cheap halcyon gear

[-hh]

SeaJay once bubbled...

I don't know where you got this idea that the webbing - which is perhaps one of the most rugged parts of a bp/wing - is a weak point. That's just silly.

Gosh, I get "it" out of reports like yours that say that they replace it every 2 seasons, such as this quote:

"I replace my webbing every two years because the ends get frayed and the material begins to soften. Also, the color begins to fade from repeated exposure to sun and chlorine in our local pool."


Since you've also said:

"I believe in addressing an issue with a solution only after it's proven to be a problem."

And yet your BC webbing replacement schedules at a frequency rate that's higher than QD failures are for some reason not considered a "problem" by you. This is a self-contradiction.

Actually, I covered all materials when I said, "I've never seen a bp with corrosion on it." It's true... I never have.

It typically takes years to show up - - how old are your BP's?

Even Marine Grade 316 SS will develop rust, usually first as spots at welds and other heat annealed spots, and/or spots that trap water. This is what my 316 SS plate has, and its probably ~8 years old. My rust is merely cosmetic at this point, but it does serve as firsthand proof to all those metallurgically-naive divers who believe that SS is a magical "be-all, end-all" material.

However, I do know that conversely, there's little you can do about a worn out or aged-looking "regular" BC.

Who cares how it looks? Its if it still functions properly that's important.

I never did "condemn plastics no matter what." I said that your plastic QD's were a failure point with no benefit.

And I provided an example of a benefit.

I do not see how your QD's prevent "possible damage in the first place."

You misread the statement.

The statement was that your QD potential vulnerabilities are preventable, which makes these concerns effectively moot.

Well, if you were as experienced as you claim, then you'd know that typically, when you're boat diving, there's not a whole lot you can do to avoid having your gear sit in the sun.

Do you carry a towel with you to dry yourself off after a dive?
Where do you hang it up afterwords to dry?


HINT: the bungee that secures your tank to the rack can do double-duty to secure the towel to prevent it from blowing away, as the towel drys in the sun while its shielding your gear.

And yet another of your malicious personal attacks goes down in flames.


-hh

 

[-hh]

SeaJay once bubbled...



What do I care what rig you dive? Where did you come up with this junk? You have repetitively attacked my opinion of QD's, which ended up in a discussion in plastics... Which led to a discussion in buoyancy...

Actually, my criticism was on how divers condem QD's but don't think twice about wingnuts. All of the tangents from there were the result of you trying to make your case for how horrible the one type of fastener was, and ignoring the vulnerabilities of the other.

Bud, I couldn't care less what you dive. But when you tell me the sky is green, I'm going to remind you that it's blue...

The alleged "sky is green" statement is that a QD and a Wingnut are both fasteners, and both have failure modes.

If a diver's risk assessment says that one has to go, then they both should go. Similarly, if one is an acceptable risk, then both are. That's it.


-hh

 

[-hh]

SeaJay once bubbled...
If, however, you still seem to be focused on that *one* "issue," then I would suggest that you take a look at your "regular" BC and note that it, too, has "sharp bend radii" on it... Specifically, at the QD's and other adjusting points.

The bend radius of a strap going through a QD is roughly 3x greater than going through a BP.

Lastly, I would suggest that, if you consider the "sharp bend radius issue" to be at the "top of the problem list" with bp's, then you also consider that this is because all of the OTHER problems have already been solved. ...if you actually do consider the connection between the plate and the harness an issue, I suggest that it's at the "top of the list" only by default... There's simply no other issues to take the place of #1.

Any item is going to have what is its "weakest link". On metal BP's, this bit of replacing the webbing every ~2 years is it.

You consider this maintenance to be an acceptable cost for all of the other benefits you believe the system has. For diving doubles, you're right.

Insofar as the beratement of conventional BC's, including all your criticisms, you're guilty of making an overly-broad generalization in order to try to make your case.

Dive gear these days is really pretty darn good, even the cheap stuff. And the typical recreational diver today don't need the "Cadillac" BC or regulator, even though it will offer them some improvement. Unfortunately, the message today is "buy the best you can afford", and we have forgotten that Better is the enemy of Good Enough.

If you want "Better" gear, that's fine...just make sure that it is really so. And don't berate me when I point out that "Good Enough" also gets the job done. This is merely recreational diving, not the first ever moon landing.


-hh

 

[SeaJay]

-hh once bubbled...

And yet your BC webbing replacement schedules at a frequency rate that's higher than QD failures are for some reason not considered a "problem" by you. This is a self-contradiction.

No it's not. I don't believe that "fading" and "having the ends wear out" is a problem. Furthermore, I don't believe that having a "regular" BC solves the "problem." Fading and wearing out happens no matter what sort of BC you choose.

With a bp/wing, the "issue" can be addressed for $12. With a "regular" BC, the "issue" can only be addressed by full replacement.

It typically takes years to show up - - how old are your BP's?

MY backplate is only a few months old... But there are people that I dive with who own bp's that are decades old... And I haven't seen corrosion on theirs either. Perhaps they apply a little metal polish every five years or so? It sure would beat a complete BC replacement, which is the option that you're suggesting.

Even Marine Grade 316 SS will develop rust, usually first as spots at welds

Your bp has welds on it? I've never seen that before. Perhaps that's the problem?

[quote
and other heat annealed spots, and/or spots that trap water.
[/quote]

I'm at a loss when you speak of these spots. I've never seen a bp which traps water, and I've never seen one that has any "heat annealed spots." What sort of backplate are you diving?

This is what my 316 SS plate has, and its probably ~8 years old. My rust is merely cosmetic at this point, but it does serve as firsthand proof to all those metallurgically-naive divers who believe that SS is a magical "be-all, end-all" material.

But then you say...

Who cares how it looks? Its if it still functions properly that's important.

Has your "rust" (which I find difficult to believe) prevented your bp from functioning properly?

I don't get it... You accuse me of contradicting myself, when you so blatantly do?

And I provided an example of a benefit.

Perhaps it's a benefit for you. No matter... You're entitled to your opinion... As am I.

You misread the statement.

The statement was that your QD potential vulnerabilities are preventable, which makes these concerns effectively moot.

I didn't misread the statement. We were talking about QD's, and that was my attempt at keeping the debate on-topic.

Do you carry a towel with you to dry yourself off after a dive?
Where do you hang it up afterwords to dry?

Yes. It sits in the semi-dry pocket of my dive bag. I rarely use it, however.

But for the sake of your point... When I do use it, I hang it up somewhere in the open, where it's subject to sun and wind and other things that will facilitate drying. Nonetheless, when it's faded and worn, I replace it... To the tune of about $12. Like webbing, this is an acceptable loss to me. I would not opt for a plastic towel in order to prevent wearing either.

HINT: the bungee that secures your tank to the rack can do double-duty to secure the towel to prevent it from blowing away, as the towel drys in the sun while its shielding your gear.

And yet another of your malicious personal attacks goes down in flames.


-hh

I don't see where you claim that my comments - or my side of the debate - can be construed as "malicious personal attacks." You've stated your side of the debate, and I've stated mine. It's really that simple.

 

[SeaJay]

-hh once bubbled...



Actually, my criticism was on how divers condem QD's but don't think twice about wingnuts. All of the tangents from there were the result of you trying to make your case for how horrible one type of fastener was.

Hm.

Well, I feel that today's current QD's and other plastic buckles so commonly found on "regular" BC's have questionable benefit, and in the meantime pose the possibility of problems which would be better avoided. Apparently, you don't feel the same. It's really that simple, and there's no personal attack necessary, IMHO.

The alleged "sky is green" statement is that a QD and a Wingnut are both fasteners, and both can fail.

If your risk assessment says that one has to go, then they both should go. Similarly, if one is an acceptable risk, then both are.


