Twin-set manifold vs Sidemount vs Independent Twins

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!

I've never trained or dove side mount but that thought has crossed my mind - if I was sure to drown because of an empty tank but yet carrying a partial tank with a bad first or second stage on it - I'd attempt changing first stage regulators out while holding my breath (blowing bubbles) - better yet, with a buddy, share air while switching.

Why not try it?

On the dive that moved me to isolated manifolds, I came very close to doing an in water regulator exchange.
The particular issue I had, using cyklons, I could have unscrewed the diaphragm section and exchanged it - had i been certain that was actually the issue.
That meant one of three choices,
1. Remove the problem diaphragm assembly from the problem regulator. Remove the section from the working primary regulator. Reassemble.
I figured that was a bad idea, i.e. go from having a working regulator, to potentially having none.
2. Remove the problem diaphragm assembly, and exchange it with the decompression gas diaphragm assembly. That would compromise the decompression phase of the dive. [1]
3. Disassemble the diaphragm section of the second stage on the bottom clean and reassemble. That would have increased the decompression penalty, moving us out side of the runtime plan, potentially outside the KYAGB plan [2].

That assumes, I had actually identified the fault correctly. One advantage of sidemount is it is a lot easier to swap a complete regulator assembly. Other than you are potentially compromising a working cylinder, as well as the problem cylinder.
I regular strip and rebuild Cyklon second stages, however, I have never attempted to do this 'in water'. I have dropped pieces in the workshop, which is a pain, dropping a component 45m underwater is a little more concerning!

[1] I know that a big section of the caving community like Cyklons. A lot do not refit the circle that retains the diaphragm front section. This allows them to remove the from of the regulator quickly to clean out the diaphragm if its been compromised by grit and rubbish crawling through a tight section.
[2] KYAGB - Kiss Your Ass Good Bye
 
BM doubles unless you need SM for the overhead profile. CCR is way down the road for you. Independent doubles never. Manifold failures are so rare I would posit they are statistically insignificant. I'm not aware of anybody who has actually ever died because of a manifold failure. (Not opening the manifold is not a failure btw.....)
I think at some point I’ll definitely go CCR, but I want more experience before to switch. Also I wouldn’t mind waiting for the technology to be even more mainstream so it is safer and cheaper.

I just learned yesterday that I will learn doubles as part of my GUE Fundies class in April and the instructor will let/lend me a wing and twin-set.

So that solves all my short term issues: I will get to learn how to use a manifold and get some training for it without having to buy one for now. So really happy now !

I’ll just need to make sure I don’t fail the swimming test now: I don’t know how to front crawl properly, I only use breaststroke normally. I’ll try to learn front crawl for the swimming test as it is timed.
 
Agreed with @RyanT above.

The point of travelling with SM is valid, that's the reason I chose SM

But as we also previously discuss, when/if you start more technical requiring multiple gasses, then the SM some people prefer back mount over SM because the SM cylinders are occupying "valuable real estate" I don't mind, it doesn't' bother me. My friend who is only 5'5 prefers BM for tech diving because of this very reason - but is happy to use her SM rig if she's not on a multi gas profile.

There is of course the personal preference of what feels most comfortable to you.

I also prefer SM because it's generally easier to move the gear around - but I'm grumpy and over 50.

Hi Blue Trin,

DD does not seem to have any "religious" or cliquish type beliefs regarding any of the different diving paradigms that recreational scuba offers. His advice always seems to be straight forward.

I have a tec 40 cert; I am a tech diver with training wheels on. For real tech diving, I require serious supervision by a person like DD.

Take my thoughts with a grain of salt.


If you are planning to dive to the Andrea Doria, or the SS Tahoe, you may want to train with a manifolded twinset. You will need more gas, of different types than a SM rig will allow.

