In article ,
Scott wrote:

If YOU don't want an RV, why don't you just say so instead of saying the
design is, in your opinion, flawed and you have a thing against time
proven engines. Not sure what you mean by skittish...I think the word
you may have been looking for is "responsive". If so, yes, I would
agree that an RV is more "skittish" than an Aeronca Chief (which pretty
much flies like a barn door in comparison), but I sure had fun with my
old Chief. Yes, you have to match the airplane to your intended
mission. RVs "may" not be the best IFR plane (which it sounds like you
are looking for), but guys ARE doing it. Maybe Jerry was right...maybe
it's YOU that is the weakest link. Are your flight skills tuned to
perfection or do you want the plane to mask your inadequacies?

I have not flown the RV-8, but I want a plane that responds to
fingertips/toetips -- NOT one where I have to apply a lot of force to
get a response!

Some people confuse responsiveness with stability -- you can have both
-- or -- you can have neither in a plane -- it is a matter of control
effectiveness/control force.

It seems that Beech, Cessna and Piper have made a lot of planes over the
past 40 years that have stability, but handle like trucks. The early
Bonanzas, IIRC, had nice, light controls, but the recent ones have heavy
controls.

--
Remve "_" from email to reply to me personally.