By all means...Can't we just get along
I think the RV crowd is OK with anyone making a contribution regarding common issues and subjects, avionics, electrical, engines, props, maintenance and safety. I especially LOVE to hear from the glass guys how to do fiberglass better. The best post on "glue and string" subjects are usually from former or current glass-plane builders.
Now lets be real. There is real fierce competitiveness or pride in ones "Brand", materials, mission or engine size. We all have prejudice or preferences. I will not go into the trade offs, but the RV's are the most popular homebuilts and have the highest resale to cost to build ratio for a reason. It does not mean other brands are not as good or don't have a niche.
One of the biggest rivalries has been the composite vs. other planes, so if plastic plane pilots and owner post and make any bragging comments like, I go 240 mph blaaaa blaaaaa, expect to be take some good natured ridicule. Granted the fast glass is not going to be real comfortable on a moderately rough 1000 foot grass strip. Besides the only glass I want to sit in is my hot tub.
PS don't forget to put your gear down.
I have seen RV'ers, Glass-pilots, Bonanza pilots and War Bird pilots (the worst) alike with their nose in the air at airshows. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It is a plane Darn it, its good. I remember when one of the "other" planes tried to park in the "chosen" RV area at a show, it was like WWIII. The poor marshaller did not know, it looked like a RV, and the pilot felt like crap (probably with less than a stellar opinion of RV'ers). Silly BS that RV'ers are not immune from. However I must admit I take great pride in the RV "Brand". I do think it offers the most bang for buck, best handling (feel) and best overall performance and safety, but it does not mean I can't appreciate an antique, war bird, wood, rag and tube or a Lancair with sexy curves.
Welcome aboard all (homebuilts), I say. RV'ers can just take it as a huge compliment that builders of other models are attracted to this RV sites and want to know how RV'ers do it. It really says it all. It is also a complement that groups like the RV killer group pop-up. George
aadamson said:
The air "sticks" to them better and that make em go faster... Where else can you do 240kts on 13.5 gph, and climb out at 2500 fpm.
That kind of bragging is going to get my attention. I don't think you are referring to your fixed gear Lancair.
I think you referring to a 2 seat Legacy, retract with a 310 HP Cont. IO-550-N. As far as 13.5 gal/hr at 240 kts, I seriously doubt, especially in a 2500 fpm climb, which is what you kind of imply. I guess you mean a 240kt cruise at 8000ft, which I believe. 13.5 gal sounds suspiciously low. My guess is 15 gal/hr or more. No doubt the Legacy is a winner at Reno and king of the fast glass class, but..........it comes at a high cost most can't or want to afford. If you want to go fast, buy a jet.
The cost of a Lancair Legacy/IV kit, engine, prop and avionics for this kind of plane is well over 1/4 million dollars typically!
I talked to a pro builder and he told me Lancair IV's cost more than 500 grand to build! That's 1/2 Mil! Turbine, 3/4 a Mil! Apples and Cucumbers. Yes you go faster but at a cost premium of gas burn, build cost and other cost (maintenance and insurance). You can by a used King Air or MU2 for less than $200,000.
I'll back thru town in my RV with a 210 mph cruise and still be able to land on a short grass strip, AND BUILD IT IT FOR $60,000 (with used 180hp Lyc, Day/Night Deluxe VFR panel). Also the Cafe Foundation Triaviathon winner is a RV-4.
Don't get me wrong I love the Lancair, but I would probably not build one even if the cost was less. For those that do build them, great, not jealous. I don't want to cruise along at altitude. That's not fun for me. In fact I do that for a living. I want to do formation, aerobatics, go into small fields and occasional X-C, while not going broke doing it. You can't touch the value of a RV. No plane on the kit plane market represents as much value.
If you compare a RV-10 to a fixed ES Lancair you find the RV-10 does very very well on at least $50 to $100 thousand dollars less. (see table below). Here's an post I made comparing the RV-10 to the Lancair ES. I think you will also find RV's compare to Lancair's (320/360's/FG) with similar size 4-banger engines very well overall. The speed difference is not as dramatic as you make it sound when quoting the top speed of the fastest plane in the Lancair line-up.
The big difference is about the $41,000 kit price plus $20k engine.
....................................
RV-10........Lancair ES
Horse Power.....................260 HP............310 HP
Cruise [75% @ 8000 ft]......201 mph..........225 mph
Stall Speed........................57 mph............65 mph
Takeoff Distance.................360 ft............600 ft
Landing Distance.................525 ft............800 ft
Rate of Climb...................1,950 fpm.......2,000 fpm
Ceiling (est.)..................24,000 ft.........18,000 ft
Empty Weight..................1,520 lbs.........1,900 lbs
Gross Weight...................2,700 lbs.........3,200 lbs
Max useful......................1,180 lbs..........1,300 lbs
Fuel...................................60 Gal.............95 Gal
KIT COST.............$34,910/($44,860 QB)....$75,500
If the RV-10 had a 310 HP engine it would cruise approx 6% faster:
201 mph x (310/260)^(.33) = 213 mph,
so the Lancair claimed cruise is 12 mph faster.
I think if you want to cruise faster, consider a turbocharger (normalizing). Both (above) nice planes, but the kit price difference, cost of larger engine would make my 4 place kit plane choice easy. Goooooooo Team Van's.