Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
gmiiii@in*.co* wrote: > With what all of you spend on useless crap, you could have everything we have > and more. Bill Gavin did not have 1000 in his dive gear [...] > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, "Michael J. Kravit, AIA" <mkravit@mi*.co*> wrote: > >You are so wrong. The hogarthian rig is much cheaper than a Scubapro > >Classic, Transpac, or Scubapro SeaHawk. You can buy the OMS single tanks > >bands and use the rig with singles. > >The whole deal is hundreds of dollars cheaper than what the manufacturers > >sell, it is simpler, safer and certainly more streamlined. OK, stupid question time. How easily adaptable is this to singles? I had always assumed backplate = manifolded doubles. I'm sure the backplate, wings, and harness are cheaper than most BCs (I have a warm-water wimp BC, a Dacor I bought for $225 <store display unit discount>). It's the $$$doubles$$$ that I haven't yet forked over the bucks for. If it flies [swims] with singles as easily as a BC I might go the plate/wings route *before* the Dacor bites the big one. I know I want a backplate next time around (try hanging a 30cf pony off of a single 80 bound to a soft-back BC... nah, you guys would never do that, and I won't much longer, but at least I'm admitting it <grin>). On the OMS singles band track, Carl Heinzl mentioned (some time ago) that there were also "Cam bands" that allowed two independents (no, let's not start that flamefest over, I'm talking about diving on vacation) on a backplate. Is that legitimate as well? Or is that also in the "worst rig" category? Jeff "still open-minded on this" Kell <jeff-kell@ut*.ed*> -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send list subscription requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
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]