Q&A #2: Why the Van’s Aircraft RV-10 versus Lancair Mako or TAF Sling TSi

[@johngilbert1325]

The first time I've ever seen a youtuber mention that using their link/connection actually gets them money. Honesty appreciated.

[@algenalbritten3056]

I just finished my Sling Tsi build and I agree with your advice, go check them out, sit in them, fly them, get a good feel for the pros and cons of each. Compare each to your overall mission. Internet only research won’t suffice. Great video👍🏿.

[@abramweston9873]

I really want a Sling Highwing.

[@Top10VideosOnTheWeb]

Great video - and a great resource for folks. Very reasonable comparison kits. I went with the Sling TSi and am still building. I looked at the RV-10. Vans is a fantastic group and likely to remain successful. I went TSi for these reasons: Nice balance of performance (with a turbocharged Rotax 915, constant speed prop, FADEC, Auto gas), efficiency (5-8 gph), range with standard tanks likely exceeded my bladder capacity, payload, useful load full fuel around 800 lbs, ballistic parachute option, stable, responsive handling. Additionally, the factory was willing to make a small modification to the seats to fit my 6'7" frame. Disadvantages: Company is in South Africa so large shipments travel by ship. Sling has a good pedigree, but hard to argue with Vans longevity and number of kits flying.

[@dabneyoffermein595]

what do you mean "Likely" to remain successful

[@EJWash57]

What plane you choose, experimental or certified, is a matter of your mission. Air-knocking, cross-country, acro, etc. For one pilot friend of mine, he threw his bladder onto his selection list, which sort of took care of the aircraft range requirement! I retire in 20-months, 2-days, and several hours/minutes (but who's counting) from a 35+ year airline pilot career. The closer I get, the more I want to stay in flying - for pleasure, not as a job! My wife and I have decided that a private plane is in our future. We've drafted our mission, and have come down on the side of cross-country comfort and speed. As far as certified -vs- experimental, it's a matter of if we want to fly now (turn-key) or delay flying our own airplane for 3-5 years while we build it? Of course, flight currency is a huge factor (don't let anyone tell you that it isn't) so there's more $$$ involved to rent a plane during the building process. Turn-key is attractive, but then it comes to a matter of budget. How much airplane can we afford (make/model/year) and stay within our mission? Well, it's NOT going to be a late-model $300K Cirrus! Would be if I hadn't put three kids through college... We've narrowed our selection to Van's. For us, there's just no other comparison out there. Again, FOR US. We are fortunate to live 2.5-hours north of Aurora, so we were able to drive down and visit the factory. We fell for the RV14A. Very roomy, fast, and we really don't need four seats. When we sat in the -10, we appreciated the increase in roominess, but I just can't wrap my head around hauling an extra two seats that *may* have butts in them once, or twice a year. I could have taken a demo flight, but didn't. I know myself well, and I would have left the factory with an empennage kit. For now, fitting-out my home shop and tooling up is enough until I retire. And now, Van's has to go and tease us with the upcoming RV15? When it comes out, depending on what it offers, we'll review our mission - again! I did not take your review of the other two aircraft you considered as anywhere near negative, or "bashing". These models, in-turn, fit the needs of other folk's mission. You were describing your mission. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. You do not have to be apologetic that the other two aircraft do not meet your mission. Congrats on your project, my wife and I appreciate your videos, and you and Tyler keep-on, keepin'-on.

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks for the kind words! I laughed at the bladder comment 😂 good point about turn-key now vs renting while you build. I totally understand how some folks just want something to fly right away.We are lucky to already belong to a great little flying club with a couple Cessna’s to use while we finish our build. We considered the 14 too, but decided we really wanted the option of being able to take others with us, especially in case we have kids one day. That’s going to be an exciting project for y’all when you retire 😊 I’m glad you like my videos! We’ll keep chugging away over here

[@ckryegrass11]

Sir. Please but the empennage. Start now. You will be thankful you did once you retire. Man! You have put 3 children thru college. BUY THE KIT! Dont wait any longer to do something. And get the rv10 . Trust me. Better to have them and not need them. Start your build brother.

