Tinkerntom wrote:
Brian and Wilko, you both represent alot of diverse paddling
experience. I found this article which was originally released as a
white page news brief by Bare, significant for the kayaking community.

http://tinyurl.com/6wozp

There's one word for the dry suit portion of this article. That word is
"bull****".

Bare position is that the Drysuit does not belong in a kayak. Even
though it gives more cold water protection, it also requires more
maintenance and training, which the recreational kayaker is probably
not prepared to provide. Granted, there are high performance expert
kayakers who can benefit from the higher performance, but the high
performance is trumped by the higher risk inherant in drysuits.

Absolute nonsense! How much training does it take to operate a friggin'
zipper? Maintenance consists of rinsing it (which you should do with a
wetsuit, too), lubing the zippers once in a while (I probably do it 2-3
times a year), powdering the seals when they need it (it requires
knowing how to twist the cap on a talcum powder bottle) and perhaps
applying a bit of 303 to the outside of the seals periodically (can you
operate a spray bottle and a paper towel?). It ain't rocket science!

Especially consider that many rec paddlers would use the drysuit in
conditions that don't require the greater cold water protection, just
to stay dry and comfortable, and the risk is even more unjustifiable.
Wilko I am with you on this one!

First off, I've yet to meet a "rec paddler" who would spring for a dry
suit, so this argument is a red herring at best. Regardless, no one
wears a dry suit - or a wet suit for that matter - if conditions don't
warrant it. It's a completely bogus premise.

Bare is basically saying that come a liability suit, They have
announced to the world, that they would not be liable for a kayaker
being injured or worse, while wearing a drysuit, since they do not
approve use of their drysuit while kayaking.

Well whoop-de-do for them! Kokatat, Stohlquist, Ravenspring, OS Systems,
Palm and NRS, just to name a few, have no problem with selling dry suits
to kayakers. Apparently their customers are complaining or suing,
either. If Bare cannot or chooses not to compete in that marketplace,
who cares? They're ****ing into the wind with this argument.

Drysuits were designed for
diving where the diver has a breathing apparatus, and goes through
intense certification in order to dive, and the equipment is constantly
scrutinized for mtce requirements.

That goes to show how little you know about diving, but if you're not a
diver, that's understandable. I'm also a certified scuba diver. I don't
own a dry suit and have never done any diving in one. However, I can buy
one off the rack and go diving in it tomorrow if I choose to. I haven't
been diving in at least ten years, but I still have my "C" card and I
could get tanks tomorrow and go diving if I choose to. Getting into
diving does require training and I applaud the industry for
standardizing on that business model. However, once you're "in the
door", there's little regulation.

The crossover application is not approved by Bare.

Again, who cares and who needs them? It's one company's opinion against
the rest of the world.

I realize there are now dedicated kayaking drysuits,
but that does not change the basic technology. The elimination of vent
valves, does not make them inherantly safer.

Actually, there is a big difference between diving dry suits and
kayaking dry suits. Either could be used for kayaking, although the
stiffer, non-breathable diving suits would be much less comfortable,
that the lighter, breathable kayaking designs. A kayaking suit cannot be
used for diving, for one good reason; diving dry suits are not just just
for immersion protection, they also function as part of the diver's
buoyancy system. Additionally, in order for a dry suit to insulate at
depth, it must be partially inflated with air and adjusted as the
diver's depth changes. The relief valves must be kept clean and be
tested every time you go out in order to insure that they're working
properly. This is CRITCAL to a dry suit diver's safety! That adds a
substantial layer of complexity to the operation of the suit compared to
one that will never be used below the surface of the water. In that
regard, it is an apples-to-oranges comparison.

And I would wonder what
the manufactures liability would be if challenged in court after an
accident.

Well, I don't see kayaking dry suit manufacturers getting sued left and
right, do you?

I am a newbie to all this, and at one point considered getting a
drysuit. The mystic of going out in cold water, and rolling the kayak
like an Eskimo is powerful motivator for getting a drysuit. However,
upon further consideration, just because I can afford the technology,
does not mean I have any business buying a drysuit and putting myself
in a life treating situation that requires it. There is alot more
training and experience that I should gain before that day.

That's a sound judgment. By all means, you must acquire the skills
necessary to kayak safely in ANY water before you consider the extra
risks that cold water adds. However, a dry suit does not increase your
risk when paddling cold water, it dramatically DECREASES it.

I've swam in my dry suit for 20 minutes or more in 40 degree water, when
training other paddlers in rescue techniques. There is NO wetsuit that I
could actually paddle in that would have protected me from becoming
seriously hypothermic under those conditions. Yet, it was no problem in
a dry suit.

