Packing Volumes

[Boris73 0]

Does anybody have the packing volumes for the following reserves and mains? Thanks

X-fast 170
Speed 2000 170
Optimum 176

Spectre 190
Dragon 190
x-fun 190

[outski 0]

x-fast 170 315
x-fan 190 395

http://www.spadochrony.podlasie.pl/bac.pdf

[freeatlast 0]

Quote

Does anybody have the packing volumes for the following reserves and mains? Thanks

X-fast 170
Speed 2000 170
Optimum 176

Spectre 190
Dragon 190
x-fun 190

Optimum 176 355
X-Fast 170 315
Speed 2000 170 307

Dragon 190 495
Spectre 190 475
X-Fun 190 395

Usual caveat's apply - these are only the manufacturer's quoted sizes and real life is sometimes different !!!

But it makes interesting reading

[Boris73 0]

Thanks guys. I have a question though, why does the 9 cell x-fun have a much smaller packing volume then the 7 cell canopies? I always thought 7 cells have a smaller packing volume?

[dragon2 0]

Quote

Thanks guys. I have a question though, why does the 9 cell x-fun have a much smaller packing volume then the 7 cell canopies? I always thought 7 cells have a smaller packing volume?

Not all 7cell canopies pack smaller than 9cell, not by far, and also the x-fun is a hybrid canopy (part F111) so it packs smaller than a full ZP 9cell.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[JohanW 0]

Also, its size might be measured differently (top skin, bottom skin, projected area), so the actual sizes might not be the same, even if all are quoted as 190.

Johan.
I am. I think.

[BKR 0]

Quote

Also, its size might be measured differently (top skin, bottom skin, projected area), so the actual sizes might not be the same, even if all are quoted as 190.

The X-Fun 190 is bit more than 190 ft².

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[JohanW 0]

By which measurement?

That's the whole point, isn't it?

Johan.
I am. I think.

[BKR 0]

Quote

By which measurement?

That's the whole point, isn't it?

Total surface of the top skin material taken above the profil chord. I do not enter in details to difficult in English. We use several methods too, project, average from top and bottom, bottom only, under the chord, etc..

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[Boris73 0]

Does anybody have the packing volume for a Triathlon 190 with zpx material? I am looking for a 7 cell canopy with a packing volume of 417 cubic inches or less. If not I will go for the x-fun.

[in2jumping 0]

Quote

Does anybody have the packing volume for a Triathlon 190 with zpx material? I am looking for a 7 cell canopy with a packing volume of 417 cubic inches or less. If not I will go for the x-fun.

Do the math!

Standard Tri 190 = 420 cui
ZPX claiming 15 to 20 % smaller pack volume
So 420 minus 17% = 348 cui

[Boris73 0]

Ahh cool, I didnt know either of those details, thanks.

[degeneration 5]

Rather than start a new thread, I'm bumping this one.

I have an Optimum 113. Quoted pack volume is 250 Cu Inch.

Regarding pack volume:
Does anyone have any real life experience of how the X-Fast 120 compares? They are both low pack volume reserves. Edit - received a reply from BKR, it apparently packs very similar, estimate 3-5% bulkier.

And also, any one had experience of the Smart LPV 110 (or 120) to give an opinion on how they compare?

I'm hesitant to take as gospel manufacturer's quoted pack volumes as they may have been measured in a differing way or conditions.

Sky Switches - Affordable stills camera tongue switches and conversion adaptors, supporting various brands of camera (Canon, Sony, Nikon, Panasonic).