|
|
Post by surflung on Aug 22, 2014 5:30:27 GMT -8
Large Bore Snorkels...
from Underwater Hockey- About four years ago, I was planning to get back into free diving on a tropical vacation. I brought some of my old gear and enjoyed it so much, I went to the local dive shop to buy a new snorkel. Much to my surprise, it was an overly complicated, expensive piece of plastic and silicone... Back in the '70s I thought the diving world had perfected snorkels with the large bore and simplicity. - Then I noticed the mouthpiece was molded to wear the snorkel on the left side... And I had always wore my snorkel right faced. When I told the young clerk I'd started diving in '64 and did he have a right handed mouthpiece he said, "If you're such an experienced diver, you ought to know the regulator goes on the right and the snorkel on the left". What a little jerk! - When I came home I started looking around for the simple, ambidextrous, large bore snorkels I know are best. I found them at the free diver spear fishing websites. But most interestingly, I found them at Canadian Underwater Hockey suppliers. Here's one to check out: Under Water Hockey Snorkels. About $20.  - I also found some excellent and CHEAP snorkels at: Snorkel City Standard Snorkels. At $3.33 they're so cheap, I buy them by the handful... And for good reason... My grandkids are always losing their snorkels.  - PS... I just ordered 6 snorkels from Snorkel City and paid only $27 including shipping!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2014 7:22:53 GMT -8
I have one left of the three I bought from Dan several years ago......USD tuned snorkels......seems USD contracted with the Univ. of Texas in Austin to find the most efficient bore size for snorkeling.........these had a flare at the top that acted like in in-tube of a venturi........I now only have one......as I lost one to my ex wife in 2007, one is on the bottom of stetson reef in the gulf of Mexico....the remaining one in my closet attached to my snorkeling mask......
Surflung, when you said big bore I immediately thought of the 1.125 inch clear plastic tubes some snorkels of yesterday..........they were in vogue then, the idea a big tube was better.......but that is a lot of air to move aback and fourth......tiring your chest muscles quicker.......
What is the Dia. of your tubes?
|
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Aug 22, 2014 8:44:03 GMT -8
Yeah, I have a White Stag, I'm not sure the size, but it's so big, it's actually hard to breathe out of: I imagine Jack Lalanne could use it, but not me:  Jaybird |
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Aug 22, 2014 9:42:04 GMT -8
I have one left of the three I bought from Dan several years ago......USD tuned snorkels......seems USD contracted with the Univ. of Texas in Austin to find the most efficient bore size for snorkeling.........these had a flare at the top that acted like in in-tube of a venturi........I now only have one......as I lost one to my ex wife in 2007, one is on the bottom of stetson reef in the gulf of Mexico....the remaining one in my closet attached to my snorkeling mask...... Surflung, when you said big bore I immediately thought of the 1.125 inch clear plastic tubes some snorkels of yesterday..........they were in vogue then, the idea a big tube was better.......but that is a lot of air to move aback and fourth......tiring your chest muscles quicker....... What is the Dia. of your tubes? Mossback, The snorkel you are talking about is the Impulse snorkel from U.S. Divers Company. Here are a few photos of it:    I tested snorkels in the 1980s in order to buy the best for may family's trip to Maui, Hawaii. I chose this snorkel, as it seemed to meet all my criterion (ease of breathing, ease of clearing, and breathing dry in waves). The theory behind the upper part was that any water coming in tends to cling to the sides of the snorkel, and would go out the non-return valve in the bulb on the top (which completely encircles the snorkel). It worked quite nicely, and my sons enjoyed using it. My favorite snorkel for diving has been the Dacor snorkel with corrugations exterior, but a smooth interior. It can be worn on both sides of the mask.  John |
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Aug 22, 2014 10:19:28 GMT -8
John, you may remember, I have one like that, only mine says, "Deep See', Honolulu Hawaii". I gave this snorkel to my wife, as I want her to have the best, and want her to feel comfortable. I really love the way it performs, you almost don't think about the fact that it's in your mouth, at least for me anyway.
I just measured the White Stag, which has the same size bore as the Dacor/Deep See: I think what makes the Dacor better is that the mouth piece is choked-down a bit, giving you better velocity of the air you take in; does this make sense? I just know that I didn't like breathing from the WS snorkel: perhaps I'll give it to Don, he's a really big guy and he might like it!
