0
mbondvegas

Triathlon DOM- F-111 or ZP

Recommended Posts

What are the other differences in the current Tri5.0 and one made in 1998. (other than use/age) Has the design changed and how? Deployment/glide/flare,etc...

Thanks for all of your help.
- - -
I am not afraid of tomorrow, for I have seen yesterday and I love today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am aware of three different fabrics that have been used in the Triathlon. In chronological order:

1. A non-slippery ZP that was bulky as hell.
(I had one of these mfg'd in the '90's)

2. A non-slippery ZP that had bulk similar to other ZP fabrics.
(I have a Triathlon and a Diablo made of this. I love it.)

3. A slippery ZP similar to what other mfgr's use.

I believe #1 and #2 were two variants of "Gelvenor". #1 was about 40% bulkier than #2, but otherwise indistinguishable.
"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What are the other differences in the current Tri5.0 and one made in 1998. (other than use/age) Has the design changed and how? Deployment/glide/flare,etc...



The lineset has been changed a few times since 1998. The most recent ones are supposed to flare much better, but that's a qualitative claim that I don't can't support with such limited experience.

My own experience however - I went from a '98 Tri220 (~70 jumps) to an '04 Tri210 (25 jumps) this spring.

The fabric (new, the old one had 250 jumps when I got it) is slippery and traps the air really well, but seems to be made up for by the less bulky fabric, more than the 10ft should explain. The same d bag is easier to deal with.

I have popped up on flare a few times on the new one. Like 5-6ft I think. The old one I struggled to get a plane out, and I adopted an earlier partial flare and then a main one - pretty much a 2 stage style. With the current one I'm back to the more adaptive plane out and then ride it - it will fly flat for much longer than my internal clock is used to.

I've heard from GravityGirl that the older ones had a reputation for hard openings, but I didn't see that in mine. Initially it opened too slowly for me and I moved to pack it with the nose untouched, etc, to promote a more prompt open.

----
Add: I don't want to scare you off the older design. It seemed to do the job, I just think the newer ones do better. I should add that I'm not one of the natural wonders for landings. I find 9 cells let me get away better with my faults.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0