Which HARNESS and why? for your BP/W

[fnfalman]

Either way I am still going to give the HOG a run for it's money. I have never been a fan of plastic anything.

As it should be. Your opinion matters to you and no more, no less.

Live and let dive. You do your HOG, I'll do my adjustable harness.

 

[fnfalman]

Its hard to break a plastic buckle if there are no plastic buckles, though

Better yet, let's not dive altogether. It's hard to have failure points when you don't have scuba gear on.

 

[DevonDiver]

But let's get back to scuba. Any death in scuba that is attributable to broken plastic clips on BCs? Any death in scuba that is attributable to quick adjustable harnesses getting hung up while wreck/cave diving?

I doubt there are many, if any, deaths. This is more of a convenience issue (ruined dive trips), than a safety one.

I don't think anyone is saying "you're gonna die" if a harness buckle breaks (except maybe for extended dives in high-flow cave systems, which is a minority pursuit)

 

[techintime]

My opinion on this has evolved over time. When I started tech diving I bought a delux Dive Rite harness and found that all of the gadgets, pads and links were getting twisted when putting it on, and made it harder to find the shoulder and waist D-rings. So then I bought a basic Dive Rite harness with one plasitc quick disconnect (huge improvement), but still had to deal with a couple of extra metal connectors. Now I use a single piece harness.
None of the plastic buckles or metal connectors ever broke and I didn't change to the Hog-rig because of worries about such a failure. For me the change to one-piece of webbing with D-rings is more about simplicity and ease of finding the D-rings, especially with heavy gloves on.

PS: The harness for an ejection seat in military aircraft has five metal quick-disconnects (one on each leg strap, one on the chest strap, and two that connect the parachute risers to the harness. In an ejection they take quite a bit of force due to the opening shock of the parachute. I have never heard of one failing.

 

[LakeCountyDiver]

Great Post TechInTime. A true honest answer of basic preference.

 

[PfcAJ]

But let's get back to scuba. Any death in scuba that is attributable to broken plastic clips on BCs? Any death in scuba that is attributable to quick adjustable harnesses getting hung up while wreck/cave diving?

Death is not my meter for if a piece of equipment is good or not. While not dying certainly is a goal of mine, actually diving is a goal, as well.

This is why I choose quality equipment that is simple and reliable. If I don't need plastic buckles (which do, unfortunately, break), why would I take them diving?

 

[SCUBANON]

I doubt there are many, if any, deaths. This is more of a convenience issue (ruined dive trips), than a safety one.

I don't think anyone is saying "you're gonna die" if a harness buckle breaks (except maybe for extended dives in high-flow cave systems, which is a minority pursuit)

Ahh, finally back to the baseline of this debate.

If indeed it is not a safety issue but simply a convenience issue then it should be simple to say that some divers may prefer the uncluttered simplicity of the hog harness while others have found they like features found on alternate harness designs.

Ruined dive trips can be avoided with a properly stocked save a dive kit that considers possible breakage for the harness type used.

We can simply leave it at that and put this to rest.

What is most popular really should have no bearing on a divers decision on what to use unless the reasons for it's popularity aligns with that users needs as a diver. It may for a majority of users but not neccesarily and definitely not all.

Asside from releases and extra padding these harnesses in fit are more similar than not. Positioning of hardware may or may not become an issue (again dependant on the divers needs)

So for the majority of recreational divers both harness types are great if they allow you to make your dive in comfort and safely. Each diver will need to decide if the particular harness will do that for the dive profiles they intend to dive.

Specific dive specialties may require a change in equipment requirements.

 

[bvanant]

My opinion on this has evolved over time. When I started tech diving I bought a delux Dive Rite harness and found that all of the gadgets, pads and links were getting twisted when putting it on, and made it harder to find the shoulder and waist D-rings. So then I bought a basic Dive Rite harness with one plasitc quick disconnect (huge improvement), but still had to deal with a couple of extra metal connectors. Now I use a single piece harness.
None of the plastic buckles or metal connectors ever broke and I didn't change to the Hog-rig because of worries about such a failure. For me the change to one-piece of webbing with D-rings is more about simplicity and ease of finding the D-rings, especially with heavy gloves on.

