Kitfox Series 7 versus Murphy Rebel with O-320

[Grant4ever]

Hey guys and gals,

I have a Series 7 with the 912ULS and while I haven't flown it yet, it looks like it's going to be lots of fun.

I'm also considering a Rebel project. I just like the idea of building something. The Rebel seems kind of like a bigger, heavier, beefier, more capable(?) aircraft, with a similar layout and executed in aluminum versus tube and fabric.

I'm not sure it makes sense to have two apples versus and apple and an orange, but hey, I sure do like the idea of taking something to the beach or Alaska.

Thanks for your feedback.

[jmodguy]

I am building a KF 5 and going with an IO-340...
My other project is a GP-4 that I have converted to a taildragger. It will have an IO-320. :D
Needed a taildragger trainer so I picked up the KF 5.
And yeah I like building too...
Jeff

[WWhunter]

Grant,

Hopefully Timberwolf will chime in here. He has a Rebel and I think he is happy with it. It is in a different class (in my opinion) than the Kitfox. I looked at several different builds before I settled on the Rebel. Even though I am currently flying a RANS S7 and a 172, I need to 'thin out the herd' a bit and try to get down to one plane. I personally feel the Rebel is a better all around type airplane that will fill my mission. It has decent 'bush plane' type performance characteristics and can still haul a respectible load, and best of all it is roomy!!

I have a Rebel kit, along with a set of the 1800 Murphy Amphibs, that I may be selling. Just haven't been able to bring myself to let it go yet.

[av8rps]

I have known 4 people over the years that had Rebels, 3 of them on floats, and none of them kept the plane.

Curious, I asked them all why they didn't stick with the Rebel, but never got a definitive or collective answer from them. But here is what I did get: One said performance was not good with the 0-320 and amphib floats, cruising only at 85 mph at 9 gph. Another said cockpit uncomfortable because you sit pretty flat on the floor compared to most other aircraft. Another with an 0-360 on amphibs said it had very poor load carrying ability and felt the wing was too short (same issue with the Murphy Moose, especially on floats). The last guy said he had to install an 0-320 because the 0-290 didn't have enough power on floats, and felt it just never met his overall expectations. All of them said the Rebel flew ok, but at the same time none of them raved about how much fun they are to fly (like most of us do with our Kitfoxes). I flew one with an 0-320 on Murphy amphibs and actually was thinking I might maybe want one (for pretty much same reasons you mentioned), but after flying it realized while it was overall ok, it just didn't excite me enough to want to own one.

For comparison, my Model 4 Kitfox amphib is way more fun to fly and outperforms the Rebel on less than half the fuel. And I'm pretty convinced if you built a new Kitfox Super Sport float plane with a 912 or 914, or if on wheels you equipped it with a 125+ hp aircraft engine, and made baggage as big as possible, you would have a better performing airplane than the Rebel. And it would burn less fuel, haul the same or more, could still be an LSA, and has the great feature of folding wings. And in a crash, the Kitfox has a chromoly steel fuselage (notice they use that in race cars, not aluminum or composite...).

I'm not bashing the Rebel, as overall I think they are good airplanes, and honestly have considered one. But compared to a late model Kitfox I really don't think there is a comparison. However, comparing a Kitfox to a lot of airplanes will be that way, as it has well above average performance for such low horsepower, and the fun factor is off the charts. That's probably why there are so many Kitfoxes out there, and so few Rebels. For similar money on the used market, and if I did'nt care about being a LSA, I'd go for a 0-360 powered older Glastar. But again, the Kitfox SS would be more fun and cost effective to own imho.

Take your Kitfox to that Alaskan beach. It will be the most fun you can have :)

[DesertFox4]

Thanks Paul for the report on the Rebel. Nice to hear from first hand experiences. While I've never flown one, I do watch a friend build his and I'd take the Kitfox six ways to Sunday on ease of build. Not sure I'll ever see his fly. You mentioned a Glastar which I do have experience in one on amphib floats. Not much of an float plane even with the O-360. Great aircraft on wheels though.
I did fly my brothers Rans S7 with Rotax 100hp. It climbs very well. Almost as good as my model 4. I can leave it pretty quickly in cruise and the controls feel very heavy compared to any Kitfox I've ever flown. Baggage capacity is less and I was not impressed with the cockpit ergonomics. Instrument panel is at full arms reach. My brother would love to change to the Kitfox throttle controls but Rans has no way to change that. He also had some wear on the landing gear attachment that needed welding reinforcing at last conditional inspection.

