Why not measure objectively?

[Cheizz]

There are some reviewers that talk about things like the buoyancy of fins, luckily. Better still: they base their choice on it, more than on looks, stiffness, etc.

 

[Cheizz]

Do you know if those numbers are for one fin, or a pair?

One single fin.

 

[inquis]

I wish manufacturers did list such things, but then there's the issue of the specs being wrong or under different conditions than you realize (e.g., salt vs fresh). Still, better than nothing.

It's a huge service that some resellers list tank specifications. (I especially like DGX's thoroughness.)

 

[Cheizz]

I checked the dry weight of the two Tecline fins I own: Lightjet, size L (pic 1) and Powerjet medium, size L (pic 2). As you can see, it matches the manufacturer's numbers quite well.

I know the Lightjet's buoyancy is neutral in fresh water. So that also matches the brand's own information.

 

[inquis]

I just measure my stuff's buoyancy in a hot tub with a luggage scale so weighting is trivial when mixing and matching.

At this point, I just go down the list of adjustments for tank, rig, and exposure suit. For instance: a Cozumel trip: AL80+reg (+1.5 lb), Reserve air (-1 lb), Mares AL BP/W (-1.5 lb), XL Bare Reactive 3mm (+5.5 lb @ 15 ft), Personal (-0.5 lb), Salt water (+6 lb). Total lead needed: 10 lbs.

If I switched to a 6 lb (dry weight spec) stainless plate, I know it's buoyancy would be 5.2 lb (based on density). The net change from my AL plate is to drop about 4 lb of lead. I would not buy a 5 lb plate, however, because that would leave me with an odd lead requirement (7 lb). So yes, having specs comes in handy, IMO.

 

[Cheizz]

That's how I compile a list of my own gear as well. Comes in handy to get at least a ball-park figure on the weight needed when I mix and match configurations.

 

[rob.mwpropane]

That's how you keep people spending money on this trial-and-error thing which shouldn't be trial-and-error. That's my point.

Here's what I do. I buy mostly used.. but I don't buy until I have thoroughly researched what it is I'm getting.. I might spend more time than I care to admit looking at something. The bonus is if after I do all this "research".. finding the right deal, buying used.. if I don't like it I can almost always turn around and sell it what I paid for it. No harm not foul and I gained experience.

The simple fact that wetsuit A in size L would take 2 lb more to sink than wetsuit B in the same size has nothing to do with the diver (since the diver in the suit is the same one). It has everything to do with the wetsuits (if tested in the manner explained in my opening post). This goes for any bit of gear, obviously. Just weigh it in water (with a simple luggage scale) and publish the read-out. This has nothing to do with an individual diver, it is actually as objective as things can be, IMO.

That shops mis-copy specific info on gear has nothing to do with measurements either. Just with lazy marketing departments.

There's just so many variables and differences in people and things change over time. I commend your attempt.. but at the end of the day it's just easier to do a weight check and see how it feels on YOU the individual.. In the time it took me to type this I could have done a weight check on any piece of new gear, lol

Not to mention.. if you had ALL the information down to the ounce of everything that's out right now... it would be obsolete in ~ 24 months as new stuff comes out.

Cheers and good luck... if you did do something like this I'm sure it would be beneficial to someone. Who knows!

 

[L13]

Not to mention.. if you had ALL the information down to the ounce of everything that's out right now... it would be obsolete in ~ 24 months as new stuff comes out.

If the norm was for manufacturers to publish the data, or even for reviewers to publish the data, it would be released with every new item, and never out of date.

 

[rob.mwpropane]

That's how I compile a list of my own gear as well. Comes in handy to get at least a ball-park figure on the weight needed when I mix and match configurations.

Ahhh... that makes sense. Yeah, if I was switching back and forth maybe it would make more sense. All I ever worry about is the weight for the undergarments... and even that's only like a 4# difference summer vs winter stuff.

If the norm was for manufacturers to publish the data, or even for reviewers to publish the data, it would be released with every new item, and never out of date.

I could maybe see it being better for newer divers? I just don't see what a seasoned diver would gain from knowing all that.

My progression has always been guestimate, add a little to make sure (because I'm lazy and would rather just be heavy then get back out).. take some weight off next time... rinse and repeat. By dive 3... maybe 4 it's all sorted depending what's different

 

[VikingDives]

Ahhh... that makes sense. Yeah, if I was switching back and forth maybe it would make more sense. All I ever worry about is the weight for the undergarments... and even that's only like a 4# difference summer vs winter stuff.

I could maybe see it being better for newer divers? I just don't see what a seasoned diver would gain from knowing all that.

My progression has always been guestimate, add a little to make sure (because I'm lazy and would rather just be heavy then get back out).. take some weight off next time... rinse and repeat. By dive 3... maybe 4 it's all sorted depending what's different

You might be surprised what divers worry about. I spent about an hour last week figuring out the weights of three different systems for a customer who wanted to trim a pound or two off his vacation packing...