Advice on buying Kitfox

[avidflyer]

Just looked at the AD myself. Got a laugh out of the Cost of Complyence part. They list the cost as being approximately 1 hr labor or on average $85 to remove the part. I guess the cost of the original unit or the cost of a new unit to replace it doesn't factor in. JImChuk

[Esser]

To me the KF is limited to cruising around the patch in the evening when winds are fairly calm and limited to one passenger, at best.

Not trying to offend anyone, but this might be the most ludicrous statement I've ever read on this website.

[David47]

I'm with Eddie and Josh. The capability of the KF go way beyond a spin round the block on a calm evening. Perhaps read the "where I fly" posts.

[Timberwolf]

Not trying to offend anyone, but this might be the most ludicrous statement I've ever read on this website.

I'll buy that. That was really aimed more at the earlier KF versions pre -IV based on my own opinion of price vs value and what I personally would be willing to spend on a 2 place tube and fabric aircraft. People have flown ultralights all over the place. Doable? Sure. Practical? Hardly. No I'm not comparing the SS7 to an ultralight...again...earlier versions.

The newer KF's are nice planes, don't get me wrong. For me, the same amount of money will buy a lot of other aircraft that will take off from a 900' strip and offer more performance and features. Either way, my opinion is KF's are overpriced for what they are. I just think the OP is doing himself a disservice if he doesn't expand and look at all the options available, both LSA and basic med.

Also misspoke earlier, Greg Miller, not Swingle in his Maule

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQkdtHM-w7I

[bogmonster]

Have to disagree with you here. Look up the Navworx AD for experimental aircraft. I'm in the process of getting bent over by the FAA on this one for adopting adsb early. Last time I will ever do that.

I think all you have to do is add an approved waas gps source. Have you looked at uavionix. They have a waas gps source for $400 and it weighs almost 2 oz.

[rosslr]

HI Timberwolf,

As you can see, we Kitfox owners are pretty passionate about these aircraft!

I note your comment about what you would be prepared to pay for a tube and fabric aircraft. I cant help but think you see tube and fabric as being some how lesser than an all metal aircraft (?). I might be wrong on this but I used to have a Mooney M20J and also had a bit of 'Prejudice' about tube and fabric - but not now - I understand the wonderful weight savings it provides and doesn't detract from any airworthiness that I am aware of??? I have flown our KF7 some pretty long distances in Australia with 2 up, full fuel and about 65kg of camping gear. Landed in some pretty remote off field places. All good, but only at about 95-100kts - but then again, using about 16-17lt of unleaded an hour. I have also flown a KF model 4 across Australia and would agree it is smaller, slower and able to carry less - but still very doable. My plane owes me about $80K (Aust) not including my labour of course - and I consider this exceptional value for a new aircraft with a new style, fully FADEC engine, constant speed prop, bush capable (big tyres and strong undercarriage) and the best compromise between speed and bush capability and value that I could find. And then there is the ability to do your own maintenance - that is a great saving!!

You are right though, it all comes down to your mission. But I would strongly suggest you examine the source of any prejudice you may have towards tube and fabric, and if in any doubt about the performance of the KF7, invest a few dollars and go fly with STick and Rudder for a few hors in the Idaho back country - that will give you a very good idea of what they will do.

Best wishes

ross

[Slyfox]

Not trying to offend anyone, but this might be the most ludicrous statement I've ever read on this website.

I guess that depends a lot on the pilots experience level. yes they are a joy to fly when it's calm out, what aircraft isn't. I've been out in real windy conditions, like 25mph. with a healthy cross. I personally did just fine. so maybe this person is talking on personal experience. yup, that's what it is.

[Slyfox]

HI Timberwolf,

As you can see, we Kitfox owners are pretty passionate about these aircraft!

I note your comment about what you would be prepared to pay for a tube and fabric aircraft. I cant help but think you see tube and fabric as being some how lesser than an all metal aircraft (?). I might be wrong on this but I used to have a Mooney M20J and also had a bit of 'Prejudice' about tube and fabric - but not now - I understand the wonderful weight savings it provides and doesn't detract from any airworthiness that I am aware of??? I have flown our KF7 some pretty long distances in Australia with 2 up, full fuel and about 65kg of camping gear. Landed in some pretty remote off field places. All good, but only at about 95-100kts - but then again, using about 16-17lt of unleaded an hour. I have also flown a KF model 4 across Australia and would agree it is smaller, slower and able to carry less - but still very doable. My plane owes me about $80K (Aust) not including my labour of course - and I consider this exceptional value for a new aircraft with a new style, fully FADEC engine, constant speed prop, bush capable (big tyres and strong undercarriage) and the best compromise between speed and bush capability and value that I could find. And then there is the ability to do your own maintenance - that is a great saving!!

You are right though, it all comes down to your mission. But I would strongly suggest you examine the source of any prejudice you may have towards tube and fabric, and if in any doubt about the performance of the KF7, invest a few dollars and go fly with STick and Rudder for a few hors in the Idaho back country - that will give you a very good idea of what they will do.

Best wishes

ross

Ok, what about the carbon cub. that's a rag plane also and that's like a 250k plane. I've read where people are doing mods to that and the cost is up to like 300k or more.

[av8rps]

I can appreciate Timberwolfs view, as there's a valid reason the Vans RV design is so popular. It makes for a very nice, practical 2 seat recreational aircraft. It goes reasonably fast yet can still go into many grass strips, and is capable of some mild acro. And it is very cost effective with a great bang for the buck value. Especially if you buy one used, as the market is usually flooded due to the popularity of the design.

And while the cost to build a new Kitfox and an RV are going to be somewhat similar, the comparison pretty much ends there. Yes, the Kitfox is a lot slower. But the Kitfox can go into places you could never take an RV-6.

And the Kitfox makes for a wonderful 2 seat seaplane. Even when put on heavy amphibious floats and have only 80 hp. The RV has been put on floats a handful of times, but you rarely see one as most of the seaplane crowd has learned that the wing area js just too small, resulting in a horrible performing seaplane.

And then there is the load carrying capability. According to factory specs, a Kitfox 7 will haul 105% of what it weighs empty. Ok, how about some real numbers...My earlier lower gross Model 4 will easily and legally carry 90% of its empty weight. Specs from the factory on the RV-6 show it can haul 65% of its empty weight, which isn't bad. But the 90% to 105% load carrying capacity of the Kitfox is 50% + better when you compare the Kitfox to the Rv.

And that's only one of the benefits of tube and fabric construction. The other is crash-worthiness. Note that Nascar racers surround the driver with a chromoly steel tube structure so they can survive hitting things at 200 mph. They do not build their cars structure from riveted aluminum sheet.

Ok, so the RV is a reasonable acro airplane. But so is a Kitfox. Youtube "Kitfox aerobatics" and watch a bone stock 80 hp Kitfox fly an acro routine at an airshow. No, its not a 300 hp Pitts, but then again neither is the RV.

I really don't mean to be bashing other airplanes, just making a comparison of two of the worlds favorite homebuilts. I agree completely with the comments from other posters about picking the right plane for the mission you choose. My mission is quite different than many others, so for my mission my Kitfox does most everything I want it to do. Granted, I'd love to find an amphib that can cruise like a Glasair, have a weight haul ratio like a Kitfox, be at least as aerobatic as an Extra 300, go 2,000 miles on 50 gallons of fuel, and can be bought for under 50k. But thus far I've not found anything even close.

So to meet most of my mission, I fly a Kitfox, a Lake Amphib, and will probably add a Glasair 3 to the mix one day. Or maybe an RV-6 or 7

[Horsefly]

Av8rps,

Thanks