Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - CH701 or Kitfox for newbie?

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

CH701 or Kitfox for newbie?

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith701801-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

motoadve

Joined: 23 Apr 2009
Posts: 123
Location: Seattle

Posted: Fri Apr 24, 2009 5:42 pm Post subject: CH701 or Kitfox for newbie?

I also posted this at the Kitfox forum.

Im thinking of buying a plane , want something durable, easy to fly, reliable, good glider in case of engine quit, and slow stall speeds



Im looking into the Zenith CH 701 or maybe a kitfox, for my needs what do you guys think is best?

I want a Rotax 912 in the nose on either plane.



If you guys think kitfox is for me which model?



Which will be safer in case of a power off emergency?



The CH701 stalls at 30mph where the kitfox 4 at 37mph and the S7 at 41mph

Althought from what i read the glide ratio of the kitfoxes is about 10:1 where the CH 701 is 7:1



Im not expert so dont be shy to flame.

- The Matronics Zenith701801-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List

dougsnash

Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 281

Posted: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:48 pm Post subject: CH701 or Kitfox for newbie?

If you want a plane that glides, the 701 is probably not the plane for you.  In fact, the lack of glide performance is kind of the whole point of the 701.  If a plane has good glide characteristics it take more space to land.



One HUGE advantage to the 701 over the other planes you listed is the aluminum construction.  No worry over the sun rotting your dacron fabric.



Hope this gives you a few ideas of the pros and cons



Doug MacDonald

CH-701 Scratch Builder

NW Ontario, Canada



Do not archive

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 I also posted this at the Kitfox forum.

 Im thinking of buying a plane , want something durable,

 easy to fly, reliable, good glider in case of engine quit,

 and slow stall speeds

 

 Im looking into the Zenith CH 701 or maybe a kitfox, for my

 needs what do you guys think is best?

 I want a Rotax 912 in the nose on either plane.

 

 If you guys think kitfox is for me which model?

 

 Which will be safer in case of a power off emergency?

 

 The CH701 stalls at 30mph where the kitfox 4 at 37mph and

 the S7 at 41mph

 Althought from what i read the glide ratio of the kitfoxes

 is about 10:1 where the CH 701 is 7:1

 

 Im not expert so dont be shy to flame.

- The Matronics Zenith701801-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List

bobkat

Joined: 07 Sep 2008
Posts: 143
Location: Bismarck, ND

Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:03 pm Post subject: CH701 or Kitfox for newbie?

I have a Kitfox model 4 and have put about 350 hours on it.  I also built 

the 701 because I knew nothing about working with aluminum and wanted to 

learn.  I had built a Starduster too a few years before that, a combo of 

wood and steel tube and fabric. A fun hot rod!

For STOL, the 701 is better, but not a whole lot.  I have VG's on the Kitfox 

and an 80 hp Rotax 912, and take off runs are only a small bit longer than 

the 701.   The 701 has a 100 hp Rotax and  mine  is about 15 mph slower than 

the Kitfox.  My  Kitfox has faired struts but I put on large tires, similar 

to the 701 which adds drag.  Neither one is overly fast, but neither one is 

designed to be fast, either!  They are both fairly high drag STOL fun 

aircraft.  The 701 cruises at about 95 at 5200 rpm and the Kitfox about 

110-112 at the same rpm.

The 701 I think is easier to land, simply being a nosewheel airplane  and 

the Kitfox is easy enough as long as you remember that it is a tailwheel 

plane and keep your head in gear and feet moving.   Both are straightforward 

with no surprises.  Land heading down the runway straight with no drift and 

you won't have problems with either.  Both seem to handle gusty crosswinds 

equally, and surprisingly well!

My Kitfox weighs 598 pounds empty and the 701 around 640 if I remember 

correctly.  The useful weights for all practical purposes are about the 

same.  CG's and baggage compartments sizes are about the same.

With an engine out the Kitfox will glide far further than the 701, which is 

to be expected with less drag and longer wings.   Stall speeds for PRACTICAL 

PURPOSES are pretty close.  Yes, the 701 stalls slower than my Kitfox with 

VG's, but only if you hang it on the prop with the nose high.  But it gets 

tricky doing this and I wouldn't advise it till you get used to the plane. 

When you first fly it, pretend it's a slow 150 for a while.  The Kitfox, 

pretend its a Chief or some side by side light taildragger like that till 

you get the hang of it.

Neither is very difficult to fly.  Both are different, but that's what makes 

them interesting.  The Kitfox floats more on landing after the round out.  I 

put Grove Gear on mine which probably is much sturdier than the original 

Kitfox gear and easier to land and it has VG's.  I don't use the flapperons 

much on either one as they slip so well, especially the Kitfox, and the 701 

comes down so fast when you pull off the power and point the nose down!  No 

question though, that I could land over a 50 foot obstacle a bit shorter 

with the 701, though really working at it, it would be closer than you 

think. Both can and shorter than necessary 99.999% of the time.  A football 

field is plenty!   The Kitfox really slips well!   So does the 701. 

Probably a toss up.

I plan to fly and rerecord all my V speeds,etc. on the first forcasted 

steady weather all day in the morning, then remove the slats, fly it again, 

then put on VG's and fly it again and compare.  I also plan to clean up the 

high drag tail and maybe put on streamlined fairings on the struts. I have 

VG's on the tail.  Both the elevator and rudder are powerful on both 

airplanes.  Never run out of authority.

I'm planning to sell my Kitfox, only because I don't need two Sport Pilot 

planes and I would like to put the 701 on Amphibs if I can find some with 

gear heavy enough for my grass field.  But I really do love both of them. 

No bad habits or nasty surprises with either of them.  I put a BRS in the 

701.  Hope to never have to use it!  And I have the Dynon glass panel which 

I love, and a radio/CD/Mp3 player into a stereo intercom.  I don't go 

anywhere fast, but I do go in comfort!  Hah!  Rados, transponders and 

intercoms in them both, of course.

Headroom I think is pretty close, and plenty for my 5 10 altitude!

The 80 hp 912 burns reg gas and the 100 hp requires 91 octane or AVGAS.  I 

only burn 91 in both.  Both fuel burn rates are close, though the 701 is a 

bit higher.

Tube and Fabric vs. aluminum.  Theoretical pros and cons for both.  Your 

personal choice, I guess.

I really do like the folding wing on the Kitfox.   Much better than the 

folding setup on the 701!   Takes on a couple minutes and away you go.  If I 

need to work on it in my heated  shop, which is 1/4 mile from my unheated 

hangar, I fold the wings back, then taxi it down the paved road over to my 

shop and push it in the 16 foot door.  To put the 701 in my shop it is 

easier just to take one wing off after scaring u a couple of buddies and a 

set of wing holders..

Interior may be a bit bigger in the 701.  I have the bubble doors.  I like 

being able to fly the Kitfox with the doors open against the wings on hot 

days or for photography, (it costs you about 7 - 8 mph)  but visibility is 

excellent with the bubble doors on the 701.  Both are equally cold in the 

winter, but fine down to 15 or so above zero.

Can't think of mch more to compare them.  The 701 is "form follows function 

ugly" compared to the Kitfox which inspires the question at every fly in 

"did you get your Cessna 195 wet and it shrunk?!?"

Both are great planes!



---

- The Matronics Zenith701801-List Email Forum -

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith701801-List

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith701801-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum