New or Used - Mirage G4-M5

[InFoDaMoNeY 0]

Looking to purchase my first rig. I am a new skydiver.. A License with 34 total jumps. With the current time I get to spend in the sport (not much), I do not see myself downsizing really quick, I plan to stay with a 190 or so for awhile. I was thinking about buying a new container and possibly a new AAD, and then getting with my rigger at my DZ and having him find me used canopies at a decent/good price. The reason (I think) I want to go new, is for perfect fit, colors I want, all options I want, and so on.

Is this a good thought process or am I wasting my money going with a new container?

Thanks,

Newbie Skydiver

[lyosha 46]

InFoDaMoNeY

Looking to purchase my first rig. I am a new skydiver.. A License with 34 total jumps. With the current time I get to spend in the sport (not much), I do not see myself downsizing really quick, I plan to stay with a 190 or so for awhile. I was thinking about buying a new container and possibly a new AAD, and then getting with my rigger at my DZ and having him find me used canopies at a decent/good price. The reason (I think) I want to go new, is for perfect fit, colors I want, all options I want, and so on.

Is this a good thought process or am I wasting my money going with a new container?

Thanks,

Newbie Skydiver

If you are a somewhat standard body shape, go used. Save $$ and use it on lift tickets.

[indyz 1]

How many jumps a year are you planning on making? If your 34 jumps in 2 years is the pace you plan on maintaining, you might be better off renting. Do the math on the annual cost of ownership of a rig. I haven't run the numbers in a while, but the last time I looked into it using our local prices, it took about 25 jumps / year to make owning cheaper than renting. Obviously you shouldn't ignore non-monetary factors like not having to wait if all of the DZ's gear is being rented, the warm and fuzzy that comes from using the same rig on every jump, etc.

[jumplongisland 0]

I was in the same boat a few months ago. Bought a new AAD ( vigil ) for 20 years of skydiving fun to come! So I can swap it around to different rigs. Found a new container with 0 jumps and have "older" canopies I got for cheap. I say if you have the means$$$ go and buy new or near new. Especially something with skyhook and really freefly friendly. IDC what some people say a rig made in the early 2000s are not as safe as a one recently manufactured. If you have the dough there's no reason not to. But I would def try to find a deal on a nice condition rig before you go drop 3k on a shinny new container just for the sake of saving money.

[mattjw916 2]

Quote

Found a new container with 0 jumps and have "older" canopies I got for cheap.

I will never understand this logic. You have to use your main on basically 100% of jumps so why jump some ragged out/possibly out of trim "older" parachute? When I see people pack a $300 (if that) parachute into a $3000 rig I simply wonder, why?

Quote

IDC what some people say a rig made in the early 2000s are not as safe as a one recently manufactured.

That's just preposterous.

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[NWFlyer 2]

jumplongisland

IDC what some people say a rig made in the early 2000s are not as safe as a one recently manufactured.

I'll bite. Tell me why.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[jumplongisland 0]

I would also look at someone funny for packing up a 300$ or less main into a brand new container they spent 3k on. That's not what I'm saying.But buying a main with minimal use that did not cost nearly as much as a new one that you eventually plan to downsize from and using it in a new container that fits you perfectly and has room to downsize sound like a good plan to me. (Why i did it myself) Perfect Fitting Container, Perfect Functioning Main), Room to downsize, Cheaperrrr....


Same reason a car from the early 2000s isn't as safe as a 2014
-More incidents/jumps for manufacturers to study and make improvements from
-Advancements in Rig Materials
-Advancements/Refinements in Rig Manufacturing Techniques
-New Technological advancements like mad riser covers, skyhook, semi stow-less bags, main risers more resistant to hard cutaways during line twists etc...

Not saying you can't take a rig from early 2000s and make thousands of jumps on it without incident. But the changes that container manufacturers have made from then to now aren't for nothing. They are revisions and refinements to older designs and techniques to make a safer, more reliable well built rig. Which would lead me to believe a rig made in 2014 will be safer to a novice jumper then one made years before it.

[Deyan 31]

mattjw916

Quote

Found a new container with 0 jumps and have "older" canopies I got for cheap.

I will never understand this logic. You have to use your main on basically 100% of jumps so why jump some ragged out/possibly out of trim "older" parachute? When I see people pack a $300 (if that) parachute into a $3000 rig I simply wonder, why?

