Actually, for me Atomic is a Rolls Royce, Scubapro is Mercedes, Apeks is Audi/BMW. AL is a Nissan or Toyota. I have owned and used AL for years and years and still own a couple now (trying to sell them). AL isn't "bad" and one won't go wrong with it but if it is a choice between Atomic and AL and the money difference isn't a factor, Atomic hands down, there is no reason to pick the AL over Atomic at all, none in this case. This is my point. If I can afford to buy a Rolls or a Mercedes, I would buy one before I would consider Nissan or Toyota.
That's just personal preference. Calling a specced piston first a Rolls Royce is a stretch, but to each their own.
The 'Toyota' will take you anywhere you want and keep working.
Calling an atomic more reliable than an aqualung is pure marketing. Both models we are talking about have had 1 serious recall. The aqualung had An issue with the yoke acd closing shut. Atomic had An issue with springs cracking and sometimes breaking.
I don't mind the claim that Atomics are more reliable and better than AL, but i'd like to see some real evidence then.
Hose routing is only an issue if you're using sidemount or as a stage. The turret is also an extra failure Point (in theory, i do regard turrets as highly reliable if not overtorqued).
Cold water performance should be equal between both, only if you pick the sealed atomic.
Service is alot easier for the AL since you don't have to worry about the Christolube gunk.
Wob bench tests actually favor the AL over the Atomic, especially in the cracking pressure department.
What am I missing here except the durability on the lp seat material and seat Saver?
It's pretty clear you don't like aqualung. Which is fine but don't pretend Atomic is making a revolutionary product. They are making a solid product and so is AL.
