Cheapest computer with liberal algorithm

[Rob9876]

So I believe that only side-by-side field tests give the reliable answer.

As mentioned in my post above, I've been diving with a Perdix 2 on one arm and a Puck Pro on the other for 44 dives -- a decent variety of recreational dives -- and while I don't have any hard number-crunching data, to me the difference was not really significant. There was no point where I modified my dive to accommodate my Puck Pro or my son's.

I had both computers set on lowest conservatism. Not sure whether the Peregrine and Perdix 2 algorithms are identical, but I'm assuming the Peregrine is not less conservative than the Perdix.

Ever since my son and I set our Puck Pros to the lowest conservatism setting, the computer has never caused us to have to have to end a dive earlier than the group -- most of the time we are some of the last divers back, and even then not because of NDL limits (rather because of how much gas was left in our tanks).

 

[Lorenzoid]

I have a peregrine. My partner is getting into diving and doesn't own a computer yet. One of the reasons I got the peregrine is to not be the guy in the group making everyone ascend on repetitive dives, which I've seen happen a lot with Suunto people.

She doesn't care for anything fancy, but I don't want my Peregrine to be "handicapped" by her computer as we're now likely to be diving together.

So what's the cheapest Nitrox capable computer that I can buy her?

I think it has already been said by someone, but my advice is to dig into the wallet and buy another Peregrine. If nothing else, both of you will be be familiar with each other's computers when you dive together, and if, for example, you decide to change some setting on the Peregrines, be it conservatism, nitrox percentage, or whatever, you can do it together and be assured that you're each running the same settings. My wife and I dive Shearwaters and that's what we do.

 

[tarponchik]

As mentioned in my post above, I've been diving with a Perdix 2 on one arm and a Puck Pro on the other for 44 dives -- a decent variety of recreational dives -- and while I don't have any hard number-crunching data, to me the difference was not really significant. There was no point where I modified my dive to accommodate my Puck Pro or my son's.

I had both computers set on lowest conservatism. Not sure whether the Peregrine and Perdix 2 algorithms are identical, but I'm assuming the Peregrine is not less conservative than the Perdix.

Ever since my son and I set our Puck Pros to the lowest conservatism setting, the computer has never caused us to have to have to end a dive earlier than the group -- most of the time we are some of the last divers back, and even then not because of NDL limits (rather because of how much gas was left in our tanks).

Pretty much same here. I checked my records and the only group dive I found when my comp pushed us out was 2 years ago off Florida. Though we were on Nitrox 36.0, our surface interval before this dive was just 26 min. I surfaced with 750 psi but still this was a 59 min dive, 71 ft max depth. I do not record when the group popped up, but likely the group ended up broken into fragments, like most Florida drift dives w/o DM do. I have Cressi Archimedes II in the least conservative mode.

 

[dmaziuk]

... So I believe that only side-by-side field tests give the reliable answer.

Sort of, but they are heavily profile-dependent. E.g. our Cressis like shore dives where you follow the bottom to the beach -- i.e. spend a lot of time in the shallows, -- then shorter (and not necessarily deeper) "square" dives. They also like 1hr+ SIs noticeably better than 45-minute ones, and even longer before the 4th dive of the day. Knowing this, I can easily devise my "field test" profiles to skew the result in Cressi's favour -- or out.

And since the vendor could tweak various "Gradient-Reducing" parameters in their implementation of RGBM, the above doesn't mean a Mares Puck will behave exactly the same way as Cressi Leo on the same profiles, despite running the "same algorithm".

(Which is what makes ScubLab "testing" useless: yeah, they ran some set of profiles in the pressure cooker. Who knows how that relates to anybody's actual dives.)

 

[tarponchik]

our Cressis like shore dives where you follow the bottom to the beach -- i.e. spend a lot of time in the shallows, -- then shorter (and not necessarily deeper) "square" dives.

What a coincidence

 

[Kimela]

Another vote for the Peregrine. That way you won't need to upgrade hers later when she says "hey, yours is easy to change the settings and they don't revert over night. I want THAT now!". I love my Peregrine. I really disliked how tedious it was to change setting on all previous computers - and of course the conservative algorithms of some were a pain (a Mares farkled a dive once - grrrr).

 

[dmaziuk]

What a coincidence

If only it didn't suck at deco: if you overstay the NDL in the bottom part, no matter how long you spend in the shallows, it will only add to the mandatory stop time. Win some - lose some.

 

[tarponchik]

If only it didn't suck at deco: if you overstay the NDL in the bottom part, no matter how long you spend in the shallows, it will only add to the mandatory stop time. Win some - lose some.

Mine adds deco time! The longest I ever got was 13 min. And then, on top of that, it adds the mandatory 3 min stop.

 

[dmaziuk]

Check. My guess is it's the limitation of the "folded RGBM" dumbed down to run on low-power Seiko watches: "RGBM proper" is supposed to require quite a bit of CPU oompf to run.

 

[tarponchik]

Check. My guess is it's the limitation of the "folded RGBM" dumbed down to run on low-power Seiko watches: "RGBM proper" is supposed to require quite a bit of CPU oompf to run.

There are too many versions already and on some comps these can be customized into RGBMTQ+