SimonN
Guest
I aim to please . 
Uwatec versus Suunto
- Thread starter downtoolong
- 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
SA-Diver
Contributor
Please update your profile, then we can all see who you are.
I dive with a Suunto Stinger and really love it, but would like to suggest you stick to your Uwatec's as you are SO biased nobody on this board would be able to convince you of anything else.
I dive with a Suunto Stinger and really love it, but would like to suggest you stick to your Uwatec's as you are SO biased nobody on this board would be able to convince you of anything else.
OP
downtoolong
Guest
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 0
SimonN, the matter between level stops and decompression stops are only 'suggestions' for microbubble elmination...
Divers who conduct repetitive dives even within the standard no decompression limits have been proven to produce microbubbles. Divers who have been diagnosed with PFO (Patent Foramen Ovale - a hole between the two chambers of the heart) are also susceptible to microbubble build up. While microbubbles may be a precondition for the formation of larger bubbles that can lead to the decompression illness, microbubbles usually present no visible symptoms to the diver.
More importantly, divers who have long term exposure to microbubbles, risk soft tissue damage. Examples of soft tissue include the brain, spinal tissues and the retina. Divers who are at risk include professional divers such as Instructors and Dive Masters who typically do a lot of repetitive diving. Even sports divers who conduct multiple repetitive dives over the duration of a dive holiday are at risk from microbubble build up.
The proof that repetitive divers were a high risk group was provided when DAN Europe "Doppler monitored" divers from a substantial sample of 1058 dives within 30 minutes of each dive's conclusion. The participating divers were average open water divers, who conducted typical open water dives with a large range of depths and bottom times. DAN Europe discovered that in the case of repetitive dives 67% of all divers produced High Grade Microbubbles.
This is consistent with the DAN Diving Accident Reports of the last 15 years that show a relatively higher frequency of Decompression Illness after repetitive dives. As we said earlier, a diver who has a high level of microbubbles might not show any visible symptoms, but it is known that constant exposure to microbubble accumulation will lead to long term effects on the central nervous system.
Experiments with staging a series of stops at the conclusion of a repetitive dive were proven to reduce microbubbles by up to 61% and in some cases totally eliminated microbubble formation.
So, for example if a diver has done three dives in one day, if on the last dive the diver considered doing a series of stops prior to the conclusion of the dive, microbubble formation could be substantially reduced and in some circumstances, eliminated.
Now, with Uwatec Smart Dive Computers, it is possible for the diver to program the dive computer to suppress the formation of microbubbles, according to the diver's actual diving circumstance. Firstly the diver must advise the Uwatec Smart Dive Computer what level of suppression is required for the particular dive. The Uwatec Smart Dive Computer then assesses the likely microbubble build up from the previous dives and recommends an advisory stop or "level stop" to be completed prior to the conclusion of the last dive.
Unlike decompression stops, which are compulsory, level stops are advisory. This is because Uwatec Smart Dive Computers recognise that the effects of microbubble formation are largely a long term condition, whereas decompression illness produces symptoms that require immediate treatment.
(I don't believe this to be hogwash for the RECREATIONAL diver.)
People get bent on the PADI tables as well, this is a poor example, people get bent using Suunto dive computers as well. There is NO PROVEN model that keeps people from being bent except not to go diving.
I agree completely.
But in the matter of trying to teach students to properly plan and execute their dives, someone always wants to 'break the rules' or grows past the base knowledge of what they've learned, eventually sometime in their diving career. And when they start taking upon themselves, the decisions to enact their OWN kind of multi-level diving, real time profiles, most divers want a useful tool to maximize their bottom versus averaging depths and doing math while diving. Hense the use of dive computer as an aiding tool.
SA-Diver, if all you want to do is rip on people, then why are you in this discussion? Speak for the board when elected to do so. Do you have something of pertinence to add?
You said you love your Stinger, but why? Well I love listening to rock and roll, but making that statement has no bearing on why does it? Remarks thrown to the wind offer no revelence for to change opinion. SA-Diver, do you dive with an Uwatec? NO. So I guess you are in the same boat as I having not enough experience with both systems. You can actually contribute to the conversation of explaining WHY you chose your Stinger?
LUPOLD, perhaps if you can get beyond name calling since its a real bore and shows no sign of maturity. Youve said with your quote, Yeah... I love Uwatec computers...They work good, their algorithms are cool, they have top of the line engineering and all that stuff.. Then they kick you in the nuts. I dont like that...
It's obvious that you 'love Uwatec computers' but have had administrative frustrations as a factor of aggravation. So perhaps you can be OBJECTIVE in review? Do you feel the Uwatecs are better performance dive computers than the Suuntos (not in the administrative b.s.), but as far as algorithms, engineering, and all that stuff and WHY? Do you feel the Suuntos are EQUAL and WHY? Do you feel the Suuntos are better, and why?
