Current builder willing to talk to Prospective builder?

[picsf340]

Hello to all. I am hoping to get in touch with someone who has built a Kitfox (or 2). I am very interested in building a 7, but I am a little intimidated by the construction process. I am very interested to hear about the entire process from someone who has done it. FWIW, my other option is the CH750 Cruiser. I know, I know. The Kitfox is SO much prettier. The build time on the 750 just seems less frightening to a new builder. Feel free to post on here or PM me.

[rosslr]

HI Pics,

I am sure you will get a lot of replies here from others much more experienced than myself. However, I suggest you look at the many build blogs on this site that will give you a fairly realistic and frank accounts of the process. I am nearly finished the covering process and haven't found anything beyond my very basic skills - thanks to the thorough manual and the amazing support on this site. I too looked at the Zentih initially and flew in both it and the Kitfox - they are a world apart in performance. Anyway, sit back and joy the opinions you will get here and ask heaps of questions in response - getting the decision right at this stage will ensure heaps of satisfaction later!

Best Wishes

Ross
Mt Beauty
Oz

[HighWing]

Russ,
I have built two Model IVs and helped finish a Series V. I have to agree with Ross' assessment. The manual is top notch. Then there are active builders with ongoing reports so lots of help there. In another post you mentioned covering. I am currently increasing the area and adding a trim tab to an elavator for a friend who has an Avid. He wanted to do a little hands on with the fabric and it went well. I am familiar with the Polyfiber process and it is pretty much fool proof. Lots of steps, but each one that follows gives some opportunity to see and fix little issues that become visible as you go. You likely will cover the rudder first and once done with that, you should be ready to tackle a part a bit more complex. The fuselage is usually last and that would be most challenging, especially the area around the vertical stabilizer base.

A look at the manuals from the various covering suppliers might be helpful as you decide.

[SWeidemann]

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

[picsf340]

Thanks for the info and PM's. I really appreaciate your knowledge and input.

[picsf340]

I am curious about the component kits vs. buying the entire kit at once. If I purchased the Kitfox one section at a time, could I actually do any work, or do I really need to get the entire thing? I just dont want to finance any of the plane. Thanks again fellas.

[68niou1]

Biggest difference will be freight. I don't believe it costs any more to buy the kit in stages, but you could probably save in freight costs if you buy it all at once.

[HighWing]

Russ,
I think I am with you on this one. Kitfox is a great hobby, but financing? Don't thinks so.

My thoughts on buying components. I would hope the covering materials are included in each component kit. My only concern there is that if you took each component kit to completion through covering, you would want to be very thorough in your planning, i.e. running wires and tubing - example - nav and anti-collision lights and pitot and static port. You could take each component to completion through final finish which would spread out the costs a bit. Working weekends and evenings, my first project took five years. The second about two as I was retired by then.

Typically the fuselage is worked on first and the other parts just take up space in your garage or hangar until you begin working on them. shipping was mentioned. It is a good point, but theoretically if you paid the factory or a local facility to store the unused components while working on the current part, the shipping differences would be a wash and no chance of hangar rash or dust accumulating on the "stored" parts - everything would be factory fresh.

[jtpitkin06]

I don't have any hard figures to back this up. Merely an observation that I believe to be true. Airplane kits purchased in stages rarely get completed.

Sometimes it is the builder that runs out of enthusiasm or funds. Other times the airplane is started with a partial kit and the kit manufacturer went out of business before the builder could purchase the remaining sub-kits. If you do decide to give it up, it is fairly easy to sell a complete package. Selling a partial kit is a problem.

I always recommend you purchase the entire kit at once.

John

[DesertFox4]

If I purchased the Kitfox one section at a time, could I actually do any workAbsolutely 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.
7398

7399

My 2 cents- if you can't swing the entire kit purchase but really want to get building then the best bet is to get the fuselage kit first. You can complete it to covering with all included materials. Obviously the tail feathers are included also.
The fuselage represents somewhere around 70 % of your entire kit build time if wiring , landing gear, engine mounting, cowling fitting are considered.


My only concern there is that if you took each component kit to completion through covering, you would want to be very thorough in your planning, i.e. running wires and tubing - example - nav and anti-collision lights and pitot and static port. I have only one set of wires running to the tail and that is the trim system wiring that comes with the fuselage kit. I do have my comm radio antenna mounted in the vertical stabilizer so I have a comm co-ax cable run to it. Most other wiring is in the cockpit or behind the panel except wing lights, pitot tubing ect.

