Why not measure objectively?

[Cheizz]

Because a lot that goes into purchasing anything is subjective and emotional. Otherwise we would all be wearing the same clothes, driving the same cars, eating the same food, reading the same books (although I’m not sure how many people still read for fun).

I am not asking to measure taste. I am asking to measure features that can be independently and objectively measured.

 

[Jcp2]

No one can answer the question 'what do YOU like?'. But if you know yourself if you want a softer or harder fin - for example - some kind of indication as to the stiffness of a fin helps create an individual shortlist.

But fins also have different offset angle, difference flex characteristics in different part of the kick cycle, which itself is different for each person. Even what you think you want might not actually be what you really want. The only way to really know is to try.

As an example, my daughter has a funny (to me) style of kick. She tried a whole compendium of fins but it turns out she does best in force fins. I also can use force fins but have to modify my kick. I’d like to try free diving long fins, but it’s not practical for drysuit quarry diving, which is what I do more of out of necessity.

 

[Cheizz]

Right now, NOTHING is measured. I'm sure stuff that is quite easy to measure (like buoyancy characteristics) could be included.

But it seems I'm the only one wanting to know this stuff to even include or exclude something on my test list. I can't imagine I'm the only one though. Or am I the only one who can't stand not knowing these things that would be so easy to measure and publish?

 

[Johnoly]

Then put on a wetsuit and jump in. How much weight does it take to become negatively buoyant in that suit A? And how much weight does it take to get another suit (B) negatively buoyant? Shouldn’t be too hard, should it?

To be fair.........
There are ALOT of variables that effect buoyancy with neoprene. It is impossible to just put a single weight number down to ounces on the specification and completely ignore all the other variables.
* A NEVER dove brand new wetsuit will be twice as buoyant as a 20 times dove suit.
* Your wetsuit on a week long liveaboard with 15 dives may have you adjust down to 2 lbs by the end of the trip due to lack of air cell size restoration
* A topside 60F location will have way less restoration than a topside 90F location in overnite drying.
* Lifetime permanent cell size reduction is a known fact in neoprene but very hard/expensive to non-destructively observe & calculate.
* It is almost impossible to get "Exactly" the very same neoprene buoyancy measurement on a repeat dive, which brings back the question of 'How close is close enough in ounces and grams of weight?'

Every diver dives differently and with different types of gear. Those who dive with the same gear 100 times a year will have more detail than a once a year diver.

 

[Vicko]

Because it does not actually matter.
You don't buy a wetsuit based on how bouyant it is and you won't buy jet fins because they are 3% heavier than F1s.

 

[rmssetc]

* A NEVER dove brand new wetsuit will be twice as buoyant as a 20 times dove suit.

Oh, really? That's a very definitve and numeric statement from someone who is disputing the value of objective measurement. Exactly 20 dives? Exactly twice as buoyant? Regardless of the manufacturer, style, or size of the suit?

As one anecdote, I bought a new wetsuit in December. Dove it once in a pool, then 17 dives in Cozumel. It hasn't lost twice it's buoyancy, and I don't expect it will suddenly change between my next 2 and 3 dives.

Oh, when I first got to the pool, I dunked my new wetsuit, then piled weights on it until it was just below the surface to determine it's buoyancy. Same thing with my new BCD. Those observations gave me a comparison to my previous gear, making it easier to adjust my own weights.

* Your wetsuit on a week long liveaboard with 15 dives may have you adjust down to 2 lbs by the end of the trip due to lack of air cell size restoration.

I think that change may be due mainly to the diver's increased comfort and ease in the water due to repetitive diving, not just a physical change.

 

[L13]

Because it does not actually matter.
You don't buy a wetsuit based on how bouyant it is and you won't buy jet fins because they are 3% heavier than F1s.

I did buy JetFins because they were more negative than my previous fins.

But, I discovered I overshot. I would love to be able to look at the buoyancy numbers for all the Jet style fins and find one half way between my previous sets to try and maybe buy. In the end, I'll have to borrow fins when possible till I find what I'm looking for, much less efficient shopping.

Someone could make an instant sale to me if they gave me the info!

 

[Cheizz]

What's the in-water weight of the Jetfins exactly?

I can only counter that with numbers from the only manufacturer I know that measures and publishes these things (regarding fins):

 

[L13]

What's the in-water weight of the Jetfins exactly?

I can only counter that with numbers from the only manufacturer I know that measures and publishes these things (regarding fins):
View attachment 768150

I only have one size, Large, I'll get you the info tonight. It would be nice if it was available like the Techline info. Do you know if those numbers are for one fin, or a pair?

 

[Ski_Lounge]

I do think having numbers is incredibly valuable information. And I don't agree with the "everyone's diving style is different so these metrics are meaningless" -- the best analogy I can think of is car MPG metrics. Drivers have different driving styles and environments (think urban vs highway driving), yet the MPG number is valuable. The manufacturers metrics provide a useful baseline on what to expect under "ideal" conditions (whatever ideal means). I would rather take an optimistic number from manufacturers that allows me to compare across products, over no number.