Current builder willing to talk to Prospective builder?

[Tomfox]

I think you have to have some experience with mechanical "stuff" or you will spend 3x as much as the "1000 hours".

I am an electrical engineer with a some mechanical experience - including work. I am currently working the wing buildup on my kitfox (finished the fuselage). If I did not have a friend with a garage machine shop and extensive machining experience, I would be still dealing with fuselage - and making extremely slow progress.

This is true of either plane that you build however.

Just my opinion...

Tom

[jrevens]

Absolutely YES.

I'm on my 2nd Kitfox purchased in partial kits only. My model 4 was completed and flying in 15 months buying only the fuselage kit from the factory.

I just finished my Super Sport 7 fuselage kit through covering in a little over 3 months. It sits awaiting paint booth space to open up while I do a hose refresh on my model 4 Rotax engine...

Gosh, that's lookin' good Steve! I think you may have accomplished more in 3 months than I have in 3 years!

[DesertFox4]

Thanks John. You're doing fine. Keep after it.

And Tomfox, I couldn't agree at all with your post. Sorry. Most don't have access to machine shops and yet so many Kitfoxs get finished and in decent time and most by first time builders.
I haven't needed any machinist work performed on my fuselage so far and I just followed the manual.

If you're having problems getting through some process please ask for help. So many on here are generous with their experience. Just another benefit of choosing a Kitfox over another brand.
Don't suffer in silence. We want you flying and enjoying the fruits of your building process.

[Av8r_Sed]

Regardless of which way you choose to go on the kit components, I recommend holding off on the purchase of engine and avionics until they're absolutely needed on the build. Seals dry out, rubber needs to be replaced, warrantees run out, regulations change, electronics and software become obsolete companies go out of business and better, lighter and more cost effective products come out.

[picsf340]

Could I build the entire airplane (since it has folding wings) in a large 2 car garage?

[mr bill]

Yes, with room to spare.

[Paul Z]

The only reason you need more room is to install & fit the wing ribs, and rigging.

[picsf340]

All this insight. Its almost like you guys have done this before. Thanks for the insight.

[av8rps]

I've been involved with Avid and Kitfox airplanes since 1986, and have to tell you the kits today are NOTHING like they used to be. I bought a Super Sport kit awhile ago and cannot believe how simple, and nice it is compared to most other kits. All the metal parts are laser cut, the fuselage welding and powder coating is phenomenal, and the prebuilt wings SO simplify the entire build process. Compared to most other kitplanes, this is essentially a bolt-togethjer process, aside from the covering, which once you do you will find to be fun. I believe the new SS Kitfox kit is as pre-built as you can buy a kit without losing the amateur built 51% qualification. The kitfox has evolved so nicely over the years, and consequently the kit itself has been made super easy to assemble compared to most other kits in my opinion.

I occasionally helped a friend with his build of a 701 Zenith. I didn't find any part of that all that easy. And the more I engaged in the build with him, the less confident I was with the longterm durability of that aircraft. I'm sure I will upset someone by saying this, but in my opinion the 701 is flimsey by comparison to a Kitfox. Especially if you compare it to the new Super Sport. Lets face it, the 701 was originally designed for an 1100 lb gross. Yet the Model 5 thru 7 (Aka Super Sport) has a design gross of 1550. There really is no comparision between the Zenith and the Kitfox for strength in my opinion. Now, I have to admit that I haven't stayed up on the changes in the 750, but for my money I'd still most definitely buy the Kitfox. I've flown my friends 701, and flown next to it with my Kitfox IV amphib. Even though he has 20 more hp than me, and is on wheels, I literally can fly circles around him. Now, I know the 750 Cruzer is a bit faster, but if you just look at the two aircraft from an aerodynamic perspective, it would be nothing short of amazing that a Zenair 750 could go as fast as a Kitfox. My buddy publicly makes jokes about his 701 saying that if you look up the word "Drag" in the dictionary, you will find a picture of a 701 there (he has a great sense of humor) Oh, and worth mentioning, I have two friends that had 701's that had fatigue cracked metal parts that held the horizontal tail together. That confirmed my suspicion about the longterm durability. Hopefully that has all been improved with the new Zenairs.

Now please understand that I say all this to help you with your decision. I like most every plane, and have always admired the STOL ability of the 701/750. But frankly, for the slight STOL advantage it may (?) have over a kitfox, I just don't see all the other tradeoffs being worth going with the Zenair. Of course that is personal opinion. But I know I'm not alone. Most people can't get past the looks of the 701/750, whereas most compliment, and like the lines of the Kitfox. Oh, and fwiw, I've flown a couple 701's now, including on floats. They do fly well, but are typically slow in cruise. But if you go into it expecting that, you will enjoy how it flies.

And one last comment about the Zenair; The one thing I always thought was odd about the 701/750 is that it was designed to be an extreme STOL aircraft, but they put a nosewheel on it with no option to make it a tailwheel. That to me is beyond bizarre...but hey, they've sold a lot of kits over the years.

[av8rps]

One last thought of Kitfox SS vs Zenair 750; (Skot's post below made me think of this)

When you watch race cars go around the race track, and when they occassionally hit walls at super high speeds, think about what they build those cars out of? Chromoly steel... Yup, frames and roll cages take up all that inertia from hitting walls (and other cars) better than anything else they've found to date.

So when you are considering an aircraft choice, it might be a good thing to look hard at crashworthiness (or which one you would rather crash in... even though we all hope we never have to use that feature).

In that regard the Kitfox really excels. I can't imagine any aluminum aircraft being able to endure the crash a chromoly steel tube airframe can? Especially when we are talking about aircraft built as light as LSA's. There the difference is even more obvious.

Paul

Picsf340

Though I am not a builder (I bought my KF already built) I have opinions about the Zenith and the Kitfox, that lead me to buy a KF. I am not sure how complicated a Zenith is to build (although I suspect the Cruzer goes together a lot better than some of the older models) as compared to a Kitfox however I think the Kitfox is a much more useful airplane. The Zenith is good at getting off the ground short and then the draggy airframe (even with the faster wing) won't take you anywhere very fast. The Kitfox gets off short too PLUS it goes much faster. My old Model 5 does 120 mph with no trouble at all, and looks good doing it. The Zenith will always be a box-like airplane no matter what kind of paint job, cowl inlets or wheel pants are hung on it.

My 2 cents.

Skot