Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Mike, >Carl(and most of this post is not aimed at you), I agree, any diver Understood, thanks... >remarks about S14 vs neutraleak deleted... Exactly, no reason to buy an inferior product for MORE money... >what we don;t need though (IMO) is everyone running their mouth >calling everyone who does own one of these things a "stroke". If the >light currently meets all their diving needs (ie they are not >exceeding the alleged good-working depth limits of the NL) then hey, >they have a light that works well for them. Period. People are upset that others are actually extolling the non-existant virtues of the neutraleaks. Hey, people screw up, and they're lead astray by equipment salesman, it happens just like shit happens. But, when you make a mistake, admit it. Trying to find some good in a piece of equipment like this is like pissing into the wind, or more like a hurricane. Has Dive Rite actually publicly stated a working depth to which it is *guaranteed* to work under repeated exposure??? I've heard them say how deep they have *taken* the light, but NOT how deep they guarantee or RATE it for!!! >*IF* said diver needs to exceed the depth limits of the NL then the >owner of the NL can (at worst) be called "shortsighted" for failing to >plan ahead (but how many of us are wearing our first BC into the >caves?) or "duped" by a salesperson who failed to inform the buyer EXACTY the point. People here are harping on the damn instructors that are STILL foisting these things off on students, even AFTER they know about the problems. I think we're arguing the same side of the coin. >This last case is the only thing I see worth getting excited about. >The rest is just hot air. In none of the cases does the end- user >deserve to be called a stroke. Need I search the archives to see how *UNLESS* they continue to defend their (poor) decision in the face of overwhelming evidence. >Again, were I today buying a new light, I would (again) buy a >cylindrical light. If however I walked into shop A and said I wanted a >light, maybe even one of those square ones, and the shop owner said >"hey I've heard they may have trouble when you get deep, plus >(snicker) they're square" and I said "yeah, but I NEVER plan to go >that (X') deep (I could do several years of wreck penetration off >the NC coast without needing to)" and he said "well ok" and so I bought >the square light then big deal. No one need presume they need to call >me a stroke. Given THAT set of purchasing criteria, both lights are >rather equal. BUt, given that the neutraleak has inferior construction, I wouldn't even guarantee that it would hold up to *repeated* stress to more intermediate depths. Remember, there's a cyclic factor to consider too here. Just because it's fine once or twice, or even ten times doesn't mean that it will work 100 times. When I buy a light or a piece of equipment I like to have a rather large afety factor built into it. The Spectrum 14 is rated to 750', that's WELL over twice the depeth I plan on gonig to anytime soon. I don't want a light that's been known to fail at less than 2x my max depth, do you? >Those are not *MY* criteria, I want to use this light for a long >time. But if I exceed 130-140' in a cave in the next 2 years I'll be >a bit surprised. So even if I had bought a NL, I'd have plenty of >time (though perhaps a muddied conscience) to sell it and buy a >new(er) cylindrical (maybe even the supposed new DR) light (though I >am very happy with my AUL light). If I KNEW a light started to fail at 200' I'd feel very unsafe about taking it to 140', just not enough margin for error and I'm not out to break any records... well, not yet (just kidding Rich)... >Nutshell: lighten up on the users/owners of the light, concentrate on >determining what the real effective (safe) limitations of the light >are(100'-150'?), and on making new purchasers aware of those >limitations so they can make informed choices (though they may be >different from yours). Anyone on this list who NOW buys a neuraleak *deserves* to be called a stroke after all the information thats been presented! >Also concentrate on discrediting those who recommend ANY product >for use beyond its limitations. (lots of that going on here, but >I think its gone a bit overboard) I agree 100%, but, remember, there are instructors and salesman on this list, some of whom are STILL selling this clearly inferior product, who KNOW it's inferior, but are still using it to pad their pockets. -Carl-
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]