Is Suunto really that bad

[weaponeer]

There are so many variables that can come into play when diving so how can anybody come up with a best answer on dive computers that will fit every single diver. I have never had an issue with my Mares M2 (same RGBM as my wife's still perfectly functioning Suunto Mosquito). I suggest the OP rent or borrow computers that use different algorithms and see which one most closely matches his style of diving while staying within all safety limits. Personally I prefer having the conservative margin that's built into the RGBM. Anyone who constantly pushes the limits on their liberal computer is asking for trouble when the unexpected happens such as being caught in a downwelling. Yes, I've had deep wreck dives where I reached NDL, so I slowly start my ascent while still enjoying the wreck and watch my computer add minutes to my NDL. And doing this during multi-dive weeks has never forced me to be the last diver in the water due to SI restrictions. I'm always right there going in and coming out with divers using less conservative computers.

 

[Couv]

Edit: I didn't see all the previous post with all the same info....no reason for my bla, bla, bla....
c

 

[Matt S.]

Which Suunto did you have that you had to mail off and which Uwatec do you have that has a user replaceable battery? I been around both for a long time and I found that there were a lot more Suunto products with user-replaceable batteries than Uwatecs.

Suunto D6 vs Uwatec Galileo Sol. As a pattern it may not hold, I don't know.

I was trying to impart to the OP that (assuming it's generally safe) the algorithm may be the least important part of the computer. If Suunto sold a computer with a nice big fat display, and a user replaceable battery, and a light that could stay on during an entire dive without pushing buttons, I would have considered it because those were the features I wanted.

On the other hand, if everyone I knew was using some other model, I'd give that weight too because it can be more convenient to be in sync.

 

[ijdod]

Staying home in bed would be even safer. You might get hit by a bus on the way to the boat!

Don't be so sure. Far more people die in bed, than under a bus.

I think the issue with the Suuntos is that the algorithm is proprietary, and it's not clear what it's going to do, unlike VPM or Buhlmann GF. It isn't RGBM, though, they just bought the rights to use the name.

Just because it's not true RGBM doesn't mean it's 'just' a name they slapped on it. The comments earlier actually point in that direction. Ascent too fast and it penalizes you for it... as it assumes a certain extra build-up of microbubbles. Whether or not this is a good thing is a different discussion.

In general, I get the feeling that the Suunto penalizes your next NDL for doing things we were tought not to do (presumably for a good reason). That does make sense to me, especially considering how little is actually understood about what we're putting out bodies through. To each their own, I guess...

 

[FritzCat66]

I see your point, and I like the watch analogy. How about after a week of 4-dives per day, including 2 reverse profiles, 3 saw-tooth profiles, 3 ragged ascents in the surge, 1 short surface interval, and 1 missed safety stop due to an up-current? Are you still a better "conservatizer" than the computer?

Great example, Vlad... What I trust my computer to do in this (and every) case is to have crunched the numbers according to its algorithm and the data it has logged, and to give me its estimate based purely on the math, then let me decide.

For example, already knowing the Sherwood is pretty generous, I normally treat the nitrogen bar segment one below deco as my personal maximum, and generally start ascending if/when I hit that, regardless of the RDT being displayed. So, in this particular case, I might choose to treat the antepenultimate bar just below that as my limit for the dive. I just don't want the computer making that choice for me.

Note I am not advocating mindlessly following a computer, in fact just the opposite: know your computer very well, know where it fits on the conservatism scale, understand even the best algortihms out there are imperfect approximations, and dive accordingly.

 

[livetwodive]

I currently have a Suunto Gekko which my wife and I have been using for a couple of years. While I like it and find it easy to use I was surprised the first time I used it at how quickly I approached NDL when I dove air compared to the Navy tables I had been using. Diving nitrox with the same computer has eased that problem but now I'm nibbling on a new computer, possibly the Uwatec Tec2g.

 

[Mod63]

I think the issue with the Suuntos is that the algorithm is proprietary, and it's not clear what it's going to do, unlike VPM or Buhlmann GF. It isn't RGBM, though, they just bought the rights to use the name.

It is RGBM. There are two ways to implement RGBM - one is the full interative version, the other is sometimes called "tiny" RGBM or "RGBM folded over ZH-L", and has been published by Wienke.

 

[Rhone Man]

People complain that they are too conservative. That doesn't make them "bad" just makes them conservative.

That's pretty much it in two sentences.

Conservatism aside, they make excellent computers. Although I could complain a bit about the straps on my D9.

 

[galvanni]

Man did I open up a can of worms with this post - but lots of insightful information which is much appreciated.


So my original thinking here to make it more clear is that I was considering the Oceanic Veo 3.0 with dual algorithms. So that would give me Pelagic DSAT, Z+, and also DSAT w/conservatism factor. Personally, I don't care if I lose a dive or dive time - I'm perfectly happy missing some time in the water in return for being able to dive another day. I'm a new diver - so I'm naturally going to lean towards conservative. Something like the Veo 3.0 seems to put much more power in the hands of the consumer to decide.

 

[Wantonmien]

A couple of items worth a thought on the issue of 'over conservative' dive computers -

Some 30 years back my cousin was a very keen diver and secretary for a part of the BSAC (British Sub Aqua Club) - and although no longer diving he keeps upto date with the diving industry, and is a great guy to talk to for me ~ a relative novice.

That ex diving Cousin now works as a fairly senior chap in the British Health Service, and in one recent conversation with him about diving, he was interested in my training, did I know the pressure tables and so on - and from medical records in the UK, he was of the oppinion that as more and more reliance is made on dive computers - then % wise more and more divers were ending up in decompression chambers - due to diving closer and closer to the limits, and exceeding them ! I'd love to get my hands on some real statistics, but well worth thinking about when being concerned about 'overly' conservative dive computers. It's also worth checking your dives through the pressure group tables, as first time I relied on a dive computer - I was horrified to see how I had exceeded limits on the tables !
---

In addition, during my PADI OW and AOW with a DAN representative, it was emphasised to me several times that when diving with a buddy and both are wearing dive computers, it is better to rely on the more conservative of your or buddys two computers - which is something I do, as at the end of the day that little bit of expensive electronic wizardry gizmo on my wrist may just malfunction one day - and if my buddys gizmo says 'slow the ascent', or 'make an additional safety stop', or 'wait a little longer between dives', or 'get into shallower water' - it's all in the interests of personal safety isn't it - and I for one do not want to exceed the limits and be one of the guys who ends up in a decompression chamber or worse !

Safe diving, cheers.