Question Have you (or anyone you know) ever seen a yoke regulator dislodged while diving?

[tursiops]

I called it ironic because his post was what you quoted to say this all misses the point... When his example was a yoke failure by nearly any definition (to include this poll... It was dislodged).

I'm sorry my post confused you, perhaps because you are in defense mode about your poll. My first sentence was about his post. The rest should have been in a separate paragraph so as not to confuse.

 

[James79]

It just doesn't make much sense to me to deliberately ignore every single possible failure mode of yoke regs because that's not the focus on this thread/poll, but then concluding that criticism against yoke regs is unwarranted because this one particular failure mode may not happen to the extreme degree that some people may have presented. Such a singular focus can't be used to conclude anything other than whether or not this one point of criticism is valid or not. Not all the other points of criticism that are being willfully ignored.
Personally I don't care at all what others use. I am not expressing my opinion on yoke vs DIN, I'm simply making an observation about the flawed logic used in the conclusion phase of this thread.

In a conclusion about one specific failure mode (what this thread is about), concluding that that specific failure mode doesn't warrant the degree and vehemence with which some present it is absolutely valid. Because it was discussing the specific failure mode. Not general criticism of yoke, not other failure modes of yoke, not as a primary or solitary decider of whether or not to use yoke. Just if this one specific failure mode is as common/dangerous as presented.
Nowhere have I claimed that criticism against yoke regs is unwarranted (in the general sense), only that this one particular criticism is less of an issue than presented in the discussion that prompted the poll. Where it was said that this (yokes getting knocked loose, sheared off, or bent) wasn't uncommon.
The only conclusions I'm taking from this poll are that this specific failure mode is not a significant enough issue to be the major factor in a DIN/yoke decision, and that SB has trouble with polls that are tight focused!

I'm sorry my post confused you, perhaps because you are in defense mode about your poll. My first sentence was about his post. The rest should have been in a separate paragraph so as not to confuse.

If your intent was for it to be 2 separate thoughts, then yes... 2 separate paragraphs would have made it read that way. It wasn't confusing due to any defensiveness, it was confusing (related to what you say you meant) because it was written with no break between a change in direction.

Regardless, I've learned what I wanted to learn from this poll. And I'm tired of reiterating the purpose of it every couple pages. Thank you to all who participated.

Respectfully,

James

 

[Aura]

In a conclusion about one specific failure mode (what this thread is about), concluding that that specific failure mode doesn't warrant the degree and vehemence with which some present it is absolutely valid.

Completely agree.

Nowhere have I claimed that criticism against yoke regs is unwarranted (in the general sense), only that this one particular criticism is less of an issue than presented in the discussion that prompted the poll.

Fair enough. That's just how post #84 came across to me. I apologize if I misunderstood its meaning.

 

[lexvil]

Split fins are "an eminent" threat????????????

Where have you been ?

 

[Lorenzoid]

I think some others who happened upon this thread are missing that what prompted your poll was a thread in which somebody asked whether a DIN reg is important for doing some wreck diving in the Red Sea. That question evoked the oft-repeated (I won't say "myth") belief that yoke regs can become dislodged if they contact something overhead and that therefore DIN is de rigeur for wreck swim-throughs, chasing fish under ledges, etc. That is the failure mode of interest in this poll, as I understand it.

@eelpout 's post is exactly what I was trying to quantify (impact induced failure, i.e. dislodged or sheared).

@eelpout's anecdote is the only one in this thread that seemed to fit the scenario imagined by the diver in that other thread: the reg contacting something overhead and becoming dislodged. And so far, 4 out of 83 respondents to the poll indicated they experienced a reg becoming dislodged (in some manner) during a dive.

So it seems it can happen. For a few likely wide-open swim-throughs on a one-week wreck diving safari, it is probably overly cautious to buy new regs just for that.

 

[BoltSnap]

Where have you been ?

Behind enemy lines.

 

[The Chairman]

One of the arguments postulated against yoke

Wild speculation, mostly. There are only two real reasons to dive DIN over yoke: preference and entanglement.

 

[billgraham]

DIN valves are better. They cost more and people don't want to replace valves and regs, I get it. If you start getting into more advanced diving, everything costs more and you end up replacing all the yoke valves and regs anyway, so if you plan on going forward, it's easier just to buy DIN in the first place.

 

[MarkA]

DIN valves are better. They cost more and people don't want to replace valves and regs, I get it. If you start getting into more advanced diving, everything costs more and you end up replacing all the yoke valves and regs anyway, so if you plan on going forward, it's easier just to buy DIN in the first place.

So that’s why I got that Cyklon 300. Even though it was 8 years before I got a cylinder with a DIN valve.

 

[John Bantin]

When you've watched busy Caribbean dive shop employees chucking tanks into a truck you'll understand why they prefer tanks with pillar valves for A-clamp connections more than tanks with DIN valve connections. If a DIN valve gets knocked out of true, it's game-over. You can't screw a regulator 1st stage into a distorted tank DIN valve. In other parts of the world where DIN valves are popular, an A-clamp insert slug helps protect the tank's DIN valve when being mistreated.