Questions about ranger

[Uncle Pug]

Originally posted by divedivedive!
Although I wouldn't say the Ranger has 18lbs (!) of inherent buoyancy, given that I can sink with 7lbs of weight (warm water, 1.5mm wetsuit), its buoyancy is certainly noticeable. When I wore a normal jacket BC I used 3-5 lbs. With the Ranger I need to add 2-4 lbs.

Funny thing....
The first dive I did with my Ranger was in Hawaii with a 3 mil wetsuit and a 12# belt.... no problem... except that the Ranger is a floppy sort of thing.

But back home in the cold with a drysuit I had to use mucho Pb...

In fact 36# is what I got down to eventually!

All my friends who were diving Rangers were using the same or more.

Go figure.

 

[jhspb]

Hey thanks for all the perspective so far and any more you or others may have!!

The very embarrasing moment recollected above: was that w a full or empty tank?

...what do you mean, uncle pug, by the ranger being ... "a floppy sort of thing"?

 

[jhspb]

...I assume you meant that there was little need for the lift capability and therefore the empty or near empty bladder was unnecessarily flopping around in back of you??

 

[Uncle Pug]

Originally posted by jhspb
...I assume you meant that there was little need for the lift capability and therefore the empty or near empty bladder was unnecessarily flopping around in back of you??

Well now to the crux of it:

The Ranger is a floppy rig... all of it.
The tank flops....
The weight flops....
The bladder flops....
The whole thing flops....

Where do you tighten it down so that it doesn't flop???
That said... some folks actually like *floppy*

As for the bladder... the Ranger is not good at UW trim with air in the bladder.... that is why folks are taught to use their drysuit for buoyancy control and not the Ranger.... you only add air to it at the surface.... see it is sorta like a *life jacket*... not really used as a BC (buoyancy compensator.)

Now that is why the Ranger requires so much weight when used with a drysuit... because of the gas you are putting into the suit to make up for the fact that the Ranger doesn't do well as a BC.

BTW...I think this is bad. I do not use my suit for a BC.... I use my wing and keep my suit squeezed....
(and I use 18# with a single steel tank....4# V weight with the doubles.)

At least that is my theory....
could be wrong....
could be right....
probably right

 

[herman]

I on the other hand like my Ranger. It suits me well. As to it being bouyant, I don't think so. I am about 2 to 3 lbs positive in sw, an AL-80 is about 5 lbs pos when empty and I dive 8 lbs in sw with just a skin. I am exactly neutral with 8 lbs and an empty(almost) tank, the Ranger can't be that bouyant.

There are a lot of people that like to dis the Ranger but there are also a lot who like it. Best advise is to try one for yourself and see if it suits you.

 

[Uncle Pug]

Originally posted by herman
I on the other hand like my Ranger.

Herman,
Thanks for giving another POV....
You are right... there are many who like the Ranger....

And good advice about trying one out....
BTW, have you ever tried a BP/wing set up to compare?

As for why they are *dissed* I think that is a function of disappointment....

Many thought they were getting a Technical BC....
And found they had gotten something else....

Aren't most of the *dissers* former Ranger owners?

 

[herman]

I agree that most of the complaints come from people who had a Ranger and now don't like it due to "problems" with it, real or otherwise. As with any other product, if the buyer does not truly understand what he wants/needs the product to do and what it's capabilities and limitations are and then proceeds to purchase an item that is not suited for the job, is it the product's fault or that of the purchaser. It has been my experience that people who do this, tend to blame the product rather than accept they purchased the wrong "model" for the job at hand. I have been guilty of not doing enough research myself and ended up with a product that was less than what I would have liked.

As a matter of fact I have not tried a BP, YET-- I already have plans to give one a try when the water warms up a bit. One the board members has offered to let me test drive his. I am a firm believer in finding out for myself and hence the suggestion to try a Ranger rather than depend solely on others opinions.

Having given it some thought, I am beginning to believe that much of the reason for some people's dislike of the Ranger is where it sits in the overall BC lineup. Its more BC than most rec divers need and not quite enough to meet the needs of the tech community. Maybe that's why I like it, the upper limit of my diving is the around the mid to upper limit of rec diving.

 

[Uncle Pug]

Originally posted by herman
if the buyer does not truly understand what he wants/needs the product to do and what it's capabilities and limitations are and then proceeds to purchase an item that is not suited for the job, is it the product's fault or that of the purchaser.

Hi Herman,

At first blush I would have to say that it is the dealer's fault since authorized sales of Rangers are through the LDS. I know of one chain that encourages the DMs and instructors to buy and use the Ranger and it is obvious (to me) why so many of the students end up with them.

However I would probably have to eat at least half my words if the truth were known. When someone sees something that they want in a shop (say a new Ranger) and someone (say the dealer) tries to talk them out of it the result can be more than a lost sale... it can be a lost customer. So maybe you are right... the purchaser is really culpable. I don't fault Zeagle for making a product that appeals to certain divers.

BTW... I will really be interested in hearing a report from you after you get to try a BP/wing.... I would especially be interested in a "this is what I thought it would be like vs. this is what I found" type format.

 

[VTWarrenG]

herman,

Its more BC than most rec divers need and not quite enough to meet the needs of the tech community.

The reason it doesn't meet the needs of the tech community is actually because it is far too much BC.

- Warren

 

[divedivedive!]

Originally posted by jhspb
The very embarrasing moment recollected above: was that w a full or empty tank?

...what do you mean, uncle pug, by the ranger being ... "a floppy sort of thing"?

Well, my abovementioned embarrassing moment happened with about half-a-tank left in an AL80. Which meant that the tank was about neutrally buoyant, so any buoyancy issues were down to the Ranger.

The Ranger is kinda floppy, now that its been mentioned. Its the lack of a hard backing I think... you don't notice it until the end of a dive or when you're fatigued. Then you realise its sort of banging on your back a little. Also with a bit of air inside I tend to start rolling ever so slightly. You need your weights to be perfectly balanced, not so easy when I need 7lbs (3.5lbs not the most common denomination), and the size of the air cell doesn't help cos it allows the air to migrate to the furthest points away from your center of balance. This isn't a Ranger-specific thing; I'm sure if you bought a 100lbs dual superwing you'd get the same problems.

I think one of the problems with the Ranger is its marketed as Tech, but isn't nearly adequate enough to handle say doubles with stages, yet its recreational use is limited due to these size problems. I mean how often do single-tank divers need 44lbs of lift? I should've really gotten the Scout, or the Escape.

Having said AAAALLLL that - its still better than most conventional BCs out there, much easier to maintain horizontal trim. Also its construction is absolutely top-notch. And it does have a rather cool techy look, which seduces all of us at first.