[@ckryegrass11]

Also, buy the quick build kit as well.

[@danielbasovitch5087]

I do understand the reason for the RV-10, I also am NOT an FAA standard pilot of 175 lbs! I can not fly gliders anymore at age 67 I am too heavy at 245 LBS. You made the correct decision, the RV is more for your money and has a very long history of completions and satisfaction among-st its owners.

[@andrewhumphrey8100]

Great video comparing these aircraft. You talked about the loading differences but I would like to have seem more of an explanation on how much you can actually have in the luggage compartment since each aircraft will have max load for that part of the aircraft regardless of how much weight you have to play with. There also must be load that will be within the CG limits. You can however use the rear seats as luggage if they are not occupied by passengers. Also, it would have been nice to touch on the build time of each aircraft since this may be an important factor on which aircraft you want to build. I see that so many people start projects and not finish them due to the time commitment required. For example, the RV requires 2500 hours to build and only 1400 hours for the TSi. The TSi uses pop rivets when the RV uses normal rivets which can lead to a much earlier build. Thank you for video and I am sure people will be appreciate it.

[@wernerberry7800]

Just as cute as could be! You most definitely made the right choice!

[@PlaneLady]

Thank you! 😊

[@gotpwr]

Great video, thanks for posting! I can’t wait to build an RV10 some day.

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks! 😊

[@CraftingN112DR]

Just found your channel, Glad you picked Van's. I just finished a 6 year RV-12iS build. I was one of the volunteers that worked in the pit the helped build the One Week WonderI. I saw in one of your videos that you are using a drill to final size your holes. I would recommend you get a #40, and #30 ream. You get a much cleaner hole with little to know burr. Thanks for sharing your build look forward to many more.

[@PlaneLady]

How fun that you just finished yours and that you helped at the One Week Wonder that we enjoyed so much 😊 we’ve got a #40 and #30 reamer so we’ll have to try that out. Thanks for the tip!

[@mojogrip]

Mako is upselling on fancy design and speed. Your comparison on the fuel capacity; keep in mind the fuel burn per hour for each aircraft. Range, I think is a matter of practicality. I personally would need 1-2 bathroom breaks before I can get to the top range of any of these aircraft. Glad you did your research. I think you chose the best plane that's right for you. Happy building!

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks! 😊

[@geanitsucuneli4791]

Correct!

[@stephen5147]

When you’re comparing prices I’d configure the 3 airplanes as similarly as you can, 2 doors, their standard engine, prop, etc. The cost of the basic kit does not paint a complete picture costs. Most folks won’t fly these for 5 hrs non-stop, myself included. So for me an important comparison is how quickly can I get there. As far as cargo capacity goes, put 50 gal in each one of them, then tell me how much weight capacity remains… apples to apples. Another important comparison is the difference is operating costs… such as fuel costs per the same distance, pro-rata cost of the overalls, cost of periodic maintenance, etc. There is so much more to consider than just the basic kit costs. In the final analysis, if my flying mission were to go from here to there frequently, I would probably choose the RV-10 as well. Thanks for the video.

[@PlaneLady]

All good points! As another user put it in a different comment, one’s bladder does have to come into consideration, lol! Like I mentioned there was a LOT more that we looked into and compared between these planes. It’s just really difficult to cram 8 months of comparisons and research into a little video 😜 I tried to cover some of the specs we looked at while also pointing out that actually getting into the planes before making your decision can really be helpful in terms of determining comfort and maybe what irks you. You’re right, the basic kit definitely doesn’t come close to the final cost of any of these, but it seemed like the most fair way to present the “price” for each of them. Glad you liked the video 😊

[@DCGULL01]

Great video! Thank you for taking the time to explain your mission, and- the things that kept you out of the Mako & the Sling TSI. I LOVE the TSI, but- I agree, it's almost sports car snug when compared to the Van Van's RV-10. All 3 are excellent aircraft, but- your mission really dictates your choice. I'm excited to see your build, so- I HOPE you will share it with us. Van's does such a good job with all of their planes, really have heard AWESOME feedback from builders. Thankfully, I've also heard great things about the other top aircraft manufacturers as well! (TAF, KitFox, RANS...) Most Importantly- Congratulations on the very first hard decision- Which One to Build!!!! Golly, I'm excited for you!

