@Dan_P we don't have to argue the merits of high pressure manifolds in doubles because they are the industry standard. Those using independent doubles are the minority and no one is trying to push an agenda and profit off of independent doubles.
Low pressure manifolds are an agenda that UTD wants to push as an agency because they profit on it. That is fine, it's something you and your agency are passionate about, however when you come out and try to push the merits of that system, be ready for the criticism.
I'm not pushing the merits of anything.
I'm making a video saying what different things are, including the high-pressure manifold in backmounted doubles.
When you say I'm pushing for profiit, it's simply incorrect.
Firstly, because I'm not pushing anything
Secondly,
because most of my students are in backmount anyway.
Thirdly, to be fair, if you're factoring in QCs etc. in your math, you can't say that's a UTD thing. They're sold by next to everyone. You've said yourself repeatedly that even the wing won't have to be a UTD one.
So, if you think about it, your argument is that I am opting for the manifolded solution so I can sell just a manifold.
Which makes no sense, at all, because:
1) If you sell someone a Z-system, you probably won't be selling them a doubles wing, let alone a whole separate double BM rig, when they progress. Which is what this string is all about. Already there, your argument falls to the ground, but
2) You won't be able to join the marketing bonanza that the dive industry has descended upon, selling indies courses to open water divers.
If you really want to rage against profit driven motivations, I'd be the first to applaud you. But rage against pushing indies to open water divers - you and I both know that's 100% a clear-cut money grab.
If you'd want to put on the selling-gear-hat, what you'd want to do, is first sell someone a jacket style BCD, then a single tank harness and wing, then a doubles wing, and then a whole separate solution for a CCR.
In Z-system, you can do everything with one solution, out of which, as you say, only the manifold is supplied by UTD exclusively, and retails for just under $250.
Hence, your whole argument about profit driven motivations, is completely and utterly inapt.
It makes no sense whatsoever.
That's also what I mean when I say it's scalable. OC I have one rig, and I'm always interfacing with it the exact same way, adding or removing tanks as needed for any given dive. I can dive a 60m dive with four tanks, or a monkey dive with a 40, and everything is consistant. Hence, consistant and scalable. I don't think you can obscure that fact no matter how much you might like to.
Pros of the Z-system, these are the only ones, literally, the only pros
You can donate out of your mouth for the 50% of the time you are on the short hose in sidemount. This is why it was created
You can share offboard stage/deco bottles with your buddy-which I don't believe anyone has ever died from, just been inconvenienced by
What are you saying, that you agree people have died due to the shifted gas donation paradigm in indies sidemount?
I think double deco can easily be more than a slight inconvenience, if you're not in luke warm water. Maybe I weigh that benefit higher for that reason, but all the same.
And you can't say there's no real benefit in being able to share your staged tanks with your team. You've said that sharability is great outside the team (which I don't agree with because I don't agree that taking other people's stages is a good solution), but surely then, at least, you'll agree that it's a good thing inside the team, and acknowledge the potential to better utilize gas contents of staged tanks given that fact.
We've already talked about the reduced need for multiple rigs - that includes either purchasing multiple regs/tanks as well, or reconfiguring your entire rig between dives.
But again, I feel it's incontextual to carry on discussions about various solutions. While it's certainly an interesting discussion, this one should be about what manifolds are, as the video content is about that topic.
BM (and SM) indies is far more defensible than any low pressure manifold.
You and
@tbone1004 can have a discussion amongst yourselves about the merits of a high-pressure manifold in backmounted doubles. But it's not what the video I made is about. It's about
what a high-pressure manifold is, and what the pro's and con's are of it. I'm not pushing that solution, or any other.
There are other discussion threads about merits of specific rigs, where that discussion would fit right in. And I'd be happy to participate. But it's not this one, that's all.
