Kitfox series 7 vs. Rans S7

Hi to all,
I was hoping there might be a soul or two here experienced with both of these aircraft. I am have been doing what research I can but so much of it is subject to marketing. I plan on purchasing a kit and there are already factors surrounding me that lead me towards the Rans S7 courier. One is a small local flight school using that aircraft and two, a very Knowledgeable builder close by for the S7.. that being said there seems to be a number of kitfox enthusiasts out there... (none that I know of in my area though) for what seems to be a very safe aircraft. The only comparable info i have received so far is that the kitfox tubing may not be a large and strong as that of the rans... can anyone hlep me layout out the pros and cons of each?.. Folding wings is nice but not absolutely neccesary.. I am in the process of preparing a strip on my own property...
Thank you
Dave Grandy

Dave,
You said there are no Kitfox enthusiasts in your area.. where might that be ??

Give us a shout if you have any questions.. if you have the time come on out to our factory fly-in Labor Day weekend (Aug 29th, 30th)
Look closely at some of the details.. Landing Gear system, brake system, wheels and tires, Aluminum spring gear is standard on the Kitfox.. Aircraft certified wheels and brakes and standard aircraft tires. All aircraft grade hardware.

Size and strength, larger isn't necessarily stronger. Safety is a big item and Kitfox has one of the best safety records.

John

In addition to the points mentioned by the others above I was going to mention what John just did... when I compared them I saw lots of ultralight looking hardware and construction on the S7 that I didn't like.

My long-winded reasons for selecting the Kitfox can be found here, take a look if interested, some may be meaningful to you.

Hey Gang,

I know this is an old subject, but thought since no one with experience in a Rans S7 and a Kitfox offered a good comparison of the two I'll give it a whirl (just for the record).

I have about 40 hours in a friends Rans S7 on amphib floats, and have flown most all Kitfox versions, owning a 912 Model IV Kitfox amphib myself. The Rans may appear similar to the Kitfox in design, but it is in fact a VERY different aircraft. First, if you compare the Rans to the Kitfox you will discover the Rans flies and feels a lot like a 90 hp J3 Cub. That says it flies nicely... if you just love the feel of a Cub.

But to fly a Kitfox, you will quickly learn one of the very best features of the Kitfox is it's EXCEPTIONAL handling that makes it easy to fly, but with very sporty, well harmonized, light to the touch controls that make you feel more like you are flying a Pitts. I can guarantee you will NEVER get bored flying a Kitfox! (and I say that after more than two decades of flying the Kitfox design...yes they fly that well). In addition to the Rans being less agile, another feature it has is a tendency to float on landings significantly more than the Kitfox. Probably due mostly to the fact that the Rans has nearly 20 more square feet of wing area than the Kitfox. And of course more wing area also means there is more drag, which will make the Rans at least 10 mph slower in cruise than the Kitfox. Out of fairness however I do think the Rans can fly slightly slower than the Kitfox (3-5 mph slower, assuming the Rans is VG equipped). But in all reality, how slow does one need to fly? I personally would rather have more efficient cruise speeds....it helps to get places faster, especially in headwinds. And the faster cruise speed also equates to much more efficient flying. If you fly the Rans and the Kitfox at the same speeds, every hour you fly the Kitfox you will save fuel compared to the Rans, because you'll be able to pull the throttle back. Oh yeah, because the Kitfox also carries significantly more fuel than the Rans (27 gals in the Fox vs 17 useable in the Rans), combine that with the better cruise speeds and you will see the Kitfox will have a MUCH better range. Also worth mentioning is the fact that the Kitfox will outclimb the Rans by hundreds of feet per minute, which is most likely the result of having a famous airfoil engineer create a computer-optimized, laminar flow wing design specifically for the Kitfox.

In addition to the performance advantages of the Kitfox, you also get as standard equipment easy folding wings that are the best in the industry. And while not everyone cares about folding wings, it can be a huge selling feature should you ever decide to sell your Kitfox. Not everyone has availability to a hangar, or the funds for one. Many Kitfoxes are kept at home, and many more share hangar space with other aircraft, being folded up so as to minimize the storage costs. Besides those great folding wings, one other factor worth mentioning is the baggage capacities between the two aircraft. The Kitfox offers a nice easy to access large baggage area that holds 150 lbs of weight. The Rans has a quite small, not so easy to reach baggage area that holds only 50 lbs.

So now that all that is behind us, lets get into the more technical differences;

The fuselage tubing on the Rans does look a bit more "beefy" than the Kitfox, but in fact it is not. The Rans uses larger diameter tubes much like the antique tube and fabric designs have used for years,. But if you put both uncovered fuselages next to one another you will notice the Kitfox has about two to three times as many tubes in it. The tubes may be smaller diameter, but all that triangulation combined with all those extra tubes everywhere equate into more strength per pound. That extra strength per pound is what also explains why the Rans and Kitfox weigh about the same empty, but yet the Kitfox can carry 318 pounds more weight (Kitfox gross is 1550, Rans is 1232). That's huge! Especially if you like the peace of mind knowing you don't have to operate over gross weight just because you have a large passenger, lots of camping gear, or decided to add a set of floats. With the Rans you will regularly need to operate well over the original design gross weight unless all of your friends are really skinny super models (smile). One last comment on weight hauling ability; if you really want to know how exceptional a Kitfox is BY DESIGN, just try to find other airplanes that can haul their own empty weight (legally, and approved by the designer). That fact alone will separate the men from the boys... as there are very few light aircraft that can boast that.

Bottom line here...the Kitfox is an exceptionally strong aircraft, with exceptional load carrying capabilities due to genius in design, and concept. While most will either overlook or misunderstand the true genius in the Kitfox design, those in the know will quickly recognize the advantages... and are likely to enjoy them for years to come.

I'm done yammering on this subject now. I could probably go on for at least a few thousand more words telling you just how superior the Kitfox is to a Rans S7, but I think if you just compare the two against eachother now that you better understand the differences, you will find these aircraft aren't even in the same league.

And remember, I've experienced both aircraft...

Paul S.

Great report Paul. Thanks for sharing. I've never had the chance to fly a Rans so your experience was interesting. Like a 90 hp J-3.