What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV-10 versus Cirrus

S

scottali

I'm New Here
I did a quick search and could not find a lot of related posts however I'll be the first to admit that navigating the forums is somewhat new to me so I will apologize if this has been covered before.
I recently made the jump to the homebuilt world with the acquisition of an F1 Rocket a few months ago (I love it !!! ). Now I'm looking to add something that can do cross country work with more people and bags. I've read all the articles I can find and have a good feel for the performance of RV-10. I've owned an SR22-G3 turbo in the past and am looking for someone who can comment on the comparability of the two (to me they appear very similar). With extended range tanks and a glass panel the RV-10 appears to be an excellent candidate for a travelling machine with the advantage of being a homebuilt. I have a kit and the builder assitance setup so looking for some thoughts before jumping in.
 
Welcome to VAF!!

Scott,
welcome.gif
to the good ship VAF!

Good to have you here.

Build the 10, you will save a ton of $$$ over buying the Cirrus.
 
+1 FOR THE RV-10

I have never flown a cirrus.

If I had to guess the sound level inside he cirrus may be quieter. That would be one benifit.

I insulated our -10 firewall, under all the floors and sidewalls from the firewall to the tailcone bulkhead and spent time sealing the doors to eliminate air draft (noise). I find the sound level very accaptable with good quality headsets but is way to loud for no headsets.

Other than that the -10 will from my understanding and I stand to be corrected:

Take-off shorter
Land shorter
Climb faster
Haul 4 full size Adults with full fuel
Fly faster on the same fuel flow (maybe even faster flat out at less than 10,000ft)


Any Cirrus owners out there want to race?


This should be a great thread
popcorn.gif
 
difference between Cirrus and RV10....you can spin the RV10 recover and fly on. You don't need a chute for spin recovery
 
TangoBravo said:
difference between Cirrus and RV10....you can spin the RV10 recover and fly on. You don't need a chute for spin recovery
Click to expand...

This is a persistent myth, but a myth nonetheless. The original FAA certification of the Cirrus did use the chute rather than a spin series (because it was the cheapest and quickest route to certification).

Subsequent certifications (Europe and elsewhere) required full spin certification.

The Cirrus SR-2x series aircraft will spin if full pro-spin controls are held, but they respond to standard spin recovery techniques. I have several hundred hours in a -22, and the airplane has very benign stall characteristics. The leading edge cuffs work as advertised, and ailerons remain effective through the stall.

I haven't flown an RV-10, but have flown and stalled RV-4, -6, -7, -8, all of which have -much- sportier stalls with little aerodynamic warning. The -8 is a partial exception, because the "tail shake" lets you know somewhat before the wing lets go.
 
Outperforms

I remember the day I had four adults in my 10 with full fuel. A Cirrus was just ahead of us for departure with just the pilot on board. I jokingly said, do you think we can take him. I really did not know at the time how the 10 performed to the Cirrus. Everyone said yah right.

Luckily he was headed in the same direction as us. He departed and we started rolling about a mile behind after tower let us go. Tower seen what was happening early and told us to overtake him on his left. We soon out climbed him and then past him about 500ft plus above while we were still climbing. :D It surprised everyone, including me. I liked my plane even more after that day.:p

The ten seems to outperform even the turbo down low in cruise. It will also take off and land much shorter as mentioned. It is an airplane that is hard to beat.
 
mtnflyer said:
Try $400,000 plus bucks and one must pay someone to work on it....
Click to expand...

i totally agree with the paying someone to work on it part, but ours has been very reliable with very little unscheduled maintenance over the last nine years and 1300+ hours.

Market for an early glass panel (Avidyne Entegra) SR22 with dual g430W, avidyne digital autopilot, TKS, active TCAS, etc. seems to be in the low $200K range. Still a lot of money, but not too far off RV10 numbers, and you can have it immediately without building.

These are very comfortable, easy flying airplanes that will cruise 170 knots LOP on 14 gph, or 180 knots ROP on about 18gph. Later examples are plusher and maybe 8-10 knots faster.

The RV-8 on the other hand, I can't identify anything certified that comes close for several multiples of the price...
 
Wesael said:
If I had to guess the sound level inside he cirrus may be quieter. That would be one benefit. ]
Click to expand...

