10 Best Experimental Airplanes to Build and Operate

[@johnreed8872]

I think that you commited an oversight by not mentioning the Zenith line of AEB Aircraft. I realize you can't feature all brands, but Zenith are an extremely popular choice among homebuilders. Both high and low wing, economic, easy to build and very practical. The choices of engines is practically limitless. By no means fast and slick , just safe affordable fun! Thanks for the video of SOME of the best EABs! Blue Skies!

[@Dwaynesaviation]

Thank you very much Reed, I just pinned your commented, viewers will find it helpful for sure

[@johnreed8872]

@@Dwaynesaviation My pleasure.. I " stumbled " upon your channel and started viewing your past videos . Don't know how I missed your channel this long. Do you fly professionally or just pleasure? Where are you based? Anyway.. subscribing now and looking forward to seeing more of your work!

[@Dwaynesaviation]

I don't fly professionally, my base is Halifax... I've been around light airplanes and I love them, I'm working on building a Sling 2 by next year

[@mattt6511]

I agree the zenith line is amazing the factory and people are as solid as it gets great aircrafts and talk about short runway needed for takeoff!

[@RV6Pilot]

Another cost saving of the RV-12 is not just the low fuel burn of the Rotax 912 but also that it uses 91 octane unleaded gas from your local gas station. That’s typically a buck or two savings per gallon. I built a fueling rig for a couple hundred bucks (lifting the gas can up to the relatively high fuel port is difficult) and it paid itself off in just a couple of months.

[@FTBonito]

Fun seeing the actual Sling TSi (PH-SLG) that me and my dad build in this list❤

[@dwayne_]

Good job Dwayne 😎🤙

[@jamesbarrick3403]

I'm all about the Velocity XL or the twin. I have reviewed STATISTICS.... and what I have learned is that twin engine planes give owners and passengers some comfort, but actually they are more deadly. Yup.

[@speedomars]

The Mako is nose gear retractable kit that will cost $400k to 500k to finish. The Glasair III is not made anymore. An inline seating aircraft is clumsy...usually only for STOLs, not cruising aircraft. There is no Lancair Evolution. The Evolution split off into its own now quiet and not making kits anymore company (can't insure it after multiple accidents). The Velocity XL5 is very real...when equipped with a TSIO550-C 300hp engine, it can get to 220ktas. But the finish cost (after Continental just raised their prices last week) is north of $300k, and $400k if factory built. Serious IFR is risky in any Velocity (twin included) since there is no de-icing system for them. Still, they are cross-country cruisers, fast and super-high structural specs. Epic doesn't make a kit anymore, they make a certified plane based on the kit and it costs over $3.25m. Sling makes a range of products, all high quality and interesting. The RV12i is a light sport competitor with the Sling.

[@speedomars]

@@abel4776 Seriously? If true, that would be FANTASTIC. I want one.

[@speedomars]

@@abel4776 Will be interesting to see what price JMB brings the plane in at...I wanted an Evolution right at the time they had the crashes and folded up. I had a builder lined up and everything. I ended up ordering and its nearly finished, a Velocity. If the Evolution is real again, I will sell the Velocity new. DarkAero has been very slow, but it looks like a fun plane. Epic is way over priced. Nice plane, but they want $3.5 million for it. At that price might as well get the Cirrus SF50.

[@speedomars]

@@abel4776 You brought it up. I will check with JMB. If they build it the same way as their current product, then they will build it at the factory and ship it. Maybe they will go for the new FAA’s Part 23 which is a hybrid between experiement and factory built. The Velocity is an experimental, but there is a new process the FAA allows with factory building. You just need to be present for some checklist items at the factory, you do not need to build it yourself. The FAA wants owners to know the guts of the plane. It is a fast fiberglass plane with a cunard. It uses the same piston engine as a Cirrus SR22T. It can get up to 260ktas.

[@speedomars]

@@abel4776 Yes, You are correct. I owned a Cirrus SR22T and it cost me over a million bucks just to go 180ktas. I sold it 7 months ago and got all the money back. Then turned around and ordered the experimental Velocity. It cost half as much, has a full G3X panel and GTN750 nav panel, and goes up to 250ktas on about the same fuel burn as the Cirrus. At the time I ordered it, there was a 1.5 year wait to get it...the plane will be ready to fly home in Jan of next year. As of now, its a FOUR YEAR wait to get one. And Cirrus has a TWO YEAR backlog for anyone getting the same plane I just sold. The supply chain mess has hit aviation too. Garmin has hiked their prices 40% since I made my order (I just missed those hikes too) and Continental has hiked their prices 35% (I was caught by the first 10% hike). No doubt JMB will be hiking prices too. Its just how it is now. I sent an email to them, I hope they respond with some news on the Evo.