[@markg4459]

Think you made the right call. I've owned 2 lancairs & 1 RV (RV-9, 2 seat taildragger). The lancairs were beautiful, fast but, frankly, a bit unreliable and support from lancair was rather poor. Granted, I did not have a Mako and that may have been key. Think they were more interested in selling & supporting the new model than the out-of-production models (360s & IVs). The RV was reliable, easy to work on and had lots of support. Best wishes with the build & your flying thereafter!

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks for sharing your experience and for the well wishes 😊

[@swoodgat]

What a great video sticking to the factors that you considered important for your choice to buy and build an aeroplane. Now more than 2 years later, Sling flew to Oshkosh with their new Sling TSI High Wings (tricycle and tail dragger configurations) with the same Rotax engine. Would be very interesting to see how this aircraft would influence your decision if you were going through the same process today. The Van’s RV-10 is a beauty and if it checks your boxes then it is the right choice for you. And keep talking with your hands; I did not even notice until I read it in the comments.

[@EJWash57]

Another thought just hit me: Manufacturer support. Not just questions and (limited) guidance during the building stage, but addendums and changes during the building stage. Also, post-build support in the way of Service Bulletins and Advisory Directives. What happens to this support if or when the kit manufacturer ceases operations? I trust that Van's will be around for a long time to provide this support. Go back over the years and take a look at the list of designers and kit manufacturers that presented at Oshkosh and Sun N Fun. See which operations are still around today. Just another consideration in choosing a design/kit.

[@airops423]

This aged well :/

[@bnosrati]

I applaud your choice. That has been my choice as well over sling-TSI, because of engine, comfort, speed and beauty.

[@GoodPlaneLiving]

Great video with lots of insights and info!! Thanks for posting it! (You look so comfortable on camera, a natural!) Keep up the great work! -Colleen

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks for the kind words Colleen 😊 hope all y’all are doing well! Ed’s build logs have helped us out more than once 😉

[@mmichaeldonavon]

I'd choose a Vans over any of the others. I think the sling tsi is a "Flash in the pan." Go Vans!

[@auburnaviator6167]

Good quick comparison Christine. Now back to work, I see some fuel tank rear baffles in the background that need to be installed 😜.

[@PlaneLady]

lol! Ok ok 😉

[@MrSixstring2k]

Thank you for the quick analysis, it’s very helpful.

[@ctn830]

Great video. Though I think the TSI has one thing going for it that puts it way past the other two. And that’s the Rotax 915 engine. No comparison to other engines. The savings on gas alone is worth it. If Rotax comes out with a bigger engine than the 915 then the game is over for others.

[@lamberto6405]

@@baseballlife5884 So, I will disagree. The Rotax is designed to run at those RPMs with the reduction gear. This is not a flaw. The rotax can burn 91 car gas, which is significantly less expensive. It does this with a much smaller displacement (which is why the RPM CAN go higher). The Rotax was designed a few years ago, my Lycoming over 50, 60, or 70 years ago? The TBO on the Rotax is 2000 hrs. No issues. They are bullet proof as the other 3 main aircraft engines.

[@philipritson8821]

Your Sling Tsi is an airport to airport cruiser, where the only fuel available is usually Avgas, so unless you're planning a drive to a local gas/petrol station (with fuel storage of some sort in tow) to refuel, you will buy Avgas anyway (which will undermine you cost and advantage and committ you to more frequent oil changes). Lycoming engines may be heavy, expensive and dated but they are perfect for the RV-10 mission.

[@slingbuilduk400]

Great Video. I really enjoyed the facts presented as part of the comparison and your rationale for choosing the Vans RV10. Great choice and good luck with your build

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks 😊

[@MariaOrLex]

Great video I really enjoy your honesty!!!!!!