Geoff Combs has one of the quietest aircraft I've ever ridden. I think the combination of his kydex interior panels and insulation makes his RV-10 pretty quiet for an aircraft. I would stack his up against a Cirrus any day.

I've built mine very similiar and hope it turns out to be as quiet as Geoff's.
 
Maintenance cost

Maintenance cost is the big difference between the 10 and the Cirrus. Especially if you have the repairmen cert. Even if you are an A&P with a Cirrus the parts are extremely expensive compared to the 10. For example, if you bang anything with hangar rash I bet the difference would be huge.
A typical conditional inspection or annual in the 10 is 200 +/- 50? What does a Cirrus typically run?
 
Thanks for all your input

Thank you all for your input. Having flown the Cirrus and currently flying an F1 rocket how is the handling of the RV-10? I was pleasantly surprised at the handling and stability of the Rocket when I transitioned to it and expect the RV-10 will make an excellent instrument platform.
Also, how is the legroom and headroom in the rear seat? One of our sons is 6'3"
 
Three tens in High River. Come on down, you can sit in the back....6'-3" should be no trouble. Don't mind taking you up, to fly it as well. Pm me if you are interested.
 
scottali said:
Also, how is the legroom and headroom in the rear seat? One of our sons is 6'3"
Click to expand...

If you go to this page:

http://www.mykitlog.com/users/displ...er&project=260&category=2779&log=49158&row=28

You'll see a photo of me sitting in Dave Saylor's RV-10 back seat. I'm 6' 2". I have almost 9-10 inches before my knees hit the seat back. The rear seat in the 10 is huge compared to most aircraft

The front seat isn't quite a roomy, but you son shouldn't have any problems. Just be careful as to which overhead console you install. The Aerosport Products one won't be an issue. Some of the older fiberglass ones were a little wider and impose on head space.

Bob
 
Scott, the -10 handles very, very well and is an exceptional IMC machine, very stable during approaches. I have a customer who is 6'4" and his sons are also 6' 3" guys and all four of us fit with room to spare.

Van intentionally designed it to accomodate 6' 4" guys from conception.

Best,
 
Actual race speeds of similar aircraft

The last two numbers are speed in kts and mph

Bob Axsom

598 Sulphur Springs 130 7/18/10 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 160.54 184.74
318 Taylor 100 2009 3/16/09 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 159.62 183.68
348 Texoma 100 2009 5/31/09 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 157.95 181.76
304 Rocket 100 2008 11/23/08 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 157.75 181.54
471 TVA II 2009 10/18/09 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 154.41 177.69
456 Grace Flight 2009 10/4/09 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 154.15 177.39
488 Rocket 100 2009 11/22/09 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 152.82 175.87
284 Memphis 100 2008 10/19/08 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 151.48 174.32
673 Great Canadian Air Rally 2010 8/22/10 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 148.77 171.20
148 Texoma 100, 2008 4/20/08 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 147.44 169.70
267 Grace Flight 2008 10/5/08 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 147.14 169.33
574 Top of the Chesapeake 7/11/10 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 144.96 166.81
733 Grace Flight 2010 10/2/10 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 144.65 166.45
528 Texoma 100 4/25/10 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 144.42 166.09
796 Rocket 100, 2010 11/20/10 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 142.89 164.43
441 Pagosa Springs 100 2009 9/27/09 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 142.78 164.20
369 Tennessee Valley Air Race 2009 6/14/09 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 141.58 162.93
707 Pagosa Springs 2010 9/26/10 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 141.13 162.29
551 West Texas 100 6/6/10 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 140.85 162.08
381 Colorado 150 2009 7/23/09 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 139.40 160.42
186 Colorado 150, 2008 6/29/08 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 138.79 159.71
508 Taylor 150 4/11/10 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 134.58 154.87
327 West Texas 100 2009 4/12/09 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 130.97 150.71
251 AirCap 200 8/25/08 FAC3FX Cirrus SR20 Porter, James 129.99 149.58
594 Sulphur Springs 130 7/18/10 FAC1FX Cirrus SR22 Sanford, Fagg 176.73 203.38

589 Sulphur Springs 130 7/18/10 FAC1FX-T Columbia 400 Lay, Rob 184.49 212.30
235 AirCap 200 8/24/08 FAC1FX Cessna 350 Bergqvist, Pia 181.77 209.17
247 AirCap 200 8/25/08 FAC1FX Cessna 400 Elder, Allison 180.23 207.40