[WWhunter]

Av8rps,

WOW! While I have to utmost respect for you and your posts, that is the first time I have seen or read that much negativity on the Rebel. I have personally flown a Rebel and I absolutely loved it!! Felt much more like a sporty handling 172 class of plane verses the light loaded KF and RANS I have flown. The thing fly like it was on rails. Nothing close to what you have discribed. The few Rebels that I know of on amphibs will generally perform at or better than the well respected Super Cub. The cruise speeds I saw (on amphibs) was usually over 100 and I know of a couple that exceed that speed by a decent amount.

I really don't believe there is any one perfect plane and they all have something that is a compromise.

Another thing you will find is most of the Rebel's seem to end up in Canada or some other type of 'bush' area.

Not understanding the comment about the low seating as this is totally up to how the builder constructs hih/her seats. The seats in one of the Rebels I own are very similar to my 172. The KF seating sure isn't 'up there' either with the factory thin pad.

I have conversed with a couple (man/wife with two planes) that own a Rebel and a Carbon Cub. They use the Rebel for most of their travels and the CC is more of the man toy. I guess it all comes down to someones mission.

My mission is changing, the only reason I might be selling the Rebel. Health issues and eventually wanting to have only one plane that will be LSA complient.

While I am defending the Rebel, my next plane will either be a RANS S20 or the KF SS7.

[av8rps]

WWhunter;

I apologize if that came off wrong. All I was doing was sharing what owners told me, and shared my own opinion after flying ONE Rebel amphib. So maybe that wasn't fair. But I have flown a lot of airplanes, especially seaplanes. And to clarify, I didn't say the Rebel flew bad, I said I just didn't get excited by it.

Ironically a buddy had a 180 hp Rebel amphib for sale a little over a year ago for 50k. The airplane was real nice and well proven, and honestly I was thinking it might be fun to play around with. Anyone that has built an airplane knows 50k for a 180 hp amphib is a hell of a deal. But he talked me out of buying it saying I wouldn't like it. He bought it thinking it would be more cost effective and fun being an amphib compared to the straight float C 182 he had last, which he didnt like the operational cost of (14 gph), and really wanted an amphib. But in less than a summer he and his wife agreed they didn't like the Rebel, and ultimately sold it to buy an older 170 with a 180 hp on straight floats. And they are very happy with it. So again, just sharing what I learned.

And honestly, maybe I am just spoiled? My Kitfox amphib can fly 100 mph without breaking a sweat on only 80 hp. And it still climbs great. But it certainly is lighter feeling than a Rebel, and I would expect that as it weighs only about 2/3rds of what the Rebel amphib weighed (I seem to recall it was around 1350 lbs empty). So yes the Rebel will probably "feel" heavier than my Kitfox because it is. And yes, the Rebel will probably feel like a sporty 172 as it will be lighter than the 172. ( Oh, and to adress previous reply about Glastar on amphibs, yes I agree, it's not going to be a spritely performing amphib, but overall they do work pretty well as long as you don't have to operate from a small lake). I do however still believe a newer Kitfox would be an overall superior airplane, but again that's only my take.

The real thing for anyone considering any airplane is to go out and fly one. And talk to others. We all may have different views. I have a friend that lives in Alaska that flew Huskies and Supercubs his entire life. Hated the Huskies, but loved Supercubs. Then one day he bought a 912s Highlander. But shortly after getting it he sold it. I asked him why and he said he hated it. When asking specificly why he hated it he replied "It was overpowered and there was just fabric on the inside of the baggage compartment and I was afraid antlers from my hunt would poke holes through it". :confused:

And counter of that, I have two other friends, one had a Husky amphib, and the other a Smith Cub on amphibs. Both built Highlander amphibs and tell people all the time they would never go back to the Husky or the Supercub. So different strokes for different folks...as they say.

Please don't be offended by my comments. Your comments have already offered the person questioning the Rebel another good perspective to consider.

[kmach]

I considered a rebel when looking for a two seat taildragger, I never found too many to look at in comparison to kitfox's.
The model 5 I currently own came up for sale, it had everything I wanted , test flew it, checked it out and bought same day.
A local EAA member has been building a rebel the last few years ,whenever I'd fly over there to see him and his progress , he would complain about the millions of rivets.:)
He was close to first flight last summer, but had some wing tank leaking problems that set him back. He should be flying it soon I would think.
I know he made comments a couple of times that he should have built a tube and fabric aircraft like my model 5.
Time will tell how he likes it, I will probably get a chance to fly it as well to see how it feels in comparison to the 5.

I almost feel quilty talking of another aircraft type on my beloved kitfox site.;)

[WWhunter]

Heck, don't feel guilty!! I own an older Cessna 172A, Kitfox IV (not flying), RANS S7 and a Murphy Rebel (10-15% work done). The 172 I purchased as my first plane 28 years ago and fly it and the RANS S7. The S7 I keep at my strip next to my house so it gets flown the most. Love the performance this type of plane has. What else can I fly in and out of a couple hundred feet, burn +/- 4gph of mogas, and performs like a sportscar?

I see the same thing as far as not many of them for sale in the lower 48. Canada probably has the majority of them and there is even quarterly meetings (called Rebel Ramble) of Murphy builders that takes place in Ontario.

I like both planes (KF and Rebel), but think they each fullfill a different mission. The KF flies much 'sportier' and will be a bit rougher ride in unstable air. The Rebel will give a little more of the 'bigger' plane feel and would be a better choice (for me) for longer cross country type flying. I will mention that I have not flown in the new Kitfox SS7, so maybe it is more alike than different from the Rebel.

I also perfer an aluminum contructed type plane over tube and fabric. Really don't know why though. Most of the planes I have owned have been tube and fabric. Fabric is easier to repair and work on but I seem to always be on high alert whenever someone, not an airplane person, is near my fabric planes. Why the heck does everyone have to 'Thump' a fabric plane when they get near it? Just irrates the crap out of me!!

Av8rps,

I was in no way offended and I think we are actually in agreement more than not. I really like flying these smaller Rotax powered planes and is why I own one and also bought the Kitfox for my son. I was sort of taken back by the speeds and performance numbers you had mentioned since they aren't the same as I am reading/seeing from the fellow Rebel owners I know.
As with any kitplane, no two are alike and they all preform differently. Generally the KF and RANS types have amazing performance. Especially on floats since they are so light.

By the way, I have a set of amphib floats I need to install on my S7. Just haven't had the time. Unfortunately they are the Full Lotus 1260's but the price was right and they were already rigged for the S7. I have seenthe KF and RANS type almost leap out of the water compared to all the certified floatplanes.

I think I know of the one you are refering to on amphibs. Did it come from the east coast (Penn.) possibly? The amphibs were of the builders own design, not Murphy 1800's. It was a nice looking plane but seemed to change hands several times. I had a friend in WY that was interested in buying it when your friend had it for sale. He passed on buying it after doing some research, that I am not sure what he found that made him pass. I will have to ask him.

Again, no apologies neccessary! I think a builder needs to really define his/her mission before jumping into buying a kit or project.

[av8rps]

WWHunter,

I'm glad to know everything is cool. I value my friends here on the forum, so it's important to me that we all get along. And yes, I do think we are basically on the same page about the Rebel. I will assure you I'm going to fly another one next chance I get as I'm curious more than anything if my original experience was a fair representation of the Rebel.* Of course these are homebuilts, so they can differ greatly one to the other, as we all know.

The Rebel my friend sold had regular Murphy 1800's as I recall and was from Illinois. I remember them looking big on the airplane, and noted in traditional Murphy style they were set real wide on the spreader bars. My friend has flown a lot of float planes over the years, so he knows a bad float when he sees one, but was actually quite complimentary of the Murphy floats. The only thing he didn't like was they originally had a manual hydraulic pump, but he added an electric one and felt that was a big improvement.

Those 1260 Full Lotus would probably be a blast on your Rans S7. A friend flew his early S7 on FL straight floats for years and loved it. And it was even more fun in the snow. You can't find a better winter ski in my opinion. Ive flown 1260's on a couple different planes now and liked them except for rough water. I could be wrong, but at that time it was the 1260 people wanted, not the earlier 1220 (?). The 1260 number is a bit confusing as from what I can tell they work well on most any aircraft within the LSA weight limits. The last Kitfox 4 I flew on that floats was almost 700 lbs on wheel gear, but even with just a 582 under the hood it was a really good performing little floatplane. And even at full weight load, it appeared quite "over floated". So if they are ready to just bolt on, I'd highly recommend you try them. I will be surprised if you dont like them.

