In a discussion of (performance) bang for the buck, was writ...
The difference in what you get today in comparison
of what you've got 20
years ago is not just 'a bit'.


I didn't know 'a bit' had a precise numerical definition!
(it was understatement). I think you were agreeing
with me in general. snips

Plus you get more for your money snip...
Certainly you'll see it in your absolute
cross-country snip enjoyment.

At the risk of anality (and not to pick on a statement probably
originally written somewhat from a contest perspective), for any newbies
pondering 'cross country enjoyment,' understand there ARE differing
views on what *constitutes* 'cross country enjoyment.'

Sure, on any given day longer distances are great for bragging rights,
and also serve wonderfully as motivation, but...

My own view is that cross country ENJOYMENT (at least in the continental
U.S. is NOT strongly related to either L/D, or its close cousin,
'penetration.' I've had as much fun flying XC in a 21:1 1-26 as I have
in a ~35:1 1st-generation 15-meter glass ship. IMHO, fun in XC relates
to one's comfort in *safely* doing it. Distance/speed 'merely' fall out
in the wash.

Since my first (inadvertent, safe) XC ca. 1973 in a 1-26 to my most
recent, I've seen many participants come and go, and I've seen many
participants lust-after/purchase flat L/D in what seemed to me to be a
hope of avoiding *any* landouts in their pursuit of 'fun XC.' I've also
seen some of these folks seriously bust their ships when
conditions/their L/D didn't work out. There's a lot to be said for
becoming comfortable in picking fields in less costly, lower performance
ships than *hoping* to never have to make an OFL in a high-dollar,
flat-gliding latest-n-greatest drool machine.

Worrying about distance before understanding how to pick - and being
comfortable picking - safe, likely-to-be-damage-free landing fields, is
to have one's priorities out of sequence, methinks.

Regards,
Bob - YMMV - W.