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:
You can gain access to all this absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
...This summer when in Malta on holiday, I happened to see that it was possible to dive with Tuna Fish ( http://www.snorkelingmalta.com/snorkeling/?snorkeling-info=tuna-park-snorkeling ) and I suddenly realized that it was an instant big wish, almost as big as diving with dolphins (I didn't go for many reasons and dolphins being mammals still makes it more interesting)....
![]()
I disagree--I can't help but think think there are some limitations unconsciously imposed, but since you are the engineer, and your product works, I'd be kind of foolish to argue the point when I'm in over my head.I could go further in my opinions, and in a casual 1-on-1 conversation I might have, if the interest were there, but I think it's in very poor taste to criticize someone you don't know, in he creation of something you haven't made. Very interesting to get a glimpse at some of the thought-process which went into your creation.
P.S. Thanks for the tube-snorkel instruction video--I'm building one now!
That is more like what I had expected. I looked at some other pictures and you are correct. The widest point is less than half way, and probably about 1/3 of the way back....I think however it's shot a bit from the front, other pictures show the widest area about 1/3 from the front....
It is only the best I know how to make at the moment. A new product needs to have a combination of viable attributes that will hold favor in the monofin market for 2 or more years, because that is about how long it usually takes to develop a mature replacement technology. But, it seems I'm always investigating new ideas. I test dozens of ideas/concepts each year. Few of those ideas actually make it into a production monofin.I don't say there isn't something better - neither does Revan say his fin is the best - and there is always something better.
Very impressive.
Fondueset, that is certainly true that a lack of understanding or appreciation for the goal being pursued would be a limitation. What I meant was actually a little different, but I'd rather not criticize any further. Suffice to say I don't like the idea of a blade, but as it proves to be efficient I could warm up to the idea of putting one on my feet.
I've been wanting to ask, have you guys ever tried breaching with the DOL-Fin?
In the Interest of Clarity: I am not a fanboy. I don't get free fins from Ron for testing his and if I thought they were crap I'd have sent them back to him and told him. I would not have bitched about them in forums unless I thought he was being dishonest.
Nor do I think the Dol-fins are the absolute shit.
I prefer my hyperfins. But my hyperfins are a bit unusual - they are made by Alex Lichenko at Starfins - they are soft - cruise- tuned fins and they are as comfy as a pair of bedroom slippers in temperate waters - this is extremely unusual for hyperfins. It's taken me years to find a fin builder that meets my criteria.
So, in my testing of Ron's fins I am fairy careful to set aside my kinesthetic addiction to hyperfins. My criteria in testing are Cruise Efficiency, Comfort and durability. So far the three Dol-fins I've tested relative to my hyperfins go along about like this:
Efficiency:
X-20 - slightly less, Orca - very slightly less, Orca Gen2 - Probably slightly exceeds with wide blade.
An important point here is that these three models were tested with three different blades. With the wide blade on all
models I would expect improved performance.
Comfort:
All Models -Matches - Exceeds in winter when the slight compression of my hyperfins becomes a factor
Durability: No Brainer
I'll add portability - which is another win for the Dol-fins - particularly the X20.
There is no magic to be had in a monofin. It cannot violate the laws of physics just because it looks different or cool. When operating on design point, hyperfins are already near the physical limits for propulsive efficiency, so we should not expect any new fin design to produce dramatic performance increases, beyond that of a good hyperfin. In my opinion, achieving large improvements in performance will require more than just a new monofin. If we want to actually swim like a dolphin, we will probably have to find a way to look more like a dolphin (at least in a hydrodynamic sense).
It is great that your Starfin has such a uniquely good fit, because it provides a benchmark to strive to exceed. Most hyperfins are uncomfortable; some are extremely uncomfortable. I've never used one without getting blisters, and sometimes it only takes about 10 minutes of use to start peeling skin. From a market perspective, it is not good enough to be able to find a comfortable monofin with years of trial and error and multiple fin purchases. This has been a bane for freedivers ever since they started using hyperfins. The result has been that many freedivers simply don't use hyperfins. They never find out how much more fun can be had when dives are efficient, easy and long. This reduced scope of high performance monofin use limits growth in the sport.
Comfort and a proper fit must be made available on the first purchase, not the second or third. Comfort, durability, portability - these are the areas where we can expect to see large improvements from new types of hardware.
This question might be slightly unrelated, but it somewhat baffles me how after all this time hyperfins remain so uncomfortable ? There are so many other solutions such as cycling shoes (and others) that I fail to understand why these old materials and methods persist...
Quick tip for anyone who gets blisters in their rubber foot-pockets: insert you foot in a piece of thicker plastic (old bag), slide in with a bit soap. It is true that standard rubber monofin pockets are tight, even so tight that people can only endure them for 15 minutes. The reason is that a tighter pocket has a better power to blade transfer. Monofin sprinters do not care about comfort, they prefer performance. Freedivers, who like to spend hours in the open waters and pools, need comfort.
Manufacturing rubber foot pockets is a skill. If the pocket is exact to the foot side, the rubber can be very stiff, reducing play and foot pressure.
Fondue, I like your reporting very much. It sounds like the new design may finally outperform the hyperfin in the performance department.
Is there a full review in the works Fondue?
It's not a romantic notion of how things should look as to why I think the ultimate fin is probably more like a tuna fin, evolution weeds out such silliness, its people that come up with crap, I've read 2 different research studies that have found their fins to be an improvement on any naca foil, I don't have a link to them as I viewed them a couple of years ago. I don't think biomimicry is the be all end all , you'd be mad to look at a cheetah for example and try and devise a way to run like them, you just get on a bike. We are trying to use a fin the same as they do, by oscillating it, the main difference being the speed by which they move both the fin and themselves, which could possibly make them not the ideal fin after all, but no one has shown this to be the case, it's mere speculation.Ichthys, I've been pondering what you mean by 'limitations unconsciously imposed'. I think one such limitation is the idea that an efficient fin must look like a dolphin or tuna tail. In the case of both the hyperfin and dol-fin, engineers analyzed HOW these tails work and based their designs on mathematical findings. The dol-fin in particular departs from romantic notions about how such propulsion should look and instead focuses on generating thrust and reducing drag based on an understanding of the laws that govern such propulsion and the materials being used. If anything this is overcoming the limitations to which you allude. Moreover, the performance of the fin supports the accuracy of understanding and execution in the design.
I don't say there isn't something better - neither does Revan say his fin is the best - and there is always something better. But your statement about unconscious bias in design is not best supported by the Dol-fin series fins - which are almost unique in their reliance of an understanding of principal - as distinct from appearances.
It's not a romantic notion of how things should look as to why I think the ultimate fin is probably more like a tuna fin, evolution weeds out such silliness, its people that come up with crap, I've read 2 different research studies that have found their fins to be an improvement on any naca foil, I don't have a link to them as I viewed them a couple of years ago. I don't think biomimicry is the be all end all , you'd be mad to look at a cheetah for example and try and devise a way to run like them, you just get on a bike. We are trying to use a fin the same as they do, by oscillating it, the main difference being the speed by which they move both the fin and themselves, which could possibly make them not the ideal fin after all, but no one has shown this to be the case, it's mere speculation.