Full foot fins: Excel vs. Superchannel

[danvolker]

You may be right, but in stating that opinion, you are denying the validity of their data. If you can demonstrate that the testing methods were in error, please do so. If you have some objective test results to the contrary, please post them. Many of us would really like to know whether any of the bells and whistles actually help or hinder.

I have used many of the fins they test, and they have always been a joke. Testing methods for the magazine, while flawed themselves, are nothing compared to ELIMINATING the BEST fins from the test ( because they don't advertise in the scuba magazine). Or, claiming a fin is fast, when the testers are so covered in high drag gear, and of pathetic cardiovascular fitness, that all they really "could" excel with would be a fin that had what is essentially low gearing, so that they could drag themselves through the water...a high speed fin uses kick and glide--again, this is foreign to the "advertising is king" crowd at the magazine.

If you want me to demonstrate what I am talking about, come to Palm beach and I will demonstrate in the ocean..I have all the freediving fins you would want to try, and would even be willing to pick up a few of the lame brands advertised in the magazine tests as so "fast"
I have a boat, so you or whoever, just needs to show up.
Dan V

 

[Hasbi]

Are you saying that you are an underwater rugby player, Hasbi? If so, why not try snorkelling with the fins you use when you're playing underwater rugby in the pool? The great thing about snorkelling is that there are neither prescriptions (you must do this) nor proscriptions (you must not do this) but simply descriptions (do what suits you) when it comes to the fins people use when snorkelling. When I visited La Jolla Cove, a great snorkelling spot in Southern California, a number of years ago, all kinds of fins were in use. Some people were wearing open-heel scuba-style fins, others open-heel bodysurfing fins, others long-bladed full-foot freediving fins, others traditional all-rubber full-foot standard-bladed fins. Although every kind of fin was represented there, the snorkellers all had one thing in common: they were having a wonderful time.

No David, I'm not a rugby player. It was just an example of what movements I like to do in water.

But yes, I do have a pair of full foot fins: Technisub Idea 3 that ı am not so comfortable with. They do great thrust at downwards kick, but nothing for upwards. In fact I've been using these fins since I was 16 (I am 28 now) and I got used to this unbalanced force. Of course I can enjoy every moment of snorkeling with these fins, too.

But now I am planning to spend some money on scuba gear (till now I've been using my clubs equipment) and I thought this is the right time to correct a 12 year old mistake. Because I won't feel the pain of $80-90 cost for the fins, when it inside a $2000 bill (Dive computer, regulator, BC, wetsuit)

 

[lmorin]

I have used many of the fins they test, and they have always been a joke. Testing methods for the magazine, while flawed themselves, are nothing compared to ELIMINATING the BEST fins from the test ( because they don't advertise in the scuba magazine). Or, claiming a fin is fast, when the testers are so covered in high drag gear, and of pathetic cardiovascular fitness, that all they really "could" excel with would be a fin that had what is essentially low gearing, so that they could drag themselves through the water...a high speed fin uses kick and glide--again, this is foreign to the "advertising is king" crowd at the magazine.

If you want me to demonstrate what I am talking about, come to Palm beach and I will demonstrate in the ocean..I have all the freediving fins you would want to try, and would even be willing to pick up a few of the lame brands advertised in the magazine tests as so "fast"
I have a boat, so you or whoever, just needs to show up.
Dan V

I am asking that you demonstrate how their testing methods are erroneous, how their data are erroneous or that you have contrary, objectively obtained data that the world can see.

From an experimental design point of view, it matters not in the slightest that divers are "covered in high drag gear" as long as the assemblage remains the same for every test. If you believe better fins were eliminated, show the comparison OBJECTIVE data to prove it.

Personally, I couldn't care less what fins are best; I just want to see well designed tests and their objective results. Whether you or I or anybody else "feels", "knows" or "wishes" that a particular fin is faster or better is totally irrelevant to the issue of testing, test design and obtaining objective results.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

But yes, I do have a pair of full foot fins: Technisub Idea 3 that ı am not so comfortable with. They do great thrust at downwards kick, but nothing for upwards. In fact I've been using these fins since I was 16 (I am 28 now) and I got used to this unbalanced force. Of course I can enjoy every moment of snorkeling with these fins, too.

But now I am planning to spend some money on scuba gear (till now I've been using my clubs equipment) and I thought this is the right time to correct a 12 year old mistake. Because I won't feel the pain of $80-90 cost for the fins, when it inside a $2000 bill (Dive computer, regulator, BC, wetsuit)

Here's a couple for what it's worths:

If a magazine proclaims fins from major advertisers to be best picks and editor's picks every year for decades while other manufacture's fins that many of us have intimate knowledge to the contrary about are either not part of the test or do not get the picks, it is hard to believe the objectivity of the tests.

I bought my first pair of fins to be used for freediving, Cresie Rondine Gara's, from Snorkel Bob's on Kauai. The list price new in '92 was $150, I paid $75 for a well used rental set. They were pretty scratched and scuffed but no cracks. I got scuba certified fairly soon after that, using those freedive fins.

Since then I have purchased many, many pairs of scuba fins, but no other freedive fins. In '04 I chose to abandon my kayak and attached fins to recover my camera from the bottom when a wave capsized me. One of my Rondine's was ruined before I could recover the kayak off the reef. Replacement cost was up to $185 for the new Gara 2000's, so I made due with borrowing my business partners 2000's when I needed to freedive. Unfortunately, he died in a skydiving accident. Fortunately for me I inherited those Gara 2000's.

My pleasure diving is to take photographs of critters that sometime lead me through tight squeezes. I also guide and instruct diving as one of my main jobs. I have been only using the Gara 2000's for nearly the last year. My scuba guiding is at dive sites with lava tubes and caverns daily. My pleasure diving is also under rock often, even when breath hold. I love the Mares Quattros; both full foot and open heel, but on an instructors pocketbook I find it hard to justify the cost of another set of fins when the 2000's are doing the job.

My employer, who has run a dive business and hired guide/instructors for over 25 years, is pushing for me to not wear the freedive fins at work, 'cause when I end up out in front of my group by more than a little he is prone to blame my fins. A funny thing is those divers I leave in the dust often are wearing those best pick and editor's pick fins.

 

[danvolker]

I am asking that you demonstrate how their testing methods are erroneous, how their data are erroneous or that you have contrary, objectively obtained data that the world can see.

From an experimental design point of view, it matters not in the slightest that divers are "covered in high drag gear" as long as the assemblage remains the same for every test. If you believe better fins were eliminated, show the comparison OBJECTIVE data to prove it.

Personally, I couldn't care less what fins are best; I just want to see well designed tests and their objective results. Whether you or I or anybody else "feels", "knows" or "wishes" that a particular fin is faster or better is totally irrelevant to the issue of testing, test design and obtaining objective results.

Sorry,
My "job" is not to help a bunch of "pencil necked geeks" with their testing methodologies. I don't want or need a nerd to find the best or fastest fins.
The testing in the magazine does NOT help real divers ( because it is bogus), and as long as advertising drives scubadiving.com, it will remain an advertorial publication--testing will remain just another form of fiction.

Fortunately, we live in a world where the Internet can get REAL INFORMATION out to interested people...We don't need an advertorial magazine with pretenda-tests to HELP show divers which fins are fast or better, any more than the WKPP needed Rodales or Skin Diver to push the "ideas" of DIR diving. The strongest thing ever done to give DIR ideas good penetration into diving, was the DIR DEMO. Instead of reading what "could be" a fiction, divers were encouraged to come and see for themselves..the experience became far more valuable than any bogus test an advertorial format magazine could ever put into print.

So again, if you or anyone else wants to experience first hand WHY C4's or Cressi freedive fins are far superior, come to Palm Beach. I'm putting my money where my mouth is, by getting you a free dive trip on my boat, free tanks, and free use of the fins. A nice perk is that we have some of the best diving in this hemisphere, so unlike some bugus pool testing, this will actually be fun. All I need in return, is true and fair posting back on Scubaboard afterwards, documenting the demos and the experience.

ps
You said it matters not in the slightests about the high drag gear.....this shows you do not understand the physics of high speed underwater propulsion by fish--or divers. Rather than wasting a whole page argueing this with you, the better response is to gear up a diver in high drag equipment, and one in very slick DIR based gear, and then see how the huge glide possible with the slick gear config, changes what optimal propulsion is needed. Another way of describing the high drag diver, is that he is always starting, and can never accelerate up to a speed he can cruise at....after each kick, he immediately slows down from drag--so much so that it is more like every kick starts like the first one. This is easy to do from my boat, if you have the high drag gear....if not, we could always tie a bunch of junk to a diver, to simulate a diver than configures himself like the magazine ads would suggest

Dan V

 

[lmorin]

.........
You said it matters not in the slightests about the high drag gear..................

My statement was completely clear. I wrote,

From an experimental design point of view, it matters not in the slightest that divers are "covered in high drag gear" as long as the assemblage remains the same for every test.

When a fin test is being conducted, the purpose is to test the fins, not the drag profile of the diver. That just needs to be held constant while the fin models vary. I am interested in objective test results about fins, not about how this or that type of fin works with or without a high or low drag profile. And, to repeat, objective results are the only ones that count. If you can provide them, please do so.

