Sidemount VS Backmount

[Gary]

If you were not the only one with a CON opinion the thread would be closed by now. There is only so much back slapping that everyone can do before it gets old.

As was said earlier "To say one is better than the other is just misinformed".

Sidemount vs backmount has been discussed many times before in a similar threads.


There are good reasons for sidemount - or for backmount. I think there is a considerable number of persons get into sidemount for lack of other "continuing education" past full cave. Given a similar expenditure of effort and gear modification anyone would have far superior buoyancy and trim in backmount. Many of the benefits of sidemount are exaggerated. Being wider and flatter is only true when the head is down and legs strait out behind - but definitely much wider and floppier.

also from an earlier thread: http://www.cavediver.net/forum/showt...8242#post38242


An important thing to keep in mind in a "sidemount vs backmount" discussion is that there has hardly ever been a death caused by a gas equipment failure. Most cave diving deaths happen due to diver errors with no equipment failures involved. Even in cases where a diver is on a "single tank & single reg" gear failure is typically not involved in any way. Deaths are more likely to be related to gas mix or medical problems than to gear failures of any kind (especially true of Rebreathers where various gear/diver errors/failures often become gas mix problems).

When talking about the limited number of problems caused by breathing system failures manifolds can be considered to be a device used to propagate a leak to an entire system. In most cases I think manifolds have been an aggravating factor rather than a cause or a benefit. As in Shek-Exley - Atlantida (Caverns Measureless p145+) where a free flowing reg "not properly recognized and isolated" depleted manifolded tanks and nearly killed both divers. The same problem on independent tanks would not have been enough of an issue to be writing about.

On sidemount/independent gives ability to exit without depending on a buddy AND still also have buddy with extra air as well. Regardless of the gear failure you "have the gas to make a safe exit unaided/unencumbered" - which is a big benefit compared to being either "flush with lots of extra gas" or "tied together with probably not enough" depending on the type of gear failure (manifold). A limiting gas failure typical of sidemount/independents is a isolated free flowing reg but there remains the possibility of recovering the gas by alternate methods (swapping regs/fluttering valves/breathing off valves). In a limiting gas failure typical of manifolded tanks (isolable/strait bar) in the unisolated leak the gas is gone.

More significant than their possible benefit in a leak isolable manifolds cause problems with fill errors, shut isolators and a variety of other problems. A strait bar does limit those problems but makes any tank side leak unisolable and guaranteed to deplete both tanks.