I was wanting some advice on the Oceanic, Uwatec and Suunto line of computers. I am relatively new to diving having recently been certified after performing the OW dives in Hawaii for a universal referral. I am interested in purchasing some equipment but I can't make up my mind on the computers. I dove with a Oceanic Prodigy while performing the OW dives and really liked it, but I have heard some real good reviews on the Suunto and Uwatec computers. Price wise, I know the Oceanic is cheaper, and the others are more expensive. If I remember correctly, the Oceanic was more liberal than the Uwatec and Suunto. What type of algorythms do the three computers use and which is better? Any advice is appreciated. I was looking at the Oceanic Versa Pro, the Suunto Cobra and an Uwatec computer that was nitrox capable. Thanks. Tim
oceanic, suunto or uwatec computers...?
- Thread starter isp475
- Start date
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
TexasMike
Contributor
Since you have already decided on selecting a Nitrox capable computer (good choice by the way! 
), let me share with you a personal preference that I have for the display of information.
After doing several nitrox dives, and working through the Advanced Nitrox course through TDI, I have come to prefer that any computer I'm using display both N2 and O2 uptake graphs. To me, this is some key information that I need to keep track of.
But unfortunately, not all models of computers do this.
The Genesis ReACT that I currently own (which is not too different from the other hocky pucks including the Oceanic line), has just one graph showing N2 loading. O2 loading is a percentage of your oxygen tolerance for the day and exposed pO2.
The Uwatec's don't use a graph, they just show remaining bottom time for that depth, and a O2 percentage (I'm going by memory of what I saw on the demo's of their website, so I might be in slight error).
And I'm not sure how the Suunto computers display the information.
Please understand that I'm not bashing the capabilities of any of these computers. I'm just stating that they currently don't meet my preference for showing both N2 and O2 loading information.
Computers that I have seen that do display both bits of info are the Aeris and Oceanic wrist mounts (including the hoseless air integrated versions), the Dive-Rite Nitek1 and Nitek3, the OMS EANx, the Oceanic "on hose" air integrated computer.
So anyway, be sure to consider WHAT information you want to be able to see on your computer's display in addition to ease of use, ease of setting, and how cool it looks during the dive (hey, fashion is everything...right? :tease: )
((The above is not a recommendation or an endorsement of any computer. Just a statement of my observations and personal preferences. Comments and discussoin are always encouraged.))
), let me share with you a personal preference that I have for the display of information.After doing several nitrox dives, and working through the Advanced Nitrox course through TDI, I have come to prefer that any computer I'm using display both N2 and O2 uptake graphs. To me, this is some key information that I need to keep track of.
But unfortunately, not all models of computers do this.
The Genesis ReACT that I currently own (which is not too different from the other hocky pucks including the Oceanic line), has just one graph showing N2 loading. O2 loading is a percentage of your oxygen tolerance for the day and exposed pO2.
The Uwatec's don't use a graph, they just show remaining bottom time for that depth, and a O2 percentage (I'm going by memory of what I saw on the demo's of their website, so I might be in slight error).
And I'm not sure how the Suunto computers display the information.
Please understand that I'm not bashing the capabilities of any of these computers. I'm just stating that they currently don't meet my preference for showing both N2 and O2 loading information.
Computers that I have seen that do display both bits of info are the Aeris and Oceanic wrist mounts (including the hoseless air integrated versions), the Dive-Rite Nitek1 and Nitek3, the OMS EANx, the Oceanic "on hose" air integrated computer.
So anyway, be sure to consider WHAT information you want to be able to see on your computer's display in addition to ease of use, ease of setting, and how cool it looks during the dive (hey, fashion is everything...right? :tease: )
((The above is not a recommendation or an endorsement of any computer. Just a statement of my observations and personal preferences. Comments and discussoin are always encouraged.))
MNScuba
Guest
My next computer will be an Uwatec, either air integrated Air Z or Smart Pro (maybe by then the Smart Pro will have an air integrated option).