783 Rocket 100, 2010 11/20/10 RV Gold RV-10 Nafsinger, Nick 191.47 220.34
969 Big Sky Air Race 7/9/11 RV Gold RV-10 Schmidt, Scott 184.14 211.91
971 Big Sky Air Race 7/9/11 RV Gold RV-10 Strasburg, Sean 183.43 211.08
756 Tennessee Valley Air Race 2010 10/30/10 RV Gold RV-10 Arter, Warren 182.18 209.69
1319 BSAR II, Three Forks, MT 7/7/12 RV Gold RV-10 Douglass, Bryan 180.33 207.52
1011 AirVenture Cup (TH) 2011 7/25/11 RV Gold RV-10 Dawson-Townsend, Tim 159.89 184.00
672 Great Canadian Air Rally 2010 8/22/10 Sport RV-10 Kristensen, Ivan 150.09 172.72
 
Last edited:
The performance of the 10 is outstanding. If I were to pick one item about the 10 that is significant vs the Cirrus I would say the amount of runway required to land and take off, not even close and a real benefit to me.

Pat
 
We just finished our -10.
Here are my comments on the negatives:
I insulated the heck out of it and it is still way to noisy to even think about flying it without a headset. The big thing I noticed when building, was the lack of robustness(as compared to the certified world) in almost everything. The skins are thinner, the doors are fragile and subject to damage in the wind due to the way they hinge upward. It is really not recommended to taxi the plane with the doors open, but some do. You can't set aside the fact that the -10 is experimental.
On the plus side:
This plane is a rocket compared to most. I handles very docile, lands a lot easier and slower than a Cirrus. Requires far less runway. Burns much less fuel at about the same speeds. And the best part is it's new, and you built it!
 
If I had a half million just begging to be spent, I would have bought a Cirrus or similar. Since we did not the -10 had to be the one. I did not build for the fun of building, I built to have a 160 KTAS family hauler sipping 10 gph at 12,500'. We love it. Yes, it is loud without a heavy interior and ANR's. If you don't add a bunch of interior consoles, arm rests, throttle quadrants then you will have loads of room up front. The rear is even better. Most of us don't care for the flimsy doors, especially building/fitting them. Just take precautions in 10 Kt winds or greater. Same with the rudder blowing in the wind, take precautions. No, it is not as stable as the 172, but we like it that way. You cannot trim it out, let go of the controls and expect it not to start into a spiral dive. A Cessna would try to stay at that trim speed. Not the -10. Boy does it pick up speed quickly too. With no flaps, you get the tail buffet before stall. With full flaps you had best not do it on the base to final turn, as it stalls abruptly. I practice often with the family at a safe altitude. As soon as you release back pressure and push forward slightly it recovers nicely. If one does the opposite at low altitude then one will be another statistic. It handles 25 Kt direct xw nicely, I won't push it more than that unless it was an emergency as there is not much rudder left. In the hottest, most humid summer days, at gross, I never saw below 1000 fpm initial climb out. In the winter never below 1500 fpm. There have been alot of fatalities in Cirrus SR-20's and 22's, but then there are many more flying and many in much worse weather than most -10 drivers fly in. No airplane is perfect, just like us, but I don't think you will be disappointed. Take one up, do a few maneuvers and let us know what you think back here.
 
Last edited:
Another thing I've noticed is that a lot of pilots don't care for the feel of the controls in the Cirrus. The spring packs they use on the control surfaces can make some pilots feel like the stick is mooshy or disconnected.

And the -10 handles just like a heavier RV, which it happens to be.
 
One more data point...

Generally speaking, if you build a new RV-10, it will be worth just about what you put into it (minus your labor). Some are even worth more... The same cannot be said for a new Cirrus, which suffers an abrupt drop in value the minute you "drive it off the lot." My $0.02.
 
Bob Axsom said:
The last two numbers are speed in kts and mph

1319 BSAR II, Three Forks, MT 7/7/12 RV Gold RV-10 Douglass, Bryan 180.33 207.52
Click to expand...

Dang Bob, I wish you hadn't put my time up. I did OK for my first race, but missed one turn big time on the outside. I guess I'll have to do better next year.
 
