DG-101 vs Discus
Roger
around as I don't have my ticket yet, but I would like to start
thinking towards next season. Obviously this would be my first ship. I
have time in pw-5, 1-26, and szd 50-3. I have heard the merits of both
of these worthy gliders. I tend to lean towards the DG becuase of the
following:
1. superior finish
2. cheaper
3. looks better
But then the Discus has the following plusses:
1. better performance.
2. newer, so it should hold value better
I worry about the discus because of the finish, but then most DG-101's
are getting to the age that they will probably need a new finish soon
also.
I would certainly appreciate any opinions from the group.
-Roger
Marc Ramsey
"Roger" <le__...@hotmail.com> wrote...
> Ok, I am thinking of buying my first glider. I have awhile to shop
> around as I don't have my ticket yet, but I would like to start
> thinking towards next season. Obviously this would be my first ship. I
> have time in pw-5, 1-26, and szd 50-3. I have heard the merits of both
> of these worthy gliders. I tend to lean towards the DG becuase of the
> following:
>
> 1. superior finish
> 2. cheaper
> 3. looks better
4. More comfortable (and crashworthy) cockpit
5. Better airbrakes
6. Better visibility
7. Easier handling on takeoff
8. Lands slower
> But then the Discus has the following plusses:
>
> 1. better performance.
> 2. newer, so it should hold value better
3. Automatic hookups (except the "A")
> I worry about the discus because of the finish, but then most DG-101's
> are getting to the age that they will probably need a new finish soon
> also.
DG used a better gelcoat than SH did, particularly in the mid to
late 80s time frame. Many DGs from that era are still have their
original finishes, and won't need a refinish anytime soon. Just
about all of the SH gliders from that time have been refinished
at least once.
> I would certainly appreciate any opinions from the group.
The Discus is, of course, a "better" glider. If you can get one
for the same price as a DG-101, there isn't anything to discuss.
Here in the US, a nice 1985 DG-101 with good finish and a
decent trailer will cost in the mid-$20K range. A 1985 Discus B
with marginal finish and a ratty trailer can cost $40K. A mid-90s
Discus B or CS will be somewhere around $50K. As for resale, I
bought a beautiful 1985 DG-101 in 1992 for $27K. I sold it in
1997 for $27K. The one I owned is still in beautiful shape, and
is probably still worth at least $25K.
If you can afford a decent newer Discus, buy it, you'll be very
happy. But a DG-101 is 95% as good, for less than 60% of the
price. A DG-300 or 303 is also worth consideration if you have
some extra cash, they have automatic hookups (which I would
recommend, I know too many people who have been killed or
seriously injured). I never experienced any performance
disadvantage relative to any Discus in my 303.
Marc
MikeYankee
It will cost more than a DG-101, however.
Address is munged to thwart spammers.
To reply, delete everything after "com".
Owain Walters
If the difference in money is no issue to you, buy
the Discus. Do not entertain any thoughts of a DG101
over a Discus.
A DG 300 is a bit closer to the Discus, but again if
the difference in price isnt going to financially cripple
you, buy the Discus.
The Discus has excellent handling, excellent crash-worthiness,
brilliant double-paddle airbrakes. The performance
of the Discus will leave the DG101 standing. It will
leave the DG 300 at higher speeds. Not to mention the
fact that the DG's are pretty ugly wheras the Discus
is beautifull.
There really is no competition between them. If you
want an endorsement of the Discus over any of the mentioned
DG's, just take a look at the results of any countries
National Champs from 1984-1996ish, and the World Champs
during that time. Any of those DG's in the top 3 is
a fluke.
Owain
Marc Ramsey
wrote...
> The Discus has excellent handling, excellent crash-worthiness,
> brilliant double-paddle airbrakes. The performance
> of the Discus will leave the DG101 standing. It will
> leave the DG 300 at higher speeds. Not to mention the
> fact that the DG's are pretty ugly wheras the Discus
> is beautifull.
Obviously, a man with of little taste 8^)
I have about 50 hours in Discus Bs, and 200 in the 300s
and 303s. The 300/303 has a double wall cockpit, whereas
the Discus has a single wall cockpit. There 300 has a deeper
well under ones posterior, which is both more comfortable
and prevents submarining under the seatbelts. The 300 has
a larger wheel/tire with a sprung undercarriage, better to
protect ones spine. I know which one I'd rather crash. As for
airbrakes, the 300s are more effective, and it lands slower.
