For what it is worth, a thought on the subject.
I replaced the Matco wheels/brakes in December with Groves and the TK5-s
went on after a bit of mucking around in January.
Both were good decisions especially the TK5s, as landings/arrivals are
softer, and taxiing is very comfortable.
The resultant effect on the airframe can only be improved.
Going back a bit, when I first planned to build a Lancair in retirement,
I would never have considered not putting in dual rudders and brakes.
When I decided that buying and not building was a better option (for
me), I carried that requirement into my search for a Lancair.
For me, unless it had dual rudders and brakes, might as well not have
wings.
The only one on the market without dual rudders/brakes in the year I
looked for a unit was the one I bought.
The reason being that the aircraft I bought was by far the best built
Lancair available, with proper cockpit equipment. (there was one other
equally well built machine but with a FP prop and sparse cockpit
equipment).
I did consider a retrofit, but wondered what the cost benefit would be,
and came to the conclusion - very little.
Since then I have come to the view that dual rudders are not really
necessary in this aircraft for most Lancair pilots, because by and large
you are not going to use the RHS for take off or landing.
Only one of my pilot passengers sort of complained.
Also, a big advantage is the valuable space in front of the passenger
feet for a bit of gear when travelling.
So after more than 40 years of flying, never without dual rudders until
now, unless you want to have the aircraft flown for take off and landing
on a regular basis from the RHS, and you are considering whether or not
you really want to put in dual rudders, don't feel it is an absolute
requirement, as I used to think.
Just a couple of thoughts on it, and not a hard fast comment gents and
ladies.
Regards
Dom Crain.
VH-CZJ