[net.consumers] Casio depth rating followup

pfeiffer@uwvax.UUCP (Phil Pfeiffer) (07/28/85)

I received the following reply to my net article on Casio watches from 
Boston University:

>  I Scuba dive and I would NEVER EVER buy a watch not water resistant to 200M
>  That watch is your life.  I would be risking my life to buy a 50M watch
>  and expect to go to any depth.  You deserve to have a broken 50M watch.  I
>  don't know what the big deal is anyhow.  My Casio 200M was only $40 and
>  is now running for 2 years perfectly.  The watch has stayed running longest
>  out of the LCD's that I have owned.  Besides, what do you expect for
>  a watch that is <$50 these days.  When diving it is always better to be safe
>  then sorry.

The author posted the reply to me directly, but I thought it merited public
comment.

First:  I agree completely with the author's main point: false economies are
a bad diving policy.  You risk your health and life when you buy substandard
diving equipment in order to save money.   We do try to be safety-conscious
about what we buy; I apologize for not saying this in in my first posting !!

We goofed when it came to the Casio's.  We failed to read the fine print
in the owner's manual explaining that "water resistant to 50M/100M" didn't mean
"water resistant to 50M/100M" when it came to diving.  My gripe was that I 
thought the statement about the watch being water-resistant was misleading;
why else would you pay extra for such a watch if you didn't want to use it
underwater??   Since both watches worked well down to 50' (15M), we were
really surprised when the 50M watch gave up the ghost 48 hours after the dive
to 82' (24M).   I posted the first article as a warning.

However, I disagree with the author, if he's suggesting that dive watches need
to be rated to 200M to be safe.  According to the U.S. Navy, standard
compressed air scuba can only be used safely to 150' (45M).  The major U.S.
training agencies (e.g., PADI, NAUI, YMCA) treat this as a theoretical limit,
encouraging divers to stay well above 150' (and, parenthetically, urge
divers to take extra training if they wish to plan dives below 60' (18M)).  
Why, then, do I need a watch rated to 200M if I'm not a commercial or a
professional diver?

Postscript:

   Linda has a combination depth-gauge / automatic bottom timer on order now;
I'm going to stop diving with my Casio and buy a bottom timer instead.
If we wanted an even greater margin of safety, of course, we should think
about buying one of the new generation of decompression meters (e.g., the
Edge or the Deco-Brain  (cf. the articles on multi-level diving and the
reliability of the decompression tables in the last two issues of
_Underwater USA_).  These meters still cost $600 and up !!!, but I can see the
day coming when NOT diving with a decompression meter will be also viewed as a
false economy.

[BTW, anyone else on the net have any experience with the new generation
decompression meters?]

-- 

-- Phil Pfeiffer

"Call all hands to man the capstan/ See the cable running clear/
 Heave away, and with a will, boys/ For New England we will steer." 
	                                                        [Ed Trickett]

bsisrs@rruxe.UUCP (R. Schiraldi) (07/29/85)

First my qualifications: A PADI Divemaster for two years and a sport diver
for more then ten years.

Second on the subject of watches, I had one of those casio "watches",
and had only one problem with it after two and a half years (one half the
life span of the watch's battery), the watch shorted out after spilling
a beer (a Weiss beer from Munich) on it. The watch was WATER resistant
to 200M but note that does not mean PRESSURE resistant. I had the watch
down to (backed up with a Princeton Tech Bottom Timer) 110' with no
problems. I have since replaced the watch with a Heuer watch PRESSURE
resistant to 20 ATM (that is 660 feet salt water).
 
> ... but I can see the day coming when NOT diving with a decompression
> meter will be also viewed as a false economy.

Third, WHAT ARE YOU, NUTS OR SOME THING!?!?!?!
Sorry, but if you are planing to get a decompression meter, save your
money for the chamber ride you WILL need if you rely on that trash.
Read these TRUE horror stories about them.

I was on a wreck at 90' when someone else on the boat found
one of these meters with barniculs (sp?) on it and it still read NO
DECOMPRESSION STOP REQUIRED!!

Another incident occured about a year ago, a diver desided to buy a meter
and used it on a 145' dive. His bottom time was 15 minutes and the meter
said no stop required. He stayed on the surface for 45 minutes and the
meter said he could dive to the same depth for 15 minutes, only he
stayed down for 12 minutes to be safe. The guage also said no stop was
required but he did stop at 10' for 10 minutes. Unfortunatey, after a 5
minute hang, he doubled over and lost consiousness. He was brought 
aboard the boat, and after MUCH delay, was brought to a chamber
about NINE HOURS after his intial hit. Today, he has very little
control over his bodily functions and has to be reminded who he is.

I can give other stories about wasting $600 to $800 on a meter,
but the best thing I can say is spend the money on a GOOD watch and depth
guage and learn to use the tables properly and know you own limitations.


                            Dive safe!!

                            Rich Schiraldi (21546)

No disclaimer needed for my own opinions and the truth.

pfeiffer@uwvax.UUCP (Phil Pfeiffer) (08/02/85)

> > ... but I can see the day coming when NOT diving with a decompression
> > meter will be also viewed as a false economy.
> 
> Third, WHAT ARE YOU, NUTS OR SOME THING!?!?!?!
> Sorry, but if you are planing to get a decompression meter, save your
> money for the chamber ride you WILL need if you rely on that trash.
> Read these TRUE horror stories about them.   ( ... )

... (the stories are horrible, but lengthy, so I won't reprint them here )

Muchas gracias, Rich, for the followup, and for your comments.  If we continue
to get this sort of cross-talk on the net, we may yet save net.rec.scuba.

Re decompression meters:  If you reread my followup, you'll notice my reference
to "second generation" decompression meters and an article in _Underwater USA_.
I'm sorry if that didn't explain what I meant well enough.  Let's try again.

The 1st generation meters, as you indicate, were *bad* products  -- real
"bend-o-matics", according to _Undercurrent_, which ran a series of horror
stories on early decompression meters a few years ago (reprinted in their 
_Best of Undercurrent_, still in print).  Their are NEWER meters, however
-- e.g., the Edge, which supposedly works and is in use by more than 1000
professional divers at this time, according to the article in the most
recent _Underwater USA_ (I can't recall who wrote that article off the top
of my head, but he seemed to have good credentials -- one of his references
that comes to mind is Dr. Bruce Basset, who's famous for the articles which
argue for more conservative dive tables than the US Navy's, based on
the amount of bubbling that he observed in divers who'd "pushed" the tables
in controlled experiments).  The article didn't mention the Deco-Brain, 
another of the newer decompression meters, but that also may be a good product:
Hans Hass, a reputed European diving pioneer who was into rebreather diving
in the late 30's, endorses the Deco-Brain, and has written about it at length.

I'm not suggesting giving up the watch and tables -- only that good, automatic
devices are coming out on the market to supplement such calculations.  I'd
guess the microprocessor revolution is making this possible.

--- Phil Pfeiffer

mls@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP (Michael Schneider) (08/02/85)

I have seen the table posted earlier when I bought my watch.  When I first
saw 50M..., I thought the M stood for meters.  IT DOESN'T.  It is just a
marking to indicate the level of water resistance.  So, I followed the table
and got a 100M.  So far, no trouble.

m. schneider