I would build the 3 if it were me. The extra HP is not only nice for going fast - it is a safety factor too. Having the ability to climb high quickly is a good idea in a plane that glides likes a flying manhole cover.

The Glasair is like any other high wig loaded high performance wing. It wants to fly fast. It is not a good slow performer. The RV is a better combination good slow flight handling and speed. The Glasair is much better in the bumps of course.

The "fast glass" experimentals such as the Lancair and Glasair are some of my favorite aircraft. Todd makes some excellent points, and his Glasair III looks absolutely incredible.

IMO, if you want to do aerobatics, the short wing Glasairs are going to be the best option. The Glasairs have higher design load limits than the Lancair, and with the short wing the roll rate is quite good. If aerobatics are not your thing, then a long wing Glasair is probably the way to go -- better climb, faster cruise, slower approach speed, etc. As Todd pointed out, the Glasairs generally use Lycoming engines, which for some folks is a definite plus. If you want maximum efficiency, a long-wing IO-360 powered Glasair II RG would be hard to beat. If you want mind-blowing speed and performance, go for the IO-540 powered III.

If you don't need serious aerobatic capability, and you like the Continental IO-550N, then the Lancair Legacy should also be considered. It is a very impressive design from an aero standpoint -- very low cruise drag, yet effective slotted flaps and a high lift coefficient for landing. The performance of the Legacy is perhaps slightly better than the Glasair III, but probably not enough to matter to most of us. The Legacy also has a unique look that most folks seem to either love or hate (I personally think it looks fantastic).

One problem you will encounter with any of these planes is finding affordable insurance. Homebuilt aircraft in general have a very poor safety record, and the record for high-wing loading experimentals such as the Glasairs/Lancairs is absolutely abysmal. This has already been mentioned on another thread, but in general you will find it impossible to obtain liability limits of over $100K per person.

Great post, Rick. I love the look of the Legacy, too.

You're killin' me. I want one of these to bad I can't stand it. Gotta have a couple extra seats to ferry the grand kids though.

If I may have some air time, you can get the Lancair with a Lycoming if you want. I had a hanger mate that flew a Lycoming powered Legacy. It was a fantastic aircraft. On take off we were at 150 knots by the time we were over the departing end of the field. I may have a bias opinion since I fly it's little brother, a Lancair 320.

Excellent points.

I have the long tips with tanks, but also have the short tips if I want to do acro. Takes about 45 minutes to swap them. The short tips were painted also, so it will look nice. Mine also has the slotted flap mod so that helps a bit.

Insurance is not cheap. $3,500/yr for $150k/$100k / $1M total. Funny thing is that the liability part is about $350.

Hardest part flying the plane is getting in and out. The wing sits high and there are no steps. I also did not want wing walk on my plane, so I have to rool out small mats to protect the paint, but it looks so much nicer this way.

Yep - there is a nice one for sale with a 400HP Lycoming. Nice machine! The speeds are fun. Lift off about 90-100 knots and once the gear is up accelerate and climb at 140-150 knots. 300 knot redline speed and the yellow arc does not start until 240 knots indicated. Crazy machine.

now.....that's one amazing clown plane.

Good point. Although I think most Legacy's have the Continental installed, the Legacy plans and build manual do include instructions for a Lycoming installation.

make it stop.....make it stop.....

Extreme? sounds about right to me

Todd,

FWIW, I think you are very wise to resist the engine mod temptations. The Glasair III and Lancair Legacy are two of the airplanes I would least want to be in if the engine quit. Although both aircraft have reasonable stall speeds when the flaps are extended, if you try to slow close to those speeds on approach the resulting sink rates will be extreme. A successful engine-out approach in either airplane would be quite challenging (but of course not impossible -- it has been done).

Just my opinion, but I would recommend extreme caution when attempting to increase the power output on these aircraft. For me engine reliability would be a higher priority than increased horsepower in this case. A Glasair III like yours with a stock IO-540 is already a rocket ship compared to any factory-built GA airplane.

Rick - I agree 100%. The only mod my Glasair has to the stock 300HP engine is Lightspeed ignition on one side. I was happy to see that the builder chose a brand new Angle Valve IO-540 instead of taking a parallel valve 260 with higher compression. That single ignition system provides a hotter spark and better timing than both factory mags. The other side is a mag for backup.

As far as engine out goes - it is no problem over a runway with gear extended; however, if you are landing off airport you land gear up. With the long tips and gear up the plane glides fairly nice. I have a fair amount of high performance and helicopter experience and have performed about 150 auto rotations in a helicopter. The Glasair is a lot like a helicopter in an engine out scenario. Speed management is very critical and timing is everything.

Todd, you've got me interested. Does BRS offer a chute for your airplane?