Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
I've been asked to forward this note to the techdiver list in response to Arnold Jackson's (to me, offhandedly vituperative) note about the new Extreme Exposure lights on display at last week's Beneath the Seas expo. The note comes from JJ and answers many of the questions brought up in this thread. As so few people have actually seen the new Explorer and Explorer Pro lights, I personally hope people would take the time to check out the Extreme Exposure web site mentioned in the note to learn more about the new lights before engaging in any speculation about features and quality. Best, Anthony Rue dasein@ib*.ne* ------------------FWD---------------------------------- I understand there has been some discussion about the lights produced by Arnold Jackson at AUL and Barry Miller at Extreme Exposure. Furthermore, there seems to be confusion about my interest in the products. Briefly, by way of clarification, I have spent more than 10 years trying to help manufacturers develop equipment that was effective in the most demanding situations. Occasionally we met with limited success and have been able to maintain reasonable access to this type of equipment. However, over the years active divers and explorers have been left increasingly out of the loop as pertains to the design of diving equipment and the training of divers. It is my hope-- and more specifically my intent--to change that equation. I acknowledge the effort, good intentions and qualified alternatives of products that are currently on the market. For example, Arnold Jackson's line of lighting products are well made and readily available. Arnold and AUL have been helpful supporters of several diving projects within the cave community and for this assistance we are grateful. It is accurate to report that I have taken many of Arnold's products (with a minimum of modifications) across the world in exploratory efforts . Over the years Arnold's products have served me well and I wish him all the best in life and business. My partnership with Barry Miller and the formation of Extreme Exposure is focused specifically to respond to the refinements in equipment technology that have proven central to effective exploration efforts around the world. We are dedicated to a continuing improvement over existing technology. Our primary focus at Extreme Exposure is the development of an ever increasing line of quality products. To this end, I will work with whomever is most capable of adjusting to those demands. For example, Halcyon manufacturing has proven themselves heavily invested in the process, resulting in our efforts to co-develop products within their sphere of experience. As for the "whose light is better" debate, I would simply say the lights manufactured by the two companies appeal to different audiences. Both designs represent steps along the evolution of quality underwater lighting. One of our most fervent desires with Extreme Exposure was to standardize features that we recognized as necessary in the equipment that we use ourselves--features like recessed bottoms, high quality batteries, and auto-plug receptacles. Furthermore, our goal of eliminating the problems associated with the fragile nature of acrylic canisters has finally been met with the introduction of a new line of revolutionary light canisters. We are not interested in price point competition. Our products will likely be more expensive across the board as each light is available with a full range of options, allowing you to create a light customized to your needs and specifications. Competition should be welcomed in the tech diving arena, as it will increase the quality of the products available and improve the nature of customer service. For example, in our short stint as an official company Extreme Exposure has standardized a line of custom features, produced the industries first comprehensive owners manual (despite more than 20 years of primary light distribution), initiated custom features such as individualized light cord length, started the construction of an informational web site, standardized a per unit pressure test, and developed a revolutionary new light canister. Undoubtedly the competition from these advances will encourage others to improve upon their products and services leaving the consumer with a wide array of qualified choices. As for the erroneous claims that I am only supporting Barry for the "kickback": >> Actually, I entered a partnership with Barry and all future efforts are toward the co-development of constantly improving products. >> Claims that the tube recess is wrong or weakened do not bear out in experience. Canisters with recessed bottoms have been tested to over 800'. Criticism and claims against the design have been proven invalid. Several reasons have been given for not recessing the bottom over the years. While claims of weakening in canisters with recessed bottoms are often touted, personal experience has shown no less than 7 bottoms that have leaked and/or fallen off because they are *not* recessed. These include lights at Chips Hole and Wakulla Springs. On the other hand, the recessed bottoms of our design have never failed. >> Claims that heat shrink is used to prevent leaking are erroneous. Heat shrink on the cord prevents kinks from developing which will result in failure. Hose protectors merely shift the location of kink from brass fitting to hose protector. >> Heat issues, as they relate to the light head assembly, pertain to the conductive nature of aluminum and the lower melting temperature of PVC (as compared to Delrin). While no light head should be burned at the surface, aluminum will rapidly conduct heat to the PVC head, causing it to melt. Delrin bulb slugs act to insulate the heat and Delrin Goodman heads are more resistant to melting. Testing has shown that a 50watt bulb was able to burn for more than two hours with no damage to the assembly as compared to the roughly five minutes for the aluminum and PVC assembly. >>> The lifetime guarantee is a reflection of our commitment to the sturdy nature of the canister. Tests with a 5lb sledge hammer resulted in nothing but a broken hammer. Repeated drops from more than ten feet with 35lbs of lead in the canister were not able to break the canister. Similar attempts to damage the canister have proven completely unsuccessful. The bottom line is that as an instructor often associated with high end technical training, I encourage my students to make an informed decision. I feel entirely comfortable with the choice of an AUL or Ralph Hood style light as I believe these products to be well made. Debates over the "mine is bigger" issue tend to degrade. I do not intend to engage in unproductive debates of this nature. Hopefully this post and the information presented in our website will avoid any further misunderstandings about our product or intentions. Individuals interested in evaluating these products and how they compare to those currently manufactured may visit our site at www.extreme-exposure.com While the site has been live for several days, we had anticipated another week of refinement before going "live." The deluge of mail I am receiving indicates that function should win over form. I understand that Arnold has a site also under construction at www.aulinc.com and that Diverite can be found at www.Dive-rite.com I am not aware of a site for Ralph Hood reels. Individuals should consult these sources and choose products that reflect their needs and interests. In all likelihood any choice will be adequate. I wish you all a good season and hope to see you in the water. Good Diving, Jarrod Jablonski aka JJ -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send subscribe/unsubscribe 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]