ScubaPro not Allowing Testing of Products

[zboss]

Isn't everything, not only mechanical, you have to fix before using, crapp?

"Microsoft Windows"?

 

[aquaoren]

"Microsoft Windows"?

 

[Toecutter]

Our sister facility is a large indoor pool where intensive underwater training is performed regulary generating lots of dive time for operations, maintenance, and support personnel. They supply and maintain all life support related equipment used in the pool. They went to ScubaPro several years ago but have sinced change their minds due to the increase in hours needed to maintain the units somehow related to increased complexity and more O-rings per unit to replace. I don't what they are using now. I have friends who moved to our facility from there and they remain diehard SP supporters. I think it boils down to a personal choice of what you do and do not like. I like Oceanic but I also have Aqualung.

 

[pescador775]

I think that I know that British pub. They found that the Scubapro reg had cold water response problems. The test was fairly conducted and the conclusions were sound, IMO. Scubapro decried the test results while secretly redesigning their regulator which resulted in the new, equally unsuccessful designs, which were test market in Europe about 2 years ago.

You're a nice guy and obviously have problems with being rude to anyone. I don't have that problem. Most of the people who complain about that British pub, and Rodales, are not qualified to open their mouths on the subject. They are emotionally immature and subject to being manipulated by promoter-manufacturers who portray themselves as gurus and solicit a cult following who will attack their critics.
Pesky

I read the thread and I agree with NetDoc.
Halcyon wanted to widen it's costumenr range into the rec-diver market, so they sent a product to be evaluated by a recreational dive mag. Since rec diver have different demands, it was noticed in the test. Where is the problem?
They didn't say it was a piece of crapp but mentioned what a rec diver would expect from his/hers gear and said that the price is high for such a minimalistic piece of gear.
Since most diver aren't DIR(whether we like or not) and if Halcyon would like them as customers too, they should either adjust their product or their PR and work to improve how the DIR philosophy is being presented to the public.

 

[beachdivequeenbelam]

One bit of info for those who have an interest....While I held my editorial position at Rodale's I was responsible to Senior Editor David Taylor. David left the mag some time ago to venture into other facets of the diving industry. Short and simple, he is a class act. While Dave was in charge he had one simple rule that was NEVER allowed to be altered...NO GIFTS ARE ALLOWED TO BE ACCEPTED BY ANY OF THE STAFF. Every piece of gear submitted by the manufacturers was inventoried, evaluated, and returned to the corporations. I had to keep accurate records along with FedEx receipts showing when items were shipped and to their contents.

As far as ScubaPro employees or anyone else wanting to provide documentation that this policy was not strictly adhered to during Dave's tenure, then put it in print. I'm certain that the mag's attorneys would love to see that written on a coroporate letterhead. I can't speak for the mag after Dave and I left, but I do know what the policy was during that time period. For example, being actively involved in technical diving research, Jarod Jablonski sent me a complimentary copy of the Fundamentals of DIR . I read it twice, spoke to Jarod on at least three different occasions concerning my perspective of its contents (I was greatly impressed), and wrote my review. Well, I told Jarod that I'd like to charge its cost to my credit card. Jarod told me to please keep it as a gift for my time. I explained to him the policy and he said that he completely understood. By the way, Jarod is another class act. You may or may not adhere to the DIR approach, but he is a real nice guy.

Sherwood, along with some other companies, has over the years claimed that Rodale's reg tests were filled with incorrect breathing simulator scores. Hummmmm....Take the time to compare the scores from the mag DIVER at www.divernet.com. Correspond with some German divers and ask them to share the ANSTI simulator scores from their country's mag Undertasser. They are for the most part virtually identical.

Subjective testing protocols are not very scientific, even when you try to control the variables. Being of a scientific nature, I trust simulator scores when comparing "apples to apples". Sure, the erogonomics and breathing patterns can be loosely compared, but they are far from being capable of standing on their own merits.