 

[deco_martini]

I am asking that you demonstrate how their testing methods are erroneous, how their data are erroneous or that you have contrary, objectively obtained data that the world can see.

Why are you asking him? If you visit the web page for this 2007 article, it basically makes no claim for a single or double blind study. In other words, this evaluation was subjective, not objective.

Instead of having someone else explain it, try doing it yourself.

 

[lmorin]

Why are you asking him? If you visit the web page for this 2007 article, it basically makes no claim for a single or double blind study. In other words, this evaluation was subjective, not objective.

Instead of having someone else explain it, try doing it yourself.

I have visited that page multiple times. From that Scuba Diver Magazine

Here are the fin test protocols:

Objective Tests

SPEED
Using a flutter kick at an average depth of 10 feet, six test divers took each fin on two speed runs using specially designed underwater digital speedometers. The highest speed for each fin was taken from each diver, then averaged, to come up with the following chart data. Please keep in mind that in real-world diving, the difference of 1/10th mph is insignificant. Speed data is only part of a fin's overall performance. Scuba Lab recommends evaluating all areas of fin performance before making a buying decision. Note: In preparation for the 2007 Scuba Lab Fin Test, we invested in a new set of underwater speedometers with updated electronics. Calibration tests showed these new speedometers track fin speeds at a consistent half knot, or .58 mph, slower than the speedometers used in previous fin tests. When comparing speed performance of this year's fins with the speed performance of fins tested in past reviews, add .58 mph to this year's speeds to make them comparable.

THRUST TEST
To gather average thrust measurements, we used 12 test divers for each fin tested. Using a flutter kick at an average depth of 10 feet, test divers grabbed onto a rigid-handled harness that connected to a scale that connected to a pier piling. Holding the handle securely against their bodies, test divers slowly kicked forward, taking the slack out of the harness, then gradually increased their speed to their maximum effort. A test supervisor monitoring the scale recorded the maximum thrust (in pounds) generated by each diver. The data in the following chart represents the average of these measurements.

SLALOM COURSE
Six test divers, using a flutter kick, followed a zig-zag course laid out in the sand in approximately 10 feet of water. While on the course, divers' hands clutched either weight belts or BC straps to ensure all maneuvering power was generated by the fins. Divers swam two round-trip circuits per fin recording their course times with digital stopwatches. The fastest time for each fin was taken from each diver, then averaged, to come up with the following course times.

Those are objective tests, as Scuba Diver Magazine so stated. Doing the study "blind" has nothing to do with whether or not a study is subjective or objective. It has to do with removing bias from the sampling method. You can certainly raise the absence of a "blind" method as a criticism of the study if you wish. To do such a study, the divers would not be able to know which fins they were wearing and, ideally, the experimenters would not know the type of fin for which they were recording data. I'm frankly impressed that they acquired large sets of objective data and Scuba Diver should be give credit for gathering such data. One of very very few such analyses, as far as I can tell.

 

[danvolker]

First, the magazine destroyed any chance at all at "objectively" determining the fastest fin, by ONLY choosing fins to test among a small number of brands that advertise with the magazine--I do not believe they ever considered C4's or Cressi Gara, or Picassos, or Omer, or other good freediving fins.
So if you are driving a Lamborghini Gallardo, and you find out Rodales just did a test, and determined that the Ford Mustang IS the fasted road racing car you can find on the streets of America, you might just take issue with Rodales, and anything that is supposed to be "objective" about their testing. Obviously your Gallardo is much faster--but rodales will say--"oh, well, they never contacted us, we did not realize Americans ever drove them, or that there even were any used in America.
The magazine is garbage, and it is a sad replacement for learning about diving by diving.

Instead, if you were diving on enough boats in Palm Beach Fl, sooner or later you could esily be paired up with divers wearing just about any kind of fin, including the faster freedive fins...once you realized that the freedive fin wearing divers are faster, the next step would be to dive with someone you dive with frequently, who dives at your speed ( by fitness and fin efficiency), and see what happens to the equation when YOU are using the fast freedive fins.....and what will happen, is that you will effortlessly be much faster....and this is faster not in some pool test, but in the constantly evolving environment of an ocean dive with lots of current, things to maneuver around, and all the real issues involved in deciding what makes a fin better.
The magazine is advertising. It is a joke.
Dan V

 

[Hasbi]

Dan, this test isn't done to find the fastest fin in the world. There are 18 fins chosen for the test and they are just comparing these fins. I think you just misunderstood the goal.

So you can blame the magazine only if the comparison is wrong between the tested fins. That's why I asked if Superchannel is really better than Avanti Excel (both fins are reviewed in the test)