JIm,

I guess the difference lies in thinking about what one is doing. you 
seem content to ignore any variables in your dive and stumble blindly 
along hoping that you will have brought enuff of whatever.

i could be wrong but this seems to be the antithesis of everything these 
florida guys preach.

the plain fact is i am worried about your approach and its consequences. 
your recent post about brass fever was disconcerting to say the least. 
you may think i am just busting your ass for the sport of it, but 
frankly i am trying to help you see that there is a reason to consider 
each dive as a seperate exposure and to choose equipment accordingly 
with the dir principles in mind, instead of insisting on a one size fits 
all approach.

I suspect that you have not even tried to experiment with smaller tanks, 
which while they require weight to compensate for their buoyancy are 
still less of a burden that the 104's. The fact is double 80s in a dry 
suit can be made to work quite easily and the result is a smaller 
cleaner rig that handles better overall, whether scootering or swimming. 
160 cu ft of gas is sufficient for a single dive and you can get two 
sets of 80s for the price of one of 104's.  a v weight can easly be used 
in place of a weight belt for those who would rathernot be bothered, 
although this does preclude the ditching of wt, like say if you need to 
flaot on the surface for a while waiting for the coasties. but even with 
a v wt the 80s arent going to be as heavy as empty 104s. JIm i didnt 
make this up, i got it all from George, who you folks seem to listen to 
very selectively.

im not going to strain thu your last 100 posts about 80s, because 
frankly, who gives a fuck. what i would like is some admission on your 
part that you dont know enuff about double 80s to make the claim that 
104s are better.

marv

Jim Cobb wrote:

> Marv-
> 
> First off I am not a cave diver. Second, you did not seem to get my point
> that for wreck diving I consider your air supply to be a tad bit more
> important than scooter battery life. In wreck diving you are given the
> opportunity to change batteries which you don't have in a cave. You are
> comparing apples to oranges.
> 
> Thirdly I believe in diving the same rig on every dive regardless of the
> depth. I don't see the point in wearing different tanks suit the particular
> depths. This is BS.
> 
> Also I don't understand what your harping about AL80's all about. If you
> dive with a wetsuit 80's are fine. If you dive with a drysuit the negative
> aspects of steel doubles help your buoyancy. The steel 104's happen to be
> ideal for this purpose.
> 
> I would like you to please repost where I said that double 80's were
> inferior to steel 104 because they don't carry enough gas. What I may have
> said is that having more gas than you need for a specific dive is not a
> detriment to the dive.
> 
> So please take your weird, ill thought out, disjointed, nonsenceical, out of
> context post here and go back to your treadmill, which happens to go the
> same destination as your argument. Nowhere.
> 
>    Jim
>  -------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Learn About Trimix at http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/
> 
>> From: marv <ajmarve@op*.ne*>
>> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 02:11:07 -0400
>> To: terry michael <OEA51@go*.co*>
>> Cc: Jim Cobb <cobber@ci*.co*>, MHK <mhkane@pr*.ne*>, "Michael J.
>> Blitch" <mblitch1@ta*.rr*.co*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com
>> Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor
>> 
>> JIm's thing< and its not just Jim, there is a small group now> is that
>> the only tanks for drysuit is the double 104's. this is despite
>> commentary from George himself that for ocean, you dont need all that
>> gas even in a drysuit and that double 80s should be enuff for most of
>> what one might attempt.< "for ocean the aluminum 80 is the tank of
>> choice">  The rationale seems to be  taught by most of your tek agencies
>> that you can never have enuff gas because "you never know what is going
>> to happen" and people find this more comforting to embrace than the fact
>> that they need to exercise aerobically for diving.
>> 
>> Personally i would suggest that you plan your dive and dive your plan,
>> altering the plan only in the direction of being conservative during a
>> dive. < i.e. less bottom time>. I would also suggest that if your going
>> to carry a major reserve of one dive parameter<gas> you should have
>> equvalent supply of any other<scooter/light burn>.
>> 
>> Finally i would suggest that anyone who cant understand why huge tanks
>> and a tiny scooter might not be a good idea should reread the last
>> paragraph of Gavin's chapter and look in the mirror.
>> 
>> marv
>> 
>> ps i wear dbl 80s, drive a mako and set the treadmill on speed 8 at
>> least once a day.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> terry michael wrote:
>> 
>>> Are we talking about diving thirds here or what? This is a public list
please
>>> explain what you are trying to tell us.
>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: "marv"<ajmarve@op*.ne*>
>>> To: "Jim Cobb"<cobber@ci*.co*>
>>> Cc: "MHK"<mhkane@pr*.ne*>, "terry michael"<OEA51@go*.co*>, "Michael J.
>>> Blitch"<mblitch1@ta*.rr*.co*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com
>>> Date: Mon Aug 27 10:37:44 PDT 2001
>>> Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor
>>> 
>>>> so what are you saying Jim, that you dont plan your dives or dont have
>>>> the discipline to follow that plan ?
>>>> 
>>>> you are on the right track with respect to less is best, you just need
>>>> to take it all the way.
>>>> 
>>>> marv
>>>> 
>>>> Jim Cobb wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Gas=Life. Is that real enough for you?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jim
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Learn About Trimix at http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/
>>>>> 
>>>>>> From: marv <ajmarve@op*.ne*>
>>>>>> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 18:11:57 -0400
>>>>>> To: Jim Cobb <cobber@ci*.co*>
>>>>>> Cc: MHK <mhkane@pr*.ne*>, terry michael <OEA51@go*.co*>, "Michael
J.
>>>>>> Blitch" <mblitch1@ta*.rr*.co*>, techdiver@aquanaut.com
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Silent Submersion Vs Dacor
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> and yet you doggedly defend the concept of carrying three times as much
>>>>>> gas as needed for a given dive< see any old dbl 80 vs 104 thread.>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Marv
>>>>>> <keepin' it real, yo>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jim Cobb wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I would still like something smaller, don't see the point in carrying 2
>>>>>>> hours worth of burn time on a dive were your actual scooting time is
>>>>>>> around
>>>>>>> 20 minutes.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
>>>>> Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___________________________________________________
>>> GO.com Mail     
>>> Get Your Free, Private E-mail at http://mail.go.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]