The 300 has a lower dry wing loading than the Discus. At
equal wingloading, a surprising thing happens, the difference
in performance at speed goes away. I my my 303 in several
contests against flocks of Discii, and never once had a problem
keeping up, even in long final glides at 100+ knots, plus I
could outclimb them. Now, a Discus 2 would make me feel
like I was standing still (though they don't climb all that well).
> There really is no competition between them. If you
> want an endorsement of the Discus over any of the mentioned
> DG's, just take a look at the results of any countries
> National Champs from 1984-1996ish, and the World Champs
> during that time. Any of those DG's in the top 3 is
> a fluke.
Of course the fact that the top pilots all happened to fly
Discii, for whatever reason, has nothing to do with the results.
Marc
Ernie Schneider
even so I am of course biased I can't suppress the urge to comment ... pls
forgive me ..;-)
"Marc Ramsey" <ma...@ranlog.com> wrote in message
news:A5QC9.1734$sR.113...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
snipped
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>
Of course the fact that the top pilots all happened to fly
Discii, """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""for whatever
reason,""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
ROTFLMAO ;-)
has nothing to do with the results.
Marc
.. so Marc, you are proving in a lovely way that love really causes
blindness some times .... really fine ships the DG10x's and 30x's, but
ignoring the markets choice for two decades is a bit tough ... don't you
think so ?
I'd say for a first ship he should probably stay away from the all flying
tail of the 100 unless he's gonna be flying lots. Other than that he's
probably be gonna happy with a 101, 30x and of course most with a Discus ;-)
cheers
Ernie
Marc Ramsey
> .. so Marc, you are proving in a lovely way that love really causes
> blindness some times .... really fine ships the DG10x's and 30x's, but
> ignoring the markets choice for two decades is a bit tough ... don't you
> think so ?
> I'd say for a first ship he should probably stay away from the all flying
> tail of the 100 unless he's gonna be flying lots. Other than that he's
> probably be gonna happy with a 101, 30x and of course most with a
> Discus ;-)
You partially misunderstand, I loved my 101, but had no great
attachment to my 303. I was probably more surprised than anyone
that the 303 could, even in my hands, be as competitive as it turned
out to be against its design contemporaries. That said, I'm trying to
scare up a ship for the standard class nats next year, and I'd take a
Discus or an LS-8 over a 303 (I'd much prefer a D2 over any of them,
but I have to be realistic). The 303 doesn't give up any performance
to the Discus (I think an LS-8 is superior to both), but it is harder
to fly well. It quite simply takes more work to keep up. Given that
fatigue is the biggest problem I've had in regionals, ease of flying is
a major plus.
What the 300/303 mostly fell victim to (as have other gliders) is
conventional wisdom. Conventional wisdom says that a Discus
will walk away from a 300/303. My experience suggests that at
comparable wing loadings, in the hands of comparable pilots, it
just ain't so. YMMV...
Marc
Martin Gregorie
wrote:
>Consider also the DG-300, all the DG advantages with Discus-like performance.
>
DG300 performance is nearer a Pegase 90 or ASW-19 than a Discus. See
the Sailplane directory for details. It's got weaker air brakes than
either Pegase or Discus. Its best glide ratio is about the same as a
Pegase, but at a lower airspeed.
I've only flown one once, but here are my impressions for what they
are worth. I prefer its left-side retract lever to the Discus, but the
Discus has a nicer trim system. It is pleasant to fly, well
co-ordinated, comfortable and has great visibility for the pilot.
A Discus will cost more than DG-300 or Pegase 90. All three types have
auto-connect controls. Discus and DG300 have the best ground
clearance. I'd be happy with any of them if I was buying.
--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :
Al
I have found that performance comes from aspect ratio and wingloading
(insane wing sections aside)
the Ventus at 16.6 and the ASW17 are almost identical in performance dry.
Add some water and the 17 will go to the high eights or low nines in
wingloading.
Add water to the Ventus at the same wing cinfiguration and it will leave the
ASW17 at higher speeds because it will go to a higher wingloading.
So..... if you do a little bit of reading and trawling in the Johnson FTE
archive you can glean a lot of stats that confirm my theory.
Fly a few hours in a few types will also confiirm this.
Al
Owain Walters
have been flying a Discus no matter what the conditions
or the wing loading. Period.
I guess all the good pilots chose the Discus over the
DG300 as they wanted to make things harder for themselves.........
or it could just be better.
I will stick to what I say, if you can afford the difference
get a Discus. I dont know what the availability is
like in the US, but try and get a Discus CS. Whack
some winglets on it and you have yourself a lean, mean
DG eating machine.
Also, I have never in my life had a problem with the
Discus aribrakes. They are so effective, I cant even
believe that we are debating which brakes are better.
The brakes are for landing anyway. Who cares how good
the ending of the flight is.
BTW, the LS8 and the D2's are a completely different
generation and shouldnt be compared performance wise
to the above mentioned gliders. Of course they go better,
otherwise there would be no point in putting them into
production.
Owain
You can tell its winter, why else would we be talking
such rubbish!
Marc Ramsey
"Owain Walters" <REMOVE_TO_REPL...@hotmail.com> wrote...
> I have never had any problem leaving a DG300 when I
> have been flying a Discus no matter what the conditions
> or the wing loading. Period.
And I never had any trouble sticking with a Discus in my
DG-303, with comparable wing-loading, and comparable
pilots. I flew it in club-style and regional races, against
all of the contemporary standard class gliders, and won
more than my share of tasks.
It makes a big difference how the 300 has been prepared.
DG/Elan used to do essentially nothing. Add "S" seals
to the ailerons, drill some big holes in the luggage shelf,
seal the canopy, seal the spoilers, etc., and you end up with
a glider that performs very differently than that ratty 300
your club probably has for the newbies. The 303 now comes
from the factory with much of this work done.
I never claimed that the 300/303 is better than a Discus, it
just isn't anywhere near as poor a performer as some suggest.
It's real advantage is quite simple, you can buy a brand new
one for pretty much the same price as a 10 year old Discus.
Seems like a good deal to me.
Marc
Owain Walters
>your club probably has for the newbies.
Marc,
I think we will have to agree to disagree here. But
I will just say that my club doesnt have a DG 300,
or a 303. It has two Discus's because it had the good
sense to buy the top performing standard class glider
at the time of purchase.
I will just say that the 300 and 303 are different
gliders, however reports on the 300 and the Discus
can be found here. I think that the reports show the
discus to be a (very slightly) better performing glider,
but without the blow system a glider which requires
much less effort.
Below is a link to the reports:
http://www.ssa.org/Magazines/Johnson.asp
Marc Ramsey
wrote...
> I think we will have to agree to disagree here. But
> I will just say that my club doesnt have a DG 300,
> or a 303. It has two Discus's because it had the good
> sense to buy the top performing standard class glider
> at the time of purchase.
We aren't disagreeing to any great extent. If I could have
afforded one at the time, I would have preferred a Discus
(well, actually, an LS-8). But, to me, the difference in
performance and handling just wasn't worth the increment
in cost and delivery time.
> I will just say that the 300 and 303 are different
> gliders, however reports on the 300 and the Discus
> can be found here. I think that the reports show the
> discus to be a (very slightly) better performing glider,
> but without the blow system a glider which requires
> much less effort.
The 303 and 300 are identical, outside of a few upgrades
in the cockpit. There were claims that the 303 has some
airfoil optimizations, but there aren't any that can actually
be seen by comparing wings. The 303 has optional winglets,
but they can be retrofitted to any 300.
> Below is a link to the reports:
>
> http://www.ssa.org/Magazines/Johnson.asp
Yes, and one outcome of that test was a discussion between
Dick Johnson and the US DG rep (carried on partially in the
letters section of Soaring), concerning the fact that the test
glider was almost completely unsealed. When I asked how
to go about race preparing my 303, I was handed copies of
that exchange.
Peace,
Marc
Ray Lovinggood
well-rigged trailer and the Discus comes with some
old ratty trailer, get the DG.
Or if the Discus comes with the good trailer and the
DG with the ratty trailer, get the Discus.
Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA
LS-1d with a ratty trailer.