Is the DSS Thorus 25 Wing actually a horse shoe?!!!!

[Splitlip]

Not Taurus
But
Torus
a. a doughnut-shaped surface generated by the revolution of a conic, esp. a circle, about an exterior line lying in its plane.
b. the solid enclosed by such a surface.

Sorry

All of our single wings use are designed to be used without a STA. Our single wing LCD series all have zippers and are intended to be used without a STA. A 360 degree zipper in the center panel of the Torus wing would have resulted in a wider center panel.

I know. I would prefer a zipper, as others might, to a STA less design.

We do not use grommets for drains, we use 4 layers of tough mesh.

I did not intend to imply you used grommets. Just commenting on an incident that gave me cause to inspect the inner bladder of my wing.

Why not just inflate it? If it holds gas there's a pretty good chance you did not poke a hole in it.

Not good enough for me.

. .

 

[BKP]

My next buy is definitely down to either the Mach V or the Torus... Leaning towards the Torus right now (zipper notwithstanding).

Won't know until I dive it, however, the slightly increased width at the bottom of the Torus would seem to be a benefit for trim (especially if you're adding rear weighting on or just below the BP).

 

[cool_hardware52]

Here's the Oxycheq Mach V. As you can see, it sports a 360 degree zipper with a center panel that is about the width of standard weight belt webbing. Now that's narrow!

Stephen,

DSS has been designing and selling narrow panel single wings for almost three years now, the advantage of this approach has much more recently become apparent to others. Center panels in DSS singles wings are about 3.5 inches wide. Are you really suggesting that center panel 2+ inches wide is a distinct advantage over a 3.5 inch center panel? That's about 1/2" per side.

With this wing you can access the wing without having to return it to the manufacturer.

Has this feature proven valuable? Have you needed to inspect or replace your MachV bladder? Are you aware of a lot of Mach V bladders that needed replacement in the field?

Of course, it requires a STA... but some of us much prefer using separate metal STAs over the built in elastomeric ones.

Your preferences are well documented. The DSS Torus wing offers the user a choice. They can use a STA if they prefer or directly mount the tank if they want to.

Can you direct me to the DSS users (besides you) who are unhappy with our "STA-Less" approach?


Tobin

 

[Patrick]

Stephen,

DSS has been designing and selling narrow panel single wings for almost three years now, the advantage of this approach has much more recently become apparent to others. Center panels in DSS singles wings are about 3.5 inches wide. Are you really suggesting that center panel 2+ inches wide is a distinct advantage over a 3.5 inch center panel? That's about 1/2" per side.Tobin

It is 3/4" per side.

Has this feature proven valuable? Have you needed to inspect or replace your MachV bladder? Are you aware of a lot of Mach V bladders that needed replacement in the field?Tobin

It is insurance just in case you need to get access to the bladder. About two years ago Halcyon came out with some prototype Evolve wings that had no zipper or access to the bladder. They were tortured for that design on this same list.

In my opinion, the only time you do not use a zipper is if you use a bladderless wing.

If zippers are not needed, why don't you remove them from all your other wings? It will save time in sewing and cost in the zipper.

Also, for what it is woth, OxyCheq has been the proponent for longer, slimmer wings since we began making wings ---longer than three years.

You shaved a couple of inches in width from my Sig Series wing and now claim to be the originator of narrow wings. I shave a couple of inches from your wing width and now it is insignificant.

Anyone who is going to DEMA and wants to see the world's most indestructable wing, please stop by with your existing wing and we'll match it up with the soon to be anoced Extreme Seres Wing.

I will not annouce this wing prior to DEMA, but will have a few made up. I will challange any other manufacturer on this list to do the same thing I do to the Extreme Series Wing at DEMA.

All other manufacturers are welcome to the OxyCheq booth --- just make sure you bring one of your wings.


Best regards,

Patrick
----
OxyCheq
http://oxycheq.com

 

[*Floater*]

Patrick, what about introducing a single-layer, ~20# lift travel version of your Mach V? All the mini-wings on the market right now (DSS LCD 20, Oxycheq Razor 18# and Halcyon Batwing 18#) look shorter than their bigger counterparts, whereas a same length, but narrower wing would be pretty sweet.

 

[Patrick]

Patrick, what about introducing a single-layer, ~20# lift travel version of your Mach V? All the mini-wings on the market right now (DSS LCD 20, Oxycheq Razor 18# and Halcyon Batwing 18#) look shorter than their bigger counterparts, whereas a same length, but narrower wing would be pretty sweet.

Ask,and you shall receive. Just might take some time. I could make the most insane 18# wing you have ever seen.

Presently working on 50 new products, have about 60 now that are not on the site --- several of them are wings.

Other than the new products, I have three shows to go to, and make a move in January, am selling my house and looking for a new place near the business. I will not have a life for about five months.

At DEMA I will have 23 wings and the Extreme series has a potential to grow as well.

The 18# Razor is only a couple inches wider than the Mach V. However, it has a very, very low profile due to the cutting edge.