Because the main is something you have fun with and the rig is something that saves your life every time you leave the plane.
Because a main with 10 patches and 5 cm out of trim is cheap but might still be airworthy ,and a poorly fitting rig is safety hazard.
Because you spend up to 10 times more time in your harness than under your main.
Because you can make more jumps on a new rig than on a new canopy.....

...And the list goes on

"My belief is that once the doctor whacks you on the butt, all guarantees are off" Jerry Baumchen

[NWFlyer 2]

jumplongisland

Same reason a car from the early 2000s isn't as safe as a 2014
-More incidents/jumps for manufacturers to study and make improvements from
-Advancements in Rig Materials
-Advancements/Refinements in Rig Manufacturing Techniques
-New Technological advancements like mad riser covers, skyhook, semi stow-less bags, main risers more resistant to hard cutaways during line twists etc...

Well, shit then. I guess my 2001 car and my 2003 container are gonna KILL ME! Or not - I can't think of a design enhancement on either cars or containers that you're going to convince me is anything more than brand wars and marketing hype. Same goes for canopies. There have been new models introduced between then and now, but a well-maintained Spectre (for example) from the early 2000s is identical to a shiny new one that you bought yesterday.

Funny, though. My 2003 container (purchased used in 2005, jumped as my primary rig for 6 1/2 years and jumped as my backup since then) and my 2011 container have exactly the same safety features. They're by different manufacturers, so there's some design differences (that haven't really changed - the design differences that existed in the early 2000s still exist today) that you could argue about which is safer till the cows come home, but for all intents and purposes, I consider the two identical from a safety perspective and will pick up either one on any given jump.

The 2011 one has all kinds of badass comfort bells & whistles, plus it was built for me so it's more comfortable just because of that. So I prefer to jump it for that reason, and that reason alone.

So if you want to get brand new shiny shit and you've got the money to do so, go on with your bad self. But don't waste your breath trying to convince me that because it is new it is by definition safer.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[Remster 24]

Quote

Same reason a car from the early 2000s isn't as safe as a 2014
-More incidents/jumps for manufacturers to study and make improvements from
-Advancements in Rig Materials
-Advancements/Refinements in Rig Manufacturing Techniques
-New Technological advancements like mad riser covers, skyhook, semi stow-less bags, main risers more resistant to hard cutaways during line twists etc...

You're funny!

Seriously, you obviously have not really research that stuff. You can afford a new rig: great. But don't kid yourself that it's for safety sake.

Remster

[mattjw916 2]

/facepalm

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[wolfriverjoe 1,346]

jumplongisland

Same reason a car from the early 2000s isn't as safe as a 2014
-More incidents/jumps for manufacturers to study and make improvements from
-Advancements in Rig Materials
-Advancements/Refinements in Rig Manufacturing Techniques
-New Technological advancements like mad riser covers, skyhook, semi stow-less bags, main risers more resistant to hard cutaways during line twists etc...

Not saying you can't take a rig from early 2000s and make thousands of jumps on it without incident. But the changes that container manufacturers have made from then to now aren't for nothing. They are revisions and refinements to older designs and techniques to make a safer, more reliable well built rig. Which would lead me to believe a rig made in 2014 will be safer to a novice jumper then one made years before it.

Ok, I'll bite.

What changes in materials have taken place?

What changes in manufacturing technique have taken place?

What changes in risers to prevent hard cutaways have taken place? (or when were hard housings in the risers first installed?)

You make it sound like there has been a significant change in rig design in the past few years (yeah, 14 is "few").

Outside of a few Service Bulletin updates, and a few "nifty" things (mag riser covers and stowless for mains), what major changes have taken place?

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Quagmirian 40]

Bill Booth believes magnetic riser covers will save lives.

[JerryBaumchen 1,050]

Hi longisland,

Quote

-Advancements in Rig Materials
-Advancements/Refinements in Rig Manufacturing Techniques

I've been sewing on parachutes for 50 yrs now. And I like to think that I keep up with what is happening.

I cannot think of any new mat'ls in the last 14 yrs. And if someone has found a way to build a rig other than pushing fabric & webbing though a sewing machine just like they were doing in 1940, I want to know about it.

Quote

-New Technological advancements like . . . . semi stow-less bags

Yup, I'll give you that one. I designed & build the NoStoBag.

JerryBaumchen

[NWFlyer 2]

JerryBaumchen

Quote

-New Technological advancements like . . . . semi stow-less bags

Yup, I'll give you that one. I designed & build the NoStoBag.

