Love to see some screenshot compares of 38m FSX mesh to 5m mesh.I tired some hi res freeware mesh, while it was more detailed,the problem was with FSX rendering... you have to basically land on it to see the differences.At normal flying distances it all looked basically the same?

5 m is only a little better if you fly not above 300 or so ft from the actual terrain - above that altitude is basically of not usethat is why most of mesh developers do not compile mesh less than 10 m resolution -

The rendering of higher res mesh is much different in FSX than in FS9 as far as the visual impact, IMO. I've made my own mesh for Hawaii and Kalifornia, Hawaii was released to the community. At normal flight levels for a low and slow person like me, it takes a bit to discern the difference between stock and higher res stuff. Mostly where it can be noticed is in the slope texturing, where you would see a greater degree of detail. That is, if you knew to look for it. The default mesh for the US would be pretty good, if Microsoft hadn't used such a high degree of compression.People are free to buy into the hype and purchase what they wish. But there are plenty of free alternatives and I'd be happy to assist in any side by side comparisons for either Hawaii or Kalifornia.