Question Sidemount or backmount doubles?
- Thread starter Cheizz
- 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
OP
Cheizz
Contributor
What I really like is wrecks and 'structures' (man-made or natural, like walls, canyons, etc.) I really like history too. So that's what I am moving towards, in terms of 'tech targets' in the future. I am just not a record-breaking kind of guy. I don't necessarily want to penetrate the narrowest cave or the deepest point into a wreck. I am not looking for any extremes. It's just that if I want to invest in a setup beyond one tank and recreational limits, I would like it to be as efficient as possible in terms of gear investments and training. I will happily do both, but I would kick myself in the butt if I invest in backmount first, and after a year switch to sidemount and never touch the backmount set again (or vice versa).
ginti
Contributor
To be honest with you, I would just dive at your stage, without thinking about any specific setup; maybe you can do a tech-skills course, like ITT or fundies, and nothing more. I really have the feeling that you are overthinking it, and I don't say it at all to criticize you (I actually often do it myself, and I need to force myself to stay realistic sometimes
)
OP
Cheizz
Contributor
Haha is there such a thing as 'over'-thinking something? There is always another angle. And one has to keep himself/herself busy during the long winter nights...
For the next year or so, I will just dive and work on the basics. It's just 1) I find it an interesting discussion, and 2) I would like to be prepared when a new phase comes (or a nice opportunity to jump into the next phase).
For the next year or so, I will just dive and work on the basics. It's just 1) I find it an interesting discussion, and 2) I would like to be prepared when a new phase comes (or a nice opportunity to jump into the next phase).
ginti
Contributor
Yes, there is, I am an expert at it
The thing is that 99% of theoretical discussion is worthless in real life. The situation is way easier than what appears as depicted in this thread:
(1) choose the kind of dives you want to do. It isn't about "I like wrecks and structures"; it is about actually doing at least 20/25 challenging dives with wrecks and structures (I did 100 idiotic shallow training dives before enrolling into a tec course - I love the self-improvement and the challenges associated with tech). The more annoying details are part of these dives, the better (for instance, crazy logistics, poor visibility, etc.); this is not strictly necessary, but if you like this type of diving even when a strongly annoying component is present - you likely love it.
(2) Meanwhile, TRY the configurations you want; trying is always better than discussing. Do it safely with an instructor, but do it if you are curious. It's the only way you can really understand if something is for you or not.
(3) At this point, you can choose a diving philosophy and a setup...
The theoretical discussion we are doing here is fine if it completes these three steps. When theory actually precedes these steps, I call it "overthinking"
EDIT: don't be mad at me, please! Your enthusiasm seems thriving, and I hope you do not lose it
OP
Cheizz
Contributor
Don't worry. I agree with your logic. I am just a scenario builder. I will be able to try both out, BM and SM. That will definitely be the decider.
It's simply my way of doing things: think first, then try to learn stuff in theory, think some more, then start trying. You may call it over-thinking. I call it 'my way' of doing things. But I hear ya
It's simply my way of doing things: think first, then try to learn stuff in theory, think some more, then start trying. You may call it over-thinking. I call it 'my way' of doing things. But I hear ya
ginti
Contributor
Thinking vs overthinking are different things. Thinking is good, I just do not think that anyone needs 10+ pages on SB to try side-mount and back-mount doubles, but I agree that having a general overview is a good thing.
By the way, almost two months from the beginning of this thread (and I remember you did another one before) - did you manage to try doubles and/or side-mount in the meanwhile?
OP
Cheizz
Contributor
Not yet... Season hasn't started up yet. Diving schools are just coming out of lockdown... Besides, want to get some more time and dives invested in the basics, so I can feel, experience, and judge the differences better.
MichaelMc
Working toward Cenotes
Body and spine flexibility it is a huge difference between SM and BM that only one person touched on.
SM lets you arch your neck and back to look above and around without hitting the valve or manifold. Or just fully in font of you without canting your head sideways to avoid the valve. It lets you twist the upper half of your body and roll your shoulders fully to the left or right without moving the lower half of your body. That is a huge difference underwater.