MY BIAS AND CHOICE FOR MY UWATEC USE CAME FROM MY FIRST PURCHASE OF ONE OVER A DECADE AGO BASED UPON ITS REPUTATION OF INGENTUITY, INNOVATION, AND RELIABILITY.
My Uwatec has never failed me, though I want to know if Im missing out on something Im unaware of with the Suuntos? ...If you see it as simply an invitation of open season to act out against me personally, get over your shortcomings. I'm looking to get past my misconceptions by learning more fruitful knowledge.
Is there a reason to change and why? Since Suuntos are well established in the market, it would be good to hear how they compare. Suggesting a dive store carry a brand thats different than their current selection needs to have foundation. What is the leading contributions Suuntos offer a diver? What is their INGENUITY? What are their INNOVATIONS? And how do they offer a benefit to the diver over the Uwatec?
(I'm starting to think that their all just Chevy's and Ford's, 'people on each bench' but essentially just slight differences that get you down the road. I'm sure someone can start a thread of Chevy vs Ford now.)
Do we just not know? Besides batteries and user error, and administrative turnaround, IS there NO REAL comparisson essentially to be made between the two? Is this all to be a matter of pointing to aesthetics?
You like it or not? Is there a foundation other that...?
BASED UPON PURELY RECREATIONAL DIVING NEEDS, IS ONE THE 'SAME' AS THE OTHER, THEY JUST GET TO THE GOAL DIFFERENTLY???? And you like it or you don't??????
Divers who conduct repetitive dives even within the standard no decompression limits have been proven to produce microbubbles. Divers who have been diagnosed with PFO (Patent Foramen Ovale - a hole between the two chambers of the heart) are also susceptible to microbubble build up. While microbubbles may be a precondition for the formation of larger bubbles that can lead to the decompression illness, microbubbles usually present no visible symptoms to the diver.
More importantly, divers who have long term exposure to microbubbles, risk soft tissue damage. Examples of soft tissue include the brain, spinal tissues and the retina. Divers who are at risk include professional divers such as Instructors and Dive Masters who typically do a lot of repetitive diving. Even sports divers who conduct multiple repetitive dives over the duration of a dive holiday are at risk from microbubble build up.
The proof that repetitive divers were a high risk group was provided when DAN Europe "Doppler monitored" divers from a substantial sample of 1058 dives within 30 minutes of each dive's conclusion. The participating divers were average open water divers, who conducted typical open water dives with a large range of depths and bottom times. DAN Europe discovered that in the case of repetitive dives 67% of all divers produced High Grade Microbubbles.
This is consistent with the DAN Diving Accident Reports of the last 15 years that show a relatively higher frequency of Decompression Illness after repetitive dives. As we said earlier, a diver who has a high level of microbubbles might not show any visible symptoms, but it is known that constant exposure to microbubble accumulation will lead to long term effects on the central nervous system.
Experiments with staging a series of stops at the conclusion of a repetitive dive were proven to reduce microbubbles by up to 61% and in some cases totally eliminated microbubble formation.
So, for example if a diver has done three dives in one day, if on the last dive the diver considered doing a series of stops prior to the conclusion of the dive, microbubble formation could be substantially reduced and in some circumstances, eliminated.
Now, with Uwatec Smart Dive Computers, it is possible for the diver to program the dive computer to suppress the formation of microbubbles, according to the diver's actual diving circumstance. Firstly the diver must advise the Uwatec Smart Dive Computer what level of suppression is required for the particular dive. The Uwatec Smart Dive Computer then assesses the likely microbubble build up from the previous dives and recommends an advisory stop or "level stop" to be completed prior to the conclusion of the last dive.
Unlike decompression stops, which are compulsory, level stops are advisory. This is because Uwatec Smart Dive Computers recognise that the effects of microbubble formation are largely a long term condition, whereas decompression illness produces symptoms that require immediate treatment.
(I don't believe this to be hogwash for the RECREATIONAL diver.)
People get bent on the PADI tables as well, this is a poor example, people get bent using Suunto dive computers as well. There is NO PROVEN model that keeps people from being bent except not to go diving.
I agree completely.
But in the matter of trying to teach students to properly plan and execute their dives, someone always wants to 'break the rules' or grows past the base knowledge of what they've learned, eventually sometime in their diving career. And when they start taking upon themselves, the decisions to enact their OWN kind of multi-level diving, real time profiles, most divers want a useful tool to maximize their bottom versus averaging depths and doing math while diving. Hense the use of dive computer as an aiding tool.