[@allenthoe8091]

3 RV's made the list except for the best one! :)

[@gregorybrown4062]

So what are the 6-seat options?

[@Pilinchi1]

Hi, I always enjoy your videos. Can you please consider making a video on small airplanes with removable or foldable wings that are considered trailable?

[@Dwaynesaviation]

Yes... That's a great idea, I'll consider making them

[@lhartford1]

The last aircraft in this video, the Vans RV-12, will do that.

[@MSingleton48]

You should have added “high end” to your title. There are some very good experimentals (i.e. Sonex, Zenith, etc.) that offer more fun for much less money than the ones you listed.

[@wylieecoyote]

Didn't mention the BD4c which is a 4 seater with a fast build time and made of aluminum. It is worth a look, although it is a little boxy, it is overbuilt and super strong.

[@tantanph7793]

7:10 Engine back fire WOW

[@jonasbaine3538]

Mixture full rich. Probably hot start

[@michaelksiezopolski]

Is this a Lancair and RV commercial? Where are the most popular planes? You choose the fastest and most expensive rather than best. To choose best you should see 10 best-selling experimental as they are best according to real data such as a number of sold and number of flying. How many people will pay for PT-6 or another turboprop engine?

[@Dwaynesaviation]

Thanks for the recommendation.... What's the best 10 experimental airplanes to you?

[@michaelksiezopolski]

@@Dwaynesaviation I would recommend planes that are most popular and most often build, like Sonex, KR2, MiniMax/Himax, Hummel, Sling, Kolb, Zenith, Fisher Flying Products, KitFox, etc... There is plenty not too expensive experimental planes available and are being built and flying all over the world. Quantity wise in way bigger numbers than Lancair or RVs. Do not get me wrong, but your list apart of Velocity is mostly Lancair and RV, where Lancair is really out of reach for most people, not worth to be mentioned unless you care only about speed, as performance is not just a speed alone. As you noticed all listed companies I provided did not mention any particular models, I will leave this research for you, as it depends on the mission of the plane. I hope to see a new and revise list of the best and most popular experimental aircraft of 2020-2021. Good Luck!.

[@DanFrederiksen]

Popularity is not the same as best. The kartrashians had many viewers but they were still trash. Lancair is simply head and shoulders above the rest. But interestingly the king of kings the Lancair IV-P, is not listed here :) That said, it could be done significantly better than that. But no one has done it. IV-P stands unchallenged. The best selling Cirrus SR22 certainly can't match it.

[@michaelksiezopolski]

@@DanFrederiksen Once again, you are missing a point here. The best is the one that is selling best, the rest is just something that exists and is either too expensive or unavailable. The factor is simple -> Demand and Price, so if the price is right the demand is high and that is why the product is best for the money you are paying for it. If you are looking for performance then jets will bit sh*t out of props but how many jet planes are available on the market today? How much are they? What is the cost for operations and insurance? BD5 jet is the best example here... There are planes made a long time ago where performance was extraordinary as for today's standards but apart from knowing these planes and even prototypes, I do not see them flying. SR22 is best because the price to performance ratio and safety is simply best! SR22 is easier to fly than any Lancair aircraft and you are buying a factory-made and ready-to-fly plane rather than a kit or secondhand. It is even stupid to compare these ones. Be real and look what the demand is and at what price. Concord is not flying as tickets were too expensive, one accident was enough to terminate the whole Concorde program, due to price and demand and at the same time, please do not tell me that people do not want to fly faster?! They do, but they are not willing to pay a premium price for such a fast fly (at least not every one of them).

[@DanFrederiksen]

@@michaelksiezopolski I'm a polymath genius, I did not miss your oddly arbitrary and frankly quite unintelligent point that sales determine which is best. By that argument the original VW beetle is the best car ever and that's just not quite the whole truth, is it. Or an F150 as a more recent impressively embarrassing display of stupidity. There is a tendency that good value for money will sell better but it's only a tendency and doesn't account for the particular complexity there is in GA. A Lancair IV-P could be produced for a very manageable price and thus might well outsell Cirrus SR22. But it was never for sale. Still a better plane. The BD5 is a quite noteworthy plane. It cruised at 370km/h with a 70HP engine. It's not necessarily the ultimate configuration as a 1 seater but it's a good datapoint.

[@kineticU]

Good list as most of them will have parts and service for years to come. For my mission parts and availability of knowledge to tool it yourself or by an AP is also key to experimental aircraft. There is no point keeping one on the ground for months unless there’s one ,ore in your hanger.

[@andremarais2706]

Title is misleading. A Pietenpol is also experimental. VNO is 80 mph. Narc produced video.

[@TheArmchairrocker]

3:38 Range of 130 nautical miles? I don't think so.

[@petesmith9472]

I owned an rv8 for five years…few aircraft match its payload, speed and with tip tanks its range. Cruise 165kts with an IO360 at 33 litres an hour. ..and the centreline seating is something you miss.