Best regards,

Patrick
----
OxyCheq
http://oxycheq.com

 

[UFScubaDiver]

damn Patrick, just as im about to order a mach v you have to make me wait until after DEMA to see what new wing you will be announcing, any way i cant wait to see it, ps i live in PSL so if u want to make me a temp employee and take me to DEMA that would be awesome... will work for free... and maybe a 12 pack. -Tom

 

[Patrick]

damn Patrick, just as im about to order a mach v you have to make me wait until after DEMA to see what new wing you will be announcing, any way i cant wait to see it, ps i live in PSL so if u want to make me a temp employee and take me to DEMA that would be awesome... will work for free... and maybe a 12 pack. -Tom

Tom, Call me (772.466.4612) and you will be able to hear the Extreme. Not kidding.

Best regards,

Patrick

 

[cool_hardware52]

It is 3/4" per side.

If you want to split hairs Patrick, the center panel in our wings is really about 3 1/4 inches wide, but it can vary just a bit due to it being a sewn feature. I'd guess that the center panel in your wing is slightly wider than 2 inch webbing, i.e. 2+ inches.

If you understand the geometry involved it is difficult to argue a 1/2 inch at this point has much effect the inflated volume.

Consider the volume in the wing a this point. The space occuppied by the wing where the tank meets the plate is roughly triangular.

Does a triangle 1/2 inch deep x maybe a 1/4 tall the lenght of the tank really contain meaningful volume? (1/2 x 1/4)/2 = .0625 sq inches x 16 inches (lenght of the plate) = 1 cubic inch

1 cubic x 2 (each side of the tank) 2 cubic inches of gas will provide (2/1728) x 63 = .08 lbs of lift, not enough to "shift the paradigm" very far. Rerun the numbers using 3/4 inch per side, and you have added ~0.11 lbs of lift compared to a wing using a 3 1/2 inch center panel.

Now let's assume that due to your required use of a STA, that the added volume on your ~2 inch center panel wing, where the tank meets the plate, is really 3/4 wide by 1 inch tall. These are generous values. The resulting volume is still less than 1/2 lbs of lift.

That's not the case the further you move from the center line of the tank. If the center panel is approximately as wide as the cylinder, i.e. 6-7-8 inches, the tank does little or nothing to constrain the inflated shape of the wing. This wide center panel is typical of the wings you market, and all others I know of, that predate our LCD wings.

When we reduced the center panel from 7-8" i.e."as wide as the cylinder" to ~ 3 inches the effects were pretty dramatic. Reducing it from ~3 inches to ~2 inches due to the geometry has almost no effect.

It is insurance just in case you need to get access to the bladder. About two years ago Halcyon came out with some prototype Evolve wings that had no zipper or access to the bladder. They were tortured for that design on this same list.

Interesting, I had no idea Halcyon had tried this. I'm sure they were tortured. New ideas are tough for some to accept.

More importantly; did the wings work? Were the bladders tough enough? Did they suffer routine failures? Has the MachV bladder suffered routine failures?

I know the 22 mil bladders in our Torus wings are performing well. We've had two out of hundreds returned, both replaced same day. Again, most divers don't carry a spare bladder, or the tools required to change the fittings. Most bladder repairs and replacements end up either at the dive shop or returned to the manufacturer, whether there is a zipper or not. Because we have the capacity in house to do these repairs the down time for the user, in the rare event repair is necessary, is minimal.

We don't need to ship the wing cross county, and export it to foreign lands, and have it lost in customs and then sent back across the country. We just fix them, and return it to the customer.

In my opinion, the only time you do not use a zipper is if you use a bladderless wing.

Good Point. Most BC's and many wings sold today don't have access to the bladder. "Single Bladder" or as you prefer "bladderless" wings do not provide access to the bladder. Are these known to routinely fail?

If zippers are not needed, why don't you remove them from all your other wings? It will save time in sewing and cost in the zipper.

I've explained why in depth many times. Short zippers in the top arc of a horeshoe wing is a very different thing than a 360 degree zipper in the center panel of a horeshoe wing. We use only #10 YKK zippers when we install a zipper. What do you use for a zipper in the Mach V?

A

lso, for what it is woth, OxyCheq has been the proponent for longer, slimmer wings since we began making wings ---longer than three years.

If our innovative design, i.e. using the plate and cylinder to control the inflated shape of the wing is so little value why are you reacting by having your line redesigned?

You shaved a couple of inches in width from my Sig Series wing and now claim to be the originator of narrow wings. I shave a couple of inches from your wing width and now it is insignificant.

1/2 inch or even 3/4 inch a side is insignificant down where the tank meets the plate, see above, do the math. 2-3 inches per side, from out board of the cylinder, is significant.

Can you show me any wing Oxycheq markets that predates our LCD wings where the center panel was significantly narrower than the cylinder?


Tobin

 

[UFScubaDiver]

Sweet, I will give you a call after I get out of this crappy organic2 lab!