But one could very easily put a semi stowless bag in an older rig. It's not as if one has to buy a brand new rig to change out the d-bag. (I know you know this, Jerry, just pointing it out for the victims of marketing hype who might not have figured that out. )

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[riggerrob 558]

Harness/container improvements occur in lurches ... er ... generations.
After each new generation is introduced, manufacturers frantically clone/copy/plagarise each other until they perfect that generation, then rest on their laurels for a decade before the next improvement is invented ... then the cycle repeats.

Each generation is invented in response to a new competition discipline.
For example, reserves on the back were invented by precision landing competitors back during the 1960s. As target discs shrank to a mere ten centimeters, PL competitors needed a better view for heal placement,, so some started swinging their chest-mounted reserves to one side for landing. Back during the 1960s, everyone wore chest-mounted reserves. The next thing we knew, some of them were tossing their (no longer needed) reserves behind their heads, on extra-long risers. The ultimate response came when Security introduced their Crossbow harness/container with both containers on the back.

Speed stars were the next competition discipline to drive innovation. With chest-mounted reserves forcing the tenth man as much as ten feet more from the door, there was new incentive to reduce container thickness. When all ten team members switched to piggyback containers, the tenth man could start eight or nine feet closer to the door and reduce completion time by several seconds. Speed Stars also affected the thickness of containers, because the easiest way to pack the same canopies into a thinner container was to make it wider.

Wider containers made no difference with the wider suits that became fashionable during the wing-wars of the late 1970s and early 1980s. However, those extra-wide suits created massive burbles that encouraged spring-loaded pilot-chutes to hesitate for an embarrassing extra few seconds. With fashionable pull altitudes near 2,000 feet, this scared skydivers into inventing hand-deploy pilot-chutes that could be deployed BESIDE the massive burble, lopping two or three precious seconds off main deployment times.

Sequential relative work (early 1980s) favoured narrower and narrower containers, containers so narrow that they no longer protruded beyond the skin-tight jumpsuits.

When canopy formations became fashionable - also during the early 1980s _ skydivers invented several new ways to accidentally open reserve containers. To reduce the incidence of un-planned reserve deployments. tuck-in reserve pin covers were invented.
As tandem started to dominate the (first jump) market during the early 1990s, it also drove several container innovations. The first innovation was bottom of container pilot chute pouches. Sure BOCs were standard on tandem containers, and many TIs switched to BOCs on their solo rigs just to reduce transition hassles.
Meanwhile, smaller cameras and larger airplanes allowed vidiots to make a living off of tandem students. Many vidiots switched to BOCs because it was easier than routing bridles over and around and under the ever-larger wings they needed to adjust fall rates.

Those larger, faster airplanes also allowed skydivers to make hundreds more jumps per year, which wore out Velcro at far faster rates, so manufacturers switched to tuck-tabs, first for main pin covers, then main riser covers and eventually to almost every corner of containers.

Sit-flying drove the last nail into the coffin of Velcro. With sit-flyers now exposing their bridles to wind from every angle, they invented bridle covers to better protect their bridles from weird winds. Sit-flying also forced container manufacturers to standardize on BOC pouches, BOB offered the shortest bridle routing from pouch to pin. The least exposed bridle further reduced the risk of pre-mature deployments.

Wing-suiting forced a second look at the problem of deploying main pilot-chutes past gigantic burbles. Some wing-suit manufacturers sewed extra pilot-chute pouches onto their suits
Wing-suiting also introduced a new ANGLE for deployment: straight towards the jumper's heels. The solution was to invent lower corners - on main containers - that open completely flat.

So over the years, we se a succession of new competition disciplines driving innovation. Every innovation reduces a risk in that new discipline and the best ideas cross-pollinate to reduce risk for all casual recreational skydivers.

[JerryBaumchen 1,050]

Hi Kris,

Quote

But one could very easily put a semi stowless bag in an older rig.

And I wish that they all would.



JerryBaumchen

[jumplongisland 0]

Some good info here keep going

[Deyan 31]

mattjw916

/facepalm

Facepalm is something you do when your mom doesn't want to give you a cookie after the dinner.

I just gave you my reasons why I'm packing mine 300$ main into mine 3000$ rig.
And that is what I advice people to buy when they have money only for one brand new item.
You may disagree and that's fine, just don't overreact

Cheers

"My belief is that once the doctor whacks you on the butt, all guarantees are off" Jerry Baumchen

[Hellis 0]

Deyan

***/facepalm

Facepalm is something you do when your mom doesn't want to give you a cookie after the dinner.

I just gave you my reasons why I'm packing mine 300$ main into mine 3000$ rig.
And that is what I advice people to buy when they have money only for one brand new item.
You may disagree and that's fine, just don't overreact

Cheers

I agree with your list.
And to add one more on the list, a old canopy is much easier to pack.
I think it's very good advice to new jumpers to not buy a new canopy, if they really want a new harness the go ahead, but a old canopy is easier to pack and will help them learn the skills.

I pack my $70 canopy in my 2012 Javelin FYI.

[GoHuskers 0]

One of the best posts I've ever read.

[tsf 0]

Deyan

***

Quote

Found a new container with 0 jumps and have "older" canopies I got for cheap.

I will never understand this logic. You have to use your main on basically 100% of jumps so why jump some ragged out/possibly out of trim "older" parachute? When I see people pack a $300 (if that) parachute into a $3000 rig I simply wonder, why?

Because the main is something you have fun with and the rig is something that saves your life every time you leave the plane.
Because a main with 10 patches and 5 cm out of trim is cheap but might still be airworthy ,and a poorly fitting rig is safety hazard.
Because you spend up to 10 times more time in your harness than under your main.
Because you can make more jumps on a new rig than on a new canopy.....

...And the list goes on
If you had to choose only 1 to spend money on, then it makes sense. But, I think he was asking why people skimp on the main instead of, say, saving up a little longer to get BOTH a nice main and a nice container. With that in mind, going back to your points:

1. A main is something you have fun with, but why not have it "save your life" as well by being new or relatively unused, nice/clean lines, well-maintained, etc.? If you can add some extra degree of safety without compromising how fun it is, why not?

2. A poor fitting rig is a safety hazard, and the canopy you quoted **might** be airworthy. Why not remove all doubt for the sake of safety and not buy such a rough canopy?

3. Most of that time is just sitting in the plane, though. You spend a fair amount of time under canopy as well. Arguably, under canopy is the most important as you rely on it to get back down safely. So, it seems strange to skimp on this part.

4. I'm assuming you're referring to slower pack times on a new canopy? Okay, it'll be slower in the beginning, but if it's safety we're talking about, is maybe dropping ~1-2 jump per day until it becomes less slippery really that big of a deal?

[GoHuskers 0]

InFoDaMoNeY

With the current time I get to spend in the sport (not much), I do not see myself downsizing really quick...The reason (I think) I want to go new, is for perfect fit, colors I want, all options I want, and so on.

Seems counter intuitive to not spend much time in the sport AND want a custom fitted,custom colored rig but that's your decision and you're entitled to it.

As far as an AAD goes, I recommend buying a new one simply due to the fact the you will drive yourself crazy trying to get an AAD with a few years left in the life cycle. And from my limited experience with compulsively looking at the classifieds ads I've arrived at 2 conclusions for AAD's.
1. Used AADs will always be a sellers market.
2. If more than 3 of the same brand are listed in the classifieds and attractively priced, you don't want that brand.

[Hellis 0]

tsf

******

Quote

Found a new container with 0 jumps and have "older" canopies I got for cheap.

I will never understand this logic. You have to use your main on basically 100% of jumps so why jump some ragged out/possibly out of trim "older" parachute? When I see people pack a $300 (if that) parachute into a $3000 rig I simply wonder, why?

Because the main is something you have fun with and the rig is something that saves your life every time you leave the plane.
Because a main with 10 patches and 5 cm out of trim is cheap but might still be airworthy ,and a poorly fitting rig is safety hazard.
Because you spend up to 10 times more time in your harness than under your main.
Because you can make more jumps on a new rig than on a new canopy.....

...And the list goes on

4. I'm assuming you're referring to slower pack times on a new canopy? Okay, it'll be slower in the beginning, but if it's safety we're talking about, is maybe dropping ~1-2 jump per day until it becomes less slippery really that big of a deal?

Correct it's safety we're talking about.
Having a new canopy and beeing a new jumper usually means a few packjobs become less than perfect.
So buying a old and learn the skills first and then buy the shiny stuff when you know how to do it.
Or what was your point bringing up the "safety" aspect?

[NWFlyer 2]

GoHuskers

[
1. Used AADs will always be a sellers market.
2. If more than 3 of the same brand are listed in the classifieds and attractively priced, you don't want that brand.

Yep, my response to #1 is embedded in #2. "Unless it's an Argus."

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke