<G>

What changed is the position of the corrugated hose, it attaches to the
middle (top) of the wing now instead of the offset way all other
manufacturers use, it is slightly longer too. The inner bag changed material
thickness, it is even thicker now.
Overall shape changed compared to the old style and the sizes are 40, 55, 70
now instead of 38, 45, 55, 65.

TT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Cobb [mailto:cobber@ci*.co*]
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 8:54 AM
> To: thomas@ha*.ne*; Tech Diver; VB Tech
> Subject: Re: OMS Wings review
>
>
> Well, that's all I had to compare it to. I'm just an old scuba diver, not
> Rondales for Christ's sake. What's been changed?
>
>    Jim
>
>  -------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Learn About Trimix at http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/
>
> > From: "Thomas Tukker" <tukker@be*.ne*>
> > Reply-To: <thomas@ha*.ne*>
> > Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 07:03:55 -0500
> > To: "Jim Cobb" <cobber@ci*.co*>, "Tech Diver"
> > <techdiver@aquanaut.com>, "VB Tech" <vbtech@ci*.co*>
> > Subject: RE: OMS Wings review
> >
> > Actually what you did is compare the new OMS wing to the old
> Halcyon wing.
> > Halcyon introduced it's new wing at DEMA, an improvement over the last
> > version.
> >
> > Later,
> >
> > TT
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jim Cobb [mailto:cobber@ci*.co*]
> >> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 9:16 PM
> >> To: Tech Diver; VB Tech
> >> Subject: OMS Wings review
> >>
> >>
> >> As many of you know, I have no great love for OMS. Their products were
> >> designed many years ago and, until now, they have done nothing
> to update
> >> them to current standards. One of their products is so
> patently stupid and
> >> unusable, the infamous stuporwings (double bladder wings with
> >> elastic "auto
> >> deflation" bands) it boggles the mind that anybody who has not
> lived in a
> >> cave for the past five years is still using them.
> >>
> >> With the market filled with used stuporwings selling for practically
> >> nothing, OMS has finally realized that they have to come up with a
> >> marketable item. Currently OMS is getting it's ass kicked by
> fast moving
> >> companies like Halcyon and DiveRite. Even huge Scubapro has
> gotten in the
> >> tech thing. Frankly I'm surprised the OMS is still in business.
> >>
> >> After a couple of false starts OMS has finally come up with a
> set of wings
> >> which are done correctly from top to bottom. Plus they come in at
> >> over $100
> >> less than those of the competition. Northeast scuba supply can
> set you up
> >> with a pair, ask John John@No*.co* and he will
> >> fix you up.
> >>
> >> John sent me a pair of 55lb wings to take a look at. I laid them
> >> out next to
> >> my Halcyon 65lb wings and took a look at the differnces. First
> >> off the hose
> >> and overpressure valve are in the correct places, OMS finally got
> >> it right.
> >> The overpressure valve and inflation valve are identical to the
> >> Halycon. The
> >> overall shape of the wings are identical, but as you might
> expect the 65lb
> >> Halcyon's have a larger cross section when inflated.
> >>
> >> For years OMS boasted of it's "high volume" inflators, exactly
> the wrong
> >> thing on a tech wing, and now they are using proper OEM "low
> >> volume" units.
> >> And it only took them 15 years to figure this out. OMS could not resist
> >> leaving the huge knob hanging off the overpressure valve, an
> easy thing to
> >> fix (snip-snip). The OMS inflator hose is about 4" longer than
> the Halcyon
> >> and is of the flat corregation style.
> >>
> >> On construction details you can see where OMS cut some corners
> to beat the
> >> competition on price. Some examples:
> >>
> >> -The Halcyons have a flaps at the bottom of the wings with a
> mesh inserts
> >> for water drainage while the OMS makes due with two grommets
> on each side.
> >> -The Halcyon has a reinforced seam on the edges while the OMS
> has a plain
> >> seam.
> >> -The Halcyon has a reinforcing web strip running down the center
> >> tank mount
> >> area while the OMS has none.
> >> -Halcyon has a canvas loop which helps keep the hose from
> getting stressed
> >> at the top, the OMS does not.
> >>
> >> On the inside the OMS has a rubber flap to keep the bladder
> away from the
> >> zipper just like the halcyon. The rubber flap is sheet rubber
> rather than
> >> the bicycle tube Halcyon uses. Don't think this makes any practicable
> >> difference but it looks better. The OMS has 4 grommets to the
> Halcyon's 2
> >> for mounting to the backplate to give you a bit of adjustment.
> >>
> >> The bladder material on the Halcyon is a urethane impregnated
> fabric while
> >> the OMS is straight urethane. With such a rugged container
> (both are 1000
> >> denier cloth) I doubt this makes much difference. The Halcyon material
> >> appears to be more rugged but on the other hand you can see
> into the OMS
> >> bladder (the material is clear) and check out what biological
> horrors you
> >> have growing in there after a long dive season.
> >>
> >> All in all the OMS 55lb wing is a good effort, overall quality of
> >> construction is good. They are the Chevrolet wings while the
> Halcyons are
> >> the Cadillacs. The Halcyons have more details in construction
> >> which show up
> >> in the price, but if you are not a "hard corp" diver and want to save a
> >> sawbuck you may want to give them a try. I would choose them over the
> >> DiveRite standard wings.
> >>
> >> Oh, and did I mention that there are no bungees on this
> model??? I thought
> >> that bungees were God's Gift to scuba divers, but low and behold not a
> >> bungee in sight. And only one bladder. Hmmm, could it be that
> bungees suck
> >> and that dual bladders are useless? Apparently OMS thinks so. But
> >> OMS won't
> >> kill the stuporwing until the clueless idiots out there quit
> >> buying them as
> >> they have warehouses full of them.
> >>
> >> Jim
> >>
> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Learn About Trimix at http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> >> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to
> `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>

--
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]