1 1
sheeks

Are there any conerns or problems with the mars2AAD?

Recommended Posts

Not only is it the cheapest AAD, but the batteries never need changing and it never needs servicing. Almost seems too good to be true. What’s the point of buying a vigil or cypress in this case? What are your opinions on the M2?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything that runs off of batteries will eventually run out of juice. As a matter of fact m2 is the only AAD currently on market that allows you to check the battery level.
The downside of using "exotic" parts or gear is that not everyone may be familiar with it.
Case in point: just last week I had a customer bring me a rig with m2 in it that still had cutter that has been recalled with SB in 2016. Rig was kept in date the entire time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mars is great. It’s not true that you always get what you pay for. There are plenty of overpriced products out there and the Mars unit is just as safe as any others. In my opinion it’s superior to other options as it has a much better screen that is easier to use and configure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very happy with my M2, especially what I percieve is an actual safety benefit of not having to take it out for service. 

For myself I think the Cypres service intervals decreased safety, because I didn't end up renting a unit when mine was out for service, and I would continue to jump the rig while it was out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DougH said:

I am very happy with my M2, especially what I perceive is an actual safety benefit of not having to take it out for service. 

For myself I think the Cypres service intervals decreased safety, because I didn't end up renting a unit when mine was out for service, and I would continue to jump the rig while it was out.

A new Cypres has the same 15-year service life as an M2, and the 5- and 10-year checks are optional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, padalcek said:


Case in point: just last week I had a customer bring me a rig with m2 in it that still had cutter that has been recalled with SB in 2016. Rig was kept in date the entire time...

Likewise I had two vigils that were 12 years old and had been installed/repacked despite a SB stating that they needed to be replaced at 10 years.    Repacked by riggers in both Canada and Eloy.

Dont blame the M2 because a rigger doesnt check for SB’s and ensure compliance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cypres does have the benefit of being in warranty for the entire lifetime if you get it serviced as recommended.

The mars has a 2 year warranty. If the battery on a mars does need to be replaced, even though the mfg says it should last 15 years, it would presumably not be done for free. It is great that it shows the remaining battery life left, and it also shows the pressure the unit is sensing for confirmation to a local barometer. If that pressure check is not within the recommended tolerance, then presumably fixing the unit would not be free.

Of course the 15 year warranty of a cypres comes at a cost, and most never need to get their AAD fixed at any time during their life. I think we should acknowledge the trade-off when discussing cost comparisons.

Another point worth acknowledging is a Cypres can seem to have no problems at all, no problems during the start-up self-test, and then when SSK does the full series of tests including accuracy/resolution at the fire/no fire limits, high/low temp, vibration, etc it fails to meet the original standards and requires repair before returning to the customer. Does this mean it would have necessarily failed to save your life if needed? No, but it does mean that the mfg is not comfortable with the self test being the only check on the proper function of the unit, and for very good reason - some fail! The self test can't check things to the same extent as can be done at the factory.

The self test cannot simulate a jump (simulate the pressures on the transducer) to test the entire system, and cannot test it in harsh environmental conditions. It just is a partial check of the health of the electronics.

If cost for an AAD is critical, then getting a used unit is also worth considering. If a used unit is bought at the right price, then the cost/year should be about the same as if buying new. I hear finding used units at the right price is the challenge.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, sundevil777 said:

If cost for an AAD is critical, then getting a used unit is also worth considering. If a used unit is bought at the right price, then the cost/year should be about the same as if buying new. I hear finding used units at the right price is the challenge.

Spoken as the true Airtec lover and defender you have always been here. Two points. Airtec no longer requires, only recommends 5 year servicing on the new units. Which means that almost no one will bother, making one of your points moot. And the other thing is that the demand for used AADs far exceeds the supply. This makes buying a new one the cheapest option on a per year cost basis.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

Spoken as the true Airtec lover and defender you have always been here. Two points. Airtec no longer requires, only recommends 5 year servicing on the new units. Which means that almost no one will bother, making one of your points moot. And the other thing is that the demand for used AADs far exceeds the supply. This makes buying a new one the cheapest option on a per year cost basis.

My point about getting a used unit applies not just to Cypres. I understand that the used market is tight. Sometimes the per year cost matters less than the "right now" cost. For some, the desire to have a predictable cost (warranty that lasts) is important.

I am a fan of the Cypres, but will be considering others when I need to replace mine in few years. The competitors definitely have some advantages, as I have mentioned. I even bought an Astra way back when I returned to jumping after several years away. Fortunately others persuaded me to reconsider and I was able to return it. Back then the only other choice was the original version of the Cypres. The exchange rate at the time allowed me to buy it at perhaps the lowest price ever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, sundevil777 said:

I even bought an Astra way back when I returned to jumping after several years away. Fortunately others persuaded me to reconsider and I was able to return it.

I agree. I won't even put my name to a repack on an Astra anymore. I don't mind orphaned canopies with no support, but Astras and even Argus? Find someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, danornan said:

If you look at the cost per year to own any AAD, and amortize it over it's life, the cost difference between the best and the worst is very little.  Why not own the best.  Maybe one jump a year difference !

Mostly because you don't pay yearly. You pay one time up front and the difference is far more than one jump. As far as owning "the best", I have seen nothing that makes me believe that any are better than the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Comparing cypres to Mars, no time value of money blah blah, $200 more initial cost, + $400 total for 2 inspections/15, = $40/year. This gets the owner a warranty for the 15 years if nothing else.

yes, the mars lasts 20 years; so the comparison isn’t quite valid.

