Hi Daniel,
The primary reason for going with the Aerocanard plan is the additional 3.5 inches given to the folks in the rear seat. All members of my family are a little on the large side. We went to Rough River Kentucky for the Canard Fly-in they have their every year to get a sample sitting in a Cozy Mark IV. My wife and I were OK with the front seat positioning, but had some concerns about the rea seats. There are numbers of builders who are adding extra space to the fuselage that is beyond that specified in the plans. You only need go as far as the modifications forum on this site to realise that. I am not real comfortable with modifying and adding space and changing the form of the aircraft in that manner. It seems outside of my scope and modifications outside of the plans seem to quadruple the effort. Don't get me wrong, I have modifications in mind, such as retractible landing gear and a Mazda Rotary turboed for the powerplant. I am comfortable with both of those modifications due to my present experinece with the infinity gear being placed on my boss' Long EZ and the Mazda Rotary already flying on canards and other airframes with good support.
So the Plans Built Aerocanard offers the greatest advantage to me by having a plans built wider rear seat area. If I had the money, I would have gone to the Velocity family of airframes, but my current finacial standing will not allow the larger up-front investment...and I'm not getting any younger:sad: . So it is the largest, sweat-equity canard I can begin to build today and at $199.00 for the diagrams and templates with a free download of the instructions it just got better;) .
I hope that answered your question. If not, write me and I will attempt to clarify.
Rough River Kentucky is a must for anyone making comparisons. I think there is a forum on this site regarding the occassion.