Review of the Cressi, Leonardo underwater dive computer.

[Asteve]

Don't ever buy a rebreather!!

This label tells of risk, I have no problems with that.
Petrel states that their software has bugs in it. I have no problems with that either. They are trying to warn of risk.
Now if either said, "do not do this". Now I do have a problem with it. Do I know more then the manufacture ??? Maybe, so do I use it?
If this rebreather had a note that said For your own safety, it is important to avoid diving for more than one times a day on this rebreather. Would you dive 2 time a day on it??? Not looking for an answer just showing you were I am coming from.

---------- Post added March 23rd, 2015 at 01:09 PM ----------

I just spent two weeks diving with someone using a Leonardo, between 2 and 5 dives a day with only one day off in the middle. Their Leonardo and my Petrel were never a limiting issue. Every DC manual I've ever read has similar warnings in them. It's too bad you're having issues but it may not just be the computer.

All I can say is that the Leonardo would not do the dive profiles that other were doing in Cozumel. I think the new Cressi RGBM agorithm does a lot of funny things with shallow depth and short surface times between dives. I had one dive master on one of the dives that said he had a Leonardo and had the same problems and replace with another brand.
As for the warning issues you may be right. Most of my working career was in the medical equipment industry and you did not disregard waning.

 

[stuartv]

Good review, Asteve. I read everything in this thread and what you said all seems clear and makes sense. The people arguing with you clearly did not actually read and attempt to understand what you posted. For example, asserting that you went into deco when you clearly posted that you did not (except for the once or twice, which were not the occasions you were using as examples). Or asserting that almost all dive computers use similar algorithms. Total balderdash.

So, again, thanks for taking the time to post a clear and detailed review. Much better to read a detailed example/review and decide for oneself if a particular DC is too conservative for you than to just read a bunch of posts that boil down to "I have an XYZ computer and it works fine for me, so you're dumb if you say it's too conservative for you."

 

[uncfnp]

Good review, Asteve. I read everything in this thread and what you said all seems clear and makes sense. The people arguing with you clearly did not actually read and attempt to understand what you posted. For example, asserting that you went into deco when you clearly posted that you did not (except for the once or twice, which were not the occasions you were using as examples). Or asserting that almost all dive computers use similar algorithms. Total balderdash.

So, again, thanks for taking the time to post a clear and detailed review. Much better to read a detailed example/review and decide for oneself if a particular DC is too conservative for you than to just read a bunch of posts that boil down to "I have an XYZ computer and it works fine for me, so you're dumb if you say it's too conservative for you."

I held my tongue and avoided posting on this bit of lunacy but now I feel I must insert some logic.

You call a whinny post about a dive computer that did the job it was designed to do a good review? Where is the informative facts? What specifically about the algorhthym caused the problem? Did he post dive profiles with direct correlation with other algorhthyms? No. He complained that the dive computer kept him unbent but prevented him from diving as long as he liked.

I just returned from a week in Bonaire. I did 22 dives with 22.5 hours bottom time. On a Cressi Giotto with the same algorhthm. I would be happy to compare dive profiles. Others have posted with actual dive experience that contradicts the OP's statements. I am not disputing that the OP did not get the BT he wanted but I am stating that there may have been a reason for this beyond the fact it was the Leonardo. I know he read the recent post by a SB member that got bent on a "liberal" DC. Prehaps instead of whinning he should be asking WHY this computer limited his dive times. Prehaps identifying the problem may help him to remain unbent. Even if he elects to use a more "liberal" computer in the future.

Rant over...

 

[Asteve]

I held my tongue and avoided posting on this bit of lunacy but now I feel I must insert some logic.

You call a whinny post about a dive computer that did the job it was designed to do a good review? Where is the informative facts? What specifically about the algorhthym caused the problem? Did he post dive profiles with direct correlation with other algorhthyms? No. He complained that the dive computer kept him unbent but prevented him from diving as long as he liked.

I just returned from a week in Bonaire. I did 22 dives with 22.5 hours bottom time. On a Cressi Giotto with the same algorhthm. I would be happy to compare dive profiles. Others have posted with actual dive experience that contradicts the OP's statements. I am not disputing that the OP did not get the BT he wanted but I am stating that there may have been a reason for this beyond the fact it was the Leonardo. I know he read the recent post by a SB member that got bent on a "liberal" DC. Prehaps instead of whinning he should be asking WHY this computer limited his dive times. Prehaps identifying the problem may help him to remain unbent. Even if he elects to use a more "liberal" computer in the future.