My $0.02

The 180+knot RV-10s that I'm familiar with on Bob's list are all unmodified, stock, Aerosport IO-540 planes, but they were flown at air-race speeds with air-race fuel flows. I'm not familiar with a couple of them. My experience is that 165-170 ktas LOP at 10.5 gph is a more typical cruise. Varies a little with altitude and load. A few more data points from someone who has flown his -10 a lot in the first year.

1. My hangar partner had a Cirrus until recently. Wing span is 8 FEET wider than my -10. Sure makes getting in and out of our hangar door easier. Recently I flew him on a short trip and gave him the stick. He said the control feels were a lot like the Cirrus.

2. I haven't flown a Cirrus but the -10 handles great. Responsive, but stable, quick but not scary. Puts a BIG smile on the face of every pilot who takes the stick.

3. With standard tanks, LOP, the range on the -10 with VFR reserves is probably 5 hours. My experience is I don't have that kind of range in my rear end or bladder, and I know my wife doesn't. I don't need extra fuel, I need an onboard lavatory.

4. My heaviest trip was with full fuel, me (6' 200#), son (6'3+" 195#), wife (just a little thang), two-75# chocolate labs, and gear. Right at gross weight. Hardly could tell the difference on takeoff, even a 6000'DA airport.

5. I don't have any interior panels and almost no soundproofing, just use ANR or QT Halo headsets. I don't think the plane is noisy at all, and other passengers/pilots seem to agree. I definitely don't think of it as a noisy plane like some have said. Seems almost quiet, in fact.

And what I really love about the plane is how easy and cheap it is to maintain. Last night I changed brake pads on the right main for the first time (210 hobbs hours). The pads were about $40, the tool about $50, done in an hour. It'll be even quicker next time.

One more thing, when I happened to meet Van at the factory this summer he got to talking about how cool the -10 is. He pointed out that it carries almost twice what the other RVs carry, at nearly the same speed, on only 30% more fuel burn. He was almost giggling when he said it (well, as much as Van could giggle) - seemed like a proud papa.
 
Last edited:
unmodified

Scott's 184kts and my 183kts are unmodified IO-540's blended airfoil 2 blades. I agree with Bryan, LOP up high and still get good performance, maybe loosing 6-10 kts. I just flew 4 hours and 12 minutes and burned 45 gallons with 15 left.
 
Mine too.

Mine is the same as Scott's and Sean's, and I think Ivan's is as well. I don't know anything about the others. I'll get 184 next year....
 
I have flown both the Cirrus and RV-10. The big thing I really noticed was the 10 has much better visibility than the Cirrus when looking thru the front window. I felt more confined in the Cirrus.
As for the noise of the RV-10 I have Bose A20 and A10 and when I got the A20's it was a little weird because I could hardly here the engine noise. It took a little time to get used to the lower noise level. A good pair of ANR headsets
really helps.

Geoff
 
True

Good point Geoff. I recall from my one ride in a Cirrus that the viz wasn't nearly as good as in the -10. I don't know about others, but perhaps the most common comment for first timers in the -10 is how good the view is, and my wife tells me the view is even better from the back seat than the front. I agree with the good headsets, too. In fact, I use my QT Halos as often as my Zulus, and the Halos make it really hard to hear the fuel pump running before start. Both do a great job of keeping out the noise.
 
There is no comparison with the SR-20. But, the OP asked about the SR-22, with a much larger engine.
Of course the turbo'd SR-22 will be faster if you climb to the oxygen altitudes. Also burn a lot more gas.

I think most real SR-22's are 3 adult airplanes with full fuel. The RV10 is a real 4 adult airplane with full fuel but it holds less fuel. Put in 20 gal aux tanks and it's a 3 person airplane. Do you need the aux tanks? If your goal is to fly 75% power, best power mixture, then the answer is yes. You've got 4 hours with no reserves. But most RV-10 pilots are happy to slow down a little; I get 160 KTAS on 10 gal/hr, so for me the standard tanks are fine (nearly 6 hours, no reserves). SR22 pilot scan chose less fuel, lower power, and get 4 adults on board too. For any given fuel burn the RV-10 is faster. But if fuel burn is no object, then I don't know which is faster.
Noisy? yes, but a decent pair of headphones and it's fine.
As others have said, take off, climb, landing distances, all favor the RV-10 by quite a bit.
Interestingly, I think (??may be wrong?) that the SR-22 turbo has a certified ceiling of 17, 500'. (?). The RV10 will easily climb above that, if needed to top the weather.
Plus for the Cirrus? I think it now comes with known ice. For enough $$.
 
