This is like wading into an argument on religion or politics.  It’s about personal preference, opinion and bias.  But there are a few facts:

 

The useful load of the Velocity XL and the RV-10 is essentially the same 1100-1200 lbs.

 

The front seat width of the Velocity is the same as the RV-10, (OK, there is ¼” less on each side) the back seat is MUCH larger; 4” wider, and more leg room

 

The Velocity will carry the same payload faster, or, at the same speed with lower fuel burn; and for a longer distance in either case.

 

Having the engine in back has little or nothing to do with engine noise level unless you are going faster than the speed of sound. Smoother less turbulent flow over the smoother profile can reduce cabin noise. Not having to fly through the prop wash is an advantage in drag and noise, more of a factor at low speed.

 

Working with composites is great – you can make any shape you want and get an absolutely smooth finish.

 

The canard airplane is inherently lower drag because all surfaces are lifting surfaces, the horizontal stabilizer on a conventional airplane generates a downward force.

 

The Velocity is inherently stable; let go the stick at cruise speed and it wlll continue on whatever course was set; let go of the stick at pattern speed and it will return to straight and level. Great stable platform for IFR flight.

 

There! – that ought provide a little balance to those other ‘biased’ responsesJ

 

They are both great airplanes, just different.  Ultimately it’s about your preference.  I have a hangar mate who loves his old T-28.  Go figure. Now go out and fly both before you decide.  (Oh; and take a couple of big friends along to sit in the back seat.  Make that 3 friends, because if you leave the front seat empty in the Velocity the CG may be too far back)

 

Al  (Now, let’s get back to religion and politics – er; I mean rotary engines)

 

J.D.

 The biggest difference is the mission of the two planes. I have looked at both kits as well. The Velocity is a fast flier that has a much longer landing distance, with somewhat lower payload. Canards are usually better on efficiency, with good range.  (I can't last longer than about 3-4 hours anyway.) The Velocity is not well equipped for landing on anything but long paved runways. The Velocity has a narrower cockpit not suitable to larger pilots. Even what they call the "bubba" version isn't that wide inside. The RG version is considered a complex aircraft and has higher insurance premiums.

 The RV-10 is fixed gear conventional low wing aircraft. The mission is somewhat more "utility" than the Velocity. RVs have short takeoff and landing distances, it's like a trademark. The RV has a roomier cockpit which is important to me since I'm a bigger guy. Fixed gear and a good rep for low-speed landings helps insurance rates on the RV. Lastly Vans has the largest flying fleet of kits in the field and is a very stable company.

 To wrap up Velocity: faster, more complex, probably more efficient (mileage), more difficult landing and takeoff (requires longer runways), looks cool, higher insurance rates, lower payload. RV: simpler, more room, higher payload, lower speed (about 200 MPH), shorter range with standard tanks. Much lower landing and takeoff speed, and shorter distances, lower insurance, better rough field capability. Looks more "Spam" like. Stable company. While it might not be a big factor for you RV's usually have a higher resale value. 

Do you want speed or utility? The Velocity will cost more to finish being a retractable plane. The RV-10 is aluminum, with THOUSANDS of tedious rivets. The Velocity will test your resistance to epoxy. The final choice is always yours!

 

Bill Jepson (I went RV. I needed the cockpit room and desired payload over speed)