Rant over...

This whinny poster thought he had posted some number in the review, did you even read the review? Have you ever seen a review that they gave any number on the algorithm of a DC? I have not, The closest is the Shearwater Petrel 2 in the Rec mode they say the least conservative algorithms is close to the PADI tables, still no numbers I did post the pre-dive planing bottom numbers and that is more then I have seen in any reviews. When you are playing follow the leader with a group of diver and you are running out of bottom time, and they are not, you become a little whinny And when you get topside and the leader tell you he tried the Leonardo Cressi DC and it was to conservative to do his job leading, you start thinking this computer is too conservative. Did you compare the pre-dive plan numbers with your computer to see if the algorithms matches, Yes they are both RGBM but that does not mean they are the same algorithms. The whinny poster does not know if the algorithms are the same? In the review the whinny poster said that the computer kept him from being bent, in the review the whinny poster said the first dive of the day had bottom times of the other diver, the whinny poster tried to put number to the shallow water algorithms above 30 feet to show what the computer was doing. What this whinny poster finds amazing is we are diving computer and have no ideas what the algorithms is doing. We seem to think my friend or other did not get bent so this must be a good computer. The whinny poster think you guys need to focus on the review and not the whinny poster. The whinny poster is going to post a dive profile. The top dive is the Cressi software plot of the first dive of the second day, the closest I got to DECO was 4 minutes at 71 ft. per the Leonardo plot software. The second is the same dive but I used the Subsurface software to plot the dive. What a surprise, I had some kind of ceiling event. Was the whinny poster lucky that he was not bent? So just how conservative is this computer? I do not know do you?

[/URL][/IMG]


If you had read the review you would see I never said this was a bad computer, I do not know if it is good or bad computer. What the whinny poster said was the DC was not a good match for the diving he wanted to do.

To be flip about it, I do know a DC is too conservative until you get bent and then you start to rethink everything and find someone to blame. Then again it may be to late at that point.

Yes I followed the thread on the skins bents closely as I am always trying to learn, again he was following the leader and he was the only one hit. Why? Red eye flight, dehydration, stress, first day diving, pushing a liberal computer that he had dove over a 100 plus dives, with no problems. I am the first to say I do not know. I do not see where this has anything to do with the review I wrote.

 

[uncfnp]

Asteve. If I can just make it past the diatribe, the comparison profiles look interesting but I am on an IPad and the image is too small for detail. And I admit that I do not use subsurface software. Hopefully someone familiar with it will take a look at this and comment. It looks like your dive did trigger quite a few alarms?

As for the predive planning you posted, the times on my Giotto miss by 1 minute with the SF setting at 2.

My dive profiles are on my computer at work. If I have time tomorrow I will post a few from Bonaire for comparison.

And if you can, post the other profiles from that day. I have heard that RGBM can be the harshest on repetitive dives.

 

[UserNameBella]

The mares computer my perma buddy wears consistently has less NDL time displayed than my Cressi does.

I have dove two dives a day plus a night dive and a morning dive the next day and I found it was pretty liberal with no extreme punishment. I think had I been doing 100 ft dives each time for the max NDL it might have punished me a bit. I would expect that. I'm trying to stay alive. Most of my dives start deep for about fifteen to twenty minutes and then work up to safety stop in the shallows after about a fifty minute dive. I play in the shallows for a bit and get back on the boat. Nothing offensive about that profile. It's safe, it's smart and it works. I have it on the safety factor of 0. I'm not old, cold, overweight, overexerted, tired, hungover or dehydrated so I feel safe with that.

The only real problem worth discussing with this dive watch is its incessant beeping. I can't even scratch my head without it going off. I sound like a pager from the nineties. It's in all my videos as I bring a hand up to change a setting. Every time I clear my mask it goes off.

You definitely cant do any form of a rapid ascent with this watch without everyone knowing right away.

It is a 200 dollar dive computer. And I treat it as such. If you are looking for bells and whistles ( I have enough bells on this watch I don't need whistles) or something that will carry you through a sketchy dive profile, this is not the computer for you.

Also- If you want a guarantee to not have any undesirable underwater outcomes, staying on land far away from any water is your only guarantee . Including puddles. We live in a nanny state where litigation is the norm. When you read warnings keep that in mind. Especially on gear that is designed to take you far underwater.

 

[lowviz]

Somebody needs to put this Cressi Leonardo/Giotto mess to rest. First, this is nothing new: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/hogarthian-diving/113312-rgbm.html

Second, a truly informed reply has been recently offered: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/co...too-conservative-post7342293.html#post7342293

Within the second reference you will find the following quote: " “Full” RGBM does not, in fact give you no-stop times, for instance, something recreational divers tend to depend on. " Please understand this before going any further.

If one desires a liberal computer, there is usually only one reason for that. The wearer does not have the ability to handle deco and thus is looking for a liberal computer that tells said wearer that more bottom time is OK. I'm fine with that. Just please realize the forces at play.

Someone out there must be making the very most liberal NDL DC. Please, someone just let us know who is doing that.

---------- Post added March 24th, 2015 at 11:45 PM ----------

... I have heard that RGBM can be the harshest on repetitive dives.

This is very true when past ascents have violated the RGBM protocol. And, BTW, this is why I really like this protocol. I'll do the deco, no big whoop...

 

[uncfnp]

Ok, this is actually kinda interesting. I did not pickup that you were diving air. I reread your initial post and if its there I am just missing it. However, looking through the thread I saw where you posted about getting Nitrox trained. So that negates any benefit of comparing our dive profiles. I haven't dove air in years. But it does raise a few other points.

I assume since you are comparing your dives to the guide/group that they too were diving air as well?

The pre dive comparison I did was with nitrox 32 with the SF setting at 2. If I take the SF to 0, I get virtually the same numbers as the PADI numbers you posted. So assuming that your ascents are good, getting nitrox certified and keeping your Leonardo set at SF 0, you should get the times and dives you are looking for at a theoretically safer level. Or just sell it and get one with an algorithm more comparable with your needs. Oceanic may be a good choice, look at the Geo 2.0. There are some good deals out there right now.

 

[Asteve]

Ok, this is actually kinda interesting. I did not pickup that you were diving air. I reread your initial post and if its there I am just missing it. However, looking through the thread I saw where you posted about getting Nitrox trained. So that negates any benefit of comparing our dive profiles. I haven't dove air in years. But it does raise a few other points.

I assume since you are comparing your dives to the guide/group that they too were diving air as well?

The pre dive comparison I did was with nitrox 32 with the SF setting at 2. If I take the SF to 0, I get virtually the same numbers as the PADI numbers you posted. So assuming that your ascents are good, getting nitrox certified and keeping your Leonardo set at SF 0, you should get the times and dives you are looking for at a theoretically safer level. Or just sell it and get one with an algorithm more comparable with your needs. Oceanic may be a good choice, look at the Geo 2.0. There are some good deals out there right now.

First from LOWVIZ post. Here is another thread with more information. Thank you.
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/co.../492111-cressi-leonardo-too-conservative.html

Yes, I was diving air. Yes, if using nitrox and setting this computer to 32 nitrox it is close to PADI air table numbers and would fit my needs.

Thanks all, I am done with this thread.

 

[stuartv]

Yes, I was diving air. Yes, if using nitrox and setting this computer to 32 nitrox it is close to PADI air table numbers and would fit my needs.

Thanks all, I am done with this thread.

This may be my ignorant newbness talking here, but I would not even consider setting my computer for nitrox and then diving air.

I'd be willing to bet there's not a person on SB that would offer you any assurance that that cannot result in a scenario where it gives you a longer NDL than you should have (for diving air), which results in DCS. Sure, maybe most of the time and all the paper or computer models you do show that it gives you NDLs that are okay for diving air. But, as nobody (on this board) seems to be able to document the EXACT implementation of the algorithm your DC is using, there is nobody that can say that there won't be a case where it lets you stay down too long (because it thinks you're using Nitrox) and you end up hurt.

I'm all about finding the least conservative computer and my posts on here have probably led some people to think that I'm the ignorantly reckless type. But, I put the exact correct data in my DC (I test my Nitrox myself and if the analyzer says 32.6, I put 33 in the computer, whether the blender told me it was 32 or not) and I adhere to the limits it tells me.