Fly A New Plane You Can Actually Afford - Vashon Ranger 

Dude you’re putting out more aviation content that matters than anyone else

Never felt more broke earning $40,000 a year hearing "affordable" and "base model starts at $120,000."

The main problem with the ranger is after fuel and and oil your looking at 250lbs of usable weight. That aside its a great deal. Hopefully the FAA will increase the weight limits when they recommend the new lsa rules before 2023.

Thanks MoJo! I dug pretty deep on this one (I like high wings). The Ranger has a header tank located just behind the bulkhead. The wing tanks feed the header tank by gravity, so nope, no fuel selector switch, I hope to get a glass panel within the next year, so been looking at all the options out there. So far, I haven't found anything close to the Dynon system without spending 3 times the money!

Love your videos! Keep it up!!!

Nice, thanks for the video Mike.

Nice to hear the confidence and passion. of the old Mike back in full form in this video. Not sure if it's the plane, you or both but I'm glad your back in the grove. The love is back.....and I'm lovin it. Nice plane BTW . That price point obviously doesn't hurt and sure could help out keeping training costs down . Something I see as one of the biggest impediment thats obviously keeping the masses from loving private aviation even more. Waiting for your next vid. 10 things up on this one. Thanks Mike

Thanks for the look at this airplane Mike! I really like the look of the aircraft and especially the company. The Continental O-200 is great, but as a 6'02" 220 lb sport pilot, I would say that it isn't cost effective for what it is advertised for (cabin large enough for 2 real people and 100 lb of baggage). Big enough, yes, legally flyable: Not even close (2-140lb people put it overweight with full fuel). Everyone's circumstances are different, and I'm hoping this was built with the expected changes to Light Sport that are coming so the useful load will not be a factor. Main drawbacks: I can't take a passenger at all (even at 1/2 fuel, I have 141 lbs useful load left not including my flight bag and clothes which most airports at least unofficially require to be worn, so say 125lbs realistically), I can't use the full baggage capacity (not that I would need to). I need to coordinate carb heat AND mixture during critical phases of flight (FAA considers an adjustable prop to bee too complex for a sport pilot, but not a combination of carb heat and mixture? Seems a bit off doesn't it?). If something goes wrong, I can't just pull a fuse or fuses in a set pattern, I have to try to manipulate the glass panel which is a challenge in anything but smooth air anyway. In short, as a newly certified sport pilot, I would not be comfortable flying this alone (and can't take a CFI or more experience pilot with me). Eliminate some of the complexities by changing the carburetor to an altitude compensating model and add auto carb heat and this would be the Cadillac of single-person aircraft for us newbies. Still too expensive, but that's aviation!

Maybe an owner will chime in, but I've looked in to the Ranger extensively. I flew a demo and it's a responsive, honest handling airplane. The Dynon avionics & autopilot are a big plus. I reserved a position and have also been to the factory to observe construction. A few more months and mine will be in the hangar. They are in the process now of relocating their two facilities (production/final assembly) in to one location. I won't give my justifications, but in short, there is much to appreciate with the airplane, the owner, the designer and the people who build it. The back and forth over the powerplant will never end and I would say that many of us who have had previous airplanes are just fine with the sturdy 0-200. Any negative comment can easily be matched by a negative about the other engine, so it comes down to personal preference. Thanks Mike for posting this video.

thanks for bring this couldnt make it this year, did you ever do a general walk around the show such a great place.

Very Nice!

nice plane! thanks for the video, Mike!

I wish John and yourself success always. Plane looks nice but I'm no plane expert. I would think there is a fuel selector because I see them on experimental plane. Have fun.

I get to fly on of these late next month! If I like it I am seriously thinking about buying this for my first airplane!

I have given a bit of training in the VR-7, over all not a bad aircraft. However, being under the light sport category it is severely limited in its capabilities. The 445lbs useful load disappears really quick when adding pilots especially when they are full sized. Two 180lbs pilots will only leave you with about 14 gallons of fuel or about 2.5 hours endurance on the conservative side. 2.5 hours endurance does not go too far when conducting a cross country instrument flight. In all practicality, there is only 2.25 hours endurance when accounting for the 45minute reserve. The real kicker for the Ranger and it being certified under as a S-LSA is that it cannot legally fly in IMC. One final kick to the Ranger is that there has been reports of the nose fork collapsing due to fatigue cracking. This has resulted in a propstrike at the organization I am currently instructing. The nose fork was shoddly designed and from what I understand is being reworked to be more beefier and stand up better to normal operations. In addition to the weak nose gear, the aluminum used to build the ranger is quite thin, which make sense because it is a light-sport. The light construction of the aircraft simply means that pilots have to be gentle when handling the aircraft on the ground. The doors have been a notorious weak point that can easily be tossed and bent if a strong gust of wind takes them. The circuit breakers are controlled through the Dynon Skyview, so there are no physical circuit breakers. Personally, i have a lot of mixed feelings about that. Over all, the VR-7 is a great VFR bird, easy to handle, and fairly simple to maintain. However, personally I believe that the wizbang glass avionics are wasted in an LSA that cannot fly in IMC or for a very long time for that matter.

