Need Advise

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

hwa0421

ScubaBoard Supporter
ScubaBoard Supporter
Messages
97
Reaction score
0
Location
underwater
Hi all,

I'm a serious uw photographer and decide switch to CCR.
Currently I'm considering mCCR (KISS or rEvo).

Q1. Which mCCR?
Q2. Training Where & with Who? (Thailand or Philippines will be great coz' I'm in Korea).

Thanks,
 
What about the Pelagian?

It is made in Thailand, and there is soon going to be a course in the Philippines (Malapascua)
 
between the KISS and Revo, I'd go with the rEvo. I am certified on the Evolution, the copis meg and the rEvo III and have try dived both KISS units, the Inspo and the Optima. I like the concept of the Pelagian and if that is easier for you to get instruction on it would probably be a fine choice... I have been thinking of adding a needle valve to my rigs for a while. I'm currently getting into more serious photography and find mCCR and photography a good match... manual injection makes you pay attention more and photography tempts distraction, a nice balance. g
 
Why not consider a rebreather that gives you both options? Manual and Electronic?
Check out the specs on the Titan eCCR. It has a beautiful manual addition block that allows you to hook up to any off board you would need. Titan has instructors that travel all over the world.
 
Why not consider a rebreather that gives you both options? Manual and Electronic?
Check out the specs on the Titan eCCR. It has a beautiful manual addition block that allows you to hook up to any off board you would need. Titan has instructors that travel all over the world.

what do you see as the advantage to having both? And then again, don't all eCCR's have a MAV? Unless you block the o2 first stage and add a MFO, you don't really get both and even then, your set point controller then has a depth limit too, right? Seems like unnecessary additional cost, adding more points of failure and putting faith in a safety net that doesn't have a very good record of catching people when they fall.

offboard o2 is so easy to plumb in from a non-depth compensating reg, eliminating the depth limitation of an mCCR.

g
 
Just personal preference. A lot of folks don't like to rely on electronics, and some like to fly manual for the entire dive. I can't say I'm one of those people, but they are out there.
I also don't consider it to be more points of failure, rather more safety backups.
 
Just personal preference. A lot of folks don't like to rely on electronics, and some like to fly manual for the entire dive. I can't say I'm one of those people, but they are out there.
I also don't consider it to be more points of failure, rather more safety backups.

Funny that you think that...

What is more likely to malfunction:

The mCCR-part?

or

The eCCR-part?

The problem with the eCCR-part is that it could inject oxygen into the loop because of a malfunction...

A hCCR (hybrid) is IMO a mCCR with almost all the cons of the eCCR... The only pro is that it is a lot easier to run manually, because of the KISS-valve.

Unless you are going to dive extremely deep, or usually don´t pay attention to your PO2, the best choice would be a mCCR. And if you want to dive extremely deep, you could still dive mCCR, by running it like a manually eCCR (without the e-safety-net), or you could use a needle-valve, which is the simplest, and least task-loading alternative.
 
Funny that you think that...

What is more likely to malfunction:

The mCCR-part?

or

The eCCR-part?

The problem with the eCCR-part is that it could inject oxygen into the loop because of a malfunction...

A hCCR (hybrid) is IMO a mCCR with almost all the cons of the eCCR... The only pro is that it is a lot easier to run manually, because of the KISS-valve.

Unless you are going to dive extremely deep, or usually don´t pay attention to your PO2, the best choice would be a mCCR. And if you want to dive extremely deep, you could still dive mCCR, by running it like a manually eCCR (without the e-safety-net), or you could use a needle-valve, which is the simplest, and least task-loading alternative.

What I so genuinely wish is that we could fast forward things a good 5 to 10 years and see if this whole "mCCR is safer" trend really plays out in the long run. With the shift in thinking that has occured in just the past 5 years, in favor of mCCR's, i'm very curious to see how it plays out with so many more mCCR divers out there now. Having dove both kinds of units quite a bit, I'm pretty punch drunk on the cool-aid, I have to admit, it appears unquestionably to me that mCCR's pose a relatively more stable and managable risk which the diver seems more able to consistently stay on top of and I'd even go further to say they seem to encourage a radical shift in attitude about diving in general that may even have a systemic effect on things as nebulous as how a diver prepares for diving. All that said though, what I would give to look into the future to be sure that I have not simply deluded myself. One thing is for sure, it's possible to make fatal mistakes on any kind of rig, even a snorkel! Never take anything for granted when it comes to being under water and please dive safely everyone!!

george
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/swift/

Back
Top Bottom