Some parting thoughts and observations

DSix36

DSix36

Well-Known Member
I have not had my trusty rEvo in the water since I returned form a cave trip over Christmas. Either work or the weather put a serious kink in my diving schedule lately and having an older cat that needs my attention kinda limits my travel possibilities at the moment. Well, it turns out that now my work is actually forcing me to dive to get some needed measurements for an upcoming project. I am planning to dive next weekend for this and figured that I should go get my rEvo together in advance to make sure I have time to remedy any little issues that might pop up. I was thinking that something was surely dry rotted by now, cells were needing replaced, or something completely unexpected would creep up on me.

I packed the scrubbers and I began thinking about how great it was to have the dual scrubbers both for safety and cost effectiveness of sorb use, how fast it was to pack them, and how I was probably going to really miss this feature. I took extra precautions to clean and lube all the essential o-rings and sealing surfaces since it has been gathering dust in my garage for several months when I realized how little time it took to do a complete assembly and that I was probably going to really miss this feature too. I finally reached the point were the rEvo was built and ready to pull a negative test. I was expecting the loop to slowly (very very slowly) let the DSV droop. I usually wait 2 minutes to listen for the swoosh, but today I let it sit for a full 10 minutes. It did not droop and the swoosh was solid. the calibration was quick and easy too. I filled the loop with air to help keep the cells from draining over the next week and put her away til I am ready to dive.

I was planning to sell her as soon as my Defender got here, but I think I may need to keep her around for awhile until I have developed the similar level of trust in the Defender. There is also the guilt factor I feel about cheating on her and also the possibility that I might not be as happy with her replacement as I think I will be.

Never take you rEvo for granted. They will treat you well if you just give them the attention and respect they deserve.
 
The rEvo is a damed fine unit.

Its got a few snags but havent they all

If I were told the only CCR i could ever dive in the future was a rEvo id not be sad

ATB
 
Tim1 said:
Why say goodbye? A man can never have too many rebreathers...
Click to expand...

I guess if diving is your occupation but for me as a vacation cave diver, I don't think it would be safe to dive multiple different units. Just my personal opinion.

I would agree that having multiple rebreathers is okay if they were the same or similar but the form and function of the two is so different I don't think I would do it. I'm sure others can do it and would be willing to sacrifice uniformity.

Just my thoughts on the matter and what I would be willing to live with,

Garth


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Garth said:
I guess if diving is your occupation but for me as a vacation cave diver, I don't think it would be safe to dive multiple different units. Just my personal opinion.

I would agree that having multiple rebreathers is okay if they were the same or similar but the form and function of the two is so different I don't think I would do it. I'm sure others can do it and would be willing to sacrifice uniformity.

Just my thoughts on the matter and what I would be willing to live with,

Garth


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Just to sum it up very roughly. I have been diving my rEvo for about 8 years now and that computes to 700 dives or about 2000 hours. I think I would be able to resort back to her in an instant if the time presented itself. Now another 8 years down the road without going to bed with her and I might forget how. :-(
 
Garth said:
I guess if diving is your occupation but for me as a vacation cave diver, I don't think it would be safe to dive multiple different units. Just my personal opinion.

I would agree that having multiple rebreathers is okay if they were the same or similar but the form and function of the two is so different I don't think I would do it. I'm sure others can do it and would be willing to sacrifice uniformity.

Just my thoughts on the matter and what I would be willing to live with,

Garth


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
My comment was flippant but your point is well made Garth. Chopping and changing between dissimilar units may not be the best approach to CCR diving! My array of CCRS are broadly similar; JJs and HHs, all configured differently for different purposes. I wouldnt throw a Sentinel into the mix! :p

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
 
Tim1 said:
I wouldnt throw a Sentinel into the mix!
Click to expand...

Oi!

I resent that last remark ;-)

I mainly dive a Sentinel, but have also done the crossover to rEvo (hCCR) and done some hours/courses with it.

I echo the fine points made by the OP regarding rEvo, even if I still prefer the Sentinel myself.

Could you perhaps go more in detail about the crucial differences between the different brands to which you allude to in you claims?

For my part the most outstanding difference between Sentinel and rEvo really boils down to having either separate or combined gas block for O2/dil.

Poltsi
 
Poltsi said:
Oi!

I resent that last remark ;-)

I mainly dive a Sentinel, but have also done the crossover to rEvo (hCCR) and done some hours/courses with it.

