ScubaPro not Allowing Testing of Products

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

drbill, your xtek bcd is an AFTER acquisition product.

Besides, Johnson purchased Sonoform which only made about 90% of the BCD's for the entire market at one time or another. It still has nothing to do with the pull from testing.

ALL the manuacturers who submit their gear for testing send in gear that has been fine-tuned. As it SHOULD be from the local dealer who sells it to the diver before they walk out the door. Just like cars, it's a dealer prep to make sure it is within specs. Even the manufacturers and Rodale's all say to have your local dealer do a prep before it goes out the door. Its just one more quality assurance check. There are no 'ringers', that would be idiotic for manufacturers to spend extra money on extra molds and manufacturing that they weren't going to sell.

SP is probably pissed at Rodale's because of all the advertising dollars that the rag receives and it's testing results biased toward whoever is keeping the most consistent advertising dollars coming in. Kind of like the idocrity of the first Atomic regs, which were only a copy of the SP MK10 being heralded as something new and high performance. B.S. Sure both manufacturers designs were great and simple, as well as high performance, but those reviews only reflected the new advertising budget being spent by Atomic to enter the market.

It should be interesting to see who caves in during this pissing match. Frankly, the testing protocol and complete disregard for any type of mention of quality, workmanship, or product backing is what makes Rodale's such an unimpressive and gimick of a magazine. They would never say if a product had good engineering, good parts, good quality materials, otherwise they'd piss off their advertisers.
 
They would never say if a product had good engineering, good parts, good quality materials, otherwise they'd piss off their advertisers.

A bunch would be upset.

Especially if they started talking about cheap plastic parts in the HP sections of regs! :)
 
I know for a fact that Rodale's has in the past purchased pieces of gear that the manufacturer would not submit. I had personally sold Mr. Hardy, before he passed, more than just a few pieces of equipment. He was always very forthcoming about what the piece was for and where it was going, and he always paid for it.

So, I don't know about now, but I do know that not ALL the gear was sent free, and that did not keep gear from being tested.

Also, I'm sure many manufacturers have 'super tuned' gear to send to Scubalab, but I also know of several who have not and do not. No names. Generally the manufacturers who know their gear works well, don't fiddle with it a great deal. Besides, as any technician knows, you can only do so much.

And, lastly, in response to the 'advertising dollars for write ups 'comments. Please explain the Apollo Bio Fin then. I don't know if they advertise in Rodales now or not, as I don't read the magazine any longer, but I do know that for the first several years of the Bio Fin's existance Apollo did not spend a dime on advertising in Rodale's but consistantly destroyed the competition on the fin tests.

Not to say I'm for or against the Scubalab and Rodales. There are way too many inconsistancies for my trust and taste. How a reg can be a tester's choice one year and the same reg be hated the next I'll never understand. Also how a fin design that has been on the market for years and years and hated by anybody who has ever used it can suddenly appear as a tester's choice also begs to be explained. How a bcd can be hated one season and the EXACT same bcd, with a different manufacturers name on it is the best thing since sliced bread the next year has often puzzled me. Or a power inflator labled as "dangerous at any depth" on a private lable bcd but is also on every single testers choice bcd from the same year?

I have no idea why SP doesn't want their toys tested any more. I can only guess that somebody in a high seat at SP got their feelings hurt by somebody in charge of testing at Rodales. How or why is all our guess.
 
Funny, I was under the impression that SP got great reviews because they were somehow tied to Scubalab, like a major funder or possibly even owned Scubalab, that's why all their gear got really good reviews.
Ah, the great mystery.
 
I worked with Jon Hardy (founder of ScubaLab) in the early 70's and knew him until his unfortunate death. I feel comfortable that Jon's evaluation of products was "objective" relative to advertising dollars (although subjective in the sense that it depended on opinions of the testers).

There are too many people I've spoken with (LDS owners, instructors, techs) who have similar tales to tell.

Undah20... not sure what you meant by my X-Tek being "an AFTER acquisition product." Besides, it is the product that functions well. The Classic which ScubaPro sent me to replace my Double Black was the one that failed three times in 6 months (and had other engineering-related problems like that stupid lever dump valve on the inflator which most people I know cut off).

Dr. Bill
 
norcaldiver once bubbled...
Funny, I was under the impression that SP got great reviews because they were somehow tied to Scubalab, like a major funder or possibly even owned Scubalab, that's why all their gear got really good reviews.
Ah, the great mystery.

Scubalab is actually Oceanic's facility...I think.
 
Maybe ScubaPro doesn't want to be associated with Roadales anymore.

Rodales has never been a good magazine, but it has become even worse over the last year or so. You really can't take anything they say seriously.

If I was ScubaPro, I'm not sure if I would want my products advertised in such a magazine as Roadales. I never took their reg reviews too seriously anyway.

I own a lot of ScubaPro regs and have never had any problems with them. ScubaPro does try and overcomplicate things. The Mk10 is just as good as a Mk25, they just added more parts.
 
ElectricZombie once bubbled...
Maybe ScubaPro doesn't want to be associated with Roadales anymore.

Rodales has never been a good magazine, but it has become even worse over the last year or so. You really can't take anything they say seriously.

If I was ScubaPro, I'm not sure if I would want my products advertised in such a magazine as Roadales. I never took their reg reviews too seriously anyway.

I own a lot of ScubaPro regs and have never had any problems with them. ScubaPro does try and overcomplicate things. The Mk10 is just as good as a Mk25, they just added more parts.

ElectricZombie

Whether Rodales is a good rag or not to serious divers is not really the point. It's a very widely read publication. SP does not have to advertise to allow products to be reviewed. Why have you not taken their reviews too seriously? SP has always done well in them so what gives?

SP is not limiting this to their regs, it's ANY of their products.
 
I'm guessing MAYBE Rodale's asks for advert cash or get a bad review in return.

Here's what I find funny... Poseidon is one of the leading tech/commercial diver's choice of regs. I haven't met a tech diver who doesn't recommend Poseidon.

Meanwhile... Rodale's reg reviews FAILED Poseidon's latest reg...on ALL tests... hard to breathe etc..etc... right after stating that Poseidon refuses to submit regs for testing.

Go figure... conspiracy theorists.... your thoughts please! hehehe :)
 
there was such an overt type of "bribe" to get a good review, SP could make a hellish amout of hay out of publicizing it.

I strongly doubt that such a thing is going on......
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom