Diverite Rec Wing and Singles

[Patrick]

Thanks Tobin,

But I wasn't questioning the stackup of dimensions. My question is much more fundamental. Why do we want to space the tank away from the back plate? If that is good, why don't we make the backplate so that it itself is further from the wearer's back? But, I thought that keeping the tank as close as possible, while keeping the valves from being hit with the back of the head, was the goal.

When talking drag, if using a STA is nothing compared to when you look at the difference in the width of the wings and the cutting edge.

Our wing lobes (the sides of the wing) are separated by 2". I think the next closest is 3" to 3.5".

When you use an OxyCheq Mach V wing w/o a STA, you have the best of both world's. No offset from cylinder, very low profile wing. Materials and features are even more important things to consider when making a wing purchase.

Best regards,

Patrick Duffy
OxyCheq
http://oxycheq.com

 

[CompuDude]

There is a huge difference in both wings (DSS vs OxyCheq) in materials and features, the most important feature being that all OxyCheq wings (other than the bladderless Razor) have a zipper to access the bladder for repair and inspection.

Rather than writing down all of our materials and features here, I will do it on mfg section and then could always refer to it.

Best regards,

Patrick
OxyCheq
http://oxycheq.com

You don't have to sell me, Patrick. You know I like your wings.

I do think DSS makes a very fine product as well, however.

 

[cool_hardware52]

When you do not use a STA with the Mach V, there is no offset. None. The cylinder sits on the spine webbing on the wing itself. That is 0".

I measure tank offset from the back plate. Anything between the tank and the plate will offset the tank from the plate. 0.0" offset would be possible only if the tank was in direct contact with the plate.

Typical wing construction, using "spine webbing" and metal grommets will result in a minimum offset equal to the height of the grommet. This is typically about ~1/4" Any fasteners used to secure the wing to the plate via these grommets will add to this value. Most divers want some means to secure or locate the wing on the plate, in most cases this means bolts of some type through the wing grommets and back plate.

I took a pair of calipers and it is .36, not .55.

I see you now agree that the typical low profile STA offsets the tank by almost twice the figure you first claimed, .36" vs "less than 3/16"

In the case of a grommeted wing and STA the total offset can be as much as the .36" you note for the STA + the ~.240 for the metal grommet, totaling ~.6" That actually exceeds the value I stated. (.60" > .55")

DSS singles wings do not use metal grommets. We use custom molded elastomeric "windows"

These windows, installed, are about .120" thick.

[url=http://www.scubaboard.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/96851][/URL]

DSS uses a compressible elastomeric Locator to position the wing on the Back Plate. These locators have a "head" on the tank side of the wing that is about 0.080" thick in the free state.

I have seen photos of your rubber locator and it sure is not .15 on the majority of diver's tanks.

With a DSS singles wing all that separates the tank from the plate from the tank is the thickness of the molded "window" and the head of the rubber locator. .120" + 0.08" is about 0.2", in the free state. Unlike metal grommets and metal bolts, these elastomeric components compress when the cambands are closed, reducing this 0.200" offset to about .15" as I have previously stated. The center portion of the DSS elastomeric "wobble stopper" is of a similar thickness.

Tobin

 

[Patrick]

If you want to add the one side of the grommet go ahead, that is insignificant.

If you want, bring your calipers to the Long Beach Show and we will measure both. And, as a bonus, we can discuss all the features that each wing has. We can do it at both of our booths just to be fair.

Also, I stated before that any amount of extra drag you are talking about in offset is minimal when compared to the width of the DSS wing vs the OxyCheq wing.

I know quite well the materials we both use and the features we both have on our wings and I think we both know I use better materials.

If we are discussing wing features like zippers on 360 loop wings, you do not have them. You did come out with 360 loop wings only after saying you saw no benefits to them.

You have made posts in the past that zippers were needed for minor repairs and inspection when you only had U-shaped wings (because you have zippers on them). But, since you came out with a 360 loop wing (with no zipper), now I see you say zippers are a failure point. I asked this before and never got an answer, why do you still have zippers on your U shaped wings if they are potential failure points? It is more expensive to add a zipper, so if it is such a great idea, why do you still have them on it?

Patrick
OxyCheq
http://oxycheq.com

 

[CompuDude]

I hate it when daddy and daddy fight. :10:

We're talking fractions of inches. Nothing worth getting worked up about.

You both make great dive gear. Let's leave it there?