 

Edited by sundevil777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
7 hours ago, danornan said:

  Why not own the best. 

There is no 'the best.' AADs only have two main functions: fire when they are supposed to and not fire when they are not. In that capacity, I have not seen any evidence that one brand does that better than another. Can you point me to a case where a Mars unit failed to do one of those two things?

Edited by 20kN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll offer slight adjustments to some of the calculations already made:

- Mars retails for $999, Cypres for $1200 at a popular online retailer

- Mars life used to be 15 years, but in recent years has been changed to 15.5 years (Presumably to give that 'extra bonus' and match Cypres).  Cypres is 15.5 years and doesn't need to be sent in for maintenance either.

So then the Cypres costs a miniscule $13 more per year (again, ignoring time value of money and having to pay the dollars up front).

- Although the issue of Warranty comes up. Yes, Cypres extends their full warranty only to those who send the units in for maintenance ($160 *2 plus a bunch of shipping costs especially if sending across borders etc.)

Airtecsays:

Quote

Airtec GmbH & Co. KG provides the 2 year war-
ranty required by law, and 3 additional years where
all repairs are free of charge, except resulting from
intentional or negligent damages.
Thereafter, on a voluntary base Airtec will be very
open to provide repairs or replacements for all non
intentional or non negligent damages free of charge
to all those customers who submit their units for
maintenance on schedule.
This is a CYPRES practice already since 1991.

Mars says:

Quote

The manufacturer grants a warranty of 24 months from the date of purchase on all parts used in the m2multi device and its proper operation within the specified limits. The warranty does not cover damage resulting from normal use of the device, its improper installation or non-standard and rough handling. The manufacturer reserves the right to decide whether to repair or replace the device.

So technically Cypres is at least as good, although in real life all the AAD companies seem to be very good about providing free fixes for units that accidentally went bad or got damaged throughout their lives. We don't really have much info yet though about how Cypres will act if you have one of the new 15.5 year units and don't send it in for maintenance. Will they be harsher than the other companies, or try to match them to maintain their good name?

This uncertainty is why one poster included the Cypres maintenance costs in the Cypres vs Mars comparison, while I didn't.

Now as far as this goes:

Quote

Can you point me to a case where a Mars unit failed to do one of those two things?

Generally they have been good, so that's a positive thing for them.

Although Cypres still has had a larger user base than Mars (tho' the Mars has become popular recently). I'd rather have, to make numbers up, 0 errors in 10 million jumps than 0 errors in 1 million jumps. Even if as you say, 0 is a good number in any case.

I personally still trust the Cypres algorithms a little more, for despite the lack of info provided publicly for any of the AADs, they sound like they worked it out in more detail. We know the Vigil algorithms for example are a little crappier. (Only they seemed to have the "slammed car trunk" firings. The firings "with the door open in the plane near firing altitude" should be mostly solved now that the II+ and Cuatro don't go active until climbing through 1000 ft.)  I'm not sure about the Mars but haven't heard anything bad. Hopefully since they are newer on the market with the M2 they thought through the algorithms better, but I haven't seen much written about them either.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

considering how many times i have heard about a cypres firing when it wasn't supposed to i would hesitate to call it 0 errors.  i understand they changed things to reduce them but i seem to recall they still happen, not sure about that though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
6 hours ago, sfzombie said:

considering how many times i have heard about a cypres firing when it wasn't supposed to i would hesitate to call it 0 errors.  i understand they changed things to reduce them but i seem to recall they still happen, not sure about that though.

CYPRES units do not have a reputation in the industry for doing what you say. You are mistaken. I would suggest you not post things like this if you are not sure. You may give other people the wrong idea. There are three main AAD manufacturers today. All three make a very good product that people can depend on to perform as advertised.

Edited by gowlerk
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, sfzombie said:

considering how many times i have heard about a cypres firing when it wasn't supposed to i would hesitate to call it 0 errors.  i understand they changed things to reduce them but i seem to recall they still happen, not sure about that though.

Maybe you are talking about Expert Cypres firing during a swoop. And thats totally the owners fault, if they are jumping a high performance wing using the Expert instead of the Speed Cypres.

Speaking of which, I decided to switch from Expert to Speed during the winter, and Cypres does this free of cost, you just have to pay the shipping for your device and they will change the software and the button cover. Is this the same with Mars and Vigil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
7 hours ago, Jaysus said:

Is this the same with Mars and Vigil?

No, The current MarS and Vigils are both multimode. You can select speed mode yourself without sending them away. The new C-Mode CYPRES has the same feature.

Edited by gowlerk
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all i know is that i read about cypres firing when it wasn't supposed to, regardless of the fault, and that makes it a non-zero event.  i have been in the sport since '97 and out of it more often than in having just got my a, so any information i have read is from years ago, but i read it and recall others on the dz discussing it. 

i should hope that they are dependable and reliable, but nothing is 100% effective, at least nothing electronic or manufactured.  they may have the safest product out there and the best recall system in the event of faulty equipment, but if there have ever been any recalls or safety advisories where something has been repaired or switched out, then it could have failed and counts toward the effectiveness.  just because the company caught it first does not mean it couldn't have caused a failure or else it would have been left alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's free!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
1 1