Zeagle Express Tech (44lb) - bit of advice por favor: too floppy with a single??

[GrumpyOldGuy]

O rly??? I've been diving that wing since I got my prototype Express Tech. It works just fine and the bungees keep it tamed just fine! Although it started life as a lowly backmounted BCD, I have used it mostly for side mounting now and found that you can tighten up those bungees a LOT without reducing the effectiveness of the bladder. It's my current plan to revert it back to backmount since I have recently adopted the Hollis SMS100 as my standard side mount BC rig.

But then, what do I know?

"Any tool can be the right tool" (Red Green, Comedian, usually referring to fixing something with duct tape)

I also think driving a 1 ton pickup with dual rear wheels into the city to pick up a couple of bag of groceries is silly too. Sure you can do it, it will get the job done, but its a paint in the butt. Some people to it out of necessity because its the only vehicle they have access to (including many of the cowboys around here). Some because they believe bigger is safer, or they thing it reflects their manhood or other silly reasons.

Back you your bungees. They are a nice features that does reduce the taco effect. They are not without some drawbacks though. It makes it more difficult to manually inflate you BCD should the auto inflate mechanism fail. They also increase the internal working pressure of the BCD so a small hole which would normally hardly effect your dive could in theory become a more serious threat due to the higher internal pressure, especially after you cinch down the bungees extra tight. I am not saying the bungees are going to kill you, just is not optimal.

I respect your experience, but I think we need to keep clear what is the optimal solution vs what is an acceptable solution.

 

[bj139]

Erring on the low side of optimal lift can be a problem leading to dumping weight or kicking like hell or both. Erring on the high side has no effect. When you first try your nice new steel tank you might appreciate not having to dump weight as you are heading for the bottom. I know, you should ALWAYS do a weight check but from boats it can be a problem.

I have often been driving and seen a sale or giveaway and thought, "If I only had my 1 ton pickup truck I could have gotten a great deal".

Why carry any extra air on a dive? Just take exactly what you need and no more. Of course, DON'T DO THIS. Plan for the worst case.

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Erring on the low side of optimal lift can be a problem leading to dumping weight or kicking like hell or both. Erring on the high side has no effect. When you first try your nice new steel tank you might appreciate not having to dump weight as you are heading for the bottom. I know, you should ALWAYS do a weight check but from boats it can be a problem.

I have often been driving and seen a sale or giveaway and thought, "If I only had my 1 ton pickup truck I could have gotten a great deal".

Why carry any extra air on a dive? Just take exactly what you need and no more. Of course, DON'T DO THIS. Plan for the worst case.

Lets discuss the worst case. That is loosing the ability to hold air is your BCD. Either a dump valve or hose fails (there are documented cases on SB of this) or a tear in the bladder. In this case it does not matter if your BCD has 17lbs of lift or 100lbs of lift. You either have planned a balanced rig where you can swim it up or you have have a redundant form of buoyancy (like a dry suite). Having neither is stupid. Thinking that a bigger bladder will help is you totally false.

Next, lets explore diving and seeing some cool thing you want to pick up. Maybe an anchor or some other heavy object. Using that extra lift of your super sized wing in inherently dangerous in place of a lift bag for this type of operation. Again, its totally useless.

BTW: I did have a 44lbs Zeagle wing on a Ranger, I was not a big fan. Way to wide, super taco. It was a solid piece of gear but I never loved it. Swapped it for a 2 rigs, a traditional BP with a 30lbs Oxycheq and a ET with a 35 donut. I fell in love with both and dive steel 95's whenever I can. I am a big guy (well maybe not as big as Net Doc), need up to 34lbs diving dry and both work fine.

 

[bj139]

Last summer I setup an aluminum plate with a Scubapro X-Tec wing (my travel wing) with 2 weight pockets. I had 5 lbs in each weight pocket and separate weight belt with 8lbs. I was properly weighted for the 7mm wetsuit I was wearing. I was in the water at the dock and realized I forgot something. I removed the BP/W and inflated it fully and it would not float. I had an HP117 tank which was 10 lbs negative. The maximum wing buoyancy is about 20 lbs positive. At the end of the dive, the tank would have been 2 lbs negative and the rig would have floated. I did the dive and overall weighting was correct.