The reason comes to me from a friend of mine who is a very experienced and well educated diver, here is what he had to say:
--------------------
Just a background, I like to keep a 1.4 ata partial pressure (p.p.) profile. I dont usually enjoy pushing the envelope into the 1.5 ata or 1.6 ata, though Ive been there and my Uwatecs worked like a charm.
Concerning algorithms: The opinion that the Suunto and Uwatec computers are more conservative is false. If the computers O2 ata p.p is programmable, then the maximum depth and bottom time algorithm is adjusted. Most computers come set at 1.4 (which most dive tables are set for), then they can recalibrate for your current location in the water throughout the dive. Others come with 1.5 ata. Which is halfway between the 1.6 emergency contingency models. (In most cases, most educated divers try to keep their p.p. at 1.4 no matter what their depth or dive profile. Even in extreme technical diving). My hose-less Uwatec for example can be set from a Maximum Operating Depth (MOD) from 1.2 ata to 1.95 ata. (John Hardy, who has since passed away, was the leading editor for scuba divings scuba lab, which tests a variety of brands of dive gear. He said that they initially made a mistake in publishing that some computers were more conservative than others, but because of content space they couldnt fit everything in they wanted which happens quite often) Ill bet everyone is wanting content space restriction on this, my posting
When I spoke with Mr. Hardy, he also mentioned an upcoming side-bar editorial that was being published afterward. It came out explaining that most of the dive computer manufacturers had not been making any advances to their algorithms, though medical research and advancements had forecasted some of them could be changed. Many were based solely upon the Navy tables (thats about 50 yrs old now) and Haldanes gas theory research, without adaptations to any current research. This publishing angered many advertisers as they were promoting latest and greatest computer advances with only a name change and new packaging. (This is still occurring, you can see the same computer under many different brand names with maybe just a slight change of read-out, etc)
I started looking into the Uwatec line of computer long ago because Uwatec was considered by many to be the brains behind the scene when they were partnered with Drager Rebreathers. I bought into the Uwatec computer line long ago because it had the most reliable and proven track record in the tech-diving community. Everyone was using the Aladin Pro at that time because it offered all the liberal profile you wanted along with the most accuracy for the depths you wanted to go. They also offered an adaptable algorithm, which was accounting for and adapting to the ACTUAL diver behavior, temperature of the water, as well as the workload. That's important to me here in Minnesota especially for temperature changes and the environment your in, the effect of your workload and movement, and a combination of these things. This was by far and huge advance in the development of a profile, based upon newer research on Doppler examination of bubble formation. (Remember that PADI RDP Wheel that was designed, it offers multi-level dive profiling, which none of the tables were designed to do. The tables were designed of the Navys basis of having divers descend for a specific task and ascend. Thats not the recreational diver, we dive multi-level profiles on almost every dive.)
Later I started using some of the Oceanic computers, but my DataMax went on the fritz, and then the company started recalling them. (All Aeris have been recently recalled as well, SAME manufacturer). I got rid of it and kept with my Uwatec.
Ive only dove the Suunto computers once and for my dive profile, it was not a computer I wished to have. I like long, deep dives, especially on vacation. There were two others with the Mosquito, same result, but even more conservative profiles than I. The Suuntos were locking out on a regular basis, though the Uwatec Aladin Pro and hose-less Air Z-Nitrox computers were all showing accurate profiles and matched with the freedom I wanted for my own diving, yet still trying to avoid decompression diving.
Recently, there is a breakthrough with the Uwatec Smart Pro (and all the Smart series). They still utilize the adaptable micro-bubble level. But more importantly for the smart series is the level stops it can recommend for micro bubble build-up. I recently read the debate of Haldane's off-gas theory versus Hill's, from Alert Diver (DAN research). Haldane said that by stopping half-way to the surface from your depth, you decrease the 1/2 life p.p of the gas, improving deco and safety. Hill suggested that a divers profile could go straight up to the safety stop. (Both following a slow ascent rate) After a long debate and a lot of research, Haldane was proven the superior method. Hill theory could potentially increase your chance of type II DCS (neurological sickness - very common), more so than Haldane's theory. And the Smart series of computers now advice you of the micro-bubble level stops, without limiting your dive freedom or profile.
I hope that some of the other manufacturers and distributors continue to improve upon their dive computers and their potentials as Im always looking for my next safe, fun and reliable toy.
The reason comes to me from a friend of mine who is a very experienced and well educated diver, here is what he had to say:
--------------------
Just a background, I like to keep a 1.4 ata partial pressure (p.p.) profile. I dont usually enjoy pushing the envelope into the 1.5 ata or 1.6 ata, though Ive been there and my Uwatecs worked like a charm.
Concerning algorithms: The opinion that the Suunto and Uwatec computers are more conservative is false. If the computers O2 ata p.p is programmable, then the maximum depth and bottom time algorithm is adjusted. Most computers come set at 1.4 (which most dive tables are set for), then they can recalibrate for your current location in the water throughout the dive. Others come with 1.5 ata. Which is halfway between the 1.6 emergency contingency models. (In most cases, most educated divers try to keep their p.p. at 1.4 no matter what their depth or dive profile. Even in extreme technical diving). My hose-less Uwatec for example can be set from a Maximum Operating Depth (MOD) from 1.2 ata to 1.95 ata. (John Hardy, who has since passed away, was the leading editor for scuba divings scuba lab, which tests a variety of brands of dive gear. He said that they initially made a mistake in publishing that some computers were more conservative than others, but because of content space they couldnt fit everything in they wanted which happens quite often) Ill bet everyone is wanting content space restriction on this, my posting
When I spoke with Mr. Hardy, he also mentioned an upcoming side-bar editorial that was being published afterward. It came out explaining that most of the dive computer manufacturers had not been making any advances to their algorithms, though medical research and advancements had forecasted some of them could be changed. Many were based solely upon the Navy tables (thats about 50 yrs old now) and Haldanes gas theory research, without adaptations to any current research. This publishing angered many advertisers as they were promoting latest and greatest computer advances with only a name change and new packaging. (This is still occurring, you can see the same computer under many different brand names with maybe just a slight change of read-out, etc)
I started looking into the Uwatec line of computer long ago because Uwatec was considered by many to be the brains behind the scene when they were partnered with Drager Rebreathers. I bought into the Uwatec computer line long ago because it had the most reliable and proven track record in the tech-diving community. Everyone was using the Aladin Pro at that time because it offered all the liberal profile you wanted along with the most accuracy for the depths you wanted to go. They also offered an adaptable algorithm, which was accounting for and adapting to the ACTUAL diver behavior, temperature of the water, as well as the workload. That's important to me here in Minnesota especially for temperature changes and the environment your in, the effect of your workload and movement, and a combination of these things. This was by far and huge advance in the development of a profile, based upon newer research on Doppler examination of bubble formation. (Remember that PADI RDP Wheel that was designed, it offers multi-level dive profiling, which none of the tables were designed to do. The tables were designed of the Navys basis of having divers descend for a specific task and ascend. Thats not the recreational diver, we dive multi-level profiles on almost every dive.)
Later I started using some of the Oceanic computers, but my DataMax went on the fritz, and then the company started recalling them. (All Aeris have been recently recalled as well, SAME manufacturer). I got rid of it and kept with my Uwatec.
Ive only dove the Suunto computers once and for my dive profile, it was not a computer I wished to have. I like long, deep dives, especially on vacation. There were two others with the Mosquito, same result, but even more conservative profiles than I. The Suuntos were locking out on a regular basis, though the Uwatec Aladin Pro and hose-less Air Z-Nitrox computers were all showing accurate profiles and matched with the freedom I wanted for my own diving, yet still trying to avoid decompression diving.
Recently, there is a breakthrough with the Uwatec Smart Pro (and all the Smart series). They still utilize the adaptable micro-bubble level. But more importantly for the smart series is the level stops it can recommend for micro bubble build-up. I recently read the debate of Haldane's off-gas theory versus Hill's, from Alert Diver (DAN research). Haldane said that by stopping half-way to the surface from your depth, you decrease the 1/2 life p.p of the gas, improving deco and safety. Hill suggested that a divers profile could go straight up to the safety stop. (Both following a slow ascent rate) After a long debate and a lot of research, Haldane was proven the superior method. Hill theory could potentially increase your chance of type II DCS (neurological sickness - very common), more so than Haldane's theory. And the Smart series of computers now advice you of the micro-bubble level stops, without limiting your dive freedom or profile.
