Err..Waterbuoy was tested by MBM (Please ignore its in the main thread

[Nauti Fox]

In the August edition.
They attached a tin of beans to it and dropped it in the harbour. After a considerable delay it lifted the tin to the surface, the delay was said to have been (bean?) the fault of a pre-production trigger.
Once on the surface MBM attached another tin of the sacred bean to it, which it supported.
So......would it lift the Titanic from the seabed, possibly not.
Will it rescue your keys, handheld radio etc, it probably would.
Will I buy one? Yes.
Will I test it? Yes, when I drop my keys, handheld radio etc over the side.

 

[lovezoo]

Re: Err..Waterbuoy was tested by MBM

Do try and keep up. That was discussed around page 15 or so of the original thread and then quite quickly ignored. If you have an hour or so to spare, have a look through.

 

[Nauti Fox]

Re: Err..Waterbuoy was tested by MBM

Ah, I do apologise. I didn't make it through all of them.
I would delete this but it would look a bit strange with a reply. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I'll change the title instead.

 

[Gludy]

A tin of bins has an SG of 1.08 - so it only needs 80 grams pull to pull up a kilo of such tins. Or as little as 35 grams to pull up one tin. To reach its claimed 1 kilo lift it would have to raise 12 tins of beans. It would never do this.

After a long delaym in shallow water, it brought a tin of beans to the sirface - so adter a long delay in shallow water it lifted about 80 grams.

Further if it was claimed that it was tested 9000 times with a 1 kg lead weight in open sea a mile from shore and every yest worked (that is the same pul as about 9 tins of beans), yet the one tested by the mag (which I did not know about until you pointed it out) managed to fail even in a shallow harbour. Had it been deeper water by the time it inflated the pressure would have been too much and the balooon too small to do anything.

I beleive that the magazine has fallen for the hype itself and carried out a totally misleading test, This was what I was trying to avoid.

Many items are more desne than a tin of beans - even a decent bunch of keys will impose a much greater load and never be seen again, so be careful if you buy one.

 

[Gludy]

I have just read the article in MBM and up until now had not realised that such a misleading article had appeared.

Neale the article is suggesting to people that the device will lift up to a kilo to the surface and that is simply not true.

What are you going to do to correct it?

I am frankly amazed that archimedes principle is not even understood by a boating magazine!

It is interesting that in the only test it took 15 minutes to lift one can of beans to the surface the delay being blamed on a pre-production trigger - this is after 9000 tests with a 1 kilo lead weight working on every occasion!

Well it just goes to show that some magazines do not even appreciate how the boats they write about float! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Nauti Fox]

I must be their dream customer!
I will buy one as I said, if it can lift a tin of beans it will lift my handheld which to be perfectly honest, is all I want it to do.
I see it as a sort of insurance policy which will hopefully pay out! The same as I put Soltron in when I fill up with diesel, which has never been proved one way or other.
I can see your point Gludy, that you want products to do what is claimed, all I want it for is to lift a light object. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Gludy]

Unit 19
Thats fine - I feel it may, if they cure the trigger problem, lift a small bunch of keys OK. However it really should do as claimed and other may try it with a larger bunch of keys or denser objects.

It is wrong of the magazine to have misled it readers with such a review that totally failed to understand the true pulling power of the device. The USA one selling at about £3.40 will also lift a tin of beans as it has a pulling power of well over 100 grams.

Waterbuoy should simply state the lifting power in newtons or grams - it is that simple. Its just tne force needed to submerge the inflated device.

By the way is your radio waterprrof to 100 foot or so? Also how many GPS units can survive that. I have a floating waterproof radio but I do not know of a single radio or GPS unit that is proof to other than a few feet..... if that.

 

[Nauti Fox]

Err..no, not to a hundred feet. Thing is where I am berthed and travel around is on the east coast, where if you ever got a depth of a hundred feet under you, I think most east coasters would suffer from nose bleeds!

 

[Gludy]

But even waterpprof radios are not normally rated much more than ten feet.
I do not know of a waterpoof GPS - splashproof etc but not waterproof - are there any?