I echo the fine points made by the OP regarding rEvo, even if I still prefer the Sentinel myself.

Could you perhaps go more in detail about the crucial differences between the different brands to which you allude to in you claims?

For my part the most outstanding difference between Sentinel and rEvo really boils down to having either separate or combined gas block for O2/dil.

Poltsi
Click to expand...
Hehe. I was the owner of an original specification Sentinel (#96) and whilst I have had no hands on experience with later models or the Red Head I do consider the Sentinel to be a rather 'singular' unit whereas the simplicity and open architecture of the JJ and HH are complimentary, notwithstanding the Shearwater electronics. No, I don't use the Rev Cs for anything other than set point maintenance...

PS. I wouldnt know a rEvo from my elbow... ;)

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Keep it, when the rose tinted specs fall off you'll realise the defender is just the latest Emperors New Clothes and want it back anyway.
 
Ben Field said:
Keep it, when the rose tinted specs fall off you'll realise the defender is just the latest Emperors New Clothes and want it back anyway.
Click to expand...

I wonder how the XCCR and the Revo compare for work of breathing.. I assume the defender would be similar to the XCCR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Ben Field said:
Keep it, when the rose tinted specs fall off you'll realise the defender is just the latest Emperors New Clothes and want it back anyway.
Click to expand...

Tim1 said:
Sage advice methinks...

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You both have a valid point, but even if I was to return to a rEvo it would need to be a micro titanium unit to get the size and weight down for traveling easier.



Garth said:
I wonder how the XCCR and the Revo compare for work of breathing.. I assume the defender would be similar to the XCCR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I would have to assume the same. I did notice that the hydrostatic imbalance of the counterlungs was much better when I did the try dive on the Hammerhead with BMCL than it ever was on the rEvo. I really doubt if we as divers could tell if the WOB differs much. I always thought the original Optima breathed fine until I saw the WOB numbers.

I am still waiting for Randy to release the WOB stats on the Defender.
 
DSix36 said:
You both have a valid point, but even if I was to return to a rEvo it would need to be a micro titanium unit to get the size and weight down for traveling easier.





I would have to assume the same. I did notice that the hydrostatic imbalance of the counterlungs was much better when I did the try dive on the Hammerhead with BMCL than it ever was on the rEvo. I really doubt if we as divers could tell if the WOB differs much. I always thought the original Optima breathed fine until I saw the WOB numbers.

I am still waiting for Randy to release the WOB stats on the Defender.
Click to expand...

Hi DSix36

I am interested that in selecting the Defender the WOB statistics obviously played no part as they have not yet been published. I presume your own "relative" view from a series of test dives was sufficient? Was this not a big factor in your decision? I know when I selected my unit I just did not think about it that much, it seemed to breathe fine so I went with that. I know you do long overhead dives and have way more experience than me, so I wondered why it wasn't more of a consideration? It is really the retained CO2 that plays on my mind a bit.

I also liked many of your selection criteria (I am also looking around as to what my next machine might be). The HH is quite popular where I dive and has local support which is a massive bonus from my perspective. But second time around I'd like to know a little more detail about their technical performance and that data seems a little hard to come by at present, though I appreciate they are relatively new to the market.

Randy you are obviously selling these machines without yet publishing this detail. Of course that is your right, but why would you not publish the details you have available? I know you are doing CE testing but that is only strictly relevant for a part of the market, why not publish what you already have available for the rest of us? Also Randy do you have any plans to incorporate a temp stick monitor/RMS type solution?



Regards
Larry


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Larry7895 said:
Randy you are obviously selling these machines without yet publishing this detail. Of course that is your right, but why would you not publish the details you have available? I know you are doing CE testing but that is only strictly relevant for a part of the market, why not publish what you already have available for the rest of us? Also Randy do you have any plans to incorporate a temp stick monitor/RMS type solution?

Regards
Larry
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...

Hi Larry,

As you may be aware, the SubGravity Defender CCR and the iQSub X-CCR share many similar components. Currently, the X-CCR is undergoing the CE certification process. We have determined that until that process is complete, we will defer making any public comments about specific details related to CE for either unit. (At least that is the plan for now. If we determine that it would be beneficial to the CE process or at least not detrimental to the CE process at some point, we will certainly make the specs public) I know this may not sit well with some potential customers, but this has been the case with many of our competitors as well. Widespread discussion and speculation about specific performance details while undergoing CE testing has been shown in the past to be counterproductive with the CE testing process.

Currently, we do not have a temp stick monitor/RMS type solution in the works. I actually like the idea, but we have a lot on our plates right now and will probably explore that possibility at a later date. Both the Defender CCR and the X-CCR have some very cool new features in the electronics packages, so for the time being, we feel as though we have a lot to offer that make both units very competitive with the rest of the marketplace.

Suffice it to say, that we feel very strongly that our units perform very well as do several hundred of our customers who continue to upgrade their existing units as well as purchase new units. They simply work well!

For those who determine that they need more detail, I guess you'll have to wait for the CE results.

Kind regards,
Randy
 
Last edited:
Larry7895 said:
Hi DSix36

I am interested that in selecting the Defender the WOB statistics obviously played no part as they have not yet been published. I presume your own "relative" view from a series of test dives was sufficient? Was this not a big factor in your decision? I know when I selected my unit I just did not think about it that much, it seemed to breathe fine so I went with that. I know you do long overhead dives and have way more experience than me, so I wondered why it wasn't more of a consideration? It is really the retained CO2 that plays on my mind a bit.

I also liked many of your selection criteria (I am also looking around as to what my next machine might be). The HH is quite popular where I dive and has local support which is a massive bonus from my perspective. But second time around I'd like to know a little more detail about their technical performance and that data seems a little hard to come by at present, though I appreciate they are relatively new to the market.

Randy you are obviously selling these machines without yet publishing this detail. Of course that is your right, but why would you not publish the details you have available? I know you are doing CE testing but that is only strictly relevant for a part of the market, why not publish what you already have available for the rest of us? Also Randy do you have any plans to incorporate a temp stick monitor/RMS type solution?



Regards
Larry


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...

Randy has an agreement with IQSUB not to release any info on WOB until the CE testing is final. he will have to explain ths in further depth if he wants to.

I am a pretty firm believer that a diver can not tell a difference in WOB unless it is rather significant. Like I said in my earlier post, I always thought my Optima breathed fine but it turned out to have some seriously bad WOB. I think the original Kiss was the only one listed that was worse. This has changed with all their recent improvements to the newer units though.

When I did my test dive on the HH, my main goal was to check how it breathed, trimmed, and generally felt in the water. It seemed to breathe great and it breathed easier in EVERY position than my rEvo does. The hydrostatic imbalance of the BMCL on the HH have an extremely noticable difference than the rEvo does and your differing trim in the water does not make near as much difference in your buoyancy as the rEvo does either.

You should read my review after the try dive for my impressions and why I have chosen it to be my new baby. You can find it HERE

http://www.ccrexplorers.com/showthread.php?t=18781&highlight=
 
Randy Thornton said:
Widespread discussion and speculation about specific performance details while undergoing CE testing has been shown in the past to be counterproductive with the CE testing process.
Click to expand...
Randy, Counterproductive for whom?

If the unit exceeds the requirements of the CE testing which you will/ought to know in advance of the CE audit testing process for EN14143, based on the R&D to ensure every design choice is optimum: its not going to matter a brass razoo if the data is public. The CE testing itself isn't going to change anything.

AFAIK it has only caused manufacturers problems when their units have failed elements of the CE testing and they have had to go back to the drawing board. As I understand Hollis have had to do recently with the P2 for example In which case your customers will know about it anyway cause all of a sudden new units will ship with a variation in parts or specification.
Or as OSEL had to do back in 2009 when their scrubber duration testing was rejected by SGS, all 143 odd runs, as it wasn't done at the mouth as required by the standard: DL having simply duplicated what everyone else did and measured the CO2 output before the BOV; from the inhale hose. In this case however the unit still has exactly the same actual performance and rather than being counterproductive, it was a valuable lesson. Albeit one that shorten'd the units quotable CE scrubber duration.
 
Brad...

I can see you feeling that it's counterproductive since it limit's your ability to stir the pot throughout the process. I would simply suggest that we let the team focus on the task and hand and them we can debate the outcome once it's formally published. I know that you might not agree with that process but it is the approach that Randy and IQSUB have selected. People are not being forced to buy any particular unit and those that feel CE certification is important may choose to wait until the process has been completed others may not care at all.


Safe Diving!

Mark

Brad_Horn said:
Randy, Counterproductive for whom?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top