I hope that some of the other manufacturers and distributors continue to improve upon their dive computers and their potentials as Im always looking for my next safe, fun and reliable toy.
exnewwavedivers
Guest
Suunto computers - Cobra, Vyper, Stinger, Mosquito - they give you a lot of details and can log a lot of dives that you can check at a later date. If you are going to buy a Stinger or Mosquito, even though it is advertised that you can use it as a watch, do not do that. I used to own a Spyder, then a Mosquito. Most of the dive professionals I am diving with here uses a Stinger and the problem is that prolonged exposure to the sun causes the LCD screen to fade. My Spyder, in fact, started to blotch until I could not read the screen anymore.
I already sold my Mosquito because the casing is not designed to be very durable. Look at the product and you'll see what I mean.
Uwatec computers are reliable. They can last a long time. It may give you a little less trivial information like time but once connected to a PC... hehehe, it's alright.
Both Uwatec and Suunto computers can be categorized as being conservative. Compared to a liberal computer that gives you more bottom time during the first dive and less during subsequent dives, the conservative computers give you a little less time during the first dive and a little more time during repetitive dives.
As to which computer is using a better algorythm, that is a question that would be difficult to answer with finality as all decompression models remain theories, and as such, divers are wise to stay well within limits.
I already sold my Mosquito because the casing is not designed to be very durable. Look at the product and you'll see what I mean.
Uwatec computers are reliable. They can last a long time. It may give you a little less trivial information like time but once connected to a PC... hehehe, it's alright.
Both Uwatec and Suunto computers can be categorized as being conservative. Compared to a liberal computer that gives you more bottom time during the first dive and less during subsequent dives, the conservative computers give you a little less time during the first dive and a little more time during repetitive dives.
As to which computer is using a better algorythm, that is a question that would be difficult to answer with finality as all decompression models remain theories, and as such, divers are wise to stay well within limits.
Bob_Harris
Guest
Do you dive with a regular buddy?
The most important factor when I puchased my last computer (Aladin Air) was that my regular buddy both owns and loves one.
Most computers I've looked at have drastically different displays and trying to read an unfamiliar one can be hard enough on the surface, let alone at 100 feet during a potential emergeny. When my buddy points to his computer it takes only a quick glance for me to see what he's trying to tell me.
Of course the computer needs to be safe and reliable, but I prefer to trade features for the comfort of knowing that in an emergency my buddy will know how to read my computer quickly and without error.
As a bonus I can borrow his PC interface
Bob
The most important factor when I puchased my last computer (Aladin Air) was that my regular buddy both owns and loves one.
Most computers I've looked at have drastically different displays and trying to read an unfamiliar one can be hard enough on the surface, let alone at 100 feet during a potential emergeny. When my buddy points to his computer it takes only a quick glance for me to see what he's trying to tell me.
Of course the computer needs to be safe and reliable, but I prefer to trade features for the comfort of knowing that in an emergency my buddy will know how to read my computer quickly and without error.
As a bonus I can borrow his PC interface
Bob
I was reading a little more on the Uwatec, Suunto and Aeris/Oceanic lines and found that each run a different algorhythm. The Aeris and Oceanic: modified Haldanean which utilizes 12 tissue compartments. The Uwatec: Buhlman which checks 8 tissue compartments and in some models monitors microbubbles and the Suunto which is a RGBM model. Does anyone know enough about these models to explain the benefits or not of them, such as monitoring 8 vs. 12 tissues.
I guess it really comes down to what your LDS sells unless you want to drive several hours to make a purchase from a different shop and then mail the product each year for it annual service?
Thanks.
I guess it really comes down to what your LDS sells unless you want to drive several hours to make a purchase from a different shop and then mail the product each year for it annual service?
Thanks.
Similar threads