-hh

I don't feel that the two fasteners are equal risks. Apparently, you do. I can't see how you could possibly place them in the same category, but apparently you can't see how I'd feel otherwise. I don't know what else to tell you... It doesn't seem that either of our opinions are going to budge. I'm happy stating my opinion, and I wish you were too.

 

[-hh]

SeaJay once bubbled...
Actually, Scott and I were talking about some metallurgical issues on one of his titanium-based products a few weeks ago. If you don't believe me, go ask him yourself. Just make sure to come back and eat your "Biggie-sized" crow.

I have no idea if you discussed those issues or not. What bearing does that have on our debate? Does it make you somehow qualified to discuss metallurgy?

Well, you're the one who said:

"I'd love to hear you debate metallurgy with him."

And now you're flat-footed to learn that I know Scott and have professionally talked with him on some technical issues. Scott's a good guy, and knows his stuff.

Somehow, you've turned this debate into something personal...

Well, you're the one who constantly insulted me and threw down gaunlets of challenge, from claims that I'm a non-diver, to green skies, to invoking Koplin.

Every time, I've picked up your gaunlet and thrown it back in your face. This time, I challenged you to call Scott yourself if you have any doubt to what I said. Every time, you've continued to argue with me, instead of checking out the references I've provided.

What do you want me to say?

A sincere apology for all of your Ad Homenium insults that I'm a non-diver and similar false claims would be a good start.


-hh

 

[-hh]

SeaJay once bubbled...


No it's not. I don't believe that "fading" and "having the ends wear out" is a problem.

If its not a problem, then why are you replacing the webbing every two years? This is self-contraditory.

With a bp/wing, the "issue" can be addressed for $12. With a "regular" BC, the "issue" can only be addressed by full replacement.

If webbing doesn't need to replaced, it doesn't need to be replaced. If the $12 every other season is indeed for a purely cosmetic change (as you now claim), then its entirely unnecessary and shouldn't be used as the basis for criticizing a BC whose webbing will last 10 years without replacement...even if it (gasp!) fades a little.

It sure would beat a complete BC replacement, which is the option that you're suggesting.

Which is better depends on the item's TCO (Total Cost of Ownership), and sometimes it is cheaper to buy a "disposable" product and replace it periodically instead of buying the more expensive "maintainable" product and paying its maintenance costs.

What I'm saying is don't automatically rule out the supposedly "nonservicable" BC.

For example, a basic BC can be bought today for as little as $200, which means if it lasts for 5 years, its TCO is only $40/year.

In contrast, you have your webbing ($12 @ 2yrs) and bladder ($300 @ 6yrs), plus your BP/Wing purchase ($505). If we assume the BP will last the rest of your life (74-33 = 41 years), your TCO is ~$67/year.

Your bp has welds on it? I've never seen that before. Perhaps that's the problem?

Actually, they're rivets. My point in mentioning welding is that metallurgical changes occur in steel when heat is applied, and this often affects its corrosion resistance (FYI, it has nothing to do with if MIG welding is or is not used).

For "spots that trap water", this includes items in contact with the plate, such as underneath webbing loops.

But then you say...

Who cares how it looks? Its if it still functions properly that's important.

Has your "rust" (which I find difficult to believe) prevented your bp from functioning properly?

No, it doesn't affect function...that's what "cosmetic" means. And that's why I don't consider the rust to be a problem.

I don't get it... You accuse me of contradicting myself, when you so blatantly do?

My rust statement was made because you claimed that SS is immune from corrosion. Its not...its merely much more resistant than other steels and metals.

... I provided an example of a benefit.

Perhaps it's a benefit for you. No matter... You're entitled to your opinion... As am I.

Given the context of the dive situation, I found use of the QD's to be a good solution. Prior to those dives, I never really thought that much about QD's, either.

The adage here is perhaps "Don't knock it until you've tried it", with the caveat of those sorts of dive conditions (Zodiak chase boat, windy & some seas, no ladder, engine running. Staff SOP is to come alongside and hand up camera, weightbelt & gear before doing a "dip and kick" snorkeler-leap to get back into boat).

