HS Explorer experience

Jakub

Hi list,

we are in the final phase to make a decision to test the Tmx HS Explorer units or not. We are using an old VR3's currently.

As I know there are so many opponents and patrons of the unit. Please has someone already done the comparison between the new VR3 with VPM and Explorer it self???

Thanks a lot for replies or recommendations.

Jakub

GKAM

Hi Jakub,

We did a series of test dives with GTZAVELAS a while back to compare the pre-VPM VR3, the HS Explorer and the NiTek He.



From our unofficial tests both in-water and out we have concluded that the HS Explorer is the best of the ones we tested. So far, our profiles have been down to 100m on RGBM CF01 both on OC and CC but we extend the last stop according to VPM/B +2 to add some more safety. I have recently started to do all stops at 6m rather than 6&3 and then take a v. long time travelling from 6m to surf.

I vote for the HS Explorer. Doing so, please beware there are a few minor bugs in the firmware and the ExpSim for the Metric settings. None seem to affect the deco algorithm which IMHO is v.reasonably applied by the computer. I have reported these bugs to Gene and he has updated the firmware.

All in all, it is a top dive computer with great support. If you decide to go for one, make sure it has the latest firmware update.

HTH
/George

__________________
Stay #

mverick

Have the Old VR3 and the HS Explorer. HS has much better deco for me, less conservative. Checked it with the VPM version and VPM was still more conservative. To much for me. Only problem, I can't get the HS to last more then 4 dives before it has a problem. To many bugs. Electronics and Cases. I keep hearing this is fixed and that is fixed. And, there are still problems.

And, it might get pricey for you sending them back.

If you're lucky and get one that works the first time. Thank your god. Most I've talked to have had to send theres back in at there expense to get things fixed 2 to 3 times before it's right. Mine's been back 3 times and still ain't right. I've written it off and use the old Shearwater on my meg. I'd consider throwing the new Shearwater into your choices. Shearwater Deco and HS are very close.

HS has to many problems. And saying great customer support? I'd rather have it work the first time. Shouldn't have to go back 3 times when it was bought new.

robinfante

I just got back from a trip with both the explorer and a VPM-upgraded vr3 - in fact I had to have the vr3 overnighted to me to make the trip. The first dive was 190' to the sand, most time spent more like 170'. After 36 minutes I left the wreck, with the explorer showing 35 minutes of deco, and the vr3 showing 67 minutes (which would no doubt have gone up too had I bothered to clear it.) I got back onboard, pitched the vr3 into my crate, and don't plan on ever diving it again - anyone want to buy a vr3 with perhaps 2 dozen dives on it?

For the trip we did the one dive to 190', 4 dives to 250', and 2 dives to 320'. For the 250' dives I typically spent 20-25 minutes on the bottom (mostly in the 200-215 range), and cleared after an hour, compared to an hour and a half minimum for the vr3 divers (and one still took a type 1 hit and got potted.) For the 320' dives I spent 15 minutes on the bottom, and cleared after 60-65 minutes. Others on the group were diving similar profiles and hanging for 2 to 3 hours. Keep in mind that I extended my upper stops on each dive considerably, generally by 15-20 minutes on the shallower dives, and by 40-45 minutes on the deeper, which should be taken into consideration. This was in keeping with my general preference to be told what I need to do, and then let me figure out what I want to do.

The explorer will die on you, guaranteed. To update an old New England proverb: You buy the meat you get the bones you buy the land you get the stones you buy the explorer you get the failures. Its just a fact of life. I've found customer support to be ok, I've had to send mine back twice (after its first dive, then after its 25th), and it took 3 weeks to a month to get it back - too long in my opinion. After 70 or so dives it is purring along quite nicely now. It also is a bit tetchy about losing contact with the battery, thereby erasing your deco information. Since then I'm more cautious to make sure it is snugged down, and haven't had an issue (vr3's are famous for this same failure, though I've never had one.) OC bailout is a snap with the explorer, as I learned for real when my Rebreather shit the bed. I think they are roughly a tie for user-friendliness, the vr3 has a more intuitive interface but still seems to confound me, whereas the explorer's controls need to be memorized but are simple enough that its not an issue.

Think of the explorer as a sliding scale, with performance on one side and failures on the other. Your unit will fall somewhere in between, you need to figure out how much of one you are willing to tolerate to get the other. Warts and all, I love my explorer, like an unfaithful woman I still can't get enough of <insert appropriate blues song, preferably by Howling Wolf.>

And I am very diligent about cutting backup tables .

silent running

Hello Jakub, I guess I'm lucky, I've had no failures on either the VR3-300+hrs-or the HE-50+. I hope my HE doesn't die, but it hasn't yet and I've taken it much deeper than I ever did my VR, but I always have tables and BT. The deco obligations are dramaticly less on my HE compared to non VPM VR3 and RGBM theory makes more sense to me, that's why I switched... -Andy

chunter

By what measure are you deciding what deco schedule is better or worse? It seems to me that not getting bent isn't where to draw the line. Just because one computer gets you out of the water a bit faster doesn't make it better as there is non-symptomatic damage that can be done in the bones etc. Perhapse it is my ignorance, but it seems that we all know so little about the long-term effects of diving (especially for dives below 90-100 meters) that we really have nothing to base our opinions on.

That being said, I go for the computer that is easy to use, reliable, and flexible. For me, that's the VR3. When I had the HS computer, it was frustrating not to be able to change gas configurations underwater, and the method for chaning gasses was complicated at best (although you do get used to its logic).

I may be pushing a political hot-button here, but it's just my opinion. The algorithms between the two units are similar enough. In the end, what's a couple of minutes? You are always better off doing slightly more deco (unless there are sharks feeding )

paulraymaekers

and what about the HH with GF's ??

units works fine after the initial problems (seem solved now)
you can change everything anywhere, even the GF's during diving :-)
and it's very 'intuitieve', changing to other setpoint, other gas, OC..

I have one unit going on with the HH just as decocomputer, not connected to the solenoid, works perfect!

regards
paul

__________________
www.rEvo-rebreathers.com

.... the earth is flat, Elvis is alive, and radial scrubbers give longer dwell time than axials...

silent running

Hello chunter, I thought I made it clear in my post that I chose the HE over the VR3 because I like RGBM better than the algs available in the VR. After reading about the different deco models in use and the ideas/principles and involved, RGBM makes more sense to me. The fact that it get's me out of the water faster is a side benefit. And the fact that it makes sense to me gives me more confidence in the profile. And you're right that we know very little about the lasting effects of deep diving. So all we ever really have to go on is the confidence we have in the way the model works and is tested.

And I also said that I usually wait around for my buddys who have longer times, just for good measure.

Knowing you have done your deco and can pad a little more if you feel the need certainly gives you more options to manage an emergency than if you have 25 extra minutes of deco. And I have been in the water decoing with big sharks about, including one memorable dive featuring a pair of Tigers. So I will always be happy to know that I'm able to get out of the water at my earliest convenience... -Andy

chunter

Thanks Andy,
I guess there is just so little actual data on RGBM vs. VPM vs. VPM-B vs. Buhl. that I find it hard to belive in any one of them exclusively. Even when studying bubbles with doppler, it is unclear exactly how DCS works. For some reason (and I don't really know why) I am a fan of deep stops, and generally buy into the logic of RGBM and VPM, but I havn't seen any hard data showing the incidence of DCS to be less with either. Even if you ask Gene at HS, he'll give you an answer like, "well, the guys in Washington State are doing dives with the "0" algorithm, and they are doing fine." For me, it is just too small a sample size.

In the end, my feeling is (and I'm sure some will disagree) that hydration, fitness, individual physiological factors (like a PFO), and other things we don't even know about, have more to do with whether we get bent or not than the small differences between bubble models. Again, this is especially true for dives past 100m because of the small sample size. There just aren't enough of us out there to make an accurate determination.

Hopefully we can avoid Tigers on deco either way.

Aloha,
Charlie

silent running

Hi Charlie, the idea behind deep stops is that of using the pressure to keep the bubble seeds very small and in the case of RGBM, to then force diffusion of some of the gas through the surfactant/membrane of the bubble seed, allowing for the differences btw aqueous and lipid surfactants. Which then helps speed offgassing and allows for shorter shallow stops. There are other components of the RGBM that are also very detailed. I learned most of what I know about RGBM from my t-mix class, some of which was authored by Bruce Weinke.

When Gene talks about guys in Washington doing X, I'm sure he doesn't expect anybody to be satisfied with that. He's forgetting to mention the 3000+ dives done on RGBM with only 2 minor DCS incidents.

But it's still true that we don't know nearly enough about the effects of deep diving on our bodies, and of course I would like to know more. I don't believe in any alg, any more than a gambler who sits down at the Black Jack table with his card counting system. We both think we have a reasonable chance of succeeding, only the stakes in BJ in any one game are much less than any 100M dive. All analogies break down at some point, but you get my drift... -Andy