Using Nitrox...

[String]

If you find you're ending dives due to running out of no-stop time then Nitrox can help.
If you're always ending dive due to gas or other reasons (thermal etc) then there is little or no point.

As others have said, if doing multiple dives over multiple days you stand more chance of hitting the no-stop times so it might be of use. If you dive 1 or 2 dives a day over a weekend and dont come up against no stop limits i dont see the point.

Somewhere like a liveaboard its going to be mostly useful. (except the one im going on next month wants $10 per fill extra cost for nitrox and im not paying $200 more just for that so its air all week for me!).

You may hear other claims about nitrox such as "safer" and "makes me less tired" but there is no evidence to support either claim and it could simply be placebo.

 

[speedhound]

All:

..... it sounds like I should stick with air, esp. since my buddy will be diving on air anyway. ....

You've mentioned another reason for sticking with air, or diving Nitrox with your computer set to air - your buddy. There's no point in one of you being able to avoid a (longer) deco obligation - or a shorter SI - if you have to stick with your buddy while he does his.

 

[Kim]

.....but there is no evidence to support either claim and it could simply be placebo.

Hey!! Don't knock it. It works for religion for some.

 

[Colliam7]

... as long as air consumption is limiting, Nitrox is going to be of little help ... except for the fact that it can give me shorter surface intervals ... given my situation, Nitrox isn't too helpful until the next time I am on a liveaboard and want to cram in as many dives as possible.

You have captured the essence of the replies.

For this scenario, it sounds like I should stick with air, esp. since my buddy will be diving on air anyway. Does this sound about right, given the advice given here?

Yes. I dove nitrox more frequently for the first year after I was certified. Since then, for routine recreational diving (quarries, shallow coastal dives), I use it infrequently. When I go somewhere such as Bonaire or Roatan, where I am diving 4-5 times/day, I use it routinely, because the extra expense is minimal and the benefits are more tangible. I do have the advantage of being able to blend my own gases locally, and for deeper (100 - 140'), non-decompression, coastal dives, I will blend an appropriate nitrox mix to minimize the possible limitations of air NDLs.

 

[Kim]

......because the extra expense is minimal and the benefits are more tangible.

Bingo!

 

[DaleC]

You may hear other claims about nitrox such as "safer" and "makes me less tired" but there is no evidence to support either claim and it could simply be placebo.

$10 extra a fill does alter the pros/cons somewhat (ouch) but I have to take exception here. - Whether you prefer nitrox or not is a personal preference and I recognise that there is a pro/anti EAN debate out there somewhere but to mitigate its effects to "placebo" is misleading to someone seeking objective advice. Those tables demonstrating the reduction of depth and the reduction of SI are based on physiological effects (not psychological).

All other variables being equal, some real safety factors (related to the OP's case) are:
a.) Is someone at less risk for a DCI diving at 60ft. for 60 min. on EAN32 compared to air.
b.) If someone dives 60ft. for 55 min. with a 1hr. SI are they at less risk for a DCI entering the water for a second dive if they have used EAN32 or air.
One could argue that it is not any safer because one plans dives safely according to NDL's and PG's but the question is whether EAN has any real effect over air. Based solely on physiological effects, two divers side by side, is it safer to use EAN vs air. If one argues that a more conservative profile is not safer than I can't go any further.

Also (I know its not Strings objection but I can't figure out the multi quote), If one is diving EAN with a partner that is using air there is no negative effect as long as one sets their computer (tables ) to air as well. In fact one is diving more conservatively (which is a good thing).

As to feeling "fresher" after a dive - Just talk to people that dive EAN (are we all suffering a mass hallucination?). For a day of ocean diving I have to drive 1.5-2.0hr's, suit up, dive, SI, dive, pack up, drive 1.5-2.0hr's and wash and store gear. If it is just placebo that I feel fresher, I'll take it!!!

To the OP: I'm not trying to sell you on nitrox, that is your choice and I respect it but (as indicated in my original post) there are other benefits associated with its use besides extending dive times. If the cost is high (as in Strings case) then the benefits of EAN might not pass muster but it is useful to understand how nitrox does/does not contribute to your dive as a whole.
I take the pro's and put them on one side of the see saw and put the cons on the other - that's all. I dive $3000-$4000 worth of gear so the $2 isn't that big a con (in my case). Just the price of the cup of coffee I will buy to stay awake for the drive home anyways.

 

[String]

Hey!! Don't knock it. It works for religion for some.

Don't even get me started on that pile of crap

 

[String]

$10 extra a fill does alter the pros/cons somewhat (ouch) but I have to take exception here. - Whether you prefer nitrox or not is a personal preference and I recognise that there is a pro/anti EAN debate out there somewhere but to mitigate its effects to "placebo" is misleading to someone seeking objective advice. Those tables demonstrating the reduction of depth and the reduction of SI are based on physiological effects (not psychological).

Those aren't the effect im debating. The 2 things i take issue with are much touted and neither has a single objective/reviewed evidence to back it up. Those are the claims:
(i) less fatigue post dive and
(ii) diving nitrox on air tables reduces the risk of DCS

Ive yet to see ANY evidence to support either claim.

 

[DaleC]

I agree that point (i) is subjective and can't be empirically demonstrated but sometimes antedotal evidence is correct as well. Most divers that I know using EAN report feeling "fresher". Either we're all dupes or we feel "an effect". Part of the discrepancy may be due to the locales dived. A dive in Florida for example (all other factors being equal) is probably less tiring than a colder dive in Canada so the benefits felt by EAN use may not be as noticable. We may both be correct in a way (shrugs).
As to point (ii). I am confused as to the statement. If one on gasses less N at a given depth are they not less exposed to DCS? Am I missing something?

Again, to me EAN is not a magic potion - just a tool. As with most tools, I try to understand their full use, risk and potential and then choose to use/not use them accordingly. I just offer my thoughts as points to ponder for the OP.

 

[String]

I agree that point (i) is subjective and can't be empirically demonstrated but sometimes antedotal evidence is correct as well. Most divers that I know using EAN report feeling "fresher". Either we're all dupes or we feel "an effect". Part of the discrepancy may be due to the locales dived. A dive in Florida for example (all other factors being equal) is probably less tiring than a colder dive in Canada so the benefits felt by EAN use may not be as noticable. We may both be correct in a way (shrugs).

and the problem with anecdotal evidence is the placebo effect is very well known. I dont know of a single person here that claims nitrox makes them feel any less tired. From a personal view i get tired and stop to sleep driving home regardless of what gas im diving so again for me no difference.

As to point (ii). I am confused as to the statement. If one on gasses less N at a given depth are they not less exposed to DCS? Am I missing something?

Because the incidences of DCS are already so vanishingly small that no statistically significance could be found in the only studies done. Just because there is a theoretical benefit doesnt mean there is a real one once you start looking at real objects in the real world.