BCD for wrecks

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!

Got your answer aye beej...

Definitely a bp/w...Not always doubles...Penetrating the U-352, you have to wear singles...

Extended range...Yeah...generally doubles.
 
Diving wrecks on a regular basis past 100 feet would require further training in advanced nitrox, deco procedures and trimix. Use of doubles is the norm. With doubles...use of a bp/wing set up is a given. Check out a "hogarthian" rig: bp/wing with shoulder/waste straps and three d-rings.
 
MSilvia:
For me, a lot of the appeal of bp/w is in the absence of B.S. "features" that don't contribute anything positive to my dive.

I have been diving a Ranger and love it. What do you consider "BS Features" on my Ranger, and why wouldn't I be able to mount doubles to it?:confused: Please don't take this as antagonistic, I really want to know what I am in for when I do put a set of double on a Ranger.:D
 
Betail:
I have been diving a Ranger and love it. What do you consider "BS Features" on my Ranger, and why wouldn't I be able to mount doubles to it?:confused: Please don't take this as antagonistic, I really want to know what I am in for when I do put a set of double on a Ranger.:D

By "BS features" he probably means all the extra pading, D-rings in useless places, integrated weight system, quick-releases,etc that aren't present in the basic BP/W.
 
Falco:
By "BS features" he probably means all the extra pading, D-rings in useless places, integrated weight system, quick-releases,etc that aren't present in the basic BP/W.

So beyond 2 D-Rings (my ranger only has 2), some (actually very limited) padding, and integrated weights that's the only beef?

What's wrong with integrated weights? I thought the problem has more to do with distribution?




Also, I do see the functionality of having a stiff plate for diving, it makes all the sense in the world
 
My Brigade (like a ranger) has I think 6+ d-rings... With a BP/W, ignoring the stability benefits, you know exactly where any tool is. The pockets on the zeagle, or any other BC, lead to fumbling and inconsistency. I am speaking from experience, on wreck dives. Having everything clipped off on one of 4 d-rings makes life easy. The d-rings on the zeagles and other BCs are not in the optimum position. I don't personally see any problem with the weight system... I use a couple of small XS pouches with my BP/W. With a BP/W I can easily fit through openings that used to be more a a challenge with 4 inches of BC "stuff" hanging off me.

That said, of all BC systems apart from BP/W, zeagles are top notch.
 
mthirsc:
My Brigade (like a ranger) has I think 6+ d-rings... With a BP/W, ignoring the stability benefits, you know exactly where any tool is. The pockets on the zeagle, or any other BC, lead to fumbling and inconsistency. I am speaking from experience, on wreck dives. Having everything clipped off on one of 4 d-rings makes life easy. The d-rings on the zeagles and other BCs are not in the optimum position. I don't personally see any problem with the weight system... I use a couple of small XS pouches with my BP/W. With a BP/W I can easily fit through openings that used to be more a a challenge with 4 inches of BC "stuff" hanging off me.

That said, of all BC systems apart from BP/W, zeagles are top notch.

It's not the pockets that lead to fumbling and inconsistency as you say, it's the diver. :)
 

Back
Top Bottom