In BM, I'm a platform that I can rotate or pivot as a whole. (Roll is not so stable...)
In SM, I'm closer to the sea lions who turn and twist their bodies to look and move all around.
Unless you have fused neck and spine, which I do not....
Stability: With SM it is easier to avoid having really negative bits (tanks and air) above really buoyant bits (you and your suit). BM doubles divers talk about you just need to learn to balance the rig above you, and then its natural and you wouldn't even notice any more, because you're always balancing the rig above you. Yeah..., how about not needing to do that in the first place. SM puts your mass and buoyancy centers much closer together.
But, yes:
- SM takes longer to dial in and learn.
- SM is more faff on land. (But you can start early without all the weight on.)
- Narrow spaces on boats with SM require extra thought and care.
- Past an extra AL40, BM looks attractive. (or really rebreather.)
- BM is easier than SM for simply more air, but SM adds body flexibility and stability.
Well, No:
- You can single tank SM, just like you can single tank BM. Or single tank either + pony for some redundancy.
Full doubles are HUGE. Full sidemount are half as big and much easier to put in/out of the car trunk.
Tiny doubles (50s or 40s) are *very* nice, side or back, though they do not help much with gas. I have both, but I dive the side.
For just more gas: Sling/sidemount an AL40 or AL30 with your back mount single.
SM lets you arch your neck and back to look above and around without hitting the valve or manifold. Or just fully in font of you without canting your head sideways to avoid the valve. It lets you twist the upper half of your body and roll your shoulders fully to the left or right without moving the lower half of your body. That is a huge difference underwater.
In BM, I'm a platform that I can rotate or pivot as a whole. (Roll is not so stable...)
In SM, I'm closer to the sea lions who turn and twist their bodies to look and move all around.
Unless you have fused neck and spine, which I do not....
Stability: With SM it is easier to avoid having really negative bits (tanks and air) above really buoyant bits (you and your suit). BM doubles divers talk about you just need to learn to balance the rig above you, and then its natural and you wouldn't even notice any more, because you're always balancing the rig above you. Yeah..., how about not needing to do that in the first place. SM puts your mass and buoyancy centers much closer together.
But, yes:
- SM takes longer to dial in and learn.
- SM is more faff on land. (But you can start early without all the weight on.)
- Narrow spaces on boats with SM require extra thought and care.
- Past an extra AL40, BM looks attractive. (or really rebreather.)
- BM is easier than SM for simply more air, but SM adds body flexibility and stability.
Well, No:
- You can single tank SM, just like you can single tank BM. Or single tank either + pony for some redundancy.
Full doubles are HUGE. Full sidemount are half as big and much easier to put in/out of the car trunk.
Tiny doubles (50s or 40s) are *very* nice, side or back, though they do not help much with gas. I have both, but I dive the side.
For just more gas: Sling/sidemount an AL40 or AL30 with your back mount single.
OP
Cheizz
Contributor
This video was just published (less than an hour ago):
I knew about UTD, I just wasn't aware of their solution of fitting sidemount into DIR philosophy. Or rather 'force' it in.
I can get the standardization of procedures and all (the goal), but adding extra elements (a manifold block, a tonne of connections) - doesn't that add quite a few potential failure points as well? Even in the new set-up they propose. I am not at all an expert. But compared to 'non-DIR' sidemount diving, this UTD approach seems to overcomplicate things rather than simplify stuff...
I knew about UTD, I just wasn't aware of their solution of fitting sidemount into DIR philosophy. Or rather 'force' it in.
I can get the standardization of procedures and all (the goal), but adding extra elements (a manifold block, a tonne of connections) - doesn't that add quite a few potential failure points as well? Even in the new set-up they propose. I am not at all an expert. But compared to 'non-DIR' sidemount diving, this UTD approach seems to overcomplicate things rather than simplify stuff...
Similar threads
