Factory-built Zenith STOL CH750 SLSA

[Wm.Ince]

. . . "I see an RV-12 in my future, if I'm still alive by then. I like the idea of a brand new SLSA made in America, not for political reasons, but for practical reasons."

If you got an RV-12, would you opt for the S-LSA or have the factory built airplane registered as E-LSA? That is an option you can choose.

[zaitcev]

I been to Arlington fly-in and talked to Doug Dugger of qualitysportplanes.com. He let me sit in his CH750. The visibility around is better than average, but the cabin is not tall. So visibility to the sides is no better than in a 172. It would be much worse if not for the raised wings. One other thing, Doug said that the plane is ridiculously slow, even with 120 hp Jabiru. I don't remember exact number, but it's something below 80 knots. He says that Cruzer is supposed to be about 50% faster. I can see why Zenith thought they needed that. We didn't discuss the M-Squared's S-LSA. Doug represents Zenith kits.

[Hambone]

Great report! Thanks for that.

[langj]

Doug gave me a demo in a 701 before I bought my 701 kit (Still building). He is a great guy very nice. I have a good portion of time in a Ch-750 as my local airport used to have one for rent(it has now been sold) I have flown a 6ft person in the plane with out issue. However, I am only 5'6 and have never had visabiltiy issues. I have flown a skycatcher three times. I had visibility issues when turning base to final as the wing blocked my view. The 750's wing sits higher up and does not block view. The 750 with out a doubt is not built for speed. And to be honest it has to be a good day to get 80 Kts. Maybe at sea level you can with a tail wind (I fly in the mountains around Tahoe) it not designed as a cross country machine but more like a piper cub where you fly low and slow. I am not sure if Doug has the bubble doors on his 750 demonstrator the bubble doors help with space and visibility you can look straight down with them. The 750 also has an incredible take off roll and landing requirement which is great for off airport operations. Landings can be tricky and the plane had suffered damage by other students multiple times on landings. However, compared to the skycatcher landing the 750 was easy. I have found low wings to be the easiest to land as they tend to provide a little bit more float on landing, which provides a little leeway on an early flare. When you flare a 750 or skycatcher you better not be too early. The 750 is okay if you end up carying a bit extra speed on landing, the skycatcher did not like that at all.

[zaitcev]

I think the biggest contributor to the base-to-final visibility in CH750 is not the height of the wings as such, but their shape. As I mentioned, the distance between the seat cushion and the bottom of the wing is the same as on common high wing airplanes, such as Skyhawk. However, the wing is way narrower at the root than most. This is why it's possible to look through the space where the wing root would be otherwise.

I'm very close to saying "screw the speed, I'll just fly commercial". Love what I see of CH750 so far. But it's still more expensive as, for example, a used RANS S7. I trawl Barnstormers looking at these two LSAs. An advantage for S7 is that its kit was on the market longer. So I can find older examples with 300-500 hours. Haven't seen a CH750 that old yet.

[Hambone]

The CH750's low cruise speed is certainly a disadvantage, especially for cross-country missions. For me, the STOL capability is more useful for the type of flying I'm interested in.

Zlin's Shock Cub offers even better STOL capability with higher cruise speeds, albeit in a tandem taildragger configuration.

It will be interesting to see how the Shock Cub program progresses. I think Zlin are onto an absolute winner.

[langj]

The 750 I used to rent had a lot of hours in it. Buzz air flight academy bought it from my local school. they are located in another state then me not sure where. But I believe they are still doing flight training in it. So it is very durable. As for parts Zenith has been around a long time and I do not think they are going anywhere. They just released a new aircraft well they bought the light sport version from another company and came out with a version that is outside of light sport specs. As for price their kits are easy to build if you decided to build one yourself. I am working on a 701, I have never had any experience building before this and it's coming together. My project has been moving slowly due to buying a new house and having a fourth child. Family takes priority over building. However, I see the advantages in having an all metal plane that can be stored outside, I would not recommended that with a Rans.

[FastEddieB]

Deleted - posted to wrong thread.