Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
George Irvine <gmiiii@in*.co*> wrote: > Joseph, we are not talking about SIDE MOUNTED independents, we are talking >about back mounted independents, a procedure so stupid that you obviously did >not even consider it when you answered the post - thanks for making that >point. >We all use side mounted independents when necesary. It would seem to me that the only real difference in configuration is the physical location of the tanks, since you're going into spaces that won't allow back-mounted tanks. From a gas-management point of view, sidemount is no different than independents. When both tanks are on your back, though, the argument seems to be that since it's now possible to use a manifold, and since having a manifold is better, that therefore it's strokery not to use one. Which brings up a point: a diving club of which I'm a member runs an annual SCUBA swap, and a few years ago somebody brought in a few interesting bits of old cave-diving kit for which he didn't want too much money. I figured better to buy it while it was there than wish I had later, so I now have a sidemount harness and an HP hose with a male connector on both ends. Apparently the idea was to get a pair of the old Dacor valves with the HP port (marketed 'way back before regulators had HP ports) and connect both sides, giving the same effect as a dual-outlet manifold. Of course, there's no isolator valve, and hoses fail more often than manifolds, so this was a scary bit of kit, but nonetheless interesting. I've never had this stuff in the water and chances are I won't. -- Anthony DeBoer http://www.onramp.ca/~adb/ adb@he*.re*.or* (here) adb@ge*.co* (work) #include "std.disclaimer"
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]