Scubapro G2 Console

[ELCAM]

So I guess the question is what's more important, having the HRM and other physiological metrics integrated into the computer algorithms or having more knowledge and control over the algorithm. I'm not implying either is better because I don't know.

Personally I value HRM only for surface activities such as running, biking, etc...

Most people aside from the first 5 mins of a dive and perhaps getting back on the boat have a fairly low heart rate anyways while diving so I don’t value the data...it’s going to tell me my heart rate is low.

I personally would stick with a ZHL-16C algorithm that you can replicate using dive planning software.

buy once...cry once...get the shearwater.

 

[MargaritaMike]

So I guess the question is what's more important, having the HRM and other physiological metrics integrated into the computer algorithms or having more knowledge and control over the algorithm. I'm not implying either is better because I don't know.

Rob, I don't have a dog in this fight. It's what YOU are comfortable with. There are thousands of people diving a G2. I think what some of the previous posters were saying is that ScubaPro performs some kind of magic in their computer and gives you a number, or set of numbers. No one except ScubaPro knows what those numbers are based on and how they are calculated, and ScubaPro ain't telling. Some of the other brands are open about which algorithm they use, and what adjustments you can make for your individual diving. They also have a diving for dummies setting in OC Rec for those of us who don't really understand Gradient Factors and bubbles in the bloodstream, etc. The HRM can be important to me IF I know how and where it's being implemented into the set of numbers that I am seeing on the face of the computer.
I am not pushing one brand over another. I dive with a couple of Shearwater products. I know what calculations and comparisons the set of numbers I see while I'm diving are based on and why it says what it says.
You said you are a recreational diver. Depending on if you ever decide to go "deeper" into diving I'm fairly confident that a console is not your optimum choice of equipment. Again, part of the beauty of a wrist AI DC is one less hose. If you're doing drysuit diving, I think you would welcome that.
Again, It's what you are comfortable with that counts. Different people have different comfort levels. Just enjoy yourself. Dive safe and dive happy.
Good luck with your decision.

Cheers - M²

 

[BoltSnap]

What vendors out there divulge what specific tweaks and magic fudge factoring they do on their flavor of deco algorithms? NONE!! Some base their computer on a Buhlmann model and some on a RGBM/VPM model and then add their own flavoring to it. No one divulges what the specific flavoring they add to the base model are (except, perhaps, some German mfg.). SP algorithm is based on the Buhlmann model and add to it their own tweaks and user adjustments. If you don't like the adjustments, you can turn them off no problem. You can also use desktop software planners with SP dive computers just like using them with other brands no problem. Thousands of divers, including technical divers who do very deep diving, use SP computers (as computers) without any issues.

One other issue here is that the OP started out stating that they are "recreational" divers and everyone is jumping on the thread and talking GF, blah blah blah. Don't you folks read the request and answer the OP's question instead of forcing your own version of what you want to hear on them?

The G2 in its 3 forms (HUD, Wrist and console) are great computers that have proven they are reliable and cover all of what a diver, basic rec to advanced rec and tech levels, needs. Lots of configurability and choices for the user to customize the computer display and functions. I prefer AI wrist computers myself and have used console based DC's as backups but only look at them occasionally just to make sure that both computers agree on numbers or close to it. SP is the second biggest dive equipment manufacturer in the world with presence in most of the world. It is also a very stable well funded company with track record that spans decades.

 

[ELCAM]

I’m speaking as a person that bought a G2 wrist version and then subsequently sold it for the shearwater because even though it has tech features...I doubt anybody would use it for that based on my previous comments. Now if scubapro would make the algorithm user selectable like their HUD computer then I would see no fault in it.

incidentally my first G2 flooded after 5 dives and scubapro replaced it for me during a dive vacation by having the nearest dive shop in St Croix swap it for me with their stock which I though was cool. The replacement was ok so I chalked it up to a manufacture defect and nothing else.

I haven’t needed shearwater customer service but I hear they are top notch.

https://www.scubaboard.com/community/media/img_2700.203643/full

 

[RobPNW]

I am not pushing one brand over another. I dive with a couple of Shearwater products. I know what calculations and comparisons the set of numbers I see while I'm diving are based on and why it says what it says.
You said you are a recreational diver. Depending on if you ever decide to go "deeper" into diving I'm fairly confident that a console is not your optimum choice of equipment. Again, part of the beauty of a wrist AI DC is one less hose. If you're doing drysuit diving, I think you would welcome that.
Again, It's what you are comfortable with that counts. Different people have different comfort levels. Just enjoy yourself. Dive safe and dive happy.
Good luck with your decision.

Cheers - M²

Understand. Nothing says that if I want redundant computers, that I can't get a second wrist AI computer instead of a console .

As far as my experience goes, I have about 50 dives, which is a lot less than most people here I assume so I appreciate advice.

I haven't done anything I would consider high risk. My deepest dive was 130 ft and I was there for only a couple minutes. And I haven't done any overhead environment dives yet. Just looking to the future.

I haven't met anyone who doesn't appreciate their Shearwater computer so I may just save up and get one.

With all that said, if I ended up with a primary and backup wrist computer, I'm struggling with something...

Is it better to get identical computers and be able to failover between consistent devices and algorithms? Or is it better to have two different watches and observe which is more conservative during a particular dive? Or of course, if the different computers are diverging in their guidance, clearly one of them may be suffering a malfunction.

Any thoughts?

 

[rsingler]

Is it better to get identical computers and be able to failover between consistent devices and algorithms? Or is it better to have two different watches and observe which is more conservative during a particular dive?

If you are starting from scratch, I would recommend keeping the same algorithm and consistent devices.
I say that because your second statement:

Or of course, if the different computers are diverging in their guidance, clearly one of them may be suffering a malfunction.

...is not necessarily true.
IF there is a malfunction, then the two may differ wildly. But the most common divergence is because they have different algorithms. If one is a proprietary algorithm, then you may not know why you are seeing what your are seeing. The less likely reason would be a malfunction.

I have dived SP's algorithm for years via the Luna. A good solid computer which (at MB Level 3) suits my conservatism nicely. Nice displays. Logical.

That said, I've converted to Shearwater for two reasons. First, the implementation of the algorithm is fairly transparent, which generally doesn't matter in rec diving.
More important, the ability to see the bloom in your tissue saturation in the last 20 feet is, I am convinced, a potential safety area that in time I think will become a real area of focus. Personally, having watched what I see on my Shearwater, I am now slowing my final ascent from the safety stop markedly, even on rec dives, because of what I saw and what Scubaboard has provided by way of discussion.

It's a new frontier, and it may not make any safety difference whatsoever. But I think it is significant, especially for repetitive dives, for dives that go near NDL, or as you age.

My 2¢.

 

[RobPNW]

FWIW, I'm not going to dismiss anyone's advice because it's beyond the scope of my current, personal skill set. I'm happy with basic dives but I want to keep my options open for future adventures. Even then I doubt I get too technical. Maybe up to some intermediate cave or caverns. Probably nothing beyond the normal recreational 130 foot limit, if that helps. If I venture away from basic air and nitrox breathing, it would only be to extend NDL stay times for a wreck or caverns.

 

[scubadada]

...Is it better to get identical computers and be able to failover between consistent devices and algorithms? Or is it better to have two different watches and observe which is more conservative during a particular dive? Or of course, if the different computers are diverging in their guidance, clearly one of them may be suffering a malfunction.

Any thoughts?

I have done it both ways. Keep in mind, unless you are willing to let the more conservative computer go in deco and then clear the obligation, your dive will always be controlled by the more conservative computer

My first computer was an Oceanic Pro Plus 2 AI console running DSAT. My first back up was a Cochran computer, which was a bit more liberal than the Oceanic. My dives were controlled by the Pro Plus 2.

After about 8 years and 400 dives later, I exchanged my Pro Plus 2 for a Oceanic VT3, hoseless AI wrist computer. Soon thereafter, I changed back ups to a Geo 2, also running DSAT. For about 5 years, my 2 computers matched perfectly, that was probably the simplest way to go.

About 4 years ago, I switched backups to a Dive Rite Nitek Q, to learn about Buhlmann and GF. Sometimes the dives would be controlled by the VT3, sometimes by the Nitek Q. I learned to match them reasonably closely but the 2 algorithms behave differently and never match perfectly.

Just under a year ago, I bought a Shearwater Teric to take advantage of some features such as SurfGFand others. I'm still diving the VT3 (1458 dives/1535 hours) along with the Teric, and they match reasonably well. I'm satisfied with my current 2 computers. The VT3 will not last forever, I will eventually be diving 2 computers running Buhlmann and they should match nearly perfectly again. I've never dived 2 computers that were drastically different in the conservative to liberal spectrum, I would likely find that intolerable.

 

[RobPNW]

I've converted to Shearwater for two reasons. First, the implementation of the algorithm is fairly transparent, which generally doesn't matter in rec diving.
More important, the ability to see the bloom in your tissue saturation in the last 20 feet is, I am convinced, a potential safety area that in time I think will become a real area of focus. Personally, having watched what I see on my Shearwater, I am now slowing my final ascent from the safety stop markedly, because of what I saw and what Scubaboard had provided my way of discussion.

It's a new frontier, and it may not make any difference whatsoever. But I think it may matter, especially for repetitive dives, for dives that go near NDL, or as you age.

My 2¢.

Interesting. As a guy who's 53, It's applicable. I have a variety of old sports injuries and active duty disabilities. I deal with daily pain on and off. It is what it is so there's no point being "that guy" and bore people complaining. So as I get older, much to the surprise of some, diving is one of those adventure activities that I can still enjoy and plan to go as long as the doctor keeps signing my form It's one of the reasons I got into it later in life than most people.

 

[shurite7]

Make sure you are happy with the proprietary Buhlmann ZH-L16 ADT MB decompression algorithm and all of the variables that may be part of it (microrbubble level, profile dependent intermediate stops, heart rate, skin temperature, breathing rate). It is my impression that the underlying algorithm is moderate to conservative.

I dive with a G2 and the Perdix. For recreational, the algorithms are fairly close; there really isn't much of a difference, even when diving in cold high elevation mountain lakes. I can't decide which computer I like better; each one has minor differences. The G2 is more intuitive and easier to navigate the menu. The Shearwater allows the diver to change the GF, but if you are not a tech diver then GF really doesn't play a role. SP has intentions on introducing GF via firmware update, but when it will happen is unknown (tech divers make up a very small market, so GF isn't a major focus, even though one of their testers is a tech diver).

The HRM is rather interesting. For example, one's heart rate does go up when doing something extra, such as sending up an SMB from depth, then drops when the task is completed.

You can change the color schemes on the G2. Simply choose the one you prefer.

Don't get caught up in peoples opinions as to which one is "best". As mentioned above, each brand uses a different or a variant of an algorithm. Remember, all the mathematical models (tables and computers) display useful information, but that is about it. It is up to you to comprehend the data. Having a better understanding of NDL and Deco will be MUCH more beneficial to you than opinions.