If you expect your wing to float your rig you need enough lift. My Zeagle 44lb wing will float my BP/W with steel tank with all the weight I need on the BP/W. With drysuit, 18lbs lead + 6 lbs BP + 10lbs tank at dive start = 34lbs (this rig will not float at dive start with 32 lb wing). At dive end after breathing 8 lbs of air, 26 lbs negative to hold safety stop with drysuit (the rig will float at dive end with 32lb wing) . If you live in warm Texas and are diving thinner wetsuits then the 44lb wing is much more than needed, I do agree, even if you put all the weight on the BP/W. If you dive a drysuit you could argue that the drysuit is all the BC you need although neck and wrist seals are the weak spot in this BC. Gas can burp out of your suit at the seals.

I have since settled on carrying 16lbs in a weight harness separate from my BP/W when diving a steel tank just to make it easier to put on my rig. So my rig is now 18lbs negative at start and the X-Tec wing will float it.

NetDoc says the 44lb wing works fine and based on my experience I agree. I do actually have an older 32lb horseshoe wing which I have used. I cannot tell the difference between the two while diving. They both hold and dump air just fine and have not tangled in anything even swimming through boats and trains and planes.

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

I understand your predicament. This is actually a more rational argument for larger wings than the first one you used. I actually traded my 40lb wing to a fellow SB member who wanted to dive a steel tank and all his weight on his rig. His 30lbs wing did not cut it. I avoid diving integrated in cold water and my 40 was overkill. So we swapped and we are both happy campers. The 40 vs 30 is not much of a size difference for Oxycheq, less than an inch in each axis. The 44 from Zeagle however is much wider.

I still have 2 BCD's with 54lbs of lift and they work fine. I just don't consider them optimal. That's why they are my backup rigs and I let my kids have them. BTW: Most of my diving is cold water, So Cal or Maine / Mass. I have everything from dry suites to 7MM FJ+Jacket to 3/2 shorties. The same 30lbs wing works on all of them as long as I use a harness or belt t keep most of the weight off the rig.

Like so many things in life, there are multiple solutions. I am just pointing our what works for me and what I consider optimal.

 

[The Chairman]

"Any tool can be the right tool"

The tool you have beats out the one you don't have. It's easy enough to dive with it and presents no additional problems.

They also increase the internal working pressure of the BCD so a small hole which would normally hardly effect your dive could in theory become a more serious threat

O rly? It's funny, but I dove this BC for at least 20 dives after I developed two holes in it. Imagine that: I failed to die! The people who said the said the same things about the infamous OMS BWOD never tried it either. At most it was a minor inconvenience and was never a safety problem.

I respect your experience, but I think we need to keep clear what is the optimal solution vs what is an acceptable solution.

That's a big "but" in there to cover your lack of experience with the unit. The BC dove fine for me with that larger bladder. Saying it didn't without having dove it is nothing more than idle speculation on your part. It would appear that the only problems exist in the minds of those who have not dove it.

 

[GrumpyOldGuy]

The tool you have beats out the one you don't have. It's easy enough to dive with it and presents no additional problems.

Yup. For that matter, I have dived with no BCD and just a Mae West vest, just as many old timers and I am 100% confident in my ability to reach the surface without the aid of my BCD.

O rly? It's funny, but I dove this BC for at least 20 dives after I developed two holes in it. Imagine that: I failed to die! The people who said the said the same things about the infamous OMS BWOD never tried it either. At most it was a minor inconvenience and was never a safety problem.

I don't believe I claimed anything amounting to the BWOD, only a realistic view that adding bungees does increase the internal pressure of the bladder. Thus more air will escape though the same size hole and manual inflation will be slightly more difficult. How much of an issue that would be depends on the circumstances. If you read post #2, you will see I even suggested this as a possible solution.

That's a big "but" in there to cover your lack of experience with the unit. The BC dove fine for me with that larger bladder. Saying it didn't without having dove it is nothing more than idle speculation on your part. It would appear that the only problems exist in the minds of those who have not dove it.

Your right, I don't have an ET with a 44lbs wing. I do have an ET with a 35. I have dove an borrowed ET with a 24 wing, I love both. I did have a Zeagle Ranger with the same 44lbs wing you have on your ET. I liked it, but felt is was floppy and was a taco. It bothered me enough I sold it and purchased the ET. So while I can't match you tit for tat, I do have relevant experience.

 

[bj139]

A note to the OP on diving doubles by buying aluminum plate.
I have the Zeagle 44lb donut wing which I have used with AL80 doubles. The inflatable part of the wing sits between the tank and the plate which probably limits maximum lift. There is a buoyancy calculator on SB which provides a good approximation of weighting and lift required. It said I needed 20lbs of lift with AL80s. I don't think expansion is restricted to less than 20 lbs lift. This restricted expansion is something to keep in mind to avoid an "oh No" moment. When diving a drysuit this is less important but underscores the advantages of carrying a little more buoyancy than needed since the drysuit provides the extra unneeded lift. I may try HP117 steel doubles in the future and was not sure my wing could inflate enough being trapped between the doubles and the plate. So I recently bought an Apeks WTX8 wing with 85 lb lift at a price too good to pass up. This should be enough lift.