Jaybird
|
|
|
|
Post by diverdon on Aug 22, 2014 12:03:10 GMT -8
Hey, wait >:/
|
|
|
|
Post by duckbill on Aug 22, 2014 16:03:43 GMT -8
Mossback, The snorkel you are talking about is the Impulse snorkel from U.S. Divers Company. John, it sounds like Mossback was talking about the Aqua-Lung Power (tuned) Snorkel.  |
|
|
|
Post by duckbill on Aug 22, 2014 16:10:49 GMT -8
Big bore snorkels are not harder to breathe through. It's just that they hold more carbon dioxide from your exhalations which you then rebreathe. The sensation is called oxygen starvation, even though the resistance to breathing is actually minimal.
That's why there is a balance, a trade-off between smaller diameters that offer more resistance, and larger diameters that breathe more easily but trap more carbon dioxide.
Also, the larger the diameter and longer the snorkel, the more water column that needs to be blown out. So that also has to be factored in to the trade-off for the "optimum" diameter and length. Of course, the "optimum" will be different for different people, hence the impossibility in coming to concensus.
|
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Aug 22, 2014 17:05:03 GMT -8
That snorkel was, in my opinion, a gimmick. Duckbill hit the nail on the head about big bore verses small bore. But we (snorkelers and finswimmers) got around that by cutting the top off the big bore snorkels. I found that head-high was all that was really needed for the snorkel to function optimally, and so for a while would cut the last four to six inches off the top of my snorkels. That way I did not have so much tube to clear, did not experience as much CO2 buildup, and had the benefits of optimal resistance. No one has yet mentioned, because we now have the "water free" snorkels, the snorkeling technique for clearing called Displacement Clearing. For old-school snorkelers, this is the technique of choice for clearing the tube. I practice it every winter in the pool too. Swimaster came out with a great four-page layout called the Swimaster Instruction Charts, that they gave to all instructors free (it had their gear in the illustrations). But the charts were great, and had a wonderful illustrations. The chart titled "The Snorkel" illustrated better than any book I've seen the technique, and since I have it, I scanned it for you to see.  John |
|
|
|
Post by scubadiverbob on Aug 23, 2014 4:55:52 GMT -8
Everyone has their own preference for snorkels.... Me, I like ScubaPro Shotgun snorkels, and don't understand why ScubaPro stopped producing them a couple of years back. Now I think they only have dry snorkels in their catalogs ... I have a dry snorkel; but, never got use to it. Found it at Lovers Point beach in Monterey, CA.
|
|
|
|
Post by surflung on Aug 23, 2014 7:32:54 GMT -8
The underwater hockey snorkels are 7/8" bore. The Snorkel City ones measure 7/8" bore as well. So the Canadians aren't any larger than what I already have.
- BTW I have used the displacement method since early '70s. Are you saying that modern divers don't learn it anymore?
|
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Aug 23, 2014 8:53:21 GMT -8
I prefer the displacement method too: the blast method takes too much effort, for me anyway!
Jaybird
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2014 10:07:23 GMT -8
There are no gimmicks on a USD power snorkel........IMHO gimmicks are devices that are "suppose" to make it better but only add weight and can fail. The bore is smaller as well.......mine measures .755 inches......a bit more than 3/4 inch. Now the bottom half that carries the mouthpiece is larger (J tube) as it fits over the upper tube. As I stated earlier, the Univ. of Texas developed these specs for USD back in the 70 or 80's. For my early years of diving I only had the one pictured below........a Snork-L.........after about six months of diving in Okinawa I shortened it. It had a small bore too but can't remember what it was now..around 3/4 or 7/8.....lost it off Huntington Beach diving on a old sunken barrage full of concrete blocks in 71. I was at my last duty station El Toro before exiting the Marines. It was bear to breath through until I cut it down about a third, didn't know better as it was my first, until trying other snorkles in Oki.  I don't use one diving now unless I dive from shore without a bc or other flotation or just skin diving. I use both methods to clear......depending on my desire to breath coming from depth...I did learn early on to clench my front teeth together to strain water droplets out of my throat and then blow again to clear the tube. Never was an issue after learning the ropes. The deepest I ever free dove was in Okinawa....35'.......I remember it sure was a long way back to the surface! mossback |
|
