DSS wing - not a donut - discuss

[Splitlip]

On this day when I've been snowbound I have been glad for this thread.

I don't mind these guys defending theselves and their products.

But there was some sarcasm along the way that didn't suit me.

All in all, in my opinion, Tobin has carried the day. Most logical, and he stayed his course, plus he put in more effort and paid greater attention to the details of the argument.

But the value of it all (short of shutting down veggie, which was big), seemed to diminish the farther we went along. I guess these guys were arguing credibility, which I can't blame them for. But in my opinion, the most important credibility comes from those who buy the products, not the vendors themselves.

Didn't know we were trying to pick a winner here. This thread I thought begin about the benefits of donuts v u-wings.
Somehow it turned into an inditement of Oxycheq's manufacturing process by Tobin (let's beat on Veggie while we are at it) as well as an attack on Patrick's communication skills.
However at the end of the debate?, I think Tobin does have a more extensive vocabulary and may have paid better attention to "details of the argument", but I am not ready to turn in my Oxycheq donut.

 

[cool_hardware52]

I was under the impression, as Patrik has since pointed out, that he is involved in R&D, just not in the same fashion that you are.

My original question was based on Patrick's own statements:

My mfg made the patterns aftter my simple drawings.( Post # 91)

I don't sew and don't see myself doing it or managing others that do. (Post #94)

If instead you were refering to my assertion that you often fatten up what others are saying, it is my contention that you often interpret statements in a very broad sense, and then refute that. Although that may be technically "correct", in that the original statement should have been made in a more constrained format, it isn't very informative, as that is not the message that the statements were meant to convey.

Words have specific meanings, if you take a public position, or make a claim, you should expect to be challanged. I have no idea what you mean when say "fatten up."

It is my contention that prior to Patrik showing up you were over constraining the scenarios in which the benefits of a donut are realized in an effort to downplay their pros. I don't have a problem that the benefits provided by your wings may offset the benefits provided by an oval design, but I do have a problem discounting the benefits of a donut to argue that fact. I read through some of your other posts in other threads, and it is my perception that you were a little more constrained in other threads regarding your preference not to manufacture ovals. In this thread you went further to discount the benefits of ovals, hence my motivation to originally enter this discussion to provide a counterpoint.

How does one compare and contrast two designs without discussing both the pros and cons of each? Has there been any reports, excepting you Veggiedog, that my position regarding DSS LCD horseshoes vs donuts is unsupportable?

Furthermore, if you wouldn't have gone to the extremes you did to avoid the point I was trying to make, my postings would have been less abrasive.

Your tone is my fault?

I don't know Patrik, but obviously, to me, his company produces quality products.

Quite right, I've said exactly that here, both publically and privately.

Are you trying to argue that because you operate in a more monolithic environment that your products are superior?

Did I say that? I have repeatedly said that there is more than one successful business model. I have repeatedly stated that donut wings work fine. The main point of contention has been whether or not zippers do or do not effect (or constrain) a wing design. I have every confidence that people who do sew, and or do detailed pattern development would recognise that zippers impose constraints.

Are you trying to make the point that Patrik's abilities are inferior to yours because he doesn't know how to sew?

Did I say that? Patrick pointed out he does not sew, not me. It would inconsistent for me to first say Patricks wings perform well, and are of high quality, and then try to make a case that Patricks goods, and by reflection his abilities, are inferior.

Veggiedog, it seems a favorite word of yours is "suspect". Might I suggest that not everything and everybody need be suspect. Some things are pretty simple, and most people are forthright.

Regards,

Tobin

 

[BigWhiteSquare]

Wow, this is really something. What started out as a semi-informative thread has turned into one big pissing contest between two guys with such over-inflated egos that they won't dare let the other (or anyone else for that matter) get in the last word.

While I still like the gear you guys make and sell, on a personal level you have shown yourselves to be kind of... pathetic.