PS: The harness for an ejection seat in military aircraft has five metal quick-disconnects (one on each leg strap, one on the chest strap, and two that connect the parachute risers to the harness. In an ejection they take quite a bit of force due to the opening shock of the parachute. I have never heard of one failing.

My point exactly. This is about personal preference not religion.
Bill

 

[bvanant]

Again, this is not clear. Maybe HOG one-piece is the favorite of BP/W users but maybe not, maybe it is Dive Rite TransPac. I certainly don't know about that but I am guessing that nobody else does either. It clearly is the opinion of about 85% of the folks in this thread; maybe 30 folks altogether. That being said, it really doesn't matter. My point was not that plastic buckles don't break and your point shouldn't be that harnesses don't since there was at least one poster who observed a broken piece of webbing. As for the guys talking about melting plastic disconnects on 2 inch webbing, after diving last week in Los Angeles, I would like some warmer water. It doesn't matter that you can break a plastic buckle running over it with a truck or melting it with a propane torch, what matters for my original argument is the likelihood of an unstressed buckle failing catastrophically and leading to some unsafe situation. I don't see how that can happen in my single tank not terribly deep (less than 40 meters), picture taking diving situation. As I said before, there are many reasons to dislike quick disconnects, but unexplained (and undocumented) failure modes should not be one of them. As for all the "I have broken plastic bits" comments, no one has said they have seen a plastic quick disconnect on an unloaded 2 inch webbing break, maybe there are some instances of that happening but I haven't been able to find any. And remember that the plural of anecdote is not data. As I said before, I will be trying to smash some of the QD fittings once I get to the lab after some dives in Hawaii.

I try very hard to be a safe diver; I think I know my limits and I try to use gear that helps keep me safe and this whole thread suggests that many of my ideas about gear might be not correct. I would dearly love to see some data on failure modes. As I also said, at the moment I have a one-piece harness system but there are folks who dive a lot here in Los Angeles who think that in rescue situations (probably because the rescue folks are generally not BP/W users) having a QD on one side of my harness might be safer for getting me out of a harness if I ever needed to.

Bill

 

[DevonDiver]

Just to make this VERY clear. The 'broken plastic QR' debate IS NOT about "you're gonna die!".

The worst-case for a recreational diver would be that a QR broke whilst load-bearing out of the water. Buckle/QR breaks and the heavy scuba kit lurches around or drops. It could cause an injury to the diver or a bystander... or damage the scuba kit.

A broken plastic buckle at any other time out of the water will lead to a PITA situation, where the kit will need repair. This could spoil a dive trip or holiday.

As for in-the-water QR 'catastrophic' failure... it is quite unlikely. The harness shouldn't be bearing any/much load underwater. Even if a QR does fail, it shouldn't cause a critical incident for the diver concerned. However, for a novice or nervous diver, any failure of any gear could lead to stress and increased danger via panic.

IMHO, the 'plastic vs metal' debate is about purchase considerations... where a diver might logically want an 'optimum' material solution in the contruction of rugged scuba kit.

In contrast, the 'Hog vs Complex/Deluxe' harness debate is about differentiating between what a diver wants and what they actually need. Most divers don't need anything more than a basic Hog harness. With that choice, they gain the benefits in terms of expense and ruggedness. Some divers do actually need a comfort harness. They are a small majority with specific requirements, such as severe upper limb immobility or regular, extended walks to/from dive sites.

The rest of the divers who opt for comfort/deluxe harnesses do so simply because they want one. If a diver wants to buy more complex, more expensive, less rugged equipment to solve a simple requirement, then that is their perogative.

Heard this joke?....

When NASA first started sending up astronauts, they quickly discovered that ballpoint pens would not work in zero gravity. To combat the problem, NASA scientists spent a decade and $2 million to develop a pen that writes in zero gravity, upside down, underwater, on almost any surface; including glass, and at temperatures ranging from -60 to 300 C.

The Russians used a pencil.

That joke sums up the Hog vs Comfort Harness admirably.