 

[Nauti Fox]

[ QUOTE ]
I do not know of a waterpoof GPS - splashproof etc but not waterproof - are there any?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I know of, but then I never said I did. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Gludy]

Its just that everyone is saying that GPS, radios etc an be attached but in practice it seems to me they cannot be attached because they would not survive the experience - better off with a floatation bag.

 

[Nauti Fox]

Do you think they will do a special Christmas one, designed to lift SWMBO's Christmas pudding. That would be a device worth having.

 

[halcyon]

One point, how many other items on our boats do we require the same level of specification ?
How many know what the actual range of there VHF's are, and in exactly what conditions ?

Brian

 

[Gludy]

I can only speak for my SWMBO and I think this is the only occasion I would want to use a Waterbuoy - I would be bitterly dissapointed if it worked with a pudding denser than lead. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
At least the local fish would probably jump out of th water and could be used /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Nauti Fox]

Thing is, whenever Cheryl starts to dish the Christmas food up she gets frenzied, starts descending into a hissy fit and stuff goes everywhere, but as you say, it may be kinder to leave the Chrissy pudding in its watery grave. Kinder for us that is, not for the marine life.

 

[Gludy]

I think we should know the limitations of things like VHFs and radar etc - that is part of safely using a boat.

In practice we know the claims of most equipment and most claims are, within reason, true.

You only find out this product does not work after its first use and then seeing as its lost can prove nowt! You cannot test it claims without destroying it and the maker point blank refuses to disclose information that could prove its functioning to spec - that makes me very, very suspicious.

What we do know is that the maker claims 9000 tests with it working with 1 kg of lead everytime but in the only independent test we lnow about, it took 15 minutes (not the less than 10 seconds claimed) to pull up an effective load of about 35 grams!!!! Good job there was no current and it was not deep!

 

[rickp]

Re: Err..Waterbuoy was tested by MBM (Please ignore its in the main th

[ QUOTE ]
What we do know is that the maker claims 9000 tests with it working with 1 kg of lead everytime

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are misrepresenting what was said. I quote:

[ QUOTE ]
Waterbuoy was tested (over 9000 units to date have been tested) with a lead 1kg weight (the most dense object I could find) and lifted this object fine every time

[/ QUOTE ]

My reading of that is that the unit was tested 9000 times, and was also tested with a 1kg lead weight. I don't read it as meaning each of the 9000 tests was with a 1kg lead weight as the comment about the 9000 units is bracketed.

Does anyone else read it the same way as me?

Rick

 

[purplerobbie]

Re: Err..Waterbuoy was tested by MBM (Please ignore its in the main th

I was going to buy floating winch handles for my boat
I was stood in the chandlers cash in hand and he said for the price of one floating winch handle i could nearly get two normal ones.
I bought the normal ones

If i dropped something with a waterbouy on over the side would i go back for it?
I cant reach the water off the side of my boat so i would have to hope that i could hook one of these with a boat hook or i would have to get the dinghy pumped up and push that over get in that and get it that way?
All while stopping the boat turning round and heading back

What i could do is push a crew member over the side and use the whole thing as a man overboard exercise??

I can see it being handy in the marina where there is no current but not much after that

Consider it like natural selection when stuff goes over the side it has had it's day and it's a good excuse to get new toys!!


Rob

 

[cliffb]

Re: Err..Waterbuoy was tested by MBM (Please ignore its in the main th

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Waterbuoy was tested (over 9000 units to date have been tested) with a lead 1kg weight (the most dense object I could find) and lifted this object fine every time


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It's ambiguous. Without wishing to get picky... the use of the word 'every' indicates more than one. Which could be 9000 or could be twice. Like a lot of the guy's comments, it isn't clear.

 

[Gludy]

Re: Err..Waterbuoy was tested by MBM (Please ignore its in the main th

Rick
I read it as it was tested 9000 times and a 1 kg lead weight was used. It states after lifting THIS object. The only this it can refer to is the 1 kg lead weight it stated.
However,leave that aside and see the bigger picture about the point I was making. It is that after testing 9000 times the one given to the magazine failed because instead of less than ten seconds it took 15 minutes!!! That to me casts doubt over it all.
Why test something 9000 times? - 9000 gas cylinders etc. On every test it worked!!! Then give one to the mag and it does not work!!! Get real.
You are bending over so far backwards on this one you will fall /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif