What's new
Van's Air Force

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

14 or 14A

I am trying to decide 14 or 14A. I am not trying to start a battle of the wheels but would like to hear the pros and cons. I don?t have any tail wheel time.
Please no bashing the opposing opinions.
Thanks
 
Not having a TW endorsement isn't a big deal. 10 hours +/- of training is all you need and who among us can't benefit from some extra training.

Some will say your insurance will be higher with the TW and they are correct, for about the first 100 hours or so. After that, your insurance will pretty much run the same as having tricycle gear.

Once you build up some TW experience, you can fly pretty much anything you want. I have logged time in many very cool TW aircraft over the years because of my experience; Stearman, Chipmunk, J3, Tcraft, Champ, and many more. If I was a tricycle pilot, that wouldn't be possible.

Then there is the option of doing three point vs. wheel landings that the TW version gives you.

The drawback is that you might ground loop; however, with the A model, there is a chance you might flip over.

Go to the Never Ending Debates section and change the settings at the bottom to display some of the older threads. This discussion has been hashed out many times before.

In the end, it is up to you to decide to build the airplane you will be happy flying. I wouldn't let the lack of a TW endorsement hold you back. The training is fun and about four to six hours in you will be pulling your hair out and then it will just click and all will be good.
 
Last edited:
Not having a TW endorsement isn't a big deal. 10 hours +/- of training is all you need and who among us can't benefit from some extra training.

Some will say your insurance will be higher with the TW and they are correct, for about the first 100 hours or so. After that, your insurance will pretty much run the same as having tricycle gear.

Once you build up some TW experience, you can fly pretty much anything you want. I have logged time in many very cool TW aircraft over the years because of my experience; Stearman, Chipmunk, J3, Tcraft, Champ, and many more. If I was a tricycle pilot, that wouldn't be possible.

Then there is the option of doing three point vs. wheel landings that the TW version gives you.

The drawback is that you might ground loop; however, with the A model, there is a chance you might flip over.

Go the Never Ending Debates section and change the settings at the bottom to display some of the older threads. This discussion has been hashed out many times before.

In the end, it is up to you to decide to build the airplane you will be happy flying. I wouldn't let the lack of a TW endorsement hold you back. The training is fun and about four to six hours in you will be pulling your hair out and then it will just click and all will be good.
Thanks Bill.
 
Go with what you're comfortable with. The -14A's nosegear design is robust and you'll have more potential buyers if you ever sell. I'd roll with that.
 
I purchased a tail wheel because it is cheaper, lighter, faster, and better for rougher fields like grass.
 
I purchased a tail wheel because it is cheaper, lighter, faster, and better for rougher fields like grass.

You forgot one thing; easier to build.

Your point is valid. When I was making that decision many years ago on my -9 build, I was told by someone at Van's that the tip-up taildragers were the lightest combination. That sold me and not once have I ever wished I had a tricycle.

I have landed my -in at some really "interesting" airports. Then again, Vlad has taken his -9A into some airports I would probably not go to.
 
I built a 14A, much cheaper insurance, safer taxing, safer landing and I love the leaf style landing gear on the 14A.
 
Tailwheel

I vote for tail wheel all the way. If I was even in the market for a used RV, I wouldn?t even consider a nose wheel version. Once you get some tailwheel instruction, you?ll understand and probably feel the same way. It?s not hard, and yet soooo much more rewarding to fly and master a tail wheel aircraft. These RVs were meant to be tailwheel.. just look at a 14 then a 14a.. no competition! Go take some dual and see what you think before making the mistake of building the wrong (a model) plane!
 
I went for the TW just for the fun and challenge of it. I had very little TW time and it was many years ago. But as much as I love flying I was getting bored. 10 years of Charter flying with as many as 12 flights a day had me losing the magic. When we sold the charter op I knew I wanted to get that magic back. One of our many time repeat passengers would always tell me about RV?s. So I started looking. My wife also thought a TW would be cool. I couldn?t be happier that I made that decision.
My thought is you go with what makes your boat float. But don?t fear the TW. After 42 years and thousands of hours in the air it?s never too late to master new skills.
 
It will be your blood, sweat and tears so build the plane how you want it. I wanted a taildragger.
 
Most of my hours are in tailwheel. I was looking hard at the -9 and the -14 and took a demo flight in the -14 when I visited the factory. Loved the plane in the air. Didn't care much for the forward visibility on the ground. Its better than a Steerman (more than just sky out front) and not nearly as good as a Supercub. Which means you don't really need to S-turn on the ground, but you probably should. I didn't care for that.

If do another Vans build after the -12, it'll have a nose wheel.
 
I've got an RV-9A that I built, a J-3 I restored, and fly numerous RV-12's.

If/When I build another RV it will most likely be a nose wheel.

I love flying the cub, but it is a local, nice weather airplane. I use my 9A to travel. I've landed it in cross winds that would be way beyond my (and I believe the planes) ability in a TW configuration.

That, and the being tired after a long flight factor are what had me decide on the A model. The tailwheel planes are darn sexy though...

-Dan
 
You are going to spend a lot of time, effort, and money so build the airplane you want; nothing else matters. You won't lose either way you go, the 14 (both versions) is an amazing airplane to build and fly.
 
You are going to spend a lot of time, effort, and money so build the airplane you want; nothing else matters. You won't lose either way you go, the 14 (both versions) is an amazing airplane to build and fly.

HERE HERE!!!

For me I chose the 14A because no matter how good I might get with a TW I need a lil mental insurance while riding inside the 4 year project full of $$$$.

100% NEXT plane will be TW, cub style...
which could be a Vans...
should they decide their next plane will be like that???!!!
 
I can't say that I wouldn't love to fly a taildragger sometimes, and I think if you lived on a grass strip I'd go that route for sure. But, I think if you plan to use it for an x/c machine, the 14A will win that battle, mainly from a crosswind landing perspective. There was a day I took my daughter for practice right before she got her private in the 14A and it was 19G28, direct 90 degree crosswind on the long runway, and direct into the wind on the short. I wasn't even sure we were going to fly that day, but we decided that if she could fly it directly down the runway with all the crosswind corrections in, and keep it on the centerline and things were feeling good, she could land it. She did, 3 times in a row.
When traveling in the RV10 and 14A, we really don't have to really think much about crosswinds if the winds are 20 and under, unless it's really gusty. For myself I feel good until at least 25kts in the RV-10. In contrast, I was talking with a local RV pilot the other day who flew a taildragger and was trying to be sure to pick the best runway when the winds were only 10-15kts and the choice was within 10 degrees of being a perfect 45 degree split to choose which one to take. He said that for him, that's a lot of wind in the taildragger.

So when it comes to travel, I've been all over and although you can look at wind forecasts, the actual winds vary so much that if you simply have a goal of getting somewhere safely, you'll probably have a little easier time in the A models than the taildraggers, especially where you visit airports with only 1 runway. Consider what happened with Draco a couple months back. It's a super awesome plane with great short field capabilities, but I'm sure the pilot certainly has more respect for crosswind today than ever before in his life. That's not to say if you go the traildragger route you're doing anything exceptionally risky, but, take all things into consideration as you decide which to build, and make sure the goal of what the airplane is for is included.
 
Rudder authority is the determining factor in how much crosswind a plane can handle. The position of the little wheel has nothing to do with it. The tailwheel -14 has the same size rudder as the nosewheel version. As far as the plane is concerned, if there's too much crosswind for a -14, there's too much crosswind for a -14A. That's as far as the plane is concerned.

As far the pilot is concerned might be a different matter, personal mins and all that. But honestly there's no magic to it. Both versions rely on rudder and differential braking to keep it going where you want it to go on the ground. If you've got enough of both in one, you're going to have enough of both in the other. And if you think you don't have enough in one, you probably shouldn't be attempting it in the other.
 
Mission

I'd go based off of your mission. If your plan is primarily to fly VFR, do aerobatics, and fly off of a grass strip, I would go with the 14. If your plan is to fly to lots of different places mainly with hard surface runways, I would go with the 14A. That's just me. You do what you want and have a blast doing it. I am really enjoying the process of building my 14A. Part of what I enjoy a lot is bringing my personality and craftsmanship into the build. If you are really on the fence, I would recommend spending some time getting your tailwheel endorsement to see if you like flying a tailwheel airplane a lot. I got mine in a J-3C at Red Stewart Airfield in Waynesville, OH. It was not very expensive and was absolutely part of my decision making when picking the 14A. Build and have fun!
 
As someone who has a fair amount of tailwheel time and has instructed in everything from the Decathlon to the T-6, there's no particular romance to them for me anymore. It's a matter of choosing the right airplane for the mission.

As others have said, if a traveling, cross-country machine is the primary objective, then the nosewheel version is probably the best fit. If a local, sunny day toy is the articulated primary mission, then one can't go wrong with the tailwheel version, particularly if grass fields are thrown into the mix. All of that said, either airplane will comfortably fill either role to the limits of the pilot's competence and confidence.

For myself, although I've previously built a tailwheel RV (an -8), I went the nosewheel route this time around. Partially to do something different, partially because my wife requested it, and partially because I don't care for the rod gear on the -14 or side-by-side tailwheel airplanes (large ones such as the C-47 and B-17 aside) in general. I like small, tandem tailwheels with zero parallax to mess with my landings! :)

So, what should the OP do? As we all have: whatever he likes! Unfortunately, it's a question that each of us must answer for himself.
 
...
I use my 9A to travel. I've landed it in cross winds that would be way beyond my (and I believe the planes) ability in a TW configuration.

...

-Dan

32 knots is my maximum demonstrated crosswind I. My -9. After that, it runs our of rudder.

I do not fear the crosswind.

Rudder authority is the determining factor in how much crosswind a plane can handle. The position of the little wheel has nothing to do with it. The tailwheel -14 has the same size rudder as the nosewheel version. As far as the plane is concerned, if there's too much crosswind for a -14, there's too much crosswind for a -14A. That's as far as the plane is concerned.

...
Well put!
 
No wrong answers in this thread. Sold a Rans S-20 I built. The insurance requirements required me to get 5 hours in the RV-7 with Mike Seager and 5 hours of dual in my Rans. I thoroughly enjoyed flying the rv-7 and didn't find it very difficult, a bit of over controlling the rudders initially.

When flying my Rans cross country, you had to pay attention to the forecasts as the winds could be a factor (760 LB's empty). This can cause some anxiety whilst traveling. Someone mentioned the 14 and the 14A have the same amount of rudder and with the right technique, should perform equally as well. This is true in theory but if you have to drop into a airport for fuel and it is blowing hard, theory won't help, especially if there is only has 1 runway. Forecasts aren't always accurate.



Ive spoke with several 14A and 14 owners that talk about what a great x-country aircraft. When considering many factors such as prop choice, insurance, ingress and egress, taxi visibility etc., The A Model would work best for me. The new gear design is robust. Heck, I am amazed at where some people on this thread take their A models. I do however like the looks of the tailwheel version. "to each his own"

Jim
 
Last edited:
Lots of good advice....

One more thing to consider.
There are quite a few people who have built a specific model without getting direct experience prior to them beginning to fly the airplane they built, and then discovered it just wasn't for them (a common theme years ago was people asking if there was a trigear mod in development for the RV-4) I know of quite a few RV's that were either sold, or converted to trigear after they were completed. There is nothing wrong with that. It is good for people to have what they will actually enjoy.

Short version - If you think you might like to fly a tail dragger, then invest in some training and get checked out in one. That is the only way you will know for sure. Considering the large investment (in time and $$$), it is a small price to pay to avoid regrets later.
 
To the original question, and IMHO:

The benefits of a tailwheel are:
1) looks
2) less drag (no data, just an opinion)
3) less weight
4) less cost
5) keeps the prop out of the rocks when doing a runup on gravel or grass
6) the thrust line pulls the airplane out of soft ground when starting to taxi, rather than into it
7) your friends think you are cool (or at least you think they do :))

The benefits of a nose wheel
1) inherently directionally stable when landing
2) better visibility while taxing
3) initial insurance is cheaper
4) ... that's about it ...

Tim
 
Thanks for all the information. I love this forum.
I am taking some advice and, Well I am scheduled for 8 hours of tail wheel instruction on the 29th and 30th this month. :eek::D:)
We?ll see how that goes.
 
question for Scott:

I'm happy with my A model, but just wondering....If someone wanted to change a -14 to a -14A (or vice-versa) what would the process entail?
 
one thing not mentioned in here... resell value! An A model will sell quicker and at a higher price compared to a tailwheeler :(

(the frown is coz I think it should be the opposite way ;))
 
The benefits of a nose wheel
1) inherently directionally stable when landing
2) better visibility while taxing
3) initial insurance is cheaper
4) ... that's about it ...

And assuming both pilots skill levels are equal, the nose wheel can takeoff and land a little shorter;)
 
question for Scott:

I'm happy with my A model, but just wondering....If someone wanted to change a -14 to a -14A (or vice-versa) what would the process entail?

It has been done with the 6,7, and 9 so it could be done with the 14 as well.
Changing from tail wheel to -A model would probably be slightly easier with one exception. If they were not installed during the fuselage build, installing the boarding step brackets would be nearly impossible.
 
32 knots is my maximum demonstrated crosswind I. My -9. After that, it runs our of rudder.

I do not fear the crosswind.


Well put!

Yikes!!! 32 knots direct cross wind in an RV?
I'm not s sh#t disturber but I'm going to have to call you on that. I have flown over 10,000 hours in many different light aircraft with a couple of thousand hours in tail wheel and I don't know of a light aircraft that can handle a 32 knot cross wind.
 
If you?re already the older side of 50, like me, you?ll find the A easier to get into. I was set on a TW but after a visit to Vans factory and trying both for size the ease of entry sold the A for me. Still wish I was a lot under 50 tho!
 
Scott
the nose wheel can takeoff and land a little shorter
Whilst the land shorter has been beaten to death in different threads (and most of my nosey wheel friends don?t even venture on grass for fear of ripping the front end off :D) and I could but won?t engage in a debate over this, I wonder how a whatever A model would take-off any shorter than a non-A?
 
Scott
Whilst the land shorter has been beaten to death in different threads (and most of my nosey wheel friends don?t even venture on grass for fear of ripping the front end off :D) and I could but won?t engage in a debate over this, I wonder how a whatever A model would take-off any shorter than a non-A?

It's the higher angle of attack that you can get on the trike gear compared to the tailwheel version. If you check out the new Carbon Cub which is now offered in trike gear youll read or hear on utube that it will also out perform the tailwheel version on take offs and landings for the same reasons. If i was operating out of rougher fields or gravel I'd prefer to have the tailwheel version of the RV simply for the additional prop clearance.
 
If you?re already the older side of 50, like me, you?ll find the A easier to get into. I was set on a TW but after a visit to Vans factory and trying both for size the ease of entry sold the A for me. Still wish I was a lot under 50 tho!

Scott
Whilst the land shorter has been beaten to death in different threads (and most of my nosey wheel friends don?t even venture on grass for fear of ripping the front end off :D) and I could but won?t engage in a debate over this, I wonder how a whatever A model would take-off any shorter than a non-A?

It's the higher angle of attack that you can get on the trike gear compared to the tailwheel version. If you check out the new Carbon Cub which is now offered in trike gear youll read or hear on utube that it will also out perform the tailwheel version on take offs and landings for the same reasons. If i was operating out of rougher fields or gravel I'd prefer to have the tailwheel version of the RV simply for the additional prop clearance.

Robert is correct

Takeoff and landing distance is based on airspeed at liftoff or touch down.
Airspeed required to lift a given amount of weight s based on angle of attack.
The RV-14 on all three wheels sits at a lower angle of attack than it is capable of flying at. There is nothing that can be done to make the angle of attack higher.
An A model can rotate to a higher angle of attack before the tail tie down drags the ground.
 
still relating to take-off roll distance only, I wonder... on a grass field yesterday, applied full throttle with one notch of flaps during the roll, stick neutral to keep the 3 points attitude, and she levitates off the ground in a very short distance, in ground effect and below stall speed at around 40kts... (yes, 180 ponies and the 3 blade CSP produce quite some pull :))
Could there be a difference, on grass strips, whereby the nose gear produces additional drag during the initial acceleration, or is the drag produced by the positive AOA of a taildragger greater?

Has any shoot-out on grass fields ever taken place?
 
cheaper insurance

My mind was made up when I compared insurance rates. TW was about $700 a year more. You can buy a lot of gas with that.
 
Back
Top