Mares Puck too conservative?

[Jacky Boy]

I'm looking into buying my first diving computer. The mares Puck seems to be very popular and one of the cheapest, along side the Suunto Gekko.
I dismissed the Gekko almost imediately as I like the idea of an electronic log book that I can load onto my PC. The Gekko doesnt have this option, but the Puck does.
My only concern is that the Puck is too conservative in dive time. Not only would this mean less bottom time, but also long decompression stops should I stay for a length of time which other computers would give a 5 minute safety-stop for.
Obveously this would be an inconvenience to me, but immagining a scenario in which Im diving in a group of 3-4 divers. Their computers are all teling them its safe to surface after 5 minutes, mines telling me to wait another 15. This also raises issues of air consuption. (I was all ready to buy it before reading an article in this months issue of DIVER magazine, which tested 10 computers side by side. One, not the Puck, was showing deco stops of 26mins, with other deeper stops aswell, when most of the other computers were only showing something like 6 minutes at 5 meters)

Dont get me wrong here, I'm not fool hardy. I have a great appreciation for safe practise. Infact I often have arguments with friends about helth and safety, they tell me it goes too far, bloody beurocrats spoiling the fun for everyone they say. I ask them if they would feel the same if it was their child who fell in the lake on an understaffed school trip and no one notised until it was too late(this is hyperthetical by the way). Im the one who raises the issue of the un-safe working environment in the disposal bay during meetings to the rolling eyes and groans of my colluiges. Too many people die and injure themselves at work every year because its easier to just get on with the job than tell your boss that you wont do it unless they sort it out (often they send other people to do it, which gets them annoyed with me. If they want to injur themselves thats upto them. They wont get any compensation because my refusal to do the job showes they would have been aware of the risks and that they did have the option to say no)....
I digress. Anyway my point is I wouldnt push the limits just for a few extra minutes under water. However I want to know what your opinions are on whether the Pucks algorithoms are too conservative and so spoil the dive a little bit, when theres no reason, safety wise, not to have a bit more bottom time and a bit less deco/safety stop time. Perhaps waiting and investon in a computer thats more sophistocated would improve my diving experience?

 

[buddhasummer]

You can download the gekko. You dont say what type of diving you do/plan to do so its hard to give a answer. Assuming you are doing OW rec dives the mares Puck will do fine and you will not likely notice its "conservatism". For what its worth it was rated very highly in Scubadiving magazine, re price, easy of use etc.

 

[Jacky Boy]

You can download the gekko. You dont say what type of diving you do/plan to do so its hard to give a answer. Assuming you are doing OW rec dives the mares Puck will do fine and you will not likely notice its "conservatism". For what its worth it was rated very highly in Scubadiving magazine, re price, easy of use etc.

"Suunto Gekko is an ideal choice for sports divers who do not require PC interface interoperability or simulation features." - taken directly from the Suunto website.
Have I missinterprated this? Apart from being unable to download dives to the computer I actually prefere the Gekko. So if I am mistaken, and if from this discussion it turns out that there is no need to spend more for a more sophisticated algorithem, I'll probably buy that instead.

Your rite, I was going to say what my diving intentions are, but I thought the post was already too long;
I want to dive wrecks. Living in the north of england Wreck diving seems to be the best diving experiences here. I particularly want to dive Scappa Bay's wrecks, some of which lie at about 40m.
I have no intention of deep diving for the sake of it, but if the object of the dive lies in deep water (within reason and within my training) I want to be able to dive it.
I also want to be able to make repetative dives, which is my main concern with the Puck. I also want to learn to dive Nitrox, but I am happy that isnt an issue with the puck.
If I am to do tech diving or tri-mix diving in the future I will buy another computer. But I probably wont.

I have looked at many reviews and it seems to be very highly rated everywhere. I have no doubt its a very good computer for the money. but there has been the odd comment on its conservitism.

 

[Web Monkey]

My only concern is that the Puck is too conservative in dive time. Not only would this mean less bottom time, but also long decompression stops should I stay for a length of time which other computers would give a 5 minute safety-stop for.

Too conservative compared to what?

Have you actually seen any comparisons with other computers on the same dive?

Terry

 

[Jacky Boy]

Too conservative compared to what?

Have you actually seen any comparisons with other computers on the same dive?