Agreed.

Strasnuts said:
Scott's 184kts and my 183kts are unmodified IO-540's blended airfoil 2 blades. I agree with Bryan, LOP up high and still get good performance, maybe loosing 6-10 kts. I just flew 4 hours and 12 minutes and burned 45 gallons with 15 left.
Click to expand...

I ran 217 MPH TAS in the last Race-to-Ridgeland(S.C.) by tweaking the RPM's, per Alan Barrett's recommendations, or 188 knots TAS at 700' ASL, WOT, 2630 RPM/ Blended airfoil. TAS read off the Dynon.

Mine is also an Aerosport, stock IO-540/260 HP.

Best,
 
Took Scott and his wife flying today. We loaded the plane up with 4 adults and full fuel so he could see it's performance. I think he liked it.:D.

Hopefully he chimes in with some comments. They seamed to really like the roominess and it's efficiency.

Looks like it might have been an expensive ride:)
 
RV-10 ride

Thanks to Troy and his great hospitality showing us and taking us flying in his prime example of a RV-10 my wife wouldn't consider any other four seat aircraft. While she loves the rocket and doing rolls & loops, a four seat cross country IFR machine would be a welcome addition to the family. It was my first time seeing an RV-10 in person and I was very impressed. The 10 has great ramp appeal and Troy proves a homebuilt can rival production aircraft in terms of fit, finish and quality. Getting into the cockpit made me feel like I was back in a Cirrus. It had the same feel. The 10's back seat is huge compared to most four seat aircraft, especially with a short guy like me upfront. Flying qualities were fantastic. We were hoping for some turbulence to see how it rode through it but we were provided with rock solid air which proved a blessing so I could take in all of the features of the AFS System (I'll definately be going with AFS in my build). There is really nothing quite like flying cross country in an aircraft that's getting better mileage than the family SUV. Thanks so much Troy, you just cost us a lot of money!! :D
 
I have only flown a Cirrus twice and thought it was a very nice plane. But both were $500,000+ machines. I thought the -10 handled better, had better economy and could carry more. The Cirrus was faster up high and has some anti-ice capability if that is important.
I have had two friends that have owned Cirrus's and -10's and they would rather fly the -10 if they could for hire. Maybe someday we can change that rule too.

Here are some graphs I put together a few years back comparing the -10, 182, SR20 and SR22. (My -10 price is off now. It would be more like $140 - $180K but the Cirrus is much higher)
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=4283&page=4
 
I don't think anyone mentioned insurance....

A Cirrus will be around $20,000 a year because of the risk of wing damage and chutes being pulled.

A nice RV-10 would be around $5000.

That's a lot of avgas and $5 EAA breakfasts.
 
Sid Lambert said:
I don't think anyone mentioned insurance....

A Cirrus will be around $20,000 a year because of the risk of wing damage and chutes being pulled.

A nice RV-10 would be around $5000.

That's a lot of avgas and $5 EAA breakfasts.
Click to expand...

I would try a different agent.

Our SR-22 insurance is typically in the low to mid $4K range, with what I suspect are higher limits than most RV policies. Accounting for hull value, it is significantly cheaper than my RV-8 to insure for liability.

I just renewed the policy within the last two weeks.
 
flyeyes said:
I would try a different agent.

Our SR-22 insurance is typically in the low to mid $4K range, with what I suspect are higher limits than most RV policies. Accounting for hull value, it is significantly cheaper than my RV-8 to insure for liability.

I just renewed the policy within the last two weeks.
Click to expand...

Wow, it has changed since I looked years ago. That's not bad at all then.
 
flyeyes said:
I would try a different agent.

Our SR-22 insurance is typically in the low to mid $4K range, with what I suspect are higher limits than most RV policies. Accounting for hull value, it is significantly cheaper than my RV-8 to insure for liability.

I just renewed the policy within the last two weeks.
Click to expand...

Just looked at my 10 insurance and its 2,378

Pat
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top