I don't see where you claim that my comments - or my side of the debate - can be construed as "malicious personal attacks."

If you like, I can go back and hit the "Report to Moderator" button on each of your posts on this thread that claimed that I'm a non-diver or the like, and let the Website Admin Staff decide if they were personal attacks or not. Or you can work it out...your choice.


-hh

 

[SeaJay]

-hh once bubbled...


The bend radius of a strap going through a QD is roughly 3x greater than going through a BP.

Let's take a specific example...

Check out the actual measurement of a Scubapro Classic or Knighthawk and a Scott Koplin "standard" backplate. I see virtually no difference in bend radius.

Any item is going to have what is its "weakest link". On metal BP's, this bit of replacing the webbing every ~2 years is it.

Well...

If that's the bp's weakest link... And admittedly, it doesn't seem to me to be a serious issue when it can be solved every two years for $12, strictly for cosmetic reasons... then I'll select a bp over a "regular" BC every time. It sure beats the alternative... Including issues with trim and buoyancy, fading, wearing out, replacement every few years for comparable cosmetic reasons, stability issues, "riding up" issues, and of course, broken plastic connectors.

You consider this maintenance to be an acceptable cost for all of the other benefits you believe the system has. For diving doubles, you're right.

Why would singles be any different? Furthermore, why force yourself to purchase two different rigs for two different dive situations? Wouldn't it be a benefit to have one rig that can handle all of your diving? Wouldn't it be a benefit to become accustomed to one rig, where all of the D-rings and connectors and straps are in the same place? That can do wonders for "muscle memory"... The ability to judge where things are without having to look. Furthermore, why would you want the added stability (over a "regular" BC) in a doubles rig, but forgo it in your singles rig? Would you not want the benefit for all of your diving?

Insofar as the beratement of conventional BC's, including all your criticisms, you're guilty of making an overly-broad generalization in order to try to make your case.

My generalization comes from diving around 30 different BC's over a period of about 150 dives. You're correct to say that it's a huge generalization. If you'd prefer to take this debate down to specifics, I'd be happy to. Feel free to name brand names and model numbers, and I'll be thrilled to give you my opinion of them. I can't promise that I've dived every BC that you could name, but I've dived a number of the most popular models.

Dive gear these days is really pretty darn good, even the cheap stuff. And the typical recreational diver today don't need the "Cadillac" BC or regulator, even though it will offer them some improvement. Unfortunately, the message today is "buy the best you can afford", and we have forgotten that Better is the enemy of Good Enough.

Agreed.

If the diver feels that it's "Good Enough" to select the BC that isn't as durable... Doesn't help with trim and buoyancy... Isn't as stable... Isn't as simple... Isn't as easily repaired... Well, then... Perhaps they don't need the "Cadillac" of BC's.

If you want "Better" gear, that's fine...just make sure that it is really so. And don't berate me when I point out that "Good Enough" also gets the job done. This is merely recreational diving, not the first ever moon landing.


-hh

Well...

Firstly, I'm not going to "berate" you. If you feel that I have done so, then my apologies. It's not my intent to attack you personally. In fact, it's not my intent to "attack" at all.

Secondly, your comment brings up a really good point, which is more the intent of DIR than the issue of gear selection. You say, "This is merely recreational diving, not the first ever moon landing."

Agreed... We aren't looking to land on the moon here... This is diving. However, you've nailed the very crux of the difference between DIR and "everyone else." While your claim that this is "merely recreational diving" is true, the entire mindset of DIR is one that takes the entire diving experience much more seriously. To the followers of the DIR dive style, the "group" isn't referred to as "the buddy system," but as "the team." Divers are encouraged to live a "diver lifestyle" that includes regular exercise, the "cleaning up" of bad habits like smoking and alcoholic consumption, and eating a more balanced diet. Divers are encouraged to learn decompression, the dive tables, and a deep understanding of the physiology of diving. They are encouraged to select "buddies" with great care and dive similar rigs such that problems are equally understood by all parties who are affected by an issue... Not to mention that possible "fixes" in gear are readily available, since everyone's diving the same stuff. DIR encourages divers to learn, understand, live the lifestyle, and be "into" diving much moreso than any other training program I've been exposed to. GUE calls this a "holistic" approach to diving... That is, "all encompassing" (not "holy" as in "sacred.")