Thanks NetDoc for providing a little factual support or I would have been completely reamed by now.

 

[roydude]

Wow - flame on , Didn't think this would be such a volatile subject to be honest!

______________________________________________________________

Couple of things re: the 44lb bladder from my point of view:

1. 44lb is a good amount of lift for what I'm after for now. I agree I could use much less for singles but it's plenty for 'small' doubles (I'm thinking 2x10's since I use very little air) or stage cylinders. My Buddy bc had around 35lb of lift and was easily enough to lift me + deflated drysuit + 13kg of lead + a pretty heavy anchor (if you want details of how that was done with minimal risk that's a different discussion ), so 44lb will be plenty for me with a 2nd cylinder and probably a stage cylinder too, especially in a wetsuit.
2. I can't afford the money or the space for a 2nd bc. I live on the move really and it helps to keep my belongings to a minimum. When I do move to twins I'll swap the travel plate for aluminium and just put up with the extra baggage weight, but apart from that I'll be using the same setup (I really don't mind spending 20 mins reconfiguring between doubles and singles).

_______________________________________________________________

Back to 'extra bungee-ing' ...

I bungeed it for some dives this weekend. Prior to that I spent 2 days staring at the rig, working out the least disruptive way to bungee it, trying some routes, inflating to see how it unfolds / collapses, where the dumps move to as it inflates etc... and finally decided on a simple method (always best ) with a single bungee in a 'v' with each end through the side holes on the plate, and the point of the 'v' pulling the 'zeagle' insignia under the wing (thus rolling it up a bit). I also then found it necessary to connect the corner of the wing to the plate too as shown, or the dump valve ended up against the cylinder.



I used red so I could see what was happening to the bungee in my friend's pictures underwater (I'll attach some when I get them).
For the record it dove wonderfully - the 'bum-dumps' were easy to find and always pointed 'up' when I was horizontal and it still has more lift than I need with a single 12l cylinder.
I'm going to do a bit more work to see if I can make it easy to add/remove (with a clip or something) without having to cut cable ties off, but I'm pretty happy with it just now.

---------- Post Merged at 02:28 PM ---------- Previous Post was at 02:23 PM ----------

Hey bj139 - you replied while I was typing my huge saga so I saw your post after I'd posted!

My bladder isn't a doughnut (there's a sentence you don't use every day!), but you give a very interesting point that I'd not considered: does anyone know if the 44lb 'horseshoe' wing gets trapped/restricted at all by doubles the way bj139 described there?

I'll check out that calculator too, thanks mate!

 

[The Chairman]

Yup. For that matter, I have dived with no BCD and just a Mae West vest, just as many old timers and I am 100% confident in my ability to reach the surface without the aid of my BCD.

My first dive, Lake Underhill in July of 1969, I had tied the tank to my back. I bought the plastic tank holder from ScubaPro right after that and dove it for years. That being said, I love BCDs now that I have them.

I don't believe I claimed anything amounting to the BWOD, only a realistic view

Speculation is not very realistic. I went through all of this kind of speculation when I dove the BWODs and found that I had actually punctured a wing at one time. I didn't even realize it until another diver pointed it out. Obviously, it didn't affect my safety or comfort much at all. Currently, I have two much smaller holes that I had to repair in my 44 pound wing. Again, they did not affect my diving and I repaired them so that my buddies would not freak out as well as to stop the holes from growing. Since in reality, I have seemingly escaped certain death twice with holy BCDs, it's my opinion that the speculation that this is a problem has been debunked as NOT being a realistic view at all. That doesn't stop anyone from arguing with a sign post and taking the wrong way home!

It bothered me enough I sold it and purchased the ET.

Great choice on your part. Not every piece of equipment that will work for me will work for you and the converse is also true. What I dive works for ME. When I saw three people unequivocally state that the wing is too big, I felt compelled to share my views and actual hands on experiences with the wing in question. Dive what works for YOU. Be prepared though, when you comment on a configuration that you have not dove, that those who have will be a bit dismissive of your speculation. It's nothing to get, er, grumpy about.

So far, my students who have complained about their BC being floppy just don't have their crotch strap tight enough. It should be just a bit lower than the belt so that when you tighten the belt, it pulls the strap up and the shoulders down. Everything feels different when the entire BCD is snug against your body. But then again... what do I know?