Our club requires dry suits on all winter paddles. We've had occasional
capsizes and swims on winter trips and in cold water workshops (the
latest was last weekend). Dry suits literally make the difference
between these incidents being potentially life-threatening events and
being merely interesting anecdotes to laugh about over beers and pizza
after the trip. Until you actually experience the difference, I don't
expect you to fully understand it, but it's absolutely true.

The use of a wetsuit is self regulating in that it is a passive device
that works to a certain temperature no matter the expertise of the
paddler, or the general condition of the suit. If it is to cold for the
wetsuit, the paddler should stay out of the water.

If that paddler doesn't possess the necessary skills to paddle safely in
cold water, absolutely. But if that paddler is skilled enough, why
shouldn't he/she buy a dry suit and paddle in cold water, if they choose
to?

It seems to me for someone like me, a newbie, and I don't know Sparks
experience, that you experts should answer his question, not with a
discussion of the merits of the two systems.

It's important that this information is available to people who need it.
What are we supposed to do, tell him that it's OK for us to paddle in
cold water, but he's not allowed to? Are we then to refuse to provide
him with information that may directly affect his safety if he does
choose to take the risk? How is that a service to anyone?

But by recognizing the
limits and aknowledging the risks involved in extreme cold water
paddling, and kill the Mystic. Just my two cents worth. TnT

First off, if you mean "mystique", there is none. A dry suit is a piece
of clothing, not a religious icon. It's safety gear, just like a PFD,
signal flares or a VHF radio. All of them require some specialized
knowledge to use them properly, but none is difficult to use and none
require any formal training. As the saying goes, RTFM.

Do yourself a favor and forget the bull**** that Bare is feeding the
public. They're a dive suit manufacturer that doesn't want people to use
their products for paddling. Big deal, it's nothing more that someone
with a personal ax to grind. It's still ridiculous, since I know several
people who have used diving dry suits for paddling without problems.
After buying breathable kayaking dry suits, they all agreed that they
were more comfortable, but there are no technical problems with using
diving dry suits for paddling. However, if Bare wants to whine about it,
it's their prerogative to do so.

It also sounds like the person making those ridiculous arguments has
never set foot in a kayak. You're getting your information from a
tainted source. I suggest that when the subject is kayaking, you get
your info from people who know that subject.

Secondly, we're answering Sparks' question. You're correct that
unprepared people shouldn't paddle in cold water, regardless of the gear
they may own. However, that wasn't the question. There's only so much
sermonizing that we can do without insulting everyone who asks about
wetsuits and dry suits. Hell, it's commendable that he even asked in the
first place, as there are a lot of dimbulbs out on the water who are
completely unprepared and don't even have a clue that they're risking
their lives!

It's up to each of us to decide if we're skilled enough to take the
risks associated with cold water paddling. You've made what seems like a
wise choice for yourself, given your skill level. I applaud you for
that. However, I really think you've gotten this whole wetsuit/dry suit
thing completely backwards in your mind after receiving some bad
information.

Brian Nystrom wrote:

Tinkerntom wrote:

Brian and Wilko, you both represent alot of diverse paddling
experience. I found this article which was originally released as a
white page news brief by Bare, significant for the kayaking community.

http://tinyurl.com/6wozp

There's one word for the dry suit portion of this article. That word is
"bull****".

Ladner claims Jacques Cousteau invented neoprene "after the second world
war." That would probably come as a surprise to Arnold Collins and
Wallace Carothers, whom Dupont says invented the stuff in 1930. And
Dupont considers in synthetic rubber, not plastic.

Maybe Cousteau invented wetsuits? Not according to this, although it
does credit him with inventing the SCUBA tank.
http://www.divinghistory.com/historyofthewetsuit.htm

--
Steve Cramer
Athens, GA

Steve Cramer wrote:
Brian Nystrom wrote:

Tinkerntom wrote:

Brian and Wilko, you both represent alot of diverse paddling
experience. I found this article which was originally released as a
white page news brief by Bare, significant for the kayaking community.

http://tinyurl.com/6wozp


There's one word for the dry suit portion of this article. That word
is "bull****".


Ladner claims Jacques Cousteau invented neoprene "after the second world
war." That would probably come as a surprise to Arnold Collins and
Wallace Carothers, whom Dupont says invented the stuff in 1930. And
Dupont considers in synthetic rubber, not plastic.