It's simply a different approach... And may not be for everyone. While the major agencies that I'm aware of preach understanding, education, and a healthy lifestyle, it's simply been my experience that DIR/GUE takes the approach a little more seriously. That may be for some, but I understand if others don't want to "be a diver" but simply want to "dive occassionally." It's a choice that depends completely on your mindset and what you deem to be "right" for you.

...Which is why it's so entertaining to those of us who dive the DIR style when someone says, "I'm 90% DIR." The very point of DIR is the holistic approach, and acceptance of anything less than 100% means that the holistic approach has not been adopted... Meaning that the person is simply not DIR.

...Which is okay for those divers who choose not to be DIR. But they're fooling themselves to claim that they're a "percentage" DIR.

The bottom line here, -hh, is that you've focused this debate on gear... The "tools"... Of diving. My mindset - or at the very least, the one that I consider ideal - has little to do with the gear, or the "tools," and instead has to do with a "mastery of the basics" of diving. To me, the very best that can be said about a tool is that it helps you to get the job done, and does not interfere with the task at hand in the meantime... In the case of diving, that "task at hand" is the enjoyment of the dive. To me, gear failure is nothing more than a tool that detracts from the enjoyment of the dive. To me, diving isn't about the gear... It's about the fun of diving... And so I get super-annoyed when my tools prevent me from having a good time.

As such, what is important to me is gear that is either bulletproof or easily fixed on-the-spot. In some cases, this includes underwater fixes, such as the ability to repair my second stages underwater during a dive.

...Which is why I've selected gear that I've come to find fits that bill as closely as possible. No gear is infallable, but it's my humble opinion that the gear I've selected, in this case specifically a bp/wing, suits that style of diving best. I've simply found that I'd rather place my life in the hands of a metal backplate, the absence of breakable components, and replacable, one-piece harnesses than the options you describe.

The only safer option I know of is to not dive at all... And that's simply not an option.

 

[SeaJay]

-hh once bubbled...

A sincere apology for all of your Ad Homenium insults that I'm a non-diver and similar false claims would be a good start.


-hh

Okay, if that helps the situation.

"I'm sorry for the insults that you're a non-diver and similar false claims."

Better?

 

[SeaJay]

-hh once bubbled...


If webbing doesn't need to replaced, it doesn't need to be replaced. If the $12 every other season is indeed for a purely cosmetic change (as you now claim), then its entirely unnecessary and shouldn't be used as the basis for criticizing a BC whose webbing will last 10 years without replacement...even if it (gasp!) fades a little.

Okay, then...

...But I still contend that 2" webbing is more durable than the webbing that comes on a "regular" BC. I find it more cut-resistant, tougher, and to generally last longer. Both are subject to fading, wear, fraying, and the like. However, with a bp/wing, the harness is replacable for $12... A much less expensive option than replacing an entire ~$500 BC.

Which is better depends on the item's TCO (Total Cost of Ownership), and sometimes it is cheaper to buy a "disposable" product and replace it periodically instead of buying the more expensive "maintainable" product and paying its maintenance costs.

Agreed.

At $505 for the most popular Halcyon bp/wing combo, there is no savings or additional cost over the "disposable" BC's that you speak of... They're priced very similarly.

...Which is why I don't understand why you'd choose to dive a product that's "disposable" over one that's "fixable" for the same price.

What I'm saying is don't automatically rule out the supposedly "nonservicable" BC.

For example, a basic BC can be bought today for as little as $200, which means if it lasts for 5 years, its TCO is only $40/year.

