Oceanic vs Mares vs Suunto Algorithm

[Griffo]

Check out this report of real testing of various computers. Not sure if the Mares is but the other are
http://www.scubadiving.com/files/_attachments/Dive_computer_profile.pdf

 

[Kern]

If that's accurate, instead of most saying, aren't those Suunto's conservative; they'd be saying, those Mares computers are so conservative, I think I'll get one of those middle of the road Suunto's.

 

[Hatul]

I dove with both my Suunto Vyper and Uwatec Sol. I found the Vyper more liberal on the first dive, but on repetitive dive the Suunto was more conservative. I like conservative computers but be prepared to do light deco with those, on repetitive diving.

Adam

 

[Bubbletrubble]

My concern was being able to ascend/descend together as guided by the dive comps. Normally we would wait for each other at the safety stop but there are times when it might be necessary for some to get out of the water sooner. I was thinking that if algorithms were similar the computers will show the all clear within a reasonable span of time is higher. Your responses validated this. Based on the responses I think I'll pass on the Oceanic. Not so hot about the Mares. Hoping to find a good deal on a Suunto.

@audiotyro: When I dive, the agreed-upon rule is that the dive is over once everyone in the buddy team exits the water. Only then is it acceptable to have buddy separation. Your post seems to imply that, within your buddy team, you manage safety stops individually with people exiting the water on their own at times. You should know that this is not good practice at all. Here is a series of questions that I'd be asking:

• Why does the person need to get out of the water sooner?
• Is it because he has less gas?
• Why does he have less gas?
• Was he experiencing a medical issue underwater that was forcing him to run through gas more quickly?
• What condition will he be in once he surfaces?
• Is it possible that he might need assistance after surfacing...even with a short surface swim to the boat/shore?

I think you can see what I'm getting at. Allowing a dive buddy to surface on his own from a safety stop and exit the water is more dangerous than a lot of people realize. When it comes to a buddy team, begin the dive together and end the dive together. The fact that buddies might be using computers with different algorithms is not an acceptable reason to allow buddy separation.

On the issue of matching computers with your dive buddies...
It's not necessary at all. I've conducted a few hundred dives with a dive buddy who uses a Sherwood Wisdom computer. I use a Suunto. No problems whatsoever. In the vast majority of cases, on any given dive, the NDLs displayed by my computer are limiting. No big deal. Simple communication between dive buddies is all that's required. I tell my dive buddy (or buddies; we often dive as a 3-man buddy team) to turn the dive, and that's what we do...together. Our computers recommend a 3 minute shallow safety stop, but we usually end up spending 7-10 minutes in the 10-20 fsw range.

 

[jacksatlanta]

Since there seems to be great satisfaction with the Sunto computers by those that posted already ( not knocking them, they make a great product) and it seems the OP may have a concern about the liberalness of the Oceanics. I would like to play devils advocate and make the point that the DSAT model used by both PADI in all their forms of the RDP and by Pelagic Instruments (Oceanic/Aeris/Some Tusa's/Some older Aqualungs/Sherwoods/Genesis/etc) is most likely the most dived model ever created and has been probably real world tested under more situations than any other. While I will agree it is one of the most liberal models out there, under recreational diving it has more than been proven to be very safe.

 

[Hatul]

Since there seems to be great satisfaction with the Sunto computers by those that posted already ( not knocking them, they make a great product) and it seems the OP may have a concern about the liberalness of the Oceanics. I would like to play devils advocate and make the point that the DSAT model used by both PADI in all their forms of the RDP and by Pelagic Instruments (Oceanic/Aeris/Some Tusa's/Some older Aqualungs/Sherwoods/Genesis/etc) is most likely the most dived model ever created and has been probably real world tested under more situations than any other. While I will agree it is one of the most liberal models out there, under recreational diving it has more than been proven to be very safe.

Yes, that's a devil's argument indeed.

 

[NCadiver]

Check out this report of real testing of various computers. Not sure if the Mares is but the other are
http://www.scubadiving.com/files/_attachments/Dive_computer_profile.pdf

There is something wrong with that chart, the teset was done wrong or one of the computer was bad. The wisdom 2 use the DSAT algorthim but it does'nt track with the OC1 and they are made at the same factory.

Since there seems to be great satisfaction with the Sunto computers by those that posted already ( not knocking them, they make a great product) and it seems the OP may have a concern about the liberalness of the Oceanics. I would like to play devils advocate and make the point that the DSAT model used by both PADI in all their forms of the RDP and by Pelagic Instruments (Oceanic/Aeris/Some Tusa's/Some older Aqualungs/Sherwoods/Genesis/etc) is most likely the most dived model ever created and has been probably real world tested under more situations than any other. While I will agree it is one of the most liberal models out there, under recreational diving it has more than been proven to be very safe.

Back in the day oceanic use to be the middle of the road but those computers makers are long gone.

 

[drrich2]

What seems strange to me is, it seems easier to use a liberal computer and dive more conservatively if you wish (say, colder water with poorer viz. & some strenuous exertion due to current), vs. to dive a conservative computer & push (and risk violating) the NDL limits. Aside from the hassles this can create diving with buddies with liberal computers who don't want to cut their dive time short, if you dive a live-aboard and violate your computer's NDL & enter deco., it's my understanding from some prior post on the forum that the crew might basically 'bench' you for the remainder of the day.

That said, I've wondered why some people choose Suunto computers (I've never used one, have no other beef with them & obviously they are quite popular). Is there any inherent advantage or selling point to a Suunto compared to an Oceanic or Aeris? Is the interface easier to work, the display sharper, the battery longer lasting, the hardware more reliable, the bundled software for PC download better implemented, etc???

I'm not anti-Sunto, I just wonder what makes people pick them (IF their good qualities are matched by competitors). I don't usually see Sunto users claim to chose Sunto because of the conservative algorithm.

Richard.

 

[redacted]

I like conservative computers but be prepared to do light deco with those, on repetitive diving.

Adam

Do you categorize those excursions into "light deco" as carelessness or emergencies, the 2 conditions Suunto says their product should be used for conducting deco?

 

[Hatul]

Do you categorize those excursions into "light deco" as carelessness or emergencies, the 2 conditions Suunto says their product should be used for conducting deco?

Unfortunately some divemasters take that view as driich2 points out that if your computer goes into any deco you're reprimanded. It's a mindless approach that follows a rulebook rather than logic. If you do the same dive and for one computer it's a no deco dive and another has a short deco stop, it's the same dive, but the diver following the latter does a safer, slower ascent. The maxim "every dive is a deco dive" applies to this.