Also, some of you may remember the hoopla over the article I wrote on comparing the various teaching materials used in open water courses from the different agencies. Some agencies were, shall I say a bit pi**ed off. Funny, though, some of my recommendations came up in later teaching materials. I can't claim the credit, but I ALWAYS called a spade a spade. Dave wouldn't let it be any other way.

Greg

I personally have read and love Rodale's. I used thier reviews plus advice from dive shops and then my own trying out products to find my equipment. I am grateful for Rodales and I think it is a great magazine personally. WHat you said GReg just makes me feel even better about them.

Bridget

 

[Greg Barlow]

I personally have read and love Rodale's. I used thier reviews plus advice from dive shops and then my own trying out products to find my equipment. I am grateful for Rodales and I think it is a great magazine personally. WHat you said GReg just makes me feel even better about them.

Bridget

Thanks, Bridget. I hope that dive gear has improved over the years due to the evaluation results. Informed divers are much more likely to make decisions that they are happy with.

Greg

 

[aquaoren]

I think that I know that British pub. They found that the Scubapro reg had cold water response problems. The test was fairly conducted and the conclusions were sound, IMO. Scubapro decried the test results while secretly redesigning their regulator which resulted in the new, equally unsuccessful designs, which were test market in Europe about 2 years ago.

You're a nice guy and obviously have problems with being rude to anyone. I don't have that problem. Most of the people who complain about that British pub, and Rodales, are not qualified to open their mouths on the subject. They are emotionally immature and subject to being manipulated by promoter-manufacturers who portray themselves as gurus and solicit a cult following who will attack their critics.
Pesky

Thanks Pescador,
Actually, I don't have any problems at all to be rude I just don't see a reason to be unneccessary rude as long as nobody is trying to piss on my leg.
I have to agree with you that I think it is ridiculous, that some people show up and say that he is obviously unqualified because they didn't like the test results.
I would estimate that the tester probably had more experience in diving than at least 50% of the ones that flamed him. I bet you'll find people, who flamed him and weren't even born when this guy was already diving
Isn't it strange how some nice people go for a course and come back with the opinion they are gods given present to the dive community. As if somebody sucked out their brains and pumped it full with ego

 

[markbruscke]

Lots of debate and conjecture on magazine reviews. Thanks to Nick Lucey, Editor at Large of Rodale's Scuba Diving magazine for his first-hand testimony about differences of opinion on testing protocols with SP.
One observation I've made (in a direct e-mail) to Scuba Diving magazine is - I beleive - more than personal prejudice. A magazine worthy of our subscription dollars must not let a leading manufacturer opt-out of testing. As a subscriber, I expect a magazine to pay-up and buy equipment from any leading manufacturer who won't supply it for free. If Scuba Diving has to fork over $700 each for a SP and a Poesiden reg each year, let them add a dime to everyone's subscription rate and announce that it's in honor of those two manufacturers.
No leading manufacturer should be free to opt-out of independent testing. Imagine what that would mean to the consumer. Any such manufacturer could build-up its reputation with a string of great reviews; then, they could opt-out and stop improving thier products. One might even start to skimp on quality. How many quarters of profits would such a company earn before the consumer caught on? We have to hold these leading manufacturers' feet to the fire to keep them at the top of their game. That, in turn, will compell all the other second-tier manufacturers who also produce excellent products to maintain their quality and hopefully beat the one or two or three with the established reputations.
It would be nice if we had an ad-free publication such as Undercurrents that could mount a testing campaign more thorough than any from the ad supported magazines. We don't. The best we can hope for today is that a couple of ad-supported magazines test ALL the major manufacturers - whether they get the products free or have to pay for them. Then, public commentary and the ad-free publications can nip at the peculiarities in the commercial reviews to try to keep them as honest as they can be made to be.
One thing would help quite a bit is if the reviewers would publish thier evaluation protocols and any criticisums. OK, so ScubaPro doesn't like some aspect of Scuba Diving's protocol; very well then, what's their beef? Is this a pretext? Or, do they have a good point? If their point has some validity, then Scuba Diving ought to own up to it; maybe Scuba Diving ought to run thru ScubaPro's preferred protocol and see what difference it makes. Public comentary on the differences in protocols and results should shed some light on the subject.
For all the criticism of ad-supported magazine reviews, the recreational diving community would be worse off without them. Without reviews our major source of info would be limited to our LDS. My LDS hates SP because of the way he percives SP treats their dealers. I sympathize with him, but his concern has nothing to do with my concern for a reliable regulator.
The ad-sponsored magazine reviews provide a point of departure for public debate. If there are inconcistancies in review results, we get to see these pointed out by astute readers. Let's provide constructive criticizum to the magazines to help them improve the utility and objectivity of their reviews.
BTW, I beleive everything is apt to change when you have a corporate takeover. Rodale has sold Scuba Diving magazine a few months ago. The new owners are entitled to the benefit of the doubt from any readers who may have harbored reservations about Rodale; just as the new owners are subject to new scrutiny from Rodale fans.

