YOKE vs DIN

[wetb4igetinthewater]

stealing that for future fun....

Don't think sitting at home is so safe either: 'Like an explosion': Family says ice mysteriously crashes through home, leaving gaping hole in roof

 

[Joneill]

Wake up and smell the coffee dude DIN has nothing whatsoever to do with over engineering.

Its the break up of an American monopoly in recreational scuba, a kick in the backside to their venture capitalist owners and a punch the throat to their padi wak piss ant teach for cash cheap ass guru mantras.

Geez - life is a too short to have so much hostility pent up towards a regulator type. Maybe you should dive more - it’s relaxing. I’ll be back in the water with my T3/B2 Yoke setup in a few weeks. Lol…

 

[tursiops]

Fortunately, their belief that DIN is vastly better won't hurt them.

I'll give them that DIN is better, if they'll give me that it doesn't make any difference to "99% of the divers for 99.9% of their dives."
The incentive to suddenly replace perfectly good tanks and valves and buy all new regulators isn't there. It is a dumb idea.

 

[Zef]

I'll give them that DIN is better, if they'll give me that it doesn't make any difference to "99% of the divers for 99.9% of their dives."
The incentive to suddenly replace perfectly good tanks and valves and buy all new regulators isn't there. It is a dumb idea.

Don't hold your breath waiting for them to concede anything...unless you are working on apnea, then hold away!

I recall a piece of advice I was given back when I was 11 or 12...I was at a bicycle race, time trial type format (race against the clock). I was gawking at someone's custom and purpose built bike for the event and wished out load I had something similar to race on. While I can't remember the guy's name, I will never forget what he told me: "The most important piece of equipment is the nut on top of the seat".

DIN-Yoke, Yoke-DIN.....I offer something similar to the advice above: "In diving the most important piece of equipment is the nut that attaches the regulator to the cylinder valve."

Cheers,
-Z

 

[Tristan24]

YOKE all the way if you don't have your own tanks.
if you don't look after your thread on the DIN then you will have problems. most dive operators hate them due to this thread problem.
also, most dive centers don't do 300bar fills

 

[pauldw]

I've been meaning to write a DIN Plug Diver specialty course, but given what a pissing match this thread has become, who would want to even go that little distance? Good heavens, people, I only got halfway through this thread before fleeing.

 

[Celt]

I'll hang my tanks in the water today and if I spot a leak I'll sort it, in the unlikely event that I blow an oring on the bottom I'll shutdown that tank and switch to the other and return to my boat, that's what divers are supposed to be able to do. If I feel like it then I'll throw myself in sun and watch the little birdies, that has to be done as well.

 

[El Diablo]

I'll give them that DIN is better, if they'll give me that it doesn't make any difference to "99% of the divers for 99.9% of their dives."
The incentive to suddenly replace perfectly good tanks and valves and buy all new regulators isn't there. It is a dumb idea.

As I wrote previously, so do seat belts, parachutes, crash helmets, fire extinguishers, lawyers, condoms, anti-snake venom, dry fire starter, prostate check, etc... 99% of the time you will not need them. Until you do.

No one said ANYTHING about replacing 'good tanks and valves'. No one said ANYTHING about you having to switch. The whole thread started as: I was asked in the gym by a new diver 'DIN or YOKE'? and I replied: 'DIN my friend, obviously. It is SAFER, SMALLER and LIGHTER'. That's all.

I did the mistake of asking (mainly older folks) here, especially Americans (and one from Hong Kong with special needs) why do they prefer YOKE? The answers varied and are ALL accepted: Slightly faster to attach, especially with cold / wet / small hands and availability of rental tanks fitted with YOKE valves. Makes total sense but still doesn't change the FACT that DIN is SAFER. My answer to any new diver buying a new regulator will be the same: BUY DIN.

The rest, just garbage from people failing to understand those 3 benefits. I was accused of politicizing diving, trying to convince people, pretending to be a DIN expert, undermining people... nations... WTF? All these 'nice qualities' just because I stated the obvious??? Can you deny that DIN is Safer? Smaller or Lighter?

"I'll give them that DIN is better, if they'll give me that it doesn't make any difference to "99% of the divers for 99.9% of their dives." Really? Does having an Octo made any difference in 99% of your dives? Having a redundant air supply made any difference in 99% of your dives? I know, you all dive with stupid divers that constantly run out of air... So let's put it this way:
Your BUDDY having an Octo makes any difference in 99% of YOUR dives?

No easy answer right? It DEPENDS ON the CONDITIONS, DEPTH, EXPERIENCE and TYPE of diving.
What you describe as overkill equals peace of mind. We all prefer that our Buddy has an Octo just for that extremely limited possibility... that almost impossible to happen remaining 1% unfortunate event (if you dive SOLO, replace the buddy with redundant air option, same logic). Well, YOKE O-ring failures are more common than people running out of air...

YOKE is still a very good system. It is still perfectly safe, people is happy with it, Dive Operators in the US, Asia & Pacific seem to be invested on it. No one stated YOKE is crap, worthless or people choosing YOKE are imbeciles.
DIN is SAFER ≠ YOKE is not safe / bad.

 

[BoltSnap]

99% safe means 1% is unsafe, that's a lot of "unsafe." 1% unsafe means 1 out of 100 dives is unsafe, for many of us here this means that we should have been dead or severely injured several times over the span of our diving career (I have been diving for over 50 years now btw but I ain't no Chairman) .

 

[WouterB]

99% safe means 1% is unsafe, that's a lot of "unsafe." 1% unsafe means 1 out of 100 dives is unsafe, for many of us here this means that we should have been dead or severely injured several times over the span of our diving career (I have been diving for over 50 years now btw but I ain't no Chairman) .

That is not how calculating chance works. 1% unsafe does not mean per se that is has to happen 1 out of a 100 times.

I plucked this from the internet, it is explained better:

Quote:
Most probably it will never happen. But it's totally depends on luck. If you ever played with dice you should know that if you throw it six times there is no guarantee that you will get 6 in the dice atleast one time. It's uncertain. There is a high chance that you will get same number more than twice.

Now why we use 1% chance then? The answer is it depends on the scale of the thing that is happening. If you do the same work atleast 10,000,000 time then there is a high possibility that the 1% chance will show result and the thing will happen around 100,000 times. It could be more or less but it will be always close to it. It will never be 10,000 times or it will never be 1,000,000 times. But if you do the work for only 100 times only for getting the exact result atleast once, the chance of happening the occasion is almost zero.


In additon to that, you could argue that servicing equipment "resets" or dimishes the chance something happens.