[@briandillard4015]

Great discussion on these 3 options. Very helpful

[@PlaneLady]

Thank you 😊

[@bayoubanditaviation3754]

The RV10 is a fantastic airplane. We are getting ready to build a 14A

[@PlaneLady]

Congratulations 😊

[@derekroulston1977]

sounds like a trip to Osh is needed. Just started looking into the ideal and I am leaning towards the Van's. Love the info.

[@geanitsucuneli4791]

I like the way you are thinging.Smart!!!

[@mohammadbarani5452]

Thanks for the VERY useful review. So, so finally how much the airplane costed you? What is the typical service cost and avionics subscription cost per year? Thanks!

[@muhammadsteinberg]

I'm not as familiar with the Sling and Mako as I am with RV-10. I've already put my deposit down on the RV-10 emp kit so I'm kind of committed to that. You covered so details that make me glad I chose the VANS. You prefectly identified some areas that would have been an irritation for me later had I chose either of the other two. Greatly appreciate you describing some details I would have overlooked and regretted later.

[@davidmiller4594]

One third of the EAA homebuilts out are Vans RVs. That does say a lot about the company.

[@flycory]

Excellent

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks! 😊

[@michaerun]

Nice video. Also, Van's does not try and take you on the parts and they have any part out of the kit available to ship. They are almost always the same price or often cheaper than other suppliers on standard parts, like Aircraft Spruce. And of course offer the engine at OEM. I don't know if the other kit suppliers of the engines at OEM, but I did not look into it. I Stopped at the kit price vs. performance (building RV10).

[@PlaneLady]

good point!

[@sirnewton6874]

I enjoyed your video.

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks 😊

[@why_the_hell_not8789]

This Really did help me... And THANKS!

[@russellesimonetta3835]

Rv 10 is the best choice.

[@AClark-gs5gl]

Really appreciate the cargo door, entry and egress comparison!

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks! It was just something that stood out to us when comparing everything

[@AClark-gs5gl]

@@PlaneLady we have "senior" passengers to consider, so very important for us. Thanks again!

[@SRiggle56]

Sounds like the best choice for your mission and reasonable points that shaped your opinions. The total completed cost ($300k to $500k) of the Mako would seem to push someone to a certified aircraft that you could get without the build time lag.......a C182 comes to mind for similar performance and even a Cirrus possibly.......unless you just want to build and avoid certified and gain the experimental advantages. Great job of consolidating the comparison.

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks! 😊

[@ttaylor7777]

C182 is not even the same world as the Mako. You will get there 50% faster in the Mako. I flew in the Mako, beautiful flying airplane. C182's are pigs in comparison.

[@edwardchipps8629]

1st thing is that I love flying women! Go girl! 2nd thing is you’re cute too! 3rd thing is unfortunately you are quite wrong about the payload. People often confuse useful load with payload. Useful load includes full fuel, which is 60 gal in an RV10(unless you’ve added aux fuel tanks). A light RV10 has an empty weight of about 1700lbs with a MTOW of 2700lbs. This gives you a useful load of 1000lbs. With 60 gal of fuel you get a payload of 640lbs. If you have the aux tanks, this goes down to about 550lbs. So whatever you do PLEASE don’t take 4 200lb adults and 100lbs of baggage and fill up the tanks! We need as many female pilots to stay alive as we can! Can’t wait to see your 10! I have been in love with mine for 7 years now! Your RV10 will become a family member. And BTW, don’t be disappointed, but the best you will see from an RV10 is 165KTAS, which is still awesome for a fixed gear piston single! Ted Chipps RV10 N498EC

[@USA-GreedyMenOfNoIntegrity]

I can haul 4 200 lb’ers with no bags and 41 gal of fuel. 169-165 kt cruise. 9 years and still loving it!

[@ss442es]

I watched a previous video of a 10 as opposed to a Lancair fixed gear and the performance was very similar all things being equal.

