Here you find some more info on polar and VMG: viewtopic.php?p=985520#p985520
I thought we all agreed to not discuss this topic as it has the same effect as saying Betelgeuse's name 3 times for someone else on this forum whose initials are one key right of "O", one key right of "N", and one key right of "Y".socommk23 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:33 pmPeople are moaning about the price with no consideration to the amount of material or time it takes to build one of these kites.
In my experience leis are great for people learning. The general unforgiving nature of crashing a foil kite into water demands a better kite flyer in the first place. Then you can realise the possibilities a foil kite brings with it. But then it's just a tool as is any kite. You get what suits you best and your style.
Would be nice to see if the v3 is noticeably better than the v1 or v2 and in what ways. But I also think it's great to see a manufacturer showing a foil kite with a tt as a lot of people I've met think they are for foil boards only or simply haven't seen a foil kite before.
Are you saying the "Speed" series is more comparable to the Chrono 2 and the Sonic is NOT comparable to the Chrono 2?Adventure Logs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:45 pmTrue but does for their Speed line which competes with the chrono.
=Jason-
Correct, would you disagree?Matteo V wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2018 4:54 pmAre you saying the "Speed" series is more comparable to the Chrono 2 and the Sonic is NOT comparable to the Chrono 2?Adventure Logs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:45 pmTrue but does for their Speed line which competes with the chrono.
=Jason-
I have enough experience on Flysurfer Speed 2 and 3, Ozone "Chrono 1" and "Chrono 2", HQ "Matrixx 1" and "Matrixx 2" to make an informed evaluation.. The other closed cell kites I have flown, I did not spend enough time on to give an opinion on them. My biggest experience gap here would relate to the Speed 4 (some time) and the Speed 5 (no time on). If there was a major change from 3-4 in the Speed series, then my evaluation would only pertain to the earlier (2 & 3) versions.Adventure Logs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2018 5:17 pmCorrect, would you disagree?Matteo V wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2018 4:54 pmAre you saying the "Speed" series is more comparable to the Chrono 2 and the Sonic is NOT comparable to the Chrono 2?Adventure Logs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2018 1:45 pm
True but does for their Speed line which competes with the chrono.
=Jason-
Bigger change between Speed 4 and 5. Speed 4 deluxe was 8 and 10 only and more a successor to Psycho IMO. Speed 4 Lotus very similar to speed 3 in its shape and flight but with water repellant and very light cloth. Definitely a step forward in material and I'd like to see more Lotus. It continues to embody the stability and ease of use design philosophy rather than power for sizeMy biggest experience gap here would relate to the Speed 4 (some time) and the Speed 5 (no time on). If there was a major change from 3-4 in the Speed series, then my evaluation would only pertain to the earlier (2 & 3) versions.
Having less cells is not very reasonable way to make kite more stable. It is a bit same like filling DH bike frame with lead to get it faster.WH Lithuania wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:23 amInteresting design changes. Chrono v3 has less cells than v2. It's inline with reported improved stability.
You need to get on a Speed 5 my friend, you might be pleasantly surprised. The Chrono completely to the Speed 5. And comparing the Chrono 1 to Sonic FR (I had both in 18), the Sonic blew Ozone out of the water for performance, stability, and inflation. The SonicFR 18m to this day is still my favorite large foil kite even though I haven't tried that size on Sonic2. The jump in performance between the Speed 4 and 5 is huge yet it maintains the great stability you would expect from Flysurfer. I hope to get my hands on the Chrono 3 but for that price range without any kind of warranty is a deal breaker for me.Matteo V wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2018 8:21 pmI have enough experience on Flysurfer Speed 2 and 3, Ozone "Chrono 1" and "Chrono 2", HQ "Matrixx 1" and "Matrixx 2" to make an informed evaluation.. The other closed cell kites I have flown, I did not spend enough time on to give an opinion on them. My biggest experience gap here would relate to the Speed 4 (some time) and the Speed 5 (no time on). If there was a major change from 3-4 in the Speed series, then my evaluation would only pertain to the earlier (2 & 3) versions.
And yes, I would completely disagree. "Chrono 1" was definelty a race kite but still had lots of turning capabilities, especially in light wind. The Speed 2 and 3 were the slowest, most nonreactive dogs I have ever flown, but was easy to fly. You just did not have access to power via working the kite on a Speed like you could a Chrono 1 or 2.
I would compare the Speed series to the HQ "Matrixx 2" - Very stable and easy to fly if you understand backstall. But almost not enough turning capabilities, even "stalled turning" sucks, to utilize the kite power/stall/window placement quickly.
"Matrix 1", fits in more with the fast turning, quick power/depower/stall/window placement of the Chrono 1 and 2.
But I do have a unique way of utilizing the back of the wind window. My kite is usually moving around looking for the highest wind while others have their kite parked. So I need a kite I can put "somewhere else" quickly. Speeds, and Matrixx 2's could not do this no matter how much I tried.