-
Welcome to the DeeperBlue.com Forums, the largest online community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing. To gain full access to the DeeperBlue.com Forums you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
- Join over 44,280+ fellow diving enthusiasts from around the world on this forum
- Participate in and browse from over 516,210+ posts.
- Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
- Post your own photos or view from 7,441+ user submitted images.
- All this and much more...
You can gain access to all this absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
Extreme Dolfinism G2
- Thread starterREVAN
- Start date
Thread Status: Hello
, There was no answer in this thread for more than 60 days.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
Myself, if I was choosing, I'd go black, but you can't deny the red and white ones look real funky.
The DOL-Fin Pilot2 is starting to take shape. At only 4 pounds, it's about 10% lighter in weight than the X-20. I've got a few tweeks to make still, but I think the testing will probably start this weekend.
Pretty sure the x20 and pilot are expected to be on the same performance level as each other, the orca being a level above both, 2 things to consider here when talking about the fairing employed in the orca model as to how it might help the other models in the range, the ease of the up and down motion of the fin and the efficiency gains when gliding through streamlining , i'd like to see the struts be curved on this model to allow easier up and down rotation of the unit through the water, it doesn't help the glide phase but it does help reduce a little bit the power needed to rotate the unit up and down ,unless your expecting some gains in thrust from the struts themselves I see this as a small compromise in design for possibly cost purposes or stability, but it's a nice design none the less, it looks very strongly built.
Last edited:
To clarify what I meant by "curved struts", I mean side to side curvature not front to back , as in round or oval shaped. This is being finicky , this version is a cut price one so you shouldn't be to fussy, if this creates build problems and pushes prices up for this model then my argument can be disregarded as it shouldn't apply.
Revan, Thank you for posting the picture. It is very neat and interesting to see your ideas expressed and ready to test. Best of luck swimming it's first test tomorrow!
I think using such a large area of contact with the shoe may eliminate the argument for only purchasing a carbon sole shoe. It seems very unlikely the shoe sole or the two metal parts separated by a spacer would ever flex or fatigue or break. I know cdavis has pointed out durability as a feature in your previous designs.
I've asked cdavis about how these flex before.... There is little or no flex in the structure... Just the tipping of the wing where it is attached at the back of the structure and front of the wing. Is that a correct impression? Any resistance to that tipping or does it simply flip from a pre defined up stroke position to a predesigned down stroke position? Does adjusting those have an effect? Are they adjustable? That area is in a shadow in this first photo.
Last edited:
I had to make a trip into town to get parts for more Orca2 monofins and some other shop supplies. So, I didn't get much work done on the new Pilot today. Before I left this morning, I designed a modification for the frame that I think will be an improvement to how the shoe is supported. It seems like a very simple modification and I should have thought of it sooner, but sometime I need to get some hardware in my hands before these things become obvious. I'm planning to implement this change before putting the prototype in the pool for testing. Plus, it gives me a good excuse to delay the testing just a little longer. The pool is about 10C right now (50F). Burrr!
In the meantime, here is another picture from a different angle. The heel strap loops on these shoes are going to make it much easier to put this fin on when I have thick neoprene gloves on my hands.
In the meantime, here is another picture from a different angle. The heel strap loops on these shoes are going to make it much easier to put this fin on when I have thick neoprene gloves on my hands.
The design does not rely on flexure of the frame as a part of it's function. However, all real structures will flex when loaded, and these frames will exhibit some limited flex also; but the flex that is important is the flexing that happens in the fin's suspension system. That is where the fin control happens. Similar to the X-20, the suspension is adjustable, but the adjustment happens a little different with the new designs.
I've been trying to make my designs less expensive and easier to support and customize. Instead of having separate metal parts that are interchanged to get the different angles (metal parts that were actually fairly expensive), there is now an inexpensive plastic shim that can be trimmed to basically any custom setting fairly easily. If it is trimmed wrong and messed up, a new set can be bought for about $10 and dropped into a small envelope and mailed anywhere for the cost of postage on a letter.
Overall, I think the new system is better for the customer than the original design that had 3 sets of parts for 3 different settings, that cost about $40 each, adding $120 to the cost of the finished product. In surveys, relatively few customers have used any settings different from the factory default setting. Though it functioned well, it was not a cost efficient design from a customer perspective, and it was an area that was in need of refinement to better align the product with customers' needs.
Last edited:
Wow! That puts things into perspective; I wouldn't have guessed that those parts would be that expensive.
The fact that you've come up with a far cheaper, and as effective, solution is great. I think it is a good sign when a design becomes simpler over time, it shows that previous design decisions were good enough and that refinements are making things better.
I put the DOL-Fin Pilot2 in the pool today for its inaugural test swim. Everything seems to be working as expected. I added a toe support to the frame. I'm not sure if it was needed, but it will be stronger with it and it is a simple and inexpensive part to include. With it, the new frame is supporting the shoes very well and I think the design is close to done. I'm going to want to think about optimizing adjustments for the shoe mounting, but it is already working very well as it is.
Let me know what you think....
Let me know what you think....
Last edited:
The Pilot2 is designed to take the Look system (3 bolt) shoes, so has a different arrangement of holes on the shoe plate, and by the sounds of it some other enhancements like the toe support too.
It's looking good Ron. I see what you say about the large heel loops making it easier to get your feet into the shoes.
It's not a bad thing to support the shoe, it reduces the stress/flex on the shoe which means you don't have to resort to expensive carbon soled shoes for the fin to maintain its efficiency and also keeps the cost of ownership down.
I see your point, but the shoe looks supported enough alone without the add on, but if it's cheap, light and streamlined then sure put it on, it can't hurt.
Last edited: