Van's RVers -- the New AppleHeads?

Jay Honeck

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
11,571
Location
Ingleside, TX
Display Name
Jay Honeck
Home Airfield
KTFP - Ingleside, TX
This year at Oshkosh, Mary and I seriously zoned in on the RV-8 line. Our goal, now that we've determined that this model is the one that might work for us, was to assess the seating position and flying qualities of the bird, with the intention of buying one in the next two years.

To that end, we hit the Van's tent early on. It was filled with fun goodies and gorgeous airplanes -- what's not to like? Then, the problems started stacking up.

Aggravation #1: When we got there, despite there being a large crowd, they weren't reserving test flight slots yet. Fine, I understand logistics, and the fact that the GIC of scheduling probably hadn't arrived yet. We would walk back the next day.

Aggravation #2: When we did arrive, the people behind the counter -- all volunteers, no doubt -- were not friendly. Now, I understand that these are all volunteers, and people tend to get crispy by the end of the week -- but this was Day 1. Their attitude was "You're glad we're here." Totally unimpressive.

Aggravation #3: No RV-8 rides. When I asked why their response was curt: "The RV-7 has the same wing -- you can fly that one."

Since the stated purpose of our mission was as much to assess seating position (Mary is 5' tall, I'm 6' tall, so not all aircraft work for both of us, and sitting in one on the ground is NOT the same as flying one.), this answer was a non-starter for us.

Aggravation #4: When I told them that riding in an RV-7 would be fun and fine, but wouldn't help us make a purchase decision, their response was: "If you don't want to buy one after a test flight, you'll be the first one, ever."

Although I appreciate their enthusiasm, this answer bordered on arrogance, and I've heard this all before -- from people who have swallowed the Steve Jobs koolaid. Those folks raved so much about the iPad that I finally fell for it and bought one -- and have been completely, utterly unimpressed. (My iPad is for sale, BTW. First $225 takes it. The Nexus 7 is twice the product, at 1/3rd the price.)

Not gonna fall for that again. No test flight, no sale.

Aggravation #5: At the agreed-upon time for said test flight in the RV-7, Mary was informed that they were 2 hours behind "due to weather". The windy weather in the morning had caused them to cancel test flights -- and rather than cancel those who had reserved at those specific times, they moved the entire schedule back two hours, screwing up EVERYONE.

Again, I understand that these are all volunteers, and they love their RVs, but that decision was just plain stupid. She told them to forget it.

So, all in all, our initial experience with Vans was a disappointment. The attitude toward us grew even worse when we told them that we planned to buy, not build one, as if we had violated the Prime Directive of the Cult.

Our search continues... Anyone flown a Glasair?
 
That's like someone trying to get to know your unique and intimate hotel during spring break. I would be shocked if you could not find a willing owner relatively local to attend to your research needs (I am sure you know about VAF).
 
Our search continues... Anyone flown a Glasair?

Yes, a friend has one here I believe it is a "1" nose wheel/ 0-320 / 150.

I liked it very much even tho I was in the right seat.

they are quick, and not for a short or soft fields, but great cross country aircraft for 2.
 
Vans sells kits for 7 models, is adding an 8th, and sells most of the kits for a 9th design. It may be unrealistic for them to bring 8 different aircraft to the show. Even if they did, somebody would want a different engine, prop, gear configuration, or canopy configuration than what they brought.

You should have taken the demo ride. Dynamically, the 7 and 8 are identical. If you had to sit in an 8 (and you needed to), there were dozens of 'em in the homebuilt area and all you'd have needed to do was ask.

As far as Glasairs go, how much factory support did they have at Osh?
 
Last edited:
Well it seems you have yet to evaluate an RV-8. You've only evaluated people -who actually didn't seem to have an RV-8 available for rides.

Keep in mind that the mindset the RV Heads display is similar to the mindset you had when you started this thread: http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50583

Well, except that I started that thread as a joke, since the conversation here seemed to be lagging. I fully appreciate that the 182 and Pathfinder are both outstanding planes in their own ways, and that the wing position is largely a matter of taste.

The folks at Van's were a little too Jim Jones-ish, for us. Their attitude toward non-builders was jarring. I mean, at some point every, single one of those builders is going to want to sell their planes....to someone like Mary and me.

The parallels between RVers and AppleHeads was striking. In both cases, they think that everyone else is simply stupid for not "getting" that their product is the best. In both cases they fawn over their Fearless Leader as if he is the next coming. In both cases they openly disdain other makes and models.

Having friends who use nothing but Apple products, it all felt very familiar. :rolleyes:

Now, in this case they may be right -- the RV may be the best aircraft on the planet -- but at this rate I will never know.
 
Vans sells kits for 7 models, is adding an 8th, and sells most of the kits for a 9th design. It may be unrealistic for them to bring 8 different aircraft to the show. Even if they did, somebody would want a different engine, prop, gear configuration, or canopy configuration than what they brought.

There were literally hundreds of Van's aircraft in OSH. Surely it wouldn't be hard to have an -8 in the stable?

You should have taken the demo ride. Dynamically, the 7 and 8 are identical. If you had to sit in an 8 (and you needed to), there were dozens of 'em in the homebuilt area and all you'd have needed to do was ask.

We have sat in -8s on the ground. Mary's not sure she will be able to see over the panel -- always a problem for her in any plane. The only way to assess that is to fly in one.

We're also unsure of how well the tandem seating will work for us. Unfortunately, none of the side-by-side RVs have adjustable rudder pedals -- essential for her to fly one. The -8s do, so they are in the lead right now in our "Next Aircraft" competitive search.

As far as Glasairs go, how much factory support did they have at Osh? Do you really want an out of production side by side airplane, or are you happy with the Glasstar, which is a strutted high winger and is the only product they currently sell. Btw, they are Chinese owned now if that makes a difference.

Heh. The Chinese own everything -- or soon will. I don't really know anything about the Glasair, but it would be nice to speak with a manufacturer who was eager to sell their product.

I think that sums up the problem right there: The people at Van's really didn't care if we bought one or not. That is an attitude that I cannot abide -- in ANY business, let alone one as important to me as aviation.
 
i've never met an RV-Anything owner that wasn't interested/willing to give a future RV owner/builder a ride...
 
Jim,
I am building an RV7 (off and on) so that makes me an 'expert' (yeah, right! )
Random thoughts here...

It sounds like some of the volunteers there did not have making a pleasant experience for 'newbies' to be Job 1 ... It is likely that Van is not aware - given his organization has become a big business...

I would tend to strongly urge you to avoid Glasair and all the other 'crotch rocket' airplanes.. Their small wing area and high deadstick speeds tend be more deadly - if being more dead is possible...

I have no strong opinions on the RV8 one way or the other... Like all RV designs it will handle like a dream, be fuel efficient, and be fast for the horsepower.. But the area where it will shine like a new penny is the landing speeds - so slow you tend to nod off on a long final / and survive... This as a safety factor cannot be over emphasized...

As far as Mary's sight lines over the cowl - this is an experimental and is not limited to only the FAA's $9000 certified seat... Mary's seat can/will be optimized for for her and fit her to the plane like a glove - along with HER pedals, etc...
She will soon refuse to fly in any other plane - and you WILL get used to flying from the right :D trust me on this...

There are custom builders out there who will help finish a partially done project, or customize a finished one...
Now, there are other planes out there besides RV, but since you identified a RV, I will not go into a long, meandering mumble about them...
 
I've got a friend who has a knack for coming up with descriptive terms to tick people off ("It's a gift," he says, modestly). He uses "Van-Cans" to refer to RV aircraft....

Ron Wanttaja
 
Apple, Van's, Glock... I have also noticed very strong similarities. Some people don't identify as customers, or even builders -- they're disciples.

I've been really impressed with what I have heard, read and seen about the RV series. I also just finished looking at what I believe are ALL of the RV-related NTSB accident reports. Every one looked liked the typical "dumb pilot tricks", with a few "downright stupid pilot tricks" involving ill-advised aerobatics thrown in. I did see a couple of them involving the deluxe self-retracting nose gear that I understand has since been fixed. However, it goes without saying that they're not perfect for everyone.

Unlike the worshippers of St. Gaston of Glock and St. Steve of Jobs, at least most of the starry-eyed RVers have an excuse to feel that way. They dedicated a substantial part of their lives to building something that perfectly embodies what they want to fly. Still, it can get annoying -- especially when they (and I'm using a generic "they" here, not pointing at the Van's folks whom I have not met) get all snooty and dismissive about it.
 
Jay,

Let's flip this one around a bit.

A guy walks into your inn on a very busy day. When he gets to the counter you ask if he's checking in, checking out, or wants to make a reservation. He says he isn't planning on buying your services, but wants to talk with you about your rooms, asks several questions, and then asks to see the RV-8 room.

You reply that the RV-8 room isn't available, but the SR-71 room is very similar, and the room should be available later in the day. You offer to let the guy come back later and see the SR-71 room. He accepts and you move on to deal with the next 5 customers in line.

When the guy comes back, you have to tell him that the SR-71 room isn't available yet (the previous customer hasn't vacated), but if he'll come back in a couple more hours, he can still see the room.

He gets mad that A. The RV-8 room isn't available and B. That he can't see the SR room on his schedule (despite that being out of your control).

He tells everyone in the lobby that your service stinks and announces that the people who frequent your inn are all jerks anyway.


Back to the here and now...

Do you realize that if you'd gotten an RV-8 ride from Van's, it would have been in the back seat, and wouldn't have answered Mary's over-the glareshield visibility question anyway ? That's the big reason they give demo rides in the -7.
 
Last edited:
Jay,

Let's flip this one around a bit.

A guy walks into your inn on a very busy day. When he gets to the counter you ask if he's checking in, checking out, or wants to make a reservation. He says he isn't planning on buying your services, but wants to talk with you about your rooms, asks several questions, and then asks to see the RV-8 room.

You reply that the RV-8 room isn't available, but the SR-71 room is very similar, and the room should be available later in the day. You offer to let the guy come back later and see the SR-71 room. He accepts and you move on to deal with the next 5 customers in line.

When the guy comes back, you have to tell him that the SR-71 room isn't available yet (the previous customer hasn't vacated), but if he'll come back in a couple more hours, he can still see the room.

He gets mad that A. The RV-8 room isn't available and B. That he can't see the SR room on his schedule (despite that being out of your control).

He tells everyone in the lobby that your service stinks and announces that the people who frequent your inn are all jerks anyway.


Back to the here and now...

Do you realize that if you'd gotten an RV-8 ride from Van's, it would have been in the back seat, and wouldn't have answered Mary's over-the glareshield visibility question anyway ? That's the big reason they give demo rides in the -7.

:yeahthat:


John, you don't have time to built, you are a tbuyer. Find one for sale and go for a test ride. BTW couples HATE the RV-8. Get a -7.
 
Last edited:
Hard to believe there are not dozens.... if not hundreds of RV-8's down in Texas..:dunno:.... Email any EAA chapter close and ask if any -8 owners will give you two a ride... Offer 10% off on your room rates to bait them over to paradise..:yesnod: IMHO.
 
So, all in all, our initial experience with Vans was a disappointment. The attitude toward us grew even worse when we told them that we planned to buy, not build one, as if we had violated the Prime Directive of the Cult.

Jay, sorry you had a bad experience. But all the RV owners I have met casually at airports have been nice people that are more that willing to show off their planes and give rides. And when I say, "show off" I don't mean they are conceited or evangelistas by any means - they are justifiably proud of what they've built and there's nothing wrong with that at all.

I've had unsolicited offers to take a flight in a RV-4 and an RV-7, and I accepted on both occasions. While it's always a little dicey going up with someone you don't really know, I had good experiences both times. They are very impressive aircraft, IMO.

I think if you contacted the factory or the owners message board, I bet someone would connect you with an owner in your area willing to give you and your wife demo flights.

I'm sure the Van's booth at OSH was busy but they bought that booth to sell kits. You need to realize that there is no incentive for them to bow at your feet if you're only going to buy a used one. That would be like going to the Ford dealer and asking to drive a new Mustang Boss 302 after you said you were really looking for a 2009 Mustang GT. And that doesn't mean the Ford dealer is doing you wrong.
 
Do you realize that if you'd gotten an RV-8 ride from Van's, it would have been in the back seat, and wouldn't have answered Mary's over-the glareshield visibility question anyway ? That's the big reason they give demo rides in the -7.

Get a Pitts. That way you don't have to worry about the visibilty over the front - there isn't any (At least on the ground...)

Plenty of room for luggage as well.
 
:yeahthat: BTW couples HATE the RV-8. Get a -7.

This is the correct answer. With a -7, -9, or -14 you'll have a second pilot up front for CRM, instead of staring at the back of the pilot's head. Also, when you're solo, you'll have an empty seat beside you where you can place your handheld, a drink, a couple of maps, etc. Or, do like me going to Osh last week and put the cooler full of beer and diet cokes there. ;-)
 
What's the differance between the 8 and 8A?

A new Lycomming is 40 Large??? Would a used be worth the savings?

Fixed pitch or constant speed?

Do I have to install avionics to comply with 51% or can I outsource that?

What other issues?
 
I also just finished looking at what I believe are ALL of the RV-related NTSB accident reports. Every one looked liked the typical "dumb pilot tricks", with a few "downright stupid pilot tricks" involving ill-advised aerobatics thrown in.

Mechanical issues occur to RVs at about the same rate as other homebuilts. The percentages are slightly lower for RVs, but that's because the pilot error rates are higher.

I did see a couple of them involving the deluxe self-retracting nose gear that I understand has since been fixed.

Nearly any RV owner will tell you: Nothing was fixed, because nothing was broken. All the collapsing-nosewheel problems were due to stupid pilots.

In case it's not clear, I'm being sarcastic....this ties into Jay's "Appleheads" reference. The community insisted there was nothing wrong with the airplane. The NTSB did attribute all the noseover accidents to pilot error, although they eventually starting raising some issues. The RV-6A's pilot loss of control rate was 27% higher than the overall RV fleet. It was actually worse than the Lancair IV.

Vans *does* have an upgraded nosewheel design. And the rate appears to be coming down....

Ron Wanttaja
 
Nearly any RV owner will tell you: Nothing was fixed, because nothing was broken. All the collapsing-nosewheel problems were due to stupid pilots.

In case it's not clear, I'm being sarcastic....this ties into Jay's "Appleheads" reference. The community insisted there was nothing wrong with the airplane. The NTSB did attribute all the noseover accidents to pilot error, although they eventually starting raising some issues.

Ron Wanttaja

Ron, I hope my editing hasn't taken anything you wrote out of context.

There have been many, many discussions in various RV centric forums about the nosegear design. I would say a substantial portion of the RV community believes the nosegear is underdesigned and prone to collapse due to relatively minor surface irregularities and other factors which shouldn't result in a gear collapse.

Here's a page full of threads on the subject:

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/search.php?searchid=15924535

<edit - Apparently links to searches time out on VAF. Type "nosegear design" into the search feature on VAF. There are tens of threads on the subject.>
 
Last edited:
No. They only think that because they haven't flown a T-18.

That is a nice plane designed by a real aeronautical designer. If I recall correctly, John Thorp worked for Boeing and was a part of the original Piper PA-28 design team.

Design credentials don't seem to be too important in the homebuilt world, though...

"In 1982, Lance Neibauer gave up a career in graphic design to design airplanes. He bought a pile of scrap foam, glued it together and started carving an airplane. He hand-carved it to shape, skinned it with fiberglass, hollowed it out and and glassed the inside."

http://www.airventuremuseum.org/virtual/interactive/innovations/lancair/

From that illustrious beginning, we now have the Lancair IV and IV-P and the turboprop version.

Silly me, but I'll put my chips down on aircraft designed by real engineers.

And people get all torqued off when you when you point out the bad safety record of some homebuilts, or that they can't possibly cruise at 200 kt on 150 HP and have a stall speed of 40 kt on 86 square feet of wing at anything over about 750 lb gross weight...
 
A new Lycomming is 40 Large??? Would a used be worth the savings?

Depends on what you want to buy...

They don't support the O-300 any more.

Fixed pitch or constant speed?

Lycoming doesn't sell props, sillly. They really don't want to sell engines in the first place, so far as I can tell, so why would they care what prop you use?

Do I have to install avionics to comply with 51% or can I outsource that?

Buying and installing avionics would satisfy the 51% rule how?
 
The "AppleHead" thing is driven by serious integration between multiple products in the product line, something which doesn't lend itself well to the "RVHead" thing -- it's not like you boot up your RV-7 and expect things to work nicely with the RV-8 parked next door.

It kinda makes the argument weaker. To say both are zealous may be true, but trying to stretch RV zealotry to Apple zealotry is a pretty far reach.

