This looks weird. Why?

[Emory Bored 61]

http://www.barnstormers.com/ad_manager/listing_images.php?id=857890&ZOOM=b1f1165ad71e43d4e7446fe97da023a7

[Logtrucker 44]

Wing tips ?

[Logtrucker 44]

Trim tab ?

[Emory Bored 61]

Maybe it's the observer doors?  I don't know.  It just doesn't look smooth?  It's probably just fine.  

[Av8r3400 1179]

Shopping cart wheels, stinger style tail wheel, Kitfox wing tips, ... ?

[akflyer 1427]

What Larry said... The little wheels and the stinger look goofy to me.. If he wanted mor aoa bigger mains would have been my answer

[Logtrucker 44]

Good visibility, light weight, and I bet it flys great, v.gs etc. I still have the 90 percent to go on my Avid IV.

[ChrisBolkan 130]

Dang, I think it's a good looking plane. Bet its fast with those little tires. Should have faired the landing gear.

[dholly 718]

It does look goofy with the tiny wheels/tires. Funny too, after looking at a whole lot of Avids over the years, the only two with a RV style stinger tail spring I've ever seen show up within a month of each other. I get the benefits on a short-coupled taildragger but can't imagine that would hold up to the abuse Avid owners who stray off pavement can inflict. Anyhoo... looks like a stretched fuse, long spar Avid speed wing or possibly Kitfox Riblett wing. Count the ribs and look at the fabric over the wing tank. Top of tank is real smooth, looks more like a KF slip-in tank than Avid F/G wrap tank... although the flaperon counterbalance weights are round Avid style, not the square KF style. Maybe right in keeping with a 'use-what-ya-got-on-the-shelf', Frankenstein-like mentality. Interesting brake pedal mods, seems like they would exacerbate the poor ankle geometry problem rather than improve it. One thing for sure, that panel is a hot mess IMHO...

[SuberAvid 617]

They all look goofy with little tires.  Noticed they didn't fair the wing struts either.  Looks like a good plane though and nothing someone couldn't tweak to fit their own flying style.

[akflyer 1427]

careful Randy.. someone is gonna question our manhood again if we keep talking about big tires   Of course, I would love said people to come play on the sands of the mac. river with 600s.  I will be the guy laughing and videoing the heli lifting their pile of rubbish off the sand bar.

 

Or watch them trying to land in the tundra with a tire that takes more than 2-3 PSI in it.  Its always fun to camp out and watch your buddy try to weld the fuse and put new gear under his plane while your out shooting animals and having a good time

 

[Bandit 286]

I'm sure it works great off of a asphalt runway.

[C5Engineer 1170]

VG's are most definitely necessary for operating an Avid off a 4000 ft paved strip! What's with the gianormous holes in the panel?  I wonder what the thought process/mission profile was during the build??

[Emory Bored 61]

I doubt the builder(s) really knew what he/they wanted.  Most of these airplanes went to folks with little or no aviation experience.  Just the desire to fly.  I would think that this one will make somebody a really nice ride with some changes.  It's got good bones I think.  To tell the truth I have been battling with my brain trying to justify owning an Avid while I build a Zenith.  It don't pencil out you know?  A new minimalist panel, gear, wheels and tires, a decent tailwheel, and there you go.  But after all that it's still a C model with insufficient gross weight for my mission.  

[akflyer 1427]

FWIW.. There is no gross weight on my mod C, or anyone elses.. not that is listed on any paperwork with the FAA anyways.  I have loaded mine up.. it handles it fine if you have enough runway to get off the ground.  I think my longest ground run was around 700'.  Water.. well I have been loaded where it took 4000' to get off the water, hence my need to have the 800 conversion