💬 Any Rook 4 pilots out there? What do you think about it? 😎 Get wing used in this video: flybubble.com/triple-seven-rook-4-size-ms-colour-orange-mso00119 🍿 What is next? 🎥 You can support our channel and future reviews like this by simply hitting the like button, sharing this video with your friends, writing a comment below and destroying the subscribe button 😁💪 Thank you! 🙏
I recently upgraded to the rook 3, really enjoying it so far! It is indeed an agile and fun wing, it really likes to roll. And yes the big ears are quite "flappy"
I have it . I like it but looks like I bought a litlle to big one:) my rook 3 was 70-85 , rook4 80-98. I like then wing loaded :) if somebody interested let me know. Maybe somebody have small ? We can swap with repay ? I flyed max 2 hours . Like new.
@@flybubblecarlo I am not fan of that BC system that goes through the metal rings. Other factor is maybe not that important for me as Rlite does not have problems with inflation. But regular rook for sure had little drawback in this area. Third is really personal one as I am happy of that little increase of certified weight range as I have difficulties to fit inside 95 weight limit.
@@sirual5 Thanks for sharing. I'm also not fan of the BC system going through the metal rings on the Rook 3; too complicated and not so great to use. The BC bridge on the Rook 4 is far better, IMO, very nice to use, and more effective.
Nice review of the R4. The R3 reminds me of the Queen 1. Also being in the correct weight of 2/3rds seems to make it a bit more floaty. The Rooks are fun gliders and always quite agile for its class. The Rook 3 suffers quite a bit pushing up wind on those strong days and holds back a little more than I think the R4 does. All the 777 gliders are quite talkative which I like. The arc profile of the R4 doesnt look radically different to the R3 from the video.
Hey Nik, thanks for commenting and adding your thoughts! 🙏 I'm glad to say I much preferred the Rook 3 to the Queen 1 - which to be honest I really didn't like much, I liked the Queen 2 a lot more! Having flown the Rook 4 a bit more since this filming this review, my initial impressions have held thus far. I do feel that it's a significant improvement on its predecessor in most regards. Especially on launch in, especially in light winds. Also I feel the BC bridge system is much improved. The overall performance seems noticeably better too. Not that the Rook 3 is poor, just the Rook 4 is better, as you'd hope for the new version. If a pilot really like the Rook 3 and wanted an upgrade, there's a very high chance they will love the Rook 4. If a pilot test flew the Rook 3 and didn't like it so much, especially the launch, don't write off the Rook 4. Although it has that Triple Seven feeling and handling, it's quite different, so worth trying, I think! 🤓
@flybubblecarlo cool, yeah, it looks a nice wing, but there are some great high Bs now. I agree with you the Q1 was like Marmite and some pilots didn't like it. I had two of them and flew them a lot but the first one was a medium and simuffered a lot on glide so wasnt a great fit. The large for some reason was good (mid weight point) but a lot more comfortable to fly and did I did quite a few long XCs on that over the years. Oddly the Q2 I didn't like it as much and preferred the K1 which was much more comfortable but had a tendancy to hang back on launch. I think the R3 might have hit the sweet spot. Interested to see the progress on their new 2 liner if they get it out.
+1 I have probably little less than 100h on Tenor 1 and I'm thinking about Rook 4 and Beat 2. I really like that Rook has all kevlar lines, but Phi may be a bit less demanding to fly. @flybubbleparagliding ?
I didn't fly the rook so far, but I am flying high B (Maestro 2 and BGD Base 2 Lite) for the second season now and I testet many high Bs (Explorer 2, Mentor 7 Light, Ikuma 3, soar 2,..) in the last 2 years and I can say that the Beat 2 is a easy wing, but definitely feels not like a high b. It has less performance, against the wind especially. If you want performance choose high B, if you want an easy wing with less performance choose mid B. Big difference in my opinion is that high Bs have B-C steering. So you can fly in turbulent air with speedbar. That's a game changer in Xc flying for me. Phi asked me after testing the Beat 2 how I liked it and I told them, that I had the feeling, that it's just not as efficient as the maestro 2 or other high Bs especially while flying against wind and they told me that exactly that is the difference between their Maestro and Beat. The Beat is more a fun glider. If your main goal is XC flying, then the maestro is the right choice. If you want to fly a bit acro, want to soar some dunes and fly a bit Xc, then the Beat is the right choice.
From my testing the pilot demands are quite different between these two wings. The Beat 2 / light is an easy mid B (pilot demands) with performance not that far off even the best high B wings. The Rook 4 is clearly a high B wing (pilot demands) offering a bit more performance, mainly top speed and glide at top speed. So, to not confuse things, first you have to decide which level of pilot demands you want, then decide from the wings that match those pilot demands.
When testing the Beat 2 / light, gliding next to higher performance wings, pilots were always surprised (and a bit frustrated) to learn it's a mid B wing; they thought it was a high B wing. However, I think the very best performing high B wings have a bit more top speed and glide at top speed (but with much higher pilot demands).
@@Adr1i96 Thanks for sharing your thoughts - all very interesting! 🙂 Honestly, I don't find that in reality that having a BC bridge really makes all that much difference in terms of real performance. It does, a little, if used correctly, and that difference can make a difference over a long, big flight, but I find the main difference is the style of piloting. As for the Beat 2 / light, as with most solo PHI wings the pilot can choose to change to their risers with a BC bridge, the R07, which I still feel have some of the best handling of any (although, as a new review to come soon will reveal, there may now be some that are even better, in our opinion).
For info, the harness I was testing in this video, a Woody Valley Race size L, is definitely too big for me. I had to shorten everything to the minimum to make it fit, which made the harness look bad, my fault. I'm a bit between the two sizes of Race, M and L. So we can best advise our customers on which is the right size for them, I have been testing them both a lot to check sizing. After loads of testing (I flew the size M again yesterday, for a few more hours on a nice XC) I am now sure that for me the size M is best for me. It looks a lot better, because it's all tight and smooth, instead of saggy and baggy, like the size L is on me! I'm glad I've done this testing as now I feel more confident on advising customers to ensure they order the right size.
Also for info, Nancy has been testing the Race in the size M, which is a great fit for her. The size L is clearly too big for her, so no point testing it for her.
I have a negative.... The pullys are not Ronstan and suck. I have them on my Artic 6 and the speedbar is very heavy because of it. I've tried another Artik 6 and it had the same problem. I will not buy risers using those again.
ℹ The primary reason we, the Flybubble crew, test flying gear is so we can best advise our customers on the most suitable gear for them, including the right size, from the huge range of top gear we offer ( flybubble.com/ ), as part of our unique Flybubble Match Service ( flybubble.com/flybubble-match-service ). Our reviews are a bi-product of this professional work, sharing our expert opinion for free to benefit the whole free-flight community. 😊
To be fair, the harness in the video (Woody Valley Race, size L) is an ultralight pod, weighting less than half of what the Arrow does, and, to be honest, I made some bad adjustments to the harness that day, as part of testing it, which, as I think you can see in the video, weren't right and made the harness look much worse than it should. Mea culpa! 🙇♂😳 Full review of the Woody Valley Race to follow. Meanwhile you can see it featured in some other of our videos, looking a lot better (as it should, properly set up). 💺🧪🎥
Further to my last comment, I can confirm that the harness I was testing in the video, a Woody Valley Race size L, is definitely too big for me, I had to shorten everything to the minimum to make it fit, which made the harness look bad, my fault. I'm a bit between the two sizes, M and L, so was trying them both to check sizing, so we can best advise our customers on which is the right size for them. After lots of testing (I flew the size M again yesterday, for a few more hours on a nice XC) I am now sure that for me the size M is best - and it looks a lot better, because it's all tight and smooth, instead of saggy and baggy! 🤓
The only problem I see with 777 gliders is their pricing. They keep cutting the price after a year or 2, screwing over the early buyers when they wanna sell their glider on the used market. Valic brothers you have to decide ... is your wing worth 3k or 2,5k... and stick to it.
During the peak of sales amidst the Covid pandemic, many companies stocked up before the market stabilized, resulting in an oversupply of wings. This led to increased discounts not only for Triple Seven but also across the entire sports segment.
![กี่หมื่นฟ้า | Your Sky Series EP.1 [1/4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vLGjxFL6U_I/mqdefault.jpg)
💬 Any Rook 4 pilots out there? What do you think about it?
😎 Get wing used in this video: flybubble.com/triple-seven-rook-4-size-ms-colour-orange-mso00119
🍿 What is next? 🎥 You can support our channel and future reviews like this by simply hitting the like button, sharing this video with your friends, writing a comment below and destroying the subscribe button 😁💪 Thank you! 🙏
I recently upgraded to the rook 3, really enjoying it so far! It is indeed an agile and fun wing, it really likes to roll. And yes the big ears are quite "flappy"
I have it . I like it but looks like I bought a litlle to big one:) my rook 3 was 70-85 , rook4 80-98.
I like then wing loaded :) if somebody interested let me know. Maybe somebody have small ? We can swap with repay ? I flyed max 2 hours . Like new.
Thanks a lot for your amazing video :) Could you show one time how you installed the insta360 on your harness?
Looks like 777 has improved on all the things I do not like on my R3lite. Hope I will be able to test it some time soon.
Definitely a significant improvement in a few key areas, I think! ✅☑✔ What things don't you like so much on your Rook 3 Light, out of interest? 🤔🤓
@@flybubblecarlo I am not fan of that BC system that goes through the metal rings. Other factor is maybe not that important for me as Rlite does not have problems with inflation. But regular rook for sure had little drawback in this area. Third is really personal one as I am happy of that little increase of certified weight range as I have difficulties to fit inside 95 weight limit.
@@sirual5 Thanks for sharing. I'm also not fan of the BC system going through the metal rings on the Rook 3; too complicated and not so great to use. The BC bridge on the Rook 4 is far better, IMO, very nice to use, and more effective.
Nice review of the R4. The R3 reminds me of the Queen 1. Also being in the correct weight of 2/3rds seems to make it a bit more floaty. The Rooks are fun gliders and always quite agile for its class. The Rook 3 suffers quite a bit pushing up wind on those strong days and holds back a little more than I think the R4 does. All the 777 gliders are quite talkative which I like.
The arc profile of the R4 doesnt look radically different to the R3 from the video.
Hey Nik, thanks for commenting and adding your thoughts! 🙏 I'm glad to say I much preferred the Rook 3 to the Queen 1 - which to be honest I really didn't like much, I liked the Queen 2 a lot more! Having flown the Rook 4 a bit more since this filming this review, my initial impressions have held thus far. I do feel that it's a significant improvement on its predecessor in most regards. Especially on launch in, especially in light winds. Also I feel the BC bridge system is much improved. The overall performance seems noticeably better too. Not that the Rook 3 is poor, just the Rook 4 is better, as you'd hope for the new version. If a pilot really like the Rook 3 and wanted an upgrade, there's a very high chance they will love the Rook 4. If a pilot test flew the Rook 3 and didn't like it so much, especially the launch, don't write off the Rook 4. Although it has that Triple Seven feeling and handling, it's quite different, so worth trying, I think! 🤓
@flybubblecarlo cool, yeah, it looks a nice wing, but there are some great high Bs now. I agree with you the Q1 was like Marmite and some pilots didn't like it. I had two of them and flew them a lot but the first one was a medium and simuffered a lot on glide so wasnt a great fit. The large for some reason was good (mid weight point) but a lot more comfortable to fly and did I did quite a few long XCs on that over the years. Oddly the Q2 I didn't like it as much and preferred the K1 which was much more comfortable but had a tendancy to hang back on launch. I think the R3 might have hit the sweet spot. Interested to see the progress on their new 2 liner if they get it out.
Bought an R4 last month, great flying wing.
Great, thanks for sharing! 🤓
I really like the 777 wings. They should make bigger size and I would buy straight away :(
If you had to pick a new mid to high B, would you go Beat 2 Light or Rook 4?
+1
I have probably little less than 100h on Tenor 1 and I'm thinking about Rook 4 and Beat 2. I really like that Rook has all kevlar lines, but Phi may be a bit less demanding to fly. @flybubbleparagliding ?
I didn't fly the rook so far, but I am flying high B (Maestro 2 and BGD Base 2 Lite) for the second season now and I testet many high Bs (Explorer 2, Mentor 7 Light, Ikuma 3, soar 2,..) in the last 2 years and I can say that the Beat 2 is a easy wing, but definitely feels not like a high b. It has less performance, against the wind especially. If you want performance choose high B, if you want an easy wing with less performance choose mid B.
Big difference in my opinion is that high Bs have B-C steering. So you can fly in turbulent air with speedbar. That's a game changer in Xc flying for me.
Phi asked me after testing the Beat 2 how I liked it and I told them, that I had the feeling, that it's just not as efficient as the maestro 2 or other high Bs especially while flying against wind and they told me that exactly that is the difference between their Maestro and Beat. The Beat is more a fun glider. If your main goal is XC flying, then the maestro is the right choice. If you want to fly a bit acro, want to soar some dunes and fly a bit Xc, then the Beat is the right choice.
From my testing the pilot demands are quite different between these two wings. The Beat 2 / light is an easy mid B (pilot demands) with performance not that far off even the best high B wings. The Rook 4 is clearly a high B wing (pilot demands) offering a bit more performance, mainly top speed and glide at top speed. So, to not confuse things, first you have to decide which level of pilot demands you want, then decide from the wings that match those pilot demands.
When testing the Beat 2 / light, gliding next to higher performance wings, pilots were always surprised (and a bit frustrated) to learn it's a mid B wing; they thought it was a high B wing. However, I think the very best performing high B wings have a bit more top speed and glide at top speed (but with much higher pilot demands).
@@Adr1i96 Thanks for sharing your thoughts - all very interesting! 🙂 Honestly, I don't find that in reality that having a BC bridge really makes all that much difference in terms of real performance. It does, a little, if used correctly, and that difference can make a difference over a long, big flight, but I find the main difference is the style of piloting. As for the Beat 2 / light, as with most solo PHI wings the pilot can choose to change to their risers with a BC bridge, the R07, which I still feel have some of the best handling of any (although, as a new review to come soon will reveal, there may now be some that are even better, in our opinion).
For info, the harness I was testing in this video, a Woody Valley Race size L, is definitely too big for me. I had to shorten everything to the minimum to make it fit, which made the harness look bad, my fault. I'm a bit between the two sizes of Race, M and L. So we can best advise our customers on which is the right size for them, I have been testing them both a lot to check sizing. After loads of testing (I flew the size M again yesterday, for a few more hours on a nice XC) I am now sure that for me the size M is best for me. It looks a lot better, because it's all tight and smooth, instead of saggy and baggy, like the size L is on me! I'm glad I've done this testing as now I feel more confident on advising customers to ensure they order the right size.
Also for info, Nancy has been testing the Race in the size M, which is a great fit for her. The size L is clearly too big for her, so no point testing it for her.
I have a negative.... The pullys are not Ronstan and suck. I have them on my Artic 6 and the speedbar is very heavy because of it. I've tried another Artik 6 and it had the same problem. I will not buy risers using those again.
ℹ The primary reason we, the Flybubble crew, test flying gear is so we can best advise our customers on the most suitable gear for them, including the right size, from the huge range of top gear we offer ( flybubble.com/ ), as part of our unique Flybubble Match Service ( flybubble.com/flybubble-match-service ). Our reviews are a bi-product of this professional work, sharing our expert opinion for free to benefit the whole free-flight community. 😊
That harness looks pretty shit, glad i brought an NK arrow 😂
To be fair, the harness in the video (Woody Valley Race, size L) is an ultralight pod, weighting less than half of what the Arrow does, and, to be honest, I made some bad adjustments to the harness that day, as part of testing it, which, as I think you can see in the video, weren't right and made the harness look much worse than it should. Mea culpa! 🙇♂😳 Full review of the Woody Valley Race to follow. Meanwhile you can see it featured in some other of our videos, looking a lot better (as it should, properly set up). 💺🧪🎥
Further to my last comment, I can confirm that the harness I was testing in the video, a Woody Valley Race size L, is definitely too big for me, I had to shorten everything to the minimum to make it fit, which made the harness look bad, my fault. I'm a bit between the two sizes, M and L, so was trying them both to check sizing, so we can best advise our customers on which is the right size for them. After lots of testing (I flew the size M again yesterday, for a few more hours on a nice XC) I am now sure that for me the size M is best - and it looks a lot better, because it's all tight and smooth, instead of saggy and baggy! 🤓
The only problem I see with 777 gliders is their pricing.
They keep cutting the price after a year or 2, screwing over the early buyers when they wanna sell their glider on the used market. Valic brothers you have to decide ... is your wing worth 3k or 2,5k... and stick to it.
Better to wait! I was patient and I paid 1400 euro for almost new R3. 777 is not great investment money wise, but sportwise yes!!😊
During the peak of sales amidst the Covid pandemic, many companies stocked up before the market stabilized, resulting in an oversupply of wings. This led to increased discounts not only for Triple Seven but also across the entire sports segment.