___

 

[fishb0y]

Wow, this is really something. What started out as a semi-informative thread has turned into one big pissing contest between two guys with such over-inflated egos that they won't dare let the other (or anyone else for that matter) get in the last word.

While I still like the gear you guys make and sell, on a personal level you have shown yourselves to be kind of... pathetic.

___

I disagree, I wish more people had a passion towards their product as these 2 do. Now as soon as I get people to pay for their products on E-Bay I'll get my new wing.

 

[Humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

Consider the shape of a captial "A". The inverted "V" section in the plate and tank, the "-" section the the flat portion of the wing. The shorter the "-", the closer it can get to the top of the A and thus it can occupy more space.

Fun example!

A while back, Tobin speculated as to the width of the middle section of Patrick's wing. Patrick, what is the width of the middle section of your Standard/Signature wing? I believe Tobin said his was 3 inches or so wide (correct me if I'm wrong...not gonna go through the whole thread ).

Also, how wide are each of your wings when inflated, at their widest point?

It would be great if it weren't treated as a competition, but I was just curious what the numbers are after the discussion of width as it relates to shape. Thanks again for your participation in the thread, guys.

I love succinct, on-topic posts, don't you veggie?

 

[cool_hardware52]

Fun example!

A while back, Tobin speculated as to the width of the middle section of Patrick's wing. Patrick, what is the width of the middle section of your Standard/Signature wing? I believe Tobin said his was 3 inches or so wide (correct me if I'm wrong...not gonna go through the whole thread ).

Also, how wide are each of your wings when inflated, at their widest point?

It would be great if it weren't treated as a competition, but I was just curious what the numbers are after the discussion of width as it relates to shape. Thanks again for your participation in the thread, guys.

I love succinct, on-topic posts, don't you veggie?

Humuhumunukunukuapua'a,

I'm at home right now, but I might be able to measure and post that info tomorrow morning, before I leave to go diving for a couple days.

Your memory is correct, the center panel in our single wings is just over 3 inches wide. I don't recall the max inflated width, but I'll check tomorrow.

Tobin

 

[cecilb63]

Such as?
]

"Well, I simply did not realize you wanted to buy a wing? What is your typical gear configuration? Have you started diving doubles yet or still singles? Are you diving a rebreather or OC? Will you be penetrating wrecks, cave neither? What type of cylinder? Wet or dry? How much lead do you need?"


Those questions strike me as sarcastic when said in the context of your discussion.

But I don't understand the protocol here..

 

[aquaoren]

"Well, I simply did not realize you wanted to buy a wing? What is your typical gear configuration? Have you started diving doubles yet or still singles? Are you diving a rebreather or OC? Will you be penetrating wrecks, cave neither? What type of cylinder? Wet or dry? How much lead do you need?"


Those questions strike me as sarcastic when said in the context of your discussion.

But I don't understand the protocol here..

These are the question a good sales person would ask you when he tries to determine what wing would suit your needs best.
I see that as a hint, concerning what question we have to ask ourselfs when looking for a new wing, Patrick gave to each diver on the board. I think he adressed Tobins remark about the fact that many potential buyer are reading the thread very well.
You have to read between the words...

 

[cecilb63]

These are the question a good sales person would ask you when he tries to determine what wing would suit your needs best.

But not a fellow competitor in the business...

 

[veggiedog]

My OxyCheq Signature Series 30lb bladder specifications:

Inflated full:
5 1/2" inner, 16" outer, 23" tall, leading (top) edge is about 2 1/2"-3" deep (wide).

Uninflated:
4 1/2" inner, 18 1/2" outer, 24" tall

This was without the bladder installed (just a free standing bladder).

Now we're on topic. Don't forget, its not just size that matters. My signature weighs about 2 1/2 lbs, that might be a good indication of material thicknesses (but the weight I provided is only approximate): the Signature bladder is made with a super durable outer cover and urethane inner bladder. Very simple quality inflator, no pull dump (better without IMO).