Maybe Cousteau invented wetsuits? Not according to this, although it
does credit him with inventing the SCUBA tank.
http://www.divinghistory.com/historyofthewetsuit.htm

That's interesting. I knew that Cousteau is considered the inventor of
SCUBA, but I hadn't heard either of these other two claims. I wonder if
this guy thinks that wetsuits need to be wet to work, too? ;-)

Steve Cramer wrote:

....stuff deleted

Maybe Cousteau invented wetsuits? Not according to this, although it
does credit him with inventing the SCUBA tank.
http://www.divinghistory.com/historyofthewetsuit.htm


I read his book. His claim was that he invented the regulator. The tank
was available (since there were already needs for compressed air and
tanks were quite available after WWII). I think there is some doubt
whether he, or his buddy (Dumas?), who actually invented the regulator,
even.

Still, interesting character, to say the least. Watching him evolve from
a callous intruder into the depths into one of its greatest caretakers
was interesting, to say the least.

Rick

Brian, I always appreciate your come back reply, since they are
informative, and represent your paddling expertise. I would clarify
that I am not opposed to the use of drysuits by properly prepared and
thoughtful paddlers. My main concern would be someone buying a drysuit
and heading out on a paddle trip thinking they have done all they need
to do to prepare because now they have the magic drysuit. I would
personally hope someday to get a drysuit, but for the meantime I need
to know the limits of my wetsuit, and if it means not paddling, then I
don't belong on the water. It appears that Sparks made the same
decision back on the 11th. Does this deprive us of the paddling
experience? Maybe, but we will live to paddle again under more
favorable conditions, with out the memory of a bad experience for us,
or worse yet, our survivors.

I also have no doubt that the Bare white sheet is a CYA . That there
are other manufactures and that there are difference in the various
types is understood. The fact that maybe they have not been sued yet,
may just be a matter of time in our litentious society. I work in a
field frought with liability issues, so maybe a little sensitive, but
remember, you got to CYA as well. TnT

Tinkerntom wrote:

Tom, I don't want you to think that I was being hard on you personally.
I just get a bit annoyed with people/companies like Bare that publish
erroneous information for self-serving reasons. It's particularly
harmful to people who are new to this game and may not possess the
knowledge to be able to separate fact from fiction. It raises
unnecessary concerns

Brian, I always appreciate your come back reply, since they are
informative, and represent your paddling expertise. I would clarify
that I am not opposed to the use of drysuits by properly prepared and
thoughtful paddlers. My main concern would be someone buying a drysuit
and heading out on a paddle trip thinking they have done all they need
to do to prepare because now they have the magic drysuit.

I have to say that I consider that a baseless concern, since it
essentially doesn't happen. Most paddlers have to be convinced to spend
the money for a dry suit, since for most, it's a substantial investment.
This is especially true of beginners, since a dry suit would cost
approximately as much as the rest of their initial gear combined. At a
minimum, it would increase their gear investment substantially.

Perhaps it's just the crowd I paddle with, but I have yet to meet anyone
who thought that a dry suit MADE them safe. Everyone I know regards a
dry suit as a necessary piece of safety gear and understands that
equipment is only a backup in case skill and judgment are not enough.

I would
personally hope someday to get a drysuit, but for the meantime I need
to know the limits of my wetsuit, and if it means not paddling, then I
don't belong on the water. It appears that Sparks made the same
decision back on the 11th. Does this deprive us of the paddling
experience? Maybe, but we will live to paddle again under more
favorable conditions, with out the memory of a bad experience for us,
or worse yet, our survivors.

Not only am I not questioning your decisions, I think you both made the
right ones considering your circumstances. Unlike many people, you two
are at least smart enough to understand that you're probably not ready
for the risks of cold water paddling. That mindset alone will go farther
toward keeping you safe than any piece of gear.

I also have no doubt that the Bare white sheet is a CYA . That there
are other manufactures and that there are difference in the various
types is understood. The fact that maybe they have not been sued yet,
may just be a matter of time in our litentious society. I work in a
field frought with liability issues, so maybe a little sensitive, but
remember, you got to CYA as well. TnT

Bare has every right to cover themselves. However, all they needed to do
was to state that they don't recommend or condone the use of their
products for sea kayaking. If they felt the need, they could have used
stronger language and simply said "Do not use our dry suits for
kayaking". They didn't need to pollute the air with all that other
nonsense disguised as legitimate safety concerns.

The truth is that dry suits work exceptionally well for paddling and
they offer a substantial increase in safety for cold water paddlers (sea
kayakers in particular) vs. the alternatives. I've seen this
demonstrated many times and have experienced it personally, so I feel
comfortable making that statement.