[Timberwolf]

I think Keith nailed it on the head. These are 2 separate "class" airplanes. My wife and I were initially looking for a KF for years. I rode in one and decided it was what we wanted, as I wanted the folding wings to keep in a trailer. As we looked around and sat down to evaluate our real mission, we realized the KF wasn't going to fulfill what we actually needed an aircraft to do. I ran across a Rebel in need of some TLC for a very reasonable price and snatched it up. Since then we repainted, put in a whole new panel, and did some minor engine work to make up for the PO glazing the cylinders after a rebuild. I do have the 0-290 and though it is great for the time being, will move up to an 0-320 or 0-360 when the time comes.

With full fuel, my wife and I, the smoke system, and the tools we can take off in just over 200' near SL at 85 degrees on 31" bushwheels. Not bad considering I'm producing 125 hp. From experience I know if I can fit it in the plane, it's going to come with me and have a short t/o roll at that. The cargo space is crazy big and once I'm up, I settle into a 110mph cruise with the 4 blade warp at 2300 rpm. The avex rivets are easy to drill out/replace should the need arise. Other than that, no mx required with them and no issues with them working loose.

Mine is a standard Rebel on wheels. There is a gentleman not far from me with the factory Rebel Elite demonstrator on floats. Again, a much different animal than the KF. He has a very small room to work with on the water with obstacles all around. Due to the lacking performance of his SC on floats, he sold it off and purchased the Rebel. Both AC had the same engine, but performance wasn't close to the same. As for mine, it will stay on wheels as I have no desire for floats.

My Rebel fits my mission perfectly allowing us to travel long distances and take a relatively large load along at a nice pace and reasonable fuel burn. (~7gph or less, depending on cruise altitude) I am frequently gone traveling out of country a few times a year and gets flown regularly by a friend. The wife is in the middle of transition training to get her tailwheel and start flying it.

For anyone interested in taking a ride, feel free to shoot me a PM. We live in the Florida panhandle close to Destin/Pensacola and would be happy to show why we love our Rebel.

[GuppyWN]

I've been enamored by the Elite for a while. I want a KF but I also want to haul the chocolate lab.

Guess I need both!

[av8rps]

Timberwolf,

Thanks for sharing your great firsthand experience of your Rebel with us. I think I really need to fly one on wheels vs amphibs as your performance results are hugely different than what I experienced in the amphib Rebels I experienced. But in defense of those amphib Rebels, many, many aircraft turn into real mutts when you strap a super draggy and heavy 300 lb set of floats under them. It truly is asking a lot of any airplane when you want to be able to operate equally from airports or waterways.

I have to admit I was astounded by your comments comparing it to a SuperCub, as the Cub has a much larger wing with a similar empty weight and engine hp. So I would not expect the SC to be outperformed by the Rebel except for maybe the cruise. I fly with friends that own SuperCubs, and they get around really good, especially in the STOL environment.

Dammit, now I have to add another plane to my bucket list (smile). But wait! I already had a Murphy design on my bucket list...which happened after I flew a friends quarter million dollar 400 hp Aerocet amphib Murphy Moose. I liked everything about his amphib Moose except for the high speeds needed for getting off and on the water, the super high fuel burn when you were in the throttle of that big supercharged Russian radial engine (40+ gph at full power - GULP! ), and I'd change the shape of the vertical fin to be more Dehavilland reminiscent. But man that Moose is a cool airplane, and super fun with all that power!

One evening at OSH Daryl Murphy and I were talking about my buddies amphib Moose and while he said he had no cure for the high fuel burn (except to stay out of the throttle- but what fun is that?), he did have a cure for the short wing and the vertical fin shape. All I had to do was order a kit and he'd throw in his wing root extensions and longer struts along with a new vertical fin of the right shape. (He's a pretty convincing salesman).

Unfortunately for Daryl, I know the huge effort it took to build my buddies Moose. So the only way I will probably ever get one is to win the lottery and then go track down my buddies wherever it is now (he sold it a few years after finishing it - 200+k if I remember right).

If I lived closer I'd love to go flying with you in your Rebel. More people that like theirs should share their experiences with it like you just did. There really isn't much written on it.

[Timberwolf]

Here is a pic of the Elite. The gentleman that owns this also has multiple other aircraft/helos and has owned quite a number of planes. For him, he said the rebel was a great fit. I had more pics but literally just deleted them a week ago cleaning up some disk space. This plane was the factory Elite demonstrator and has an 0-360 and a fixed pitch.

[av8rps]

I remember that one. Nice airplane.