Comparison Suunto vs Oceanic

"Adam Helberg" <sendspamhere@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:BiYhc.7570$e4.2559@newsread2.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
> In the end my cheapness prevailed (over the Vytec) and my Suunto Vyper came. I've had a
> chance of playing with the functions on the surface and have a few early comments in
> comparison with my old Oceanic Prodigy.
>
> It has far more functions, of course than the Prodigy.
>
> Even in the most liberal setting it is still more conservative than the Prodigy.
>
> I now understand why some think the bar graph is useless. In the Prodigy the bar graph
> displays the nitrogen content of the controlling tissue compartment, but in the Suunto
the
> bar graph is merely a graphic display of the no-deco time. Thus the Prodigy bars do show
> extra info while the Suunto does not. At the surface the Prodigy shows bars regressing
> whereas I expect the Suunto to show no bars. Here I prefer Oceanic's method.
>
> The Vytec has a handy simulator mode useful for seeing what the display would look like
in
> unlikely conditions, such as heavy deco diving or violations. It also came with a PC
> interface which looks a little dated with its serial interface and no mention of Windows
> XP compatibility.
>
> Adam

The last paragraph should read "The Vyper.." not "The Vytec.."

Also if someone has the Vyper, can they confirm that at the surface the bars do not show,
as I have not taken my computer diving and am not sure.

Adam

"Adam Helberg" wrote

in message news:BiYhc.7570$e4.2559@newsread2.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
> In the end my cheapness prevailed (over the Vytec) and my Suunto Vyper
came. I've had a
> chance of playing with the functions on the surface and have a few early
comments in
> comparison with my old Oceanic Prodigy.

Check out how the computers deal with repetitive dive times when your PPO2
is 1.4 or more.

Adam Helberg wrote:

>Also if someone has the Vyper, can they confirm that at the surface the bars do not show,
>as I have not taken my computer diving and am not sure.
>
>Adam
>
>
>
What the Vyper's bars show is how close you are to your no deco time at
any given point. The more bars, the closer you are to your limit.
Depending on your profile, etc., you could potentially still be showing
bars at or near the surface.

I kind of like that. It keeps it simple, but it's also redundant. The
number of bars showing correlates with the amount of ND time showing,
which is the largest and most prominent part of the whole display. You
get under 10 minutes, the bars get to the first yellow mark. Under five,
you're at the second mark, and you better be looking for the anchor
line. But you can see the numbers clearly, so what's the point of the bars?

Take it diving. It works best underwater.

g

George Cathcart wrote:
> Adam Helberg wrote:
>
>> Also if someone has the Vyper, can they confirm that at the surface
>> the bars do not show,
>> as I have not taken my computer diving and am not sure.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
> What the Vyper's bars show is how close you are to your no deco time at
> any given point. The more bars, the closer you are to your limit.
> Depending on your profile, etc., you could potentially still be showing
> bars at or near the surface.
>
> I kind of like that. It keeps it simple, but it's also redundant. The
> number of bars showing correlates with the amount of ND time showing,
> which is the largest and most prominent part of the whole display. You
> get under 10 minutes, the bars get to the first yellow mark. Under five,
> you're at the second mark, and you better be looking for the anchor
> line. But you can see the numbers clearly, so what's the point of the bars?
>
> Take it diving. It works best underwater.
>
> g
>
Redundancy like this is BS. Can't imagine a situation with failing
digits but the bars still working.

edwin

edwin <evr@dirtydivers.net> wrote:
>Redundancy like this is BS. Can't imagine a situation with failing
>digits but the bars still working.

Anyone setting the computer to nitrox mode (which is most of us, I think)
won't even see the bars unless a button is hit. (displays O2 load instead)
So yeah, just read the digits.

I think it's there because so many people were used to having on with the
pelagics.

--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com

"Jason O'Rourke" <jor@soda.csua.berkeley.edu> wrote in message
news:c6bo81$72m$1@agate.berkeley.edu...
> edwin <evr@dirtydivers.net> wrote:
> >Redundancy like this is BS. Can't imagine a situation with failing
> >digits but the bars still working.
>
> Anyone setting the computer to nitrox mode (which is most of us, I think)
> won't even see the bars unless a button is hit. (displays O2 load
instead)
> So yeah, just read the digits.
>
> I think it's there because so many people were used to having on with the
> pelagics.

Interesting. That's another reason for liking my Oceanic better than the
Suunto line. My Oceanics show both O2 and Nitrogen.

Lee

"Lee Bell" <leebell@ix.remove.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:nrkic.19983$l75.6794@newsread2.news.atl.earth link.net...
> "George Cathcart" <gcathcar@nospam.umd.edu> wrote
>
> > What the Vyper's bars show is how close you are to your no deco time at
> > any given point. The more bars, the closer you are to your limit.
> > Depending on your profile, etc., you could potentially still be showing
> > bars at or near the surface.
> >
> > I kind of like that. It keeps it simple, but it's also redundant. The
> > number of bars showing correlates with the amount of ND time showing,
> > which is the largest and most prominent part of the whole display. You
> > get under 10 minutes, the bars get to the first yellow mark. Under five,
> > you're at the second mark, and you better be looking for the anchor
> > line. But you can see the numbers clearly, so what's the point of the
> bars?
>
> For me, the graphic display is better information than the numbers alone. I
> kind of like seeing my remaining time in relation to the time I've already
> spent and the graphics are better than the numbers for that. I also like
> the concept of a caution, or yellow zone. It gives me an indication of
> somebody else's idea of what is sufficiently conservative without imposing
> that conservatism on me.
>
> Nothing above should be construed to mean that I own or wish to own a Suunto
> product. They are a bit too conservative for my taste.
>
> Lee
Lee,

I prefer the Oceanic display as well, but my overriding criterion was the more
conservative (and I believe more advanced) Suunto algorithm. I'm not as fit as I used to
be and definitely no US Navy diver. Also there was a study that found subclinical spinal
cord lesions on MRI in divers and another of memory deficits in divers and I fear losing
neurons.

In Nitrox mode the Suunto displays O2 bars rather than no deco time. This makes sense
because the Suunto N2 bars are really just the no deco time in bar form. (Suunto calls the
N2 bars the Consumed Bottom Time). By pressing a button it will switch from O2 to the N2
bars for 5 seconds, but as I said the Suunto N2 bars provide no more info than the big no
deco digital display.

The Suunto has continuous deco depth stops rather than the fixed steps of the Oceanic. The
stops increase and decrease in increments of one foot.

The Suunto show the floor as well as the ceiling. Once above the floor you start
decompressing rather than taking up N2. Unfortunately, and I don't understand why, it only
indicates the floor in deco mode. I would think this concept is useful in no deco diving
as well and would help with the deep stop, which should occur somewhere just above the
floor. The current issue of Alert Diver (the DAN flyer) talks about deep stops.

Adam

Lee Bell <leebell@ix.remove.netcom.com> wrote:
>Interesting. That's another reason for liking my Oceanic better than the
>Suunto line. My Oceanics show both O2 and Nitrogen.

It's a shame they're so poorly manufactured. (I've gone thru two
DataSports and a DataPlus) Frankly, I'd rather the thing work
when I need it to.

--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 23:11:29 GMT, "Adam Helberg"
<sendspamhere@yahoo.com> wrote:

>In the end my cheapness prevailed (over the Vytec) and my Suunto Vyper came. I've had a
>chance of playing with the functions on the surface and have a few early comments in
>comparison with my old Oceanic Prodigy.
>
>It has far more functions, of course than the Prodigy.
>
>Even in the most liberal setting it is still more conservative than the Prodigy.
>
>I now understand why some think the bar graph is useless. In the Prodigy the bar graph
>displays the nitrogen content of the controlling tissue compartment, but in the Suunto the
>bar graph is merely a graphic display of the no-deco time. Thus the Prodigy bars do show
>extra info while the Suunto does not. At the surface the Prodigy shows bars regressing
>whereas I expect the Suunto to show no bars. Here I prefer Oceanic's method.
>
>The Vytec has a handy simulator mode useful for seeing what the display would look like in
>unlikely conditions, such as heavy deco diving or violations. It also came with a PC
>interface which looks a little dated with its serial interface and no mention of Windows
>XP compatibility.
>
>Adam

I have used a Suunto Vyper several times, and I own an Aeris Atmos 2
(which is essentially the same computer as the Oceanic Versa Pro).
Personally, I much prefer the Atmos 2 primarily because the display is
much easier for me to read than the Vyper. Also, I've found the Vyper
to be conservative to the point of almost being useless. Frankly, I
don't use the Atmos 2 as a dive computer very often, but mostly in
gauge mode. Again the display is better for me on the Atmos than on
the Vyper. Just my thoughts.

-bob