In contrast, you have your webbing ($12 @ 2yrs) and bladder ($300 @ 6yrs), plus your BP/Wing purchase ($505). If we assume the BP will last the rest of your life (74-33 = 41 years), your TCO is ~$67/year.

Well, I would hardly say that a $200 BC is comparable to a bp/wing in terms of trim, streamlining, and customizability. For example, can you use a $200 BC for doubles? Can you attach a can light? Is there any option for pockets, accessories, and the like?

But so be it, if you'd like to compare the two... I do have an issue, however, with the concept that a wing will only last you six years. According to the dive schedule you mentioned before, that would be 900 dives. I contend that it will last at least twice that. The material in a Halcyon wing, for example, is much more durable than the stuff found on a $200 BC. Furthermore, you yourself agreed that the replacement of the webbing is optional.

Actually, they're rivets. My point in mentioning welding is that metallurgical changes occur in steel when heat is applied, and this often affects its corrosion resistance (FYI, it has nothing to do with if MIG welding is or is not used).

Your bp has rivets on it? I've never seen that before. What is the brand name of your bp, and what, exactly, is riveted to your bp?

For "spots that trap water", this includes items in contact with the plate, such as underneath webbing loops.

Your webbing traps water? I've not seen that either.

No, it doesn't affect function...that's what "cosmetic" means. And that's why I don't consider the rust to be a problem.

I don't understand... If the "rust" isn't a problem, then why did you bring it up?

You know, come to think of it... I once saw someone use crappy bolts on their bp before... And those rusted. They were the "regular" bolts, not the SS ones that came equipped on the bp. I do remember that now that you mention it.

Of course, the situation was resolved by using the hardware that came with the bp...

My rust statement was made because you claimed that SS is immune from corrosion. Its not...its merely much more resistant than other steels and metals.

I didn't claim it was "immune." I'm sure that you could get just about any metal to corrode, under the right circumstances.

Nonetheless, I've never seen a metal bp corrode... So I'm left to conclude that getting a 316 SS bp like FredT or Scott Koplin makes to corrode would require a considerably more corrosive "attack" from an environment that is not normally encountered by divers. Perhaps if you placed the bp in a laboratory, applied the right unlike metal to it, changed it's electrical properties, and then exposed it to a year's worth of salt spray?

Given the context of the dive situation, I found use of the QD's to be a good solution. Prior to those dives, I never really thought that much about QD's, either.

So be it. I'm glad that you found them to be of use. I didn't - and don't - find the same solution in them.

The adage here is perhaps "Don't knock it until you've tried it", with the caveat of those sorts of dive conditions (Zodiak chase boat, windy & some seas, no ladder, engine running. Staff SOP is to come alongside and hand up camera, weightbelt & gear before doing a "dip and kick" snorkeler-leap to get back into boat).

Of course, I wouldn't "knock it until I've tried it." I've tried it many times. In fact, I was taught to scuba dive using "regular" BC's with QD's on them. I tried something else, and found that I preferred it.

Conversely, I would suggest that you take a dose of your own recommendation and not knock a 316 SS backplate and a Halcyon wing until you've tried them.

If you like, I can go back and hit the "Report to Moderator" button on each of your posts on this thread that claimed that I'm a non-diver or the like, and let the Website Admin Staff decide if they were personal attacks or not. Or you can work it out...your choice.

You're welcome to do whatever you like. I don't think that anyone else views my comments as "attacks," but I can assure you that threatening me with a "moderator" wouldn't be seen as too kind. Please notice the number of posts I've placed on this board... I'm fully aware of the terms of service, and I'm fully aware of what is allowed and not allowed, from personal experience.

-hh, I questioned your experience level because of some of the odd opinions you seem to carry - quite personally, I might add. Since they are not the same as many other experienced divers' opinions, I questioned. And guess what? I have the right to that... I have the right to question, and I have the right to my own opinion... Just as you do. I have not attacked you. Why are you so defensive?