Mike, it has a mixture control because Vashon decided to use a 100hp O-200 instead of the most common Rotax 912. Big disadvantage vs other LSAs which use the lighter, more economical, and single lever Rotax.

I love it 😍

Great video. I enjoyed it immensely.

I hope they make a tail dragger version

Keep up the good work with the varying designs!

Great review as always Mike

Competition includes Aeroprakt A22 LS 50 inch wide cabin Stall 35 Mph, Cruise 100-110 Mph and A32 Vixxen 47 inch cabin Cruise 125-130 mph, Stall 35 mph . Both models have a 600 pound useful payload

Gross weight LSA is 1320 pounds. You were close. I would love to fly this aircraft. Absolutely beautiful bird. I've flown behind Dynon avionics. S-LSA is factory-built, ready-to-fly fixed-wing aircraft that is FAA-approved to meet industry ASTM* consensus standards. They can be rented out & used for instruction. Once one is purchased, an owner can change the certificate to E-LSA (experimental category), but can no longer instruct in it or rent it out. Hope this helps.

this plane realy looks like an expirimental/ selfbuild

Is there a float kit?

Awesome vid! Mike.

1. it's SLOW (all metal, draggy, angled, crude looking) 2. its only 46inches wide (other SLSA like the CTLSi are 50 inches wide) 3. it's using an old, heavy, carb'd Continental O200 (other SLSA are fuel injected, FADEC control) 4. It only has a 27 gal fuel capacity and a 500mi range, other SLSA have more fuel and fly further 5. the seats are rigid, and there are old style Varnier throttle and fuel control (better SLSA use a center console and throttle handle) 6. there are no 2.5mm mini plugs for a Bose headset. The price is $130k...pretty cheap, but not for what you get.

How does the Vashon Ranger performance compare to Cessna Skycatcher 162?

Have you heard of the RV-12?

The issue with the Vashon is that it is a tank with only 200 Kg between empty and maximum take off weight.

it reminds me of a Piper Colt

Please do a review on Zenith CH 701 and Zenith CH 801

Please review the Bd4c

Good information. Good video.

Was this aircraft originally called Murphy Ranger? I knew a guy in the UK who built a tail wheel version. Who needs a tent, with all that room in the back.

Mike Ojo.please teach me how to make a 4 seater aeroplane.

We are in South Africa will this also work for us?

Could this be made a taildragger?

I would love to have an above wing plane but I hate to get off the ground! lol

If the pilot has a PPL not a Light sport cert they can fly it at night and IFR probably not into known IMC I'm guessing?

A better dollar value is the zenith 701. You can build or find for sale by owner.

My dad is hopefully getting one soon, he's just waiting on a hanger but it's not looking promising in our area.

They need to make it in an experimental so you can put a seat in the rear!

Nice panel, but not much to look at. Pretty sure Cessna isn't jealous.

Fuel mixture has nothing to do with SLSA. SLSA indicates that it is a factory built certified aircraft that can be used for instruction.

why is the pitot way out there?

What's up with the red tape that looks like it is holding the rudder onto the vertical stabilizer?

Is it noisy to ride in?

Nice! But, scary to know they lost battery power????

ooh

I should have bought one when they were under 100k loaded

What type of Expo is that that you are attending? Are they ever on the West Coast? San Diego/Los Angeles?

First here and it's interesting I was just looking up information on flight schools in my area back home

Cessnas, except for the Skycatcher have a much nicer nosegear.

Cool, which lsa you recommend for low budget?

Zenith CH 701 looks like a much better deal.

They are making a 4 seat version to compete with Cessna 150s.

👍

What motor has?

An O-200 has mixture control

I like everything about this aircraft aside from the legal useful load. Assuming the rules change, and apparently they will, this is the new 152 only better.

No wing struts

Im not a pilot yet but.... Looking at that pitot tube can't help but think about how flimsy it looks why. Couldnt they make it shorter i can see a bird striking it while under IFR conditions im pretty sure there are other redundant sytems onboard but thats the first thing i noticed pardon my ignorance pilot people.

G,day Mojo Mike from Sydney Australia. Looks like an alternative to a Cessna 150. Is Cessna manufacturing the 150? 🌏🇦🇺

Combining Off Roading with Aviation. Check out my backcountry flying videos with my heavily modified monster bush plane “Ghost”. 🤙❤️ We should finally collab.

An affordable airplane is a taylorcraft or quad city or avidflyer. 10 to 20 grand.