Example: With the recent upgrade to Mountain Lion, it's now one click with zero additional work on my part to toss the live screen from my MacBook Pro up on the AppleTV in the living room. I mean, it's brain-dead simple. No loading jack squat. It's just there on the toolbar now. Comes in handy for... "Hey, check this out" sessions in the living room.

That's the kind of stuff that keeps me using Apple toys. I see almost zero correlation to RV products. Another complete opposite is that Apple builds stuff so I don't have to... I could make a Linux desktop do everything the MacBook does... seriously... it'd take months to get it right. Even that TV trick with some other set-top box.

But RV is about building... for most of the RV folk anyway, certainly the zealouts at Oshkosh. My lord, the last thing I really want to do is build an airplane. Sure, it's a neat idea and all... but at the end of the day, I can't see myself really spending 2-3 years of free time fabricating aluminum parts and assembling them.

Sooooo... pardon me if the "AppleHeads" complaint doesn't make any sense to me Jay. My Macs are just Unix machines with a real friggin' desktop I don't have to spend days configuring or ripping the latest desktop-du-jour off of and putting something sane on them, like wanting to kill whoever wrote Gnome 3 with heavy blows from large blunt objects.

The Mac is "I'm a Unix guy who has stuff to get done. Give me something that works."

The RV is "I'm a pilot who wants to spend 80 or more percent of his free time building an airplane instead of flying. Give me a giant kit of crap and I'll see if I barely have the skillset to get the thing flying in three to five years."

Completely different mentalities...
 
I've got a friend who has a knack for coming up with descriptive terms to tick people off ("It's a gift," he says, modestly). He uses "Van-Cans" to refer to RV aircraft....

Ron Wanttaja

I'm going to have to remember that one for use around my RV friends.
 
> But RV is about building.

Building? I'd say that it is more of an assembly job, than a building job.

>> Van-Can

This morning I joined the Rutan side of the breakfast table ... and tossed
out the term Van-Can to the RV side of the table. Kind'a like throwing gas
on an already roaring fire. <g>

Then, we all made-up and went flying. Woo hoo!
 
But RV is about building... for most of the RV folk anyway, certainly the zealouts at Oshkosh. My lord, the last thing I really want to do is build an airplane. Sure, it's a neat idea and all... but at the end of the day, I can't see myself really spending 2-3 years of free time fabricating aluminum parts and assembling them.

snipped

The RV is "I'm a pilot who wants to spend 80 or more percent of his free time building an airplane instead of flying. Give me a giant kit of crap and I'll see if I barely have the skillset to get the thing flying in three to five years."

Completely different mentalities...

I spent a lot of extra years building the six. A few went with no building, due to new house, my business, etc. Even had thoughts of selling the project several times, at a loss.

But...............once it was done, it's extremely satisfying. The performance in takeoff and climb, seriously outdoes so many of the certifieds. The view out of a full canopy is wonderful.

And best of all............I read this forum daily, and look at all the junk outdated avionics, that owners are willing to put in their certifieds to keep the cost down. This includes comms, gps, & auto-pilots. The idea of buying this equipment for less, and not paying out of this world installation fees, is very appealing.

L.Adamson
 
A new Lycomming is 40 Large??? Would a used be worth the savings?

Depends on what you want to buy...

They don't support the O-300 any more.

Fixed pitch or constant speed?
Lycoming doesn't sell props, sillly. They really don't want to sell engines in the first place, so far as I can tell, so why would they care what prop you use?

Do I have to install avionics to comply with 51% or can I outsource that?
Buying and installing avionics would satisfy the 51% rule how?

I wasn't asking what props to buy from Lycoming, I was asking on opinions on how to outfit an RV8/8a.
 
I aways find it funny when people think Apple Consumers are somehow duped into buying products.

The only people that should have a say in the quality of a product, are those that own it. Among customers, no tech company has even remotely the satisfaction rating as Apple. I have not looked, but I think you would be hard pressed to find any company in any industry with as high a rating (USAA maybe).

http://osxdaily.com/2011/09/20/appl...ating-at-all-time-high-dominates-pc-industry/

With a rating of 88, that means 12 out of a 100 people who buy there products are not happy. I can see you are one of those 12. I am sure Apple would like to make those 12 happy as well, but I am not sure what you expect Apple to do to make all the people happy all the time.
 
I aways find it funny when people think Apple Consumers are somehow duped into buying products.

The only people that should have a say in the quality of a product, are those that own it. Among customers, no tech company has even remotely the satisfaction rating as Apple. I have not looked, but I think you would be hard pressed to find any company in any industry with as high a rating (USAA maybe).

http://osxdaily.com/2011/09/20/appl...ating-at-all-time-high-dominates-pc-industry/

With a rating of 88, that means 12 out of a 100 people who buy there products are not happy. I can see you are one of those 12. I am sure Apple would like to make those 12 happy as well, but I am not sure what you expect Apple to do to make all the people happy all the time.

I think there is a lot more that goes into it than simply reviewing for satisfaction.

IMHO, the immense cost of the Apple products attracts a certain type of person. It's the same phenomenon we see in the hotel biz -- those who pay more are actually LESS likely to complain.

Let me illustrate. We have been selling like hot-cakes this summer at our aviation themed hotel. I can't remember the last weekend we DIDN'T sell out. As a result, it's just plain stupid for us to put any rooms on-line, because we have to pay those parasites a 15% commission on every sale. Why pay it if we don't need to?

Still, I like having an on-line presence. Solution? We put our two most expensive rooms (kitchenettes) on-line -- and jacked the price sky-high to cover the cost of the commission.

Result? Those rooms are selling like hot cakes -- and our survey results show that the people who stay in those rooms rate us as high, or higher, than those who stay in other rooms, or who walk-in for those rooms at a lower rate.

IMHO this is the same phenomenon we're seeing with Apple products. In short, when you pay a fortune for something, you are more likely to like it.

The same is true with Garmin products, IMHO. When I bought my 496, I immediately went on-line and blasted the crap out of it. IMHO, it is a laughably bad piece of kit, with a processor so slow that my then-teenage son made fun of it -- even when it was new.

When I posted that opinion, yikes! You would think I had called the Virgin Mary a whore! People screamed to high heaven.

I personally think THAT is why the survey results for Apple are so good. When I posted what a POS the iPad was, right after I bought it (an opinion I still hold, for many reasons) you would think I had kicked Appleheads in the groin.

Do I think the parallel between Appleheads and RVers is perfect? Nope. But the ones we met at the Van's booth in Oshkosh share many of their traits.
 
Do I think the parallel between Appleheads and RVers is perfect? Nope. But the ones we met at the Van's booth in Oshkosh share many of their traits.

I really can make an honest and "informed" statement, in regards to what you're discussing here. Afterall, I've been around this Van's stuff..........for 18 years now. To keep it simple & short as possible, you really don't know what you're talking about..

At best, you came to some quick conclusions, that don't mirror fact. The same happenend on the Red board, last year. And that was certainly a waste........for most involved.

L.Adamson
 
Here come the thought police again.
"...those dangerous underpowered wichita spam cans...." and other commentary from the VAF site.

Honestly, it's not the airplane. It's about the "crowd mentality" of superiority that pervades a lot of pilots of these aircraft.

Flying is flying, now matter what you are flying.
 
I really can make an honest and "informed" statement, in regards to what you're discussing here. Afterall, I've been around this Van's stuff..........for 18 years now. To keep it simple & short as possible, you really don't know what you're talking about..

At best, you came to some quick conclusions, that don't mirror fact. The same happenend on the Red board, last year. And that was certainly a waste........for most involved.

L.Adamson

Well, as stated my experience with the Van's people was limited to our interaction with them at Oshkosh, at their booth, on three occasions -- admittedly a tiny data-set.

Therefore, my opinions don't go beyond how they treated us there, and they may very well be the greatest people in the world outside of that venue, and their aircraft may very well be the best in the world. But that's outside of my personal experience, so I can't comment either way.

In that regard, your 18 years of experience with them is a good recommendation, and I appreciate it. I won't lose heart with them just yet.
 
Well, as stated my experience with the Van's people was limited to our interaction with them at Oshkosh, at their booth, on three occasions -- admittedly a tiny data-set.

Therefore, my opinions don't go beyond how they treated us there, and they may very well be the greatest people in the world outside of that venue, and their aircraft may very well be the best in the world. But that's outside of my personal experience, so I can't comment either way.

In that regard, your 18 years of experience with them is a good recommendation, and I appreciate it. I won't lose heart with them just yet.

Okay............and I'll think about a Nexus 7. My wife already has an Ipad 2.
 
Back
Top