Newbie questions
- Thread starter ns2ny
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
ClassAction:
Depending on how you go about it, you can get away for less than 1000. For a low/mid-range suit, anywhere from 500-800 depending, (LP, Ebay, diverswarehouse, etc), woolies depending on your needs 80-150+, gloves hood <$100. Then you need may need new fins (turtles) to handle the shoes.
Then again....you can spend 2-3000 grand if it's just laying around burning a hole in your pocket...... :toilet_cl
david
Yes, that's the one. This is the front zip (Bare came out this year with a CD2 PRo which is a rear zip). I chose this over trilam because I do a lot of cold water wreck diving and I wanted something that was pretty tough and provided some insulation. I chose a 2mm because I wanted to minimize the buoyancy change factor (there is some, but not a lot). I'm still trying to get used to the suit, but so far so good. I the warmer months, I won't have to wear too much in terms of undergarments, which will be nice.ns2ny:
warren_l:
Tks...I have been going back and forth between the ATR HD and XCD. And while I was leaning towards the HD, something tells me the XCD will be a better choice.
Out of curiousity....how much weight do you wear with that?
david
glbirch
Contributor
I also have the XCD2. I quite like it so far. Well made, solid suit. Went with the compressed neo to minimize bouyancy change, and also because I find I like the little extra 'give' that you do not get with a tri-lam. Got the hard soles because there's no such thing as a rock boot that will fit my feet. Bare has a wide range of stock sizes, or you can spend a little more and get a custom fit. I'm still sorting out my weighting with it so can't really help you there yet. With the front zip I find it's 'almost' self donning. Can't quite get the zip all the way back around the shoulder.
glbirch:
That is good to hear. If I go that route, I will likely get the back zip anyway. I won't be diving dry alone and it will be cheaper to fix when the time comes....
As for the boots, why not just a cumffy pair of Converse?
d
glbirch
Contributor
ns2ny:
I assume Converse is a brand of shoe or boot? If so, same problem. They will likely not have my size. Appreciate the thought though.
Right now with a steel 120 on my back, I am wearing about 20 lbs - more weight than with my wetsuit because I am wearing a CT-200 underneath. When it gets warmer, I expect I should be able to drop some weight when I go to lighter undergarments. I thought about an HD for a while too, but decided against trilam for my needs. Not that trilam is bad - in fact, I've been thinking about a second drysuit which I might very well go trilam (lighter for traveling, etc).ns2ny:
But the XCD2 being a front zip is not really self donning with full undergarments on, as I cannot get the zipper started easily. It is better at self doffing, as I can get out of it by myself for the most part as unzipping is much easier.
I decided on the compressed neoprene because it is very durable. Repairs are easily made in the field with a tube of aquaseal. I'm not sure about ease of repair of trilam and how good the repairs hold (images of duct tape keep coming to mind). The neoprene maintains perhaps more streamlined in the water compared with some trilams which can be baggy. As well, I may get away with minimal undergarments in the warmer months around here, with the compressed neoprene having some insulating factor over trilam. And I went with the 2mm as opposed to a thicker neoprene due to the lower change in buoyancy factor. As well, there is better mobility with a thinner neoprene.
All in all, no complaints.
glbirch:
For starters, thanks to all of your for your input. It's been very helpful.
and yes, Converse is a really light tennis shoe, sneaker or sand shoe depending on where you were raised.
Now maybe I should move this next one to a new post but...
Another silly thought came to mind as I read this. If someone had a suit w/ the soft sock, rather than wearing rock boots (or Converse) would it not be possible to get a plain old rubber sole from the local shoe repair and glue them onto the bottom. That would:
a) avoid the need for rock boots or shoes,
b) likely mean you could still use your regular fins
c) not rip holes in the socks if you have to walk rocks, etc
d) replace them (the soles) pretty damn easily.
Tell me, what's wrong with this picture????
glbirch
Contributor
ns2ny:For starters, thanks to all of your for your input. It's been very helpful.
and yes, Converse is a really light tennis shoe, sneaker or sand shoe depending on where you were raised.
But another silly thought came to mind as I read this. If someone had a suit w/ the soft sock/sole, rather than wearing rock boots (or Converse) would it not be possible to get a plain old rubber sole from the local shoe repair and glue them onto the bottom. That would:
a) avoid the need for rock boots or shoes,
b) likely mean you could still use your regular fins
c) not rip holes in the socks if you have to walk rocks, etc
d) replace them (the soles) pretty damn easily.
Tell me, what's wrong with this picture????
I suspect that would put a fair amount of stress on the material, which is not particularily substantial, As well, it would be easy to catch on a rock edge or some such and tear above the rubber sole. What would you use as glue that would be durable enough to stay on, but yet allow you to pull off the sole when it wears and glue on a new one?
Just some thoughts off the top of my head.
Similar threads