[@peterjohnkendall7637]

Great Video what engine prop and avionics did you choose and therefore what is your estimate for the RV10's final build? Thanks

[@PlaneLady]

Haven't made all our final decisions yet - we were planning to use Oshkosh this year to really compare all our options and obviously that is unfortunately not going to be possible 🙁

[@kevinrtres]

That's why there's a saying that women keep the economy going... thanks for the confirmation...!😊

[@jeffchapman8992]

Thank you. 1st time viewer. Continued success. Liked. Will check out more videos and consider subscribing.

[@MrJsii69]

Just discovered you and your videos yesterday and I'm already a subscriber, keep it coming! Having a hard time deciding. So I went to Oshkosh 2019 for the first time and wanted to see a few specific aircraft and fell in love with them BUT! My mission was speed and range, ideally with 4 seats however much like the motorcycle that my wife bought for me I think most of the time it will just be me flying (she's been on the bike twice!). So the first stop was the RDD LX7 (modified Lancair). What a great piece of engineering; but, 1 door (no option for a 2nd) and I want to fly with a right handed stick; pricey but nicely done! Then I got in the Mako, now unlike your take (no issues there) I absolutely love the center stick and I can get a 2nd door??? Then I took a looked at the Sling & the RV and for all the reasons you mentioned I agree with you about them both. After looking at completion and operation cost I questioned how important speed and range really are? To me the RV isn't the ideal aircraft but it just does everything pretty darn well! Thanks for your insight!

[@waqarsyed6641]

Very cool

[@syman0007]

What motor are you planning to use?? Did you consider Aeromomentum's AM20T which they claim is a direct fit for Lycoming IO540 for less than half the price

[@jwagner1993]

I'm kinda same internal discussion here with my wife. We need room! ..and Lancair is out almost from start. Sorry Lancair, to pricey But I put the Velocity ony list.. I'm lost hehe

[@clemsonaeronautics7447]

Thanks for a great video.

[@1shARyn3]

Another thing that the price doesn't include: PAINT (figure $10-15k+)

[@PlaneLady]

Very true! Lots of variables & options that affect the final cost for any of these planes; there’s a guy in our flying club who painted his RV himself. That’s why I stuck with just listing the costs for each standard slow build kit.

[@1shARyn3]

@@PlaneLady Reason for adding paint is cuz so many are shocked at the cost, especially when considering DIY with quality paints that are extremely toxic and require exotic paint tools (and state permits) for application. But as you say, YMMV and building is for education and recreation. BTW, OUTSTANDING video. I am recommending your channel to our EAA Chapter for builders' reference.

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks for the nice compliment and recommending my channel to your EAA chapter 😁 I’m glad you like it

[@davidcook5295]

Did you fly in these planes before making your decision?

[@PlaneLady]

No, we didn’t get to fly them

[@georgeburns1561]

Great explanation. Really as I see it, you decided over comfort, and that is the most important part. One minor quibble with your comparisons, though... You mentioned the fuel capacity of all three, but neglected to note a very important difference about the Sling TSi. While it's true the Sling has a really small (by comparison) fuel capacity, the Rotax 914si only burns about 6-8 gph. That big 'ol 540 is gonna get close to 12 gph. So it's not going to even out on range, but it's not as bad as it sounds when just looking at a fuel capacity straight comparison. Also, did you ever in your research come across and consider the Zenair CH640? I know you would have chosen the RV10 over the CH640 because the performance isn't that close, but was just wondering if you even knew it existed. (They just discontinued future sales this past month - I suspect because they let it "languish on the advertising floor" for too long).

[@PlaneLady]

Thanks! 😊 Fair point about the fuel efficiency. The Rotax 915iS for the Sling TSi burns about 7-9gph from what I've read and the 540 I think will burn about 11gph, so the fuel efficiency is better. But that TSi is also only going to cruise on average around 148 knots (I misspoke in the video, looks like 155 is their max cruise - www.slingaircraft.com/aircraft/sling-tsi/) and the RV-10 will cruise on average about 170 knots. At 148 knots that a lot more like the 182t that we have with our flying club and we figured if we're spending the money to build our own plane we wanted something that would get us around faster than the planes we already had available with our club. So looking at flying say from here to Atlanta that's about 650nm. At 170 knots we'd get there in 3.8hours and at 11gph that's 41.8gal burned. At 148 knots we'd get there in 4.4hours and at 8gph that's 35.2gal burned. So it's about a 6.6gal difference so about $26-$33 savings at $4-5/gal. But we'd get there about 40 minutes faster. For us saving that time and getting there in under 4 hours is worth the extra $30 or so we might spend on fuel. Plus the TSi can only carry 55lbs in their baggage compartment so even if we cut out enough fuel to fit 4 "standard size" adults in the plane and max baggage, 55lbs isn't a lot of weight to work with for 4 people to take a trip. Versus the 100lbs the RV-10 can hold in the back. Again, this just fit better with our desired purpose for the plane. Again there was LOTS of stuff that we looked at and there's LOTS of information to sort through and I tried to condense it to some of the highlights to explain why we went with Van's - for us the speed and useful load won out over fuel efficiency (plus the comfort of the RV-10 😊). But I can totally see why others would prefer an option that burns less fuel. Oh, and Tyler said he was familiar with the CH640, but that cruise speed (~130 knots) ruled it out pretty early since it was even slower than the Cessna's in our club. The three I mentioned were really the 3 we focused on.

[@timm1583]

@@PlaneLady also less time on the engine I am not sure what it cost to rebuild the Rotax compared to what you end up with in the RV but either way a faster plane has several benefits

[@lamberto6405]

@@PlaneLady I think a 540 is burning significantly more than 11gph. My 360 burns that.

[@BobPenzien]

Great video Christine. Are you and Tyler considering any optional upgrades to your RV-10 that are worth the extra cost?

[@PlaneLady]

We are - we've already made a couple changes to our fuselage kit. I guess that will be another video in the future 😜

[@SailFlyTri]

What’s your projected finished cost with the RV10. How many hours of total work estimated to complete (at no cost?)

[@drexplordinaire]

can you use normal carry on bags on any of these? how do you even get 200 lbs of carry on bags in that tiny compartment

[@jeeeeeeees]

i'd love a 10 ,im version of this, with more straight to the point / list :) #low attentionspan

[@timduncan8450]

Plane Lady did you consider the Veloce-400 or the Tango Foxtrot-4? These composite kits look fast but much less prolific. I am wondering if they have issues?

[@PlaneLady]

We did not look at either of those so I can’t say 🤷🏼‍♀️

[@adddad9779]

I wish the RV-10 would come with a Rotax 915 option. Im super interested in that motor. I have like a decade b4 i can begin my build so I hope they read this :) thanks for your video!!

[@PlaneLady]

I know Higgs Diesel is supposed to be working on an option for the RV-10 that would take jet a, diesel, etc (the Hawk 4), but I’m honestly not sure when that is going to happen because they said earlier this year that buyers would start taking delivery of them this September but haven’t seen any new announcements from them in a while. I’ve heard from others that there is apparently still a fair amount of testing that needs to be done on it, so that might not be an option for a couple more years. We’ll see, but something you can keep an eye on.

[@Austinmediainc]

The Rotax is only 140 HP so not sure if it would be enough for the RV 10, the TSI is very light. I love the fact the Rotax takes car gas, doesn't use much, and takes care of constant speed prop. That being said it has an overhaul at 1200, it revs at twice that of the legacy engines, and don't really have data on longevity. Would be nice if the legacy engines adopted a little more technology like the Austro and Rotax, taking less work from the pilot.

[@Austinmediainc]

@@baseballlife5884 is Austro-Engine used by Diamond owned by Mercedes? If so I wasn't aware.

[@philipritson8821]

​@@AustinmediaincNo Diamond's engine division hold the intellectual property rights to that engine. They (Diamond) future proofed the engine rather than take the risk Mercedes would take it out of production.

[@gottafly30]

As has been said all planes are a compromise, and these three are designed for a different missions. The sling is an economical light 4 seat that in reality carries 2 adults with a ton of bags or small kids, pets instead. Load all 4 seats with adults and you are leaving gas or baggage on the ground. But This not unlike early certificated aircraft from the major manufacturers. For example a 172 has four seats as well, but as any owner knows if you fill the tanks, you generally can’t fill the seats. So you are trading gas/range for people and cargo. And with modern design the sling crushes the similar powered 172 in both airspeed and fuel burn. The RV 10 is an almost 4 adult aircraft, which was designed to be less of a compromise than the traditional certified 4 place, and competes very very well with early cirrus, particularly the 20’s which what it was designed for. The RV10 has a similar shape and is sometimes mistaken for it on the ramp by pax in my experience. Similar load, similar fuel burn, but much better speed and agility due to a much different wing. In my experience the 10 is much sportier and fun, but if you are a hard core all weather flyer, it is pretty twitchy in the bumps. IMHO . THE 10 is a great choice. The Mako was designed specifically to beat the SR22, and it does so in every facet. Some could argue part of the speed advantage is pulling in the nose gear, which in all trigear is a huge drag. Pun intended. It is way more expensive than the 10, but if you are planning on using quick build with a builder assist center for your 10, that gap closes a bit. As a current cirrus driver I’d argue it’s the plane Cirrus would build if the FAA would let them, which it won’t without years and tens of millions due to bureaucracy. The builder assist at the factory is included on the Mako, and their goal is having you flying in months not years.... The best advice is test drive talk to owners and pick the one that best meets your usual mission. If you normally fly alone or with one other person a couple hundred miles on sunny days, any of these will serve you well. On the occasion that you fly full of big people you make trade offs. That is the same logic you use by not driving a moving truck every day because you may move every few years... blue skies everyone.

[@avaldes74]

Very interesting video, if I could only get my wife on board with this project!!!?? :-(

[@meradu2]

Love the vide so much research on this plane ✈️ May nephew build he’s RV10 in the garage I think almost 10 year’s a go lol and when he told me that ,I was thinking no way lm going to fly in this plane lol But he deed an excellent job on the plan and now fling like a pro in it for so many years, I even got to fly in it .. flying not landing lol . I also have a dream to build an RV9 A If you want pl look and c my video 2020 flying RV10 and RV7 Have a bless day

[@dvsmotions]

Should have looked at the Velocity.

[@taxacher]

I agree with that. awesome airplane

[@bikersoncall]

These 'kit' companies essentially sell you an airframe kit, not an airplane kit, at their advertised prices. (?)

[@dabneyoffermein595]

Sounds like the 10 is the best of class

[@SirMasterJoe]

What did you go with for your engine?

[@PlaneLady]

Still deciding

[@philipritson8821]

​@Plane Lady Do you have a choice? It's either an injected O-540 or one carbs.

[@matthewnelson4039]

Did you get the quick build kit?

[@PlaneLady]

No. Slow building everything 😊

[@matthewnelson4039]

@@PlaneLady nice thats what I want to do, with the RV 10 as well!

[@PlaneLady]

We’re close to finishing the wings here soon - really was not bad. Have you started your build yet?

[@matthewnelson4039]

@@PlaneLady no, we are holding off on buying until this coronavirus craziness dies down.

[@joegremlin]

No one in their right mind would ever argue the choice of an RV10. But measuring the merits of the fuel capacity of a 12 GPH (at 75%) 6 cylinder big bore engined airplane against the fuel capacity of an7-8 GPH 4 cylindered turbo'd small block engined airplane is kind of like saying this 5 hp push lawn mower that only holds 2.5 gal of fuel isn't as good as this 20hp zero steer that holds 5 gal of fuel because it doesn't hold as much fuel. If they both get your lawn mowed without having to stop to refill the fuel tank, what do you care how much fuel they hold? I'm not arguing your choice, but your reasoning is a bit disingenuous IMO.