Terry

I was all ready to buy it before reading an article in this months issue of DIVER magazine, which tested 10 computers side by side. One, not the Puck, was showing deco stops of 26mins, with other deeper stops aswell, when most of the other computers were only showing something like 6 minutes at 5 meters

Sorry, I know I ramble alot in my posts making it tempting to skim through and just get the jist.

I havnt used it along side other computers, the scenario I mention is not literal, just what my worries about the computer are. Reading the article in DIVE mag raised these conserns for me, motivating me to post this thread.

What it boils down to is that many other computers have almost the same features yet are more expensive. I think it would be worth the extra £100-£200 if by paying that I got an extra 10 mins bottom time on most dives without compromising safety. Would I achieve that by paying the extra cost for a midrange computer instead of a budget one?

 

[Web Monkey]

What it boils down to is that many other computers have almost the same features yet are more expensive. I think it would be worth the extra £100-£200 if by paying that I got an extra 10 mins bottom time on most dives without compromising safety. Would I achieve that by paying the extra cost for a midrange computer instead of a budget one?

Unfortunately, this is a whole can of worms.

Different computers use different decompression models, and any given model or implementation of that model may or may not model you safely. Some people would consider "more conservative" to be a benefit, while others consider it an annoyance.

OTOH, people frequently get bent "riding their computers", even though the computer says everything is "OK".

I really don't have any specific computer recommendations, but just wanted to mention that there are worse things than having to hang out at a stop for a little while, especially if it means reducing your chances of getting bent and ending your vacation.

Terry

 

[Web Monkey]

I havnt used it along side other computers, the scenario I mention is not literal, just what my worries about the computer are. Reading the article in DIVE mag raised these conserns for me, motivating me to post this thread.

According to what I think you said they didn't test the puck, so you don't really have any way of knowing how conservative it is (or isn't).

Also, FWIW, a "more expensive computer" doesn't necessarily equal "more dive time", and I wouldn't trust a general purpose recreational computer's deco requirements on a regular basis anyway. It's nice for an infrequent "I screwed up, what now?" but for a planned deco dive, I'd be using vPlanner and printing out a dive plan.

Terry

 

[Jacky Boy]

Unfortunately, this is a whole can of worms.

Different computers use different decompression models, and any given model or implementation of that model may or may not model you safely. Some people would consider "more conservative" to be a benefit, while others consider it an annoyance.

OTOH, people frequently get bent "riding their computers", even though the computer says everything is "OK".

I really don't have any specific computer recommendations, but just wanted to mention that there are worse things than having to hang out at a stop for a little while, especially if it means reducing your chances of getting bent and ending your vacation.

Terry

Thanks for your response, its greatly appreciated.
What does "Riding your computer" mean? Is that when people dangle it over the side of the boat so it doesnt tell them not to get back in the water? Ive heard of people doing that. Why buy a computer if your just going to ignore it.

Is the Puck meant for diving 30m or less? Because I plan to learn to dive deeper that that. I think that was what the issue with the overly conservative computer in the magazine test, the algorythem used simply wasnt meant for diving more than 30m so beyond that depth it started racking up deco time with added deep decos at an unrealistic rate (according to the articles author). Also this conserns me in terms of air usage. If im expected to make very long assents any time I dive a wreck at 35-40m, Im at risk of running out of, or dangerously low on air before surfacing unless I ignore my computer. Obveously I'd like to aviod having to choose between sticking with the computers calculations and drowning, or surfacing and getting bent. So if the Pucks not designed to handle these depths outside of an emergency or otherwise a-typical situation then I have to buy a diffrent computer.


Does anyone have experience of diving to these depths with the Puck?

 

[Jacky Boy]

OK, Ive just looked over the article again and also at the Puck one the Mares website.
The Puck uses an RGBM (reduced gradient micro bubble) algorythem, as do some of the computers tested. They seem to be in the mid-range of caution to agression in dive times and deco times. The one which was calcuilating 5 times as much deco time and little bottom ttime as the others was the Oceanic 0C1. That was using a compleatly diffrent algorythem to the others and clearly behaved in a far more cautious way.

I think im probably going to buy the Puck.

Thanks for your comments. I guess I should have thought of checking the actual algorythems used earlier.

 

[Web Monkey]

Thanks for your response, its greatly appreciated.
What does "Riding your computer" mean? Is that when people dangle it over the side of the boat so it doesnt tell them not to get back in the water? Ive heard of people doing that. Why buy a computer if your just going to ignore it.

"Riding the computer" means just diving until it says you're out of air or time.

It's the equivalent of diving to the edge of the tables.

Terry