt crowd.

Still kicking ideas around......
 
LDJones said:
The -7 also had a slightly redesigned tail and heavier control skins to solve some cracking issues, IIRC.
Click to expand...

6's came with two different skin thicknesses on control surfaces, depending on the vintage of the kit. Some were 0.016", some were 0.020". Probably not a deciding factor. The skins on the 7 are the 0.020".
 
kyleb said:
6's came with two different skin thicknesses on control surfaces, depending on the vintage of the kit. Some were 0.016", some were 0.020". Probably not a deciding factor. The skins on the 7 are the 0.020".
Click to expand...

True....I started on a six, but paid extra for .020 control skins.

I would not hesitate to buy a -6 if the workmanship is good and the price is right. If the control surface cracking issue appears, it's not that big a deal to replace them with new ones using .020 skins. A good builder can knock out those parts in pretty short order.
 
If your not real tall the 6 is the better buy everything else being equal. 6s go for 10-20k less than an equally equipped 7. The IO360 parallel valve with a C/S prop is the best combination. The extra 100lbs or so of useful load is nice in the 7. I have owned and built a 7 and have flown several 6s and 7s. Don
 
Non Compos Mentis said:
Thanks, guys.

It seems as asking prices for completed airplanes For Sale are quite a bit different between the 6 and the 7. Not sure if the airplanes are that much better, or if it's primarily because 7s tend to have fancier avionics since so much more is available today for the homebuilt crowd.

Still kicking ideas around......
Click to expand...


Kyle hit it on the head as usual. Nothing wrong with the -6 at all, just that there are a lot of them, and a lot for sale. It is the most successful model of all time for RV's. A cheap way to get into RV's. They fly great, own one for a summer and sold it. Kinda miss the old gal. :redface:
 
Non Compos Mentis said:
What is "real tall"?

I'm 6'-1" or thereabouts.
Click to expand...

Depends on how the builder set it up. I'm 6' and I'm tight in most 6s ( I've flown 10 different 6s ) my knees are up against the bottom of the panel and my head is close to the canopy. That is with fairly thin cushions. Not uncomfortable but tight. The 7 is an inch deeper, the canopy is an inch higher and the instrument panel is about 11/2" further forward. Makes a big difference in cockpit space. Again, other than that they are about the same. Don
 
yakdriver said:
Depends on how the builder set it up. I'm 6' and I'm tight in most 6s ( I've flown 10 different 6s ) my knees are up against the bottom of the panel and my head is close to the canopy. That is with fairly thin cushions. Not uncomfortable but tight. The 7 is an inch deeper, the canopy is an inch higher and the instrument panel is about 11/2" further forward. Makes a big difference in cockpit space. Again, other than that they are about the same. Don
Click to expand...

Interesting. I've had a normally proportioned 6'3 buddy in my -6 for a 7 hour X/C and he wasn't bumping the canopy with his head or hitting the panel with his knees.
 
kyleb said:
Interesting. I've had a normally proportioned 6'3 buddy in my -6 for a 7 hour X/C and he wasn't bumping the canopy with his head or hitting the panel with his knees.
Click to expand...

Probably depends on the configuration. I'm 6'7" and my dad is 6'5". When we put the seats in the -7, we didn't even install the forward two sets of piano hinges and we mounted the 'back' hinge as far back as possible and the rudder pedals as far forward as possible. We also don't have any extra lip on the bottom of the instrument panel and we have thinner-than-standard seat cushions (when 'normal' sized people ride with us, we have an extra ~2" cushion we put under the main cushion).

Even with all those 'adjustments', I still have to duck when sliding the canopy forward. Once I'm in the 'bubble', I'm fine, though.
 
kyleb said:
Interesting. I've had a normally proportioned 6'3 buddy in my -6 for a 7 hour X/C and he wasn't bumping the canopy with his head or hitting the panel with his knees.
Click to expand...

Total height isn't the only variable: length of torso makes a big difference. I'm only 5'11" but I sit "tall in the saddle". In a C-172 I lower the seat all the way down. (The chief instructor says he can always tell when I've been flying.).

I can't speak to the fit of an RV since I've never been in an RV of any number but would love the chance someday.

John
 
jsstevens said:
Total height isn't the only variable: length of torso makes a big difference. I'm only 5'11" but I sit "tall in the saddle". In a C-172 I lower the seat all the way down. (The chief instructor says he can always tell when I've been flying.).

John
Click to expand...

Therefore my comment about my "normally proportioned" 6'3" friend.
 
CJones said:
Even with all those 'adjustments', I still have to duck when sliding the canopy forward. Once I'm in the 'bubble', I'm fine, though.
Click to expand...

I'm 5'7" and have the cushions set so I have to do the "duck to close" drill too. That's the way to maximize over the nose sightlines.
 
Question: Can you tell the difference between a -6 and a -7 on the ramp from a distance? I like plane spotting as a pastime and mental game and I can't tell the difference between the two. I assume the differences are the same for the -4 and -8 too?
 
Dav8or said:
Question: Can you tell the difference between a -6 and a -7 on the ramp from a distance? I like plane spotting as a pastime and mental game and I can't tell the difference between the two. I assume the differences are the same for the -4 and -8 too?
Click to expand...

The 6 has a significantly smaller vertical fin that is much better aesthetically proportioned IMO. The 7's fin is taller and goofier looking, but does make the airplane spin slower, with a quicker recovery of a fully-developed spin. The 4 vs. 8 is much more distinctive.
 
The 7 rudder also has an aerodynamic counter balance at the top. You always have to duck when closing the slider canopy if you are sitting about the right height. The canopy is about 2" higher where it sits over your head. And yes you can find 6's that will fit a taller person but you are giving up a lot of cushion thickness compared to the 7. Don
 
Lots of talk of tall people, but what about the short ones? Would a 5' 0" pilot fare better in one or the other? What would need to be modded for rudder pedals, etc for it to work?
 
FORANE said:
Lots of talk of tall people, but what about the short ones? Would a 5' 0" pilot fare better in one or the other? What would need to be modded for rudder pedals, etc for it to work?
Click to expand...

I'm 5'5" and fly an RV-6 ... I have a cheapy 1.5" boat cushion under the regular seat cushion, a nice 2" foam cushion behind the regular back cushion, the seat/back adjusted all the way forward, and 2" rudder pedal extensions.

I could not sit any farther forward without eating the panel and impinging the stick. Additionally, sitting that far forward reduces my leverage on the manual flap handle too much and aggravates my rotator cuff.

I did not build the plane.

Another option would be move the rudder pedals and find a workaround that would ensure passenger comfort (short of shortening their legs).

All in all, I'm quite happy with the arrangement in my plane and wouldn't change a thing.
 
I'm 5'7" and fit my RV-6 very well. The rudder pedals are a perfect reach/fit for my short legs. The worst is visibility over the panel... I have to stretch up to see well over the nose when the tailwheel is on the ground but it's just one of those things you get accustomed to with practice.
 
yakdriver said:
The 7 rudder also has an aerodynamic counter balance at the top.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the tip! This is the easiest way to identify the two. I did notice the difference in vertical stabilizer size, but without the two planes side by side, or immersing yourself in all things RV everyday, it can be a tough call.
 
I have a -6a and it has a counterbalanced rudder. So this is not a sure way to tell them apart. -6 kits ordered after about 2000 have the new rudder.

The only way I can tell for sure, is the -6 spar goes to the center of the fuselage. This makes a peak when you look at the belly. The -7 has a flat belly.
 
mike d said:
I have a -6a and it has a counterbalanced rudder. So this is not a sure way to tell them apart. -6 kits ordered after about 2000 have the new rudder.

The only way I can tell for sure, is the -6 spar goes to the center of the fuselage. This makes a peak when you look at the belly. The -7 has a flat belly.
Click to expand...

Went back and tried looking for this peak. This is way too subtle for me! I'll have to just look for the counter balance, call it a -7 and be wrong, what maybe 20% of the time? Not too bad.:lol:

So, if your -6 was shipped with the counter balanced rudder, does it also have the larger vertical stabilizer?
 
Since this thread about the RV7 already exists, I just have one question.

Would the RV7 be suitable as a trainer for a first time pilot??
 
Capt.Crash'n'Burn said:
Since this thread about the RV7 already exists, I just have one question.

Would the RV7 be suitable as a trainer for a first time pilot??
Click to expand...


Yes, very much so.

I know a new pilot that have used it as his primary training aircraft, no problem. Finding a CFI to train him was the first issue, after the local CFI flew in the plane he was sold.
 
Last edited:
JoeSelch said:
I'm 5'5" and fly an RV-6 ... I have a cheapy 1.5" boat cushion under the regular seat cushion, a nice 2" foam cushion behind the regular back cushion, the seat/back adjusted all the way forward, and 2" rudder pedal extensions.

I could not sit any farther forward without eating the panel and impinging the stick. Additionally, sitting that far forward reduces my leverage on the manual flap handle too much and aggravates my rotator cuff.

I did not build the plane.

Another option would be move the rudder pedals and find a workaround that would ensure passenger comfort (short of shortening their legs).

All in all, I'm quite happy with the arrangement in my plane and wouldn't change a thing.
Click to expand...
Walt would be happy to hear that you're lovin your plane:yes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top