[@PlaneLady]

You’re right, I didn’t really go into why we looked at the difference in fuel capacity and failed to mention the difference in fuel efficiency. It was difficult trying to answer the question of why we picked the RV-10 and go over our months of comparing the 3 planes without making a ridiculously long video 😳 I’ll probably make an additional video and address the fuel efficiency because it is a good metric and there is a substantial difference and also go into more detail about our comparison with the fuel capacity.

[@DanFrederiksen]

Minor point, maybe turn off vents for videoing

[@PlaneLady]

Lol! Yeah, I had the AC running in the garage. But it’s Houston and it’s hot and that seemed like a better idea than turning it off and sweating profusely throughout the video 😜

[@gmcjetpilot]

You cab buy a used single engine turbo prop for $0.5M. Can'a has always been best value. I built two of them. Sow a dont tell the whole story. RV10 flys nicer.

[@pilotavery]

The sling TSI is faster at altitude and can reach 26,000 feet easily... True airspeed is much faster, and RV10 VNE is true and not indicated

[@royalewithcheese25J]

The current owners of Lancair stewed that company up

[@Zanzabar5]

Lancair should rename their name to LawnDart.

[@DanFrederiksen]

How about a used Lancair IV-P. 250k. Yummy fast and pressurized. Retractable gear. Actually a crime that plane isn't a certified series production, ignoring the issue of grossly overpriced engine. Also I don't know the detail, and the Mako is expensive, but it's my impression that the idea of coming 2 weeks to them is that they then essentially factory build it for you. Not take home pieces and have to spend 2000 hours on your own more. If that's the case, I think that's a great premise. Price aside. I don't really like the Mako product because it's a betrayal of the awesomeness that is the IV-P

[@PlaneLady]

So we wanted to build the plane ourselves and get the repairman certificate rather than buy a used experimental. And my understanding from talking to Lancair at AirVenture in 2018 and the stuff we looked at on their site, the 2 weeks doesn’t get you a fully completed build assist Mako. They said it could take “as little as two weeks” to get the “critical components” built. I think you had the option to finish building it there (not sure if there was an extra cost for that), but after those critical components were done you could take it and finish building it elsewhere. Their site currently says it can be built and ready to fly in as little as 6 months. All that to say you wouldn’t have a completed Mako in just two weeks 😜

[@DanFrederiksen]

@@PlaneLady ok but if it's partially built, how do you move it... anyway I don't care for homebuilding. They should be factory built. Imagine if cars were like that. Instead of done at the factory. Crazy.

[@bogdanbkk]

So, you totally ignored the fuel efficiency when you compared with Sling TSI? Why?

[@PlaneLady]

Hey! I mentioned in response to another comment that I just failed to mention it when going over everything and trying to answer the question without making a ridiculously long video 😳 Tough to try and cram months of research and comparisons into a 20 minute video on 3 planes. I’ll probably make another one going into more detail and I’ll definitely be going over fuel efficiency and capacity and some trip scenarios we made in that one

[@bogdanbkk]

Plane Lady nice! Looking forward! However it seems I’ve already made my decision anyway - I’ll go for RV-10...

[@raffaelesilletti156]

Sling carries less fuel because burns less fuel than others.

[@justsmy5677]

A gal who wants to build an airplane with her husband! Where were women like this when I was dating!!

[@bikersoncall]

MIDROLL ADDS :facepalm:

[@sunbulah9779]

Christine I would like to on go on a date with you

[@flexairz]

How did that work out for you?

[@jamesbarrick3403]

Social media 101. I watched 30 seconds and I'm in pain. The remote microphone with background noise and crazy hand gestures (she does not like camera work)

[@nv7593]

My god this video could’ve been five minutes long with info in front of you and not being concerned about hurting other brand owners’ feelings.

[@BariFromDaBoot]

Give her a break. You can say the same thing about 99% of the videos on KZbin

[@cannon440]

Can You learn to talk WITHOUT YOUR HANDS.

[@PlaneLady]

NOPE 🤗

[@puretrouble1603]

How are you feeling about choosing a Van's now the just declared bankruptcy?

[@philipritson8821]

Fingers crossed for her.