[@Gettinherethehardway]

Pete Smith did you build yourself. What build package did you use. What is your background was the build challenging?

[@dirtcop11]

I wonder if anyone ever said, "My butt's in a Sling?" They are all good airplanes. I would love to fly in any of them.

[@russellesimonetta3835]

Uhh Mustang Aero mustang ll or the whitman tailwind. High performance and affordable.

[@mitchellsmith4601]

Where are the videos of the inside of these planes? The avionics?

[@RV6Pilot]

The avionics in Experimentals are different in every build. Most people these days are going with glass panels from Dynon, Garmin, etc. I prefer Dynon for lower cost and easier usage, but either way they’re 21st century tech. My fully capable autopilot cost $1,500. Dirt cheap.

[@aladdingames6557]

I did heard you don’t need a pilot license to fly a Spera mental aeroplane is that true

[@AvgDude]

Should have Bede BD-4 on the list, a blazingly fast, inexpensive, and roomy high wing.

[@kvnkaveman]

The Velocity N13VT V Twin you used in your video crashed and killed the Two ferry Pilots on Feb 16 2021.

[@KOUKAROS-GR]

Rv 14?

[@souljahroch2519]

It must be nice to not worry about the price😏

[@VinaySagarG]

LX7 is missing.

[@SalveMonesvol]

You should give MPG

[@FourthWayRanch]

watch out for kit manufacturers that withhold parts of the drawings or plans from you

[@savethedeveloper]

c'mon, how many Makos are out there? of course "best" does not always equate to most sold

[@Johann75]

По русски написано «Руками не трогать» в первом кадре 😊

[@ndirangukanene7432]

Sling TSI💪✌️

[@jhonwainne8392]

Parecen aviones, normales y corrientes.

[@gregorybrown4062]

What are the ten best six-place experimental aircraft we can build?

[@majorchungus]

Alot of the planes are close to $1million or over.

[@scottwillson5562]

haha the sportsman range isn't 130 nm.

[@jimydoolittle3129]

Sling TSI should not be in this list 😖 because of the rotax engine , in 23000 hrs of flight i had two engine failures , ...... yes with a rotax

[@Dwaynesaviation]

Lol.. Why?

[@CraigMaiman]

Rotax engines have roughly the same reliability as Lycoming and Continental. That's actual data, not anecdotes. There are over 600 Slings flying worldwide and I've yet to hear of an in-flight engine failure. The Slings are very efficient, so would certainly deserve to be on this list.

[@speedomars]

Rotax is the highest quality, most reliable small aircraft engine made. They are the most technologically sophisticated also.

[@RV6Pilot]

I have 600+ hours on my 912ULS without as much as a burp. 100% reliable, starts easily no matter the weather, and it’s glass smooth. The only thing I don’t really like is balancing the carbs, and that’s only difficult when I can’t find a helper. I can do it alone, but it takes a bit longer.

[@MartinGak]

What the hell is with the voice over?

[@chrisbuckle3132]

I think the speeds is fake Its to fast that aeroplanes can t go so fast.

[@thesep1967]

And now please, let's link exp/acft performance to fatal accidents. Wot? A linear curve? How come? Ever increasing wing loading, smaller and smaller empennage, ever shorter fuselages surely don't make flying characteristics worse, don't they? But what the heck, your widow is going to sue the hell out of the kit manufacturer anyway, and a jury of utterly incompetent peers will find in her favor. And there we have another bancruptcy.

[@crapisnice]

they are not experimental, they are common inefficient low aspect ratio petrol tailplanes developed in the 1930s. when petrol is gone they won't be flying

[@CraigMaiman]

Silly and untrue comment.

[@mill2712]

@@CraigMaiman Even if petroleum disappears in the future, prop planes will probably be the easiest aircraft to keep in the skys.

[@scottwhitcher265]

Petrol won't bw gone in the next 50-100 years. It will get more expensive and as ( and when) better energy sources become available they will be adopted and displace petrol.

[@crapisnice]

@@scottwhitcher265 you cannot extract petrol and its an alternative energy source that will be depleted so you wont be driving flying bricks.

[@jhaedtler]

Why are you only looking at the plastic and snap together EAB planes? Open you eyes and you will find much cheaper to operate and own planes! Go up child!

[@CraigMaiman]

Almost half the planes listed are not "plastic" airplanes. The Vans and the Slings are all-metal aircraft.

[@ralphhubbell]

All low wings, No thanks.

[@JEMPL27]

I wonder why the BD-4C was left out... that's my dream plane😊

[@markhathaway9456]

The Sportsman is high-wing.

[@antoniog9814]

Sling is working on a high wing TSi.

[@danielb516]

This list is idiotic .

[@JoeStarr-j6q]

All are too expensive for the average person.