On Wednesday, September 17, 2003 5:13 PM, Lee Bell wrote:

(snip)
> Personally, the first time I saw one of the baggy rubber dry suits, I
> decided I did not need to dive in water cold enough to require one.  With
> what I now know was the newer, cave cut version, that might not be the
case.

Hi, Lee!  Just to keep the pot stirring <bwg>, I'd be interested in knowing
what, "baggy rubber dry suits" you mean?  :-)

'Cause my early experiences were with what, today, we call shell suits, I've
always favoured them over, say, neoprene because of their functional use in
a variety of water temperatures.  Even in that regard, I've always
considered tri-laminate suits to be far more generously cut than the sleek,
figure hugging and flattering ones that I was first used to!  :-)

And before you ask, the fact that I don't still own a dry-suit is based on
simple economics and the type of diving that I now prefer to do.  Quite
frankly the suits that appeal to me are way out of my budget range - and
requirements.  :-)

Another fact that - I don't think - has been mentioned in this thread, is
that a dry-suit is more of an equipment item than a wet-suit - whose sole
purpose is to slow heat loss!  A dry-suit does require a degree of skill in
its proper use - even if it is an easily learned skill made better through
practice. :-)

> > I'd wager that as a confirmed, self-admitted Warm Water Wimp, you
probably
> > know next to nothing about diving dry, outside what little you learned
> > in your PADI specialty course - you know, the one where they teach that
> > crap about using the suit for "buoyancy control". If you buy into that
> > nonsense, well then naturally you are going to require a suit that was
> > handcrafted by Omar the Tentmaker.

I've no idea what PADI - or any other agency - teaches in their specialty
dry-suit diving courses, (I only used to run the DUI orientation courses
when they first appeared in OZ), - and may the DIR gods jump all over me for
this<bwg> - but in pre-BCD days, even the most figure-hugging and tailored
rubber suit, doubled as a flotation device!  :-)

> Frankly, I would not have expected that you would need all that space to
use
> the drysuit as a buoyancy control device.  Admitedly, I don't know much
> about it, but even the cave cut suit looked like it would hold more gas
than
> I'd ever need for buoyancy purposes.  In fact, I was under the impression
> that, even with the cave cut suit, a diver required more lead to offset
the
> buoyancy of the gas in the suit to prevent squeeze.  Was I mistaken?

The amount of lead carried is largely immaterial as concerns a squeeze.
It's the amount of compensating gas in the suit to offset ambient water
pressure that matters!  And any dry-suit - with the possible exception of
thin material cut to follow every contour of the body and with no thermal
undergarments - will increase the volume of the body and therefore
necessitate the use of more lead in order to achieve neutral buoyancy at
????   :-))))

> > But the people who actually do the dives and know what they are doing,
> > know better. And it's a real pity that more people OUTSIDE the cave
> > community don't.

I'd be inclined to extend the scope of Jim's comment and say that there are
MANY people outside of the cave diving community who know the capabilities
and importance of good fitting dry-suits! :-)

> Now at least one does.

Every journey begins with a single step!  :-)))

Strike