Matrk

 

[aquaoren]

Lots of debate and conjecture on magazine reviews. Thanks to Nick Lucey, Editor at Large of Rodale's Scuba Diving magazine for his first-hand testimony about differences of opinion on testing protocols with SP.
One observation I've made (in a direct e-mail) to Scuba Diving magazine is - I beleive - more than personal prejudice. A magazine worthy of our subscription dollars must not let a leading manufacturer opt-out of testing. As a subscriber, I expect a magazine to pay-up and buy equipment from any leading manufacturer who won't supply it for free. If Scuba Diving has to fork over $700 each for a SP and a Poesiden reg each year, let them add a dime to everyone's subscription rate and announce that it's in honor of those two manufacturers.
No leading manufacturer should be free to opt-out of independent testing. Imagine what that would mean to the consumer. Any such manufacturer could build-up its reputation with a string of great reviews; then, they could opt-out and stop improving thier products. One might even start to skimp on quality. How many quarters of profits would such a company earn before the consumer caught on? We have to hold these leading manufacturers' feet to the fire to keep them at the top of their game. That, in turn, will compell all the other second-tier manufacturers who also produce excellent products to maintain their quality and hopefully beat the one or two or three with the established reputations.
It would be nice if we had an ad-free publication such as Undercurrents that could mount a testing campaign more thorough than any from the ad supported magazines. We don't. The best we can hope for today is that a couple of ad-supported magazines test ALL the major manufacturers - whether they get the products free or have to pay for them. Then, public commentary and the ad-free publications can nip at the peculiarities in the commercial reviews to try to keep them as honest as they can be made to be.
One thing would help quite a bit is if the reviewers would publish thier evaluation protocols and any criticisums. OK, so ScubaPro doesn't like some aspect of Scuba Diving's protocol; very well then, what's their beef? Is this a pretext? Or, do they have a good point? If their point has some validity, then Scuba Diving ought to own up to it; maybe Scuba Diving ought to run thru ScubaPro's preferred protocol and see what difference it makes. Public comentary on the differences in protocols and results should shed some light on the subject.
For all the criticism of ad-supported magazine reviews, the recreational diving community would be worse off without them. Without reviews our major source of info would be limited to our LDS. My LDS hates SP because of the way he percives SP treats their dealers. I sympathize with him, but his concern has nothing to do with my concern for a reliable regulator.
The ad-sponsored magazine reviews provide a point of departure for public debate. If there are inconcistancies in review results, we get to see these pointed out by astute readers. Let's provide constructive criticizum to the magazines to help them improve the utility and objectivity of their reviews.
BTW, I beleive everything is apt to change when you have a corporate takeover. Rodale has sold Scuba Diving magazine a few months ago. The new owners are entitled to the benefit of the doubt from any readers who may have harbored reservations about Rodale; just as the new owners are subject to new scrutiny from Rodale fans.

Matrk

Welcome to the board Mark.
Thanks for a well thought post.

 

[Rig Magician]

If you go to the Scuba pro web site there is a letter from the CEO about the dission to stop sending equipment to Rodel's.
Basicaly it say they had problem with one piece of equipment getting poor reviews, then another piece made form the same factory under a defferant name getting better reviews, Thus not being purely subjective.