SA-Diver, if all you want to do is rip on people, then why are you in this discussion? Speak for the board when elected to do so. Do you have something of pertinence to add?
You said you love your Stinger, but why? Well I love listening to rock and roll, but making that statement has no bearing on why does it? Remarks thrown to the wind offer no revelence for to change opinion. SA-Diver, do you dive with an Uwatec? NO. So I guess you are in the same boat as I having not enough experience with both systems. You can actually contribute to the conversation of explaining WHY you chose your Stinger?
LUPOLD, perhaps if you can get beyond name calling since its a real bore and shows no sign of maturity. Youve said with your quote, Yeah... I love Uwatec computers...They work good, their algorithms are cool, they have top of the line engineering and all that stuff.. Then they kick you in the nuts. I dont like that...
It's obvious that you 'love Uwatec computers' but have had administrative frustrations as a factor of aggravation. So perhaps you can be OBJECTIVE in review? Do you feel the Uwatecs are better performance dive computers than the Suuntos (not in the administrative b.s.), but as far as algorithms, engineering, and all that stuff and WHY? Do you feel the Suuntos are EQUAL and WHY? Do you feel the Suuntos are better, and why?
MY BIAS AND CHOICE FOR MY UWATEC USE CAME FROM MY FIRST PURCHASE OF ONE OVER A DECADE AGO BASED UPON ITS REPUTATION OF INGENTUITY, INNOVATION, AND RELIABILITY.
My Uwatec has never failed me, though I want to know if Im missing out on something Im unaware of with the Suuntos? ...If you see it as simply an invitation of open season to act out against me personally, get over your shortcomings. I'm looking to get past my misconceptions by learning more fruitful knowledge.
Is there a reason to change and why? Since Suuntos are well established in the market, it would be good to hear how they compare. Suggesting a dive store carry a brand thats different than their current selection needs to have foundation. What is the leading contributions Suuntos offer a diver? What is their INGENUITY? What are their INNOVATIONS? And how do they offer a benefit to the diver over the Uwatec?
(I'm starting to think that their all just Chevy's and Ford's, 'people on each bench' but essentially just slight differences that get you down the road. I'm sure someone can start a thread of Chevy vs Ford now.)
Do we just not know? Besides batteries and user error, and administrative turnaround, IS there NO REAL comparisson essentially to be made between the two? Is this all to be a matter of pointing to aesthetics?
You like it or not? Is there a foundation other that...?
BASED UPON PURELY RECREATIONAL DIVING NEEDS, IS ONE THE 'SAME' AS THE OTHER, THEY JUST GET TO THE GOAL DIFFERENTLY???? And you like it or you don't??????
my name is LUBOLD.... L... U... B...O... L... D... Secondly, I already stated why I dont like Uwatecs, read my posts. Also, I do not love Uwatecs. Its called sarcasm, and yes, its hard to recognize in a post.
I think you should stick to your uwatecs because no one will ever show you why Suuntos are better. You ask for peoples opinions and such, but then you are so close minded that you wont accept them.
You are not worth our time...
Check you later , dude...
I think you should stick to your uwatecs because no one will ever show you why Suuntos are better. You ask for peoples opinions and such, but then you are so close minded that you wont accept them.
You are not worth our time...
Check you later , dude...
leadweight
Contributor
For starters, I think both brands of computers are good.
I dive a Uwatec Pro Nitrox. It has over 300 dives on it and is almost 5 years old. The battery reads 65% remaining life. I like it.
Out of what Uwatec/Scubapro is selling right now, I think the Pro Ultra is the best bet. So far as I can tell, it is the Pro Nitrox in a new case with a backlight.
I am not to warm on the Smart series of computers. The main problem seems to be that the optional level stops are displayed where the remaining no-stop time is. Once the level stop is displayed the diver can only guess as to the remaining no-stop time or recuce depth until the level stop clears. Not so good. The comments above also indicate that the irda is at cross purposes with the low power concept which gives the earlier Uwatec models such outstanding battery life.
If the diver really wants the additional conservatism of microbubble protection, the Suunto's are probably a better bet. Its just that some divers find the Suunto's to be on the conservative side. A few months ago a thread in the Dr. Deco forum reached the conclusion that all major brands of dive computers are safe when used for recreational diving. I would love to see some statistics that prove one is really safer than the other, but there don't seem to be any around. I have also seen some comments by the experts with respect to recreational diving that the accident rates are so low that it is hard to draw conclusions about a variety of issues.
I dive a Uwatec Pro Nitrox. It has over 300 dives on it and is almost 5 years old. The battery reads 65% remaining life. I like it.
Out of what Uwatec/Scubapro is selling right now, I think the Pro Ultra is the best bet. So far as I can tell, it is the Pro Nitrox in a new case with a backlight.
I am not to warm on the Smart series of computers. The main problem seems to be that the optional level stops are displayed where the remaining no-stop time is. Once the level stop is displayed the diver can only guess as to the remaining no-stop time or recuce depth until the level stop clears. Not so good. The comments above also indicate that the irda is at cross purposes with the low power concept which gives the earlier Uwatec models such outstanding battery life.
If the diver really wants the additional conservatism of microbubble protection, the Suunto's are probably a better bet. Its just that some divers find the Suunto's to be on the conservative side. A few months ago a thread in the Dr. Deco forum reached the conclusion that all major brands of dive computers are safe when used for recreational diving. I would love to see some statistics that prove one is really safer than the other, but there don't seem to be any around. I have also seen some comments by the experts with respect to recreational diving that the accident rates are so low that it is hard to draw conclusions about a variety of issues.
SimonN
Guest
Indeed they have.
This is a long running debate. Dr Simon Mitchell (a noted hyperbaric doctor and technical diver) stated in a presentation that there is no evidence that PFO sufferers are more likely to get bent. However, there is statistical evidence that they are more likely to suffer a serious bend if they do get bent. He also pointed out that the difference between 2 chances in 100,000 and 1 chance in 100,000 is not something to get worried about.
Do you mean that you do not believe microbubbles to be irrelevent to the recreational diver?
I agree. However, being bent is being bent, why level stops? They are deco stops. How is a diver able to determine what level of microbubble suppression is needed? So why the choice?
It is a marketing gimmick. The stops are not deep enough. End of story. (and this is from experience).
You are absolutely correct. However, I feel that the wooshing sound that went over your head earlier on was my point.
You were extolling the virtues of the Buhlmann ZHL-8ADT algorythm and now you are not. I guess we are in agreement.
And your point is what? Computers are good for multilevel diving? I agree with you. They give you a good idea of where you are with regards to deco obligation. That shouldn't stop a diver from introducing new techniques like deep stops etc. Using them to slow ascents on recreational dives can be very beneficial. You do not need an algorythm to do it for you.
However, I still maintain that level stops are a marketing gimmick - especially with the PFO thing. The whole recreational diving industry is so scared of mentioning the word 'decompression' that it has all got a bit crazy.
Suunto uses RGBM. Uwatec uses Buhlmann ZHL-8ADT.
Suunto has an effective guage mode. Uwatecs do not.
That's about it.
My experience with my Smart Pro is that it is not as good as a Suunto Vyper because half the stuff doesn't work or is a gimmick. As a purely recreational computer it is fine, but a Vyper is just as good at doing that as well.
ERP
Guest
Actually I believe this statement to be largely true.
Nothing I have ever seen written about either computer convinces me that it is going to give you a statistically significant lower chance of a DCI hit.
So assuming that there is no requirement that isn't met by the computert (user changable battery, useful gauge mode, or just the same computer as your buddy uses) the decision largely comes down to which display layout works better for you. I happened to like the Suunto layout , FWIW my dive instructor picked a UWATEC for exactly the same reason.
rogerhelmich
Guest
Anger over dive computers????
leadweight
Contributor
Suunto computers have a nice feature set, but are inconveniently conservative. The Vytec mitigates this with RGBM 50, but it costs $$$.
Aladin computers are built like a brick s-house but lack many features that Suunto and Pelagic have at lower prices. They have the reputation for being useful for some deco diving. Go look at the Bikini Atol website. Meanwhile, the level stop feature on the smart models obscures the no-stop time on the display.
Pelagic (Oceanic/Aeris) computers are popular in North America and absent everywhere else. They have a nice feature set, but admonish in their instruction manuals that a 24 hour surface interval is necessary after a deco stop dive. This leaves one wondering about being able to use them for anything but no-stop diving. According to their manuals, they will cut out (error mode) if a deco stop below 60 feet is required.
Anger over computers is not cool, but I have no control over that.
Aladin computers are built like a brick s-house but lack many features that Suunto and Pelagic have at lower prices. They have the reputation for being useful for some deco diving. Go look at the Bikini Atol website. Meanwhile, the level stop feature on the smart models obscures the no-stop time on the display.
Pelagic (Oceanic/Aeris) computers are popular in North America and absent everywhere else. They have a nice feature set, but admonish in their instruction manuals that a 24 hour surface interval is necessary after a deco stop dive. This leaves one wondering about being able to use them for anything but no-stop diving. According to their manuals, they will cut out (error mode) if a deco stop below 60 feet is required.
Anger over computers is not cool, but I have no control over that.
Similar threads
- Question