Next, and this feeling is based on my beliefs, not from actual training or experience, for a dive to 200 fsw, SM would provide enough gas and the ability to use a bottom gas with a richer mix for decompression. By having O2 staged on the deco bar, you could theoretically, use three gases on your dive. Again, consult a tech instructor and get training before you try what I am "feeling" is possible.

For me, I think I could get rid of my ponies, pack an SM harness, and still pack my BCD, for the best of both worlds. There probably would be no weight difference; same dive bag and same weight for checked bags. Or, I could dive SM and leave the rec BCD at home at save travel weight.

I would use SM for Solo or for diving with questionable buddies. For splashing to a depth of 100 feet with a decent buddy, I could use my rec BCD.

SM on deck and u/w seems to be very balanced. Some friends have used SM while in the same group as I, and they dived effortlessly, and seemed to be very balanced and stable on deck. They claimed that SM was no different than a rec BCD rig u/w and better than a twinset.

I am seriously thinking about SM because the system is so simple and lightweight (for travel purposes) and opens up the possibility of doing "light deco" that I am certified for. Traveling with a 40cf to use with my BCD for deco, or renting one in some far off place can be sucky. SM resolves those issues.

markm
 
I can dive 4x AL80 in SM comfortably, any more than that and it starts getting a little silly. For normoxic ranges, SM is doable. For hypoxic ranges the loss of back real estate becomes very noticeable.

Note, this is assuming no tanks staged. Also, I know folks here who do 110m (350’ ish) dives on SM and have no issues but that’s an outlier.
 
I just learned yesterday that I will learn doubles as part of my GUE Fundies class in April and the instructor will let/lend me a wing and twin-set.

So that solves all my short term issues: I will get to learn how to use a manifold and get some training for it without having to buy one for now. So really happy now !
Great, have fun! Don't try doubles unless you have someone to teach you according to the proper procedure. You will best learn during the course how to use and dive them.

I’ll just need to make sure I don’t fail the swimming test now: I don’t know how to front crawl properly, I only use breaststroke normally. I’ll try to learn front crawl for the swimming test as it is timed.
Don't worry (too much) about that. Even if you're very slow you'll make it in time. The most difficult part for me was the underwater swim. That required some training before I could achieve that.

I use doubles, singles and Sidemount because I can, not because I have to. I love to be flexible in systems so I can adapt to the dive and circumstances. I you learn and train your skills properly, it won't matter much what you use. My advice is not to get to hung up about the system but learn to dive properly. If you will, you will be able to dive everything they trow at you :D
 
I can dive 4x AL80 in SM comfortably, any more than that and it starts getting a little silly. For normoxic ranges, SM is doable. For hypoxic ranges the loss of back real estate becomes very noticeable.

Totally agree 100%

Although it's generally now a bit of a moot point, because generally for the most part people doing those sort of dives have moved across to a box?
 
I can dive 4x AL80 in SM comfortably, any more than that and it starts getting a little silly. For normoxic ranges, SM is doable. For hypoxic ranges the loss of back real estate becomes very noticeable.

Note, this is assuming no tanks staged. Also, I know folks here who do 110m (350’ ish) dives on SM and have no issues but that’s an outlier.

Hi Rain Pilot,

Do you have a picture of an SM quad diver?

markm
 
From the internet...

This
upload_2019-1-6_18-35-42.png


But NOT this

upload_2019-1-6_18-36-22.png
 
Hi Rain Pilot,

Do you have a picture of an SM quad diver?

markm
I follow a Facebook group called ‘sidemount diving’ (mostly to see diving pictures)

They have sometimes picture of people using quads:
Levent Aydogmus

Lol this one is funny, is he collecting used tanks ?
2mfz0d1.jpg
 
I follow a Facebook group called ‘sidemount diving’ (mostly to see diving pictures)

They have sometimes picture of people using quads:
Levent Aydogmus

Lol this one is funny, is he collecting used tanks ?
View attachment 497780

Hi Blue Trin,

None of those pictures looks remotely enjoyable to me (your picture or DD's pictures). No thanks.

markm
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom