I'm not sure where you got those flap settings number from, but when I say the S-20 has the same wing as the S-7S, that includes the flaps. But you got me curious, so I grabbed the trusty bubble protractor (I trust that bubble more then I do a digital readout) and I came up with 37 degrees of flap on my 2007 S-7S. Aft spar loading is the biggie with flap setting, and I think over the years as the wing has been tweaked, Randy has increased the flap angle a tad, but even my '97 had more then 25 degrees, in fact I think it had the same as my newer bird. Maybe that was the first notch?? Whatever it is, they work great and are very effective, plus it slips like an anvil, with or without flaps, so setting up any kind of descent rate is a piece of cake. So... no advantage for the S-20 there, back to the side by side seating (and the attendant large/wider baggage bay) thing being the big difference.

I WILL make a stopover at Seeley Lake, to eyeball the one up there, it's a beautiful area and I need about zero excuse to fly anywhere anyways, so count on a trip report from there and a in build progress report in a week or so.

Quite nice
https://youtu.be/Zkk8nEfIEe0

Actually the RANS S-20 Raven, S-7S, and the Kitfox S7 Super Sport are very high on MY list. There are a couple of other designs I am looking at but these 3, plus the cub clones, are all contenders. I will not be purchasing anytime soon, 1-2 years away, so just trying to get all the info I can.

My quiry on the cub types was due to this type being prefered by my partner in crime. He is wanting to stay with the trusty 'ol Lynosuaris engine whereas I am undecided. The newer Lycoming clone engines are definitely updated from engines of old, but the Rotax is a very proven design.

Honestly I have had more experience with the Cont. and Lycs. I have owned, than the single Rotax 912 that has been a headache, to say the least! I am not yet ready to give up on the Rotax because it does give good fuel efficiency and power when it is running the way it is supposed to. I have spent more money on fixing the 912 than I have in my 172's O-300, I bought it in 1987!!!

WWhunter,

My only experience with the 912 Rotex was when I taught a guy to fly his Kitfox. I din't like the sound of it and the fact that the airplane needed nearly full power just to haul two overweight guys.

I liked the engine in the Savage Cub a guy brought down from KC to fly with me. He named the engine maker, but I had never heard of it. Sounded more normal and of course the Cub has a lot more wing.

I would hope Rotex has an AD program like conventional airplane engine makers. It is good to know how the engines are performing around the country and good to fix things before they quit.

Contact

I was dragged kicking and screaming into the Rotax camp, but now, coming up on 1700 hours of: changing the oil every 50 to 75 hrs (using less then a qt in between, and NAPA car filters) plugs every 500 hours or so (NAPA or Car Quest again), check the gear box at about 1,000 hrs (way over the recommended but still showed almost no wear, same with the carbs), I am a believer! Zero problems or issues, and at most, if I had to round off (and up) all at 4 gph on mogas, E 10 even.

Rotax is ridiculously conservative with their called out maintenance schedules, on average I double them (not on purpose, but looking backwards), and still have zero issues I have heard rumors of many going over 4K hours with no major problems. Like any engine flying often seems to be easier on them then infrequently.

The sound they make is for sure different then a traditional aircraft engine, just like a Harley sounds different then a Goldwing bike. The prop and the way it is setup can have a major impact on that, but what the heck, with the modern ANR headsets (and SAT entertainment radio) who cares? The PERCEIVED noise from the ground is much less, and probably the best thing to happen in a while as per flyer/non flyer public relations. They can't complain if they don't even hear you! Hang out long and often enough with the Rotax crowd, and when a "regular" airplane flies by, you will be amazed at how long you hear it coming and going, the time span hearing it is much greater, making the tonal difference pretty much inconsequential.

I was on a crane job the other day, and a neighbor was there also. As another old timer up here on the mountain, (he was born and raised up here, and I know his dad, unlike the other newbies) when I climb out when N. bound, clawing for altitude to clear the 8 K pass) I often overfly his place at 500' to 750' or so. Full or nearly so power, and often before the sun comes up. In a pause in the work I asked him if he ever minded..... he said no he didn't mind, and in fact had never even noticed! Point being, that low overall sound level has major operational advantages, especially for those of us who fly out of rural residential type home strips.

It's also the lightest thing out there, besides being the most reliable, for LSA types. Other contenders have yet to gain a major foothold, as in total fleet hours, nothing is even close. Anyone want to venture the highest time UL engine out there? And how many of them? If my 912S took a crap tomorrow, I'd buy another in a heartbeat.

Can you fly the doors open in the S20? I'm guessing you can in both the S7 and the cub clones.

Brett

Yes you can, but the doors are so large, it's almost too much of a good thing. A common mod among the S-7 pilots is a flip up window on one or both sides. With that, you can open the window for taking pictures or throwing banana peels out, or for just hanging your elbow out, with out having to worry about stuff in the main baggage area getting sucked out.

I've flown mine quite a bit with both doors totally off, at fly-ins or other special events, it gives the passenger quite a thrill while the PIC stays pretty wind free up front.