Certified or experimental?

Cessna already built one...the skycatcher tanked

This LSA ranger (115,000) vs an LSA piper cub (50-60000 or cheaper) I’m going with the cub 😂. No disrespect to ranger but I wouldn’t call it the most affordable aircraft.

Might want to check with previous owners. Panels are painted prior to assembly. Several videos out there of these with water damage. They leak. Graphic skins limit leaking, but are expensive.

You left out the most important selling point for many pilots... it does NOT have a Rotax engine. It uses a Continental 0-200 4-banger - same as the C-150/152. Nice to see they got rid of the cheap & cheezy Washington green "tree-hugger" wrap at least for this year's display model.

A real aviation engine is a huge plus. This engine can be worked on anywhere in the country.

The Sling is vastly superior to this aircraft in appearance and finish but similarly priced. With all due respect, this does look like a very well executed home build instead of a factory built plane and where I live (South Africa) it is a lot cheaper and easier to maintain a Rotax 912 than any Continental. The vast available luggage space will require good discipline from pilots on fly aways to stay within limits.

Cheerrs

Hey now

115,000…. You greatly overestimate what I can afford.

Nice presentation. I always appreciate your passion for aviation…….but……160K for a basic IFR LSA aircraft is still far too expensive for a 2 seater in my opinion. This airplane doesn’t have enough power to get out of it’s own way where I live in Colorado…….I’d rather buy a used C-182 for that price….I remember when you could buy a new C-172 or a PA-180 fully loaded for half that price 30 years ago..Let’s face it there is no such thing as an affordable 2 or 4 place aircraft on the market anymore…planes are now only accessible to the wealthy. The attorneys and all the frivolous lawsuits ruined the small aircraft industry years ago.

Jab 230

I THOUGHT YOU SAID THIS PLANE WAS CHEAP, FOR A RICH MAN!!!!!!!!

It’s very hard to watch your videos. With how little info you actually look up prior to making each video. It takes 5 mins to look on their website or talk to someone from the company. You got the gross weight and “mixture”/carb heat, wrong without any mention of the useful load, strut-less wings, easy egress, and wide cabin which are arguably the biggest pros and cons of this plane.

Compared to the Jabiru, Montaer, and Texas Aircraft Colt, this thing just doesn't measure up.

Try 160k in 2024! The ever out of touch market of light sport! So not affordable! A VERY nice Cherokee 140, or Cessna 172 FAR more affordable. INCLUDING annuals, hell, at those prices, I can buy an old 172, and put a new motor in it, with all new interior and instruments, for far less. LOL. I can't wait for FAA rules to change next year. These insane prices for LS need a reality check!

I understand $120,000 for the plane as a VFR craft, all new and ready to go. I don't understand $40,000 to make the plane instrument capable. That seems not just high, but abusive in terms of cost.

The plane Cessna wished they built? Yeah they wasted their time with failures like the 150, 152 and even worse 172. 😏

Starting at only $127,500!!! What a bargain!!!!

Why are planes so expensive? There's no way that's $160k worth of material and software.

I'll take a 1970's Cessna 172 at 1/2 the price and much more capability. spend a few more bucks, oh, and get a pilots license, it's only a little more work than the sport pilot license.

Assuming this is toe brakes? Its likely the rudder pedal are movable? Geez, look at the construction. Its obvious. You build airplanes, you should know.

This plane looks like it was made of cardboard. A heavy wind would blow it away.

You thought of a C- 172? Really? Why would you possible think that, seeing the Ranger is a two place airplane? Perhaps you could compare it to a C-150/152, but you seem to like hype rather than reporting factual comparisons.

Only $160,000? LMAO Competitive? Still LMAO! Would like to see who would buy this.

For $120k you can buy a REAL airplane. Sheesh.

How about speaking to the owner before you record. So many times you say "I think..." or "maybe...". You've left us guessing where the circuit breakers are and whether the rudder pedals are adjustable, for example. And you did not even mention the powerplant! Do not give up your day job.

This isnt practical for 170k bucks you could get an cessna 172

YOU will be sorry you hitched your chute to Dan Gryder, many people are RUNNING from him and his YT sites

More knowledge of what you are talking about would be good.... `instrument` what? `1,300 lbs is NOT the aircraft limit. Thumbs down from me. However the notion is alright, just needs improvement in the presentation. I assume this wasn''t pre-planned?

120,000$ US? affordable?? NOT!!!!

Stop calling planes over 100,000 affordable. Just stop. No excuse for it.

That is an ugly airplane, looks like a really short wing base, the gear looks flimsy, and overall looks more like a toy than an airplane.

Maybe you should study your subject before going on camera. 1320 lbs. been that way for over a decade Embarrassed for you actually.....so many things wrong or absent from your content.