[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

[N981MS]

I have done both (although not a Cruiser): Kitfox S6 (IO-240) and a STOL 750 (O-200) from a kit (with friends). I have about 700 hours in the Fox and about 40 in the Zenith.

Each has its pros and cons. For me the Kitfox fits my mission better. It will not take off as short as the 750 but it will take off plenty short. The Fox will out climb and out cruise the 750 with our setup. I suspect other setups do better.

Visibility in both is excellent. Both are solid built aircraft. I would say the build from a kit is no more difficult for one or the other. Just different techniques.

I am in the camp of buy the whole thing. If the unthinkable happens and the company is no longer around it will be difficult to find your parts. I guess the 750 gets the edge here in that you get plans that would enable building from plans if you decided not to buy "kits".

I do not think you can go wrong with either. Get a ride in each. You will love whichever you choose. If you can get to Dublin, GA sometime we can likely get you a ride in each back to back.

I think the decision comes down to the mission. If you need to be able to take off as short as possible; Zenith it is.

As to the nose wheel decision on a STOL it was John McBean that told me the nose wheel Fox takes off shorter because it accelerates faster. Less wing drag, thrust line better, I guess? The STOL 750 is all about short take off. They also have a lot of room under the tail for rotation such that you can take off at ridiculous deck angles and let those slats work for you. That part is FUN, FUN, FUN.

[av8rps]

Excellent write up comparing the Kitfox 7 and the Zenair 750.

But the part talking about the nosewheel vs tailwheel, even if the nosewheel aircraft lifted off sooner (which I find hard to believe - not one valdez STOL competitor uses a nosewheel) a nosewheel doesn't hold up in really rough and tough backcountry conditions. There's a reason bush pilots fly tailwheel aircraft.

Now, that's not to say the 701/750 series don't make good short field aircraft, because they do. But if you put one in rough and tough conditions that bush pilots and backcountry recreational pilots operate in regularly, you'd damage that nosewheel in short order. Ironically, both of my friends with Zenair 701's have damaged their nosewheels by landing hard in high rate of descents on hard surfaced runways. But the main gear was fine in both cases.

I think the nosewheel choice on the Zenair is simply about marketing airplane kits...more people can fly a nosewheel than a tailwheel.

Just my two cents worth...

Paul

"You might be a redneck pilot....if you've never flown a nosewheel airplane" ;)

[N981MS]

I agree with av8rps on the tail wheel better in the bush. And I cannot personally attest to the nose wheel getting you off the ground sooner. I do think it was a conscious STOL decision for the 750 though.

The Zenith has unusual lines to say the least. These lines do not lend well to a tail wheel configuration. They do lend well to take off with a higher AOA than can be achieved with a tail wheel Kitfox on stock legs and wheels. The slats let the high AOA work. Our Advanced Flight Systems EFIS in the 750 (I know, overkill but we had our reasons) does dot display airspeed below 25 kts. It may be partially the extreme AOA concomitant with the low airspeed but the 750 flaps down will take off with AS at zero.

I neglected to mention comparison numbers earlier.
My Kitfox cruise-100kts
Our STOL 750 cruise- 70kts

I do not have hard numbers for climb but my gut tells me the Kitfox is 400-500 FPM more. Gut feeling take off roll for Kitfox about double the Zenith (125ft measured on a cool morning.)

I think a tail dragger 750 is not as "pretty" as a nose wheel.

The Kitfox on the other hand seems more at home with a tail wheel.

Can I be a Redneck pilot if I prefer tail wheels on everything except a 750? The pretty red one is our Kitfox. The others are not ours.

[av8rps]

Maxwell,

Thanks for the great education about the 750. Good info!

And I agree, if there is an airplane that looks better as a nosewheel than a taildragger, it would be the 750/701 Zenair.

And I also agree the way the aircraft was designed, it probably works better with a nosewheel.

And yes, you can still qualify as a Redneck pilot, even if you fly a 750 nosewheel.

Heck, the rest of the plane is so bush-like that putting a nosewheel on it by design is almost like if Henry Ford had put air dams, a hood scoop, and slicks on a model T at the factory. And that is most definitely something a redneck would do. So I'd say flying a 750 most definitely still qualifies you... :D

Paul

(attached a pic of the STOL I like...Gets off really good while still looking good. And if that's not enough you "just super-stol" it...kind of like going through the drive through and asking to have it super-sized. Hopefully I won't get censored off the forum for posting propaganda :p )


I agree with av8rps on the tail wheel...Snip snip... Can I be a Redneck pilot if I prefer tail wheels on everything except a 750? The pretty red one is our Kitfox. The others are not ours.