Are Converted Scubapro 109's a weak link?

[Angelo Farina]

Imaginary horribles. What a load of nonsense!

So tell me why in my official Scubapro "expert" Level III class, René Dupré distributed "Jewels from Jules" showing all the old schematics, complete with which parts were "No longer available", if they were not meant to be serviced?
And, Hello! A service bulletin specifically describes the upgrade from old poppets to new. And, Hello! Scubapro has not printed new full schematics since 2014. They just dribble out individual stuff. And their new manuals? Horrible translations from the Italian with no graphics and odd part names. Scubapro's official support to the technician remains marginal, though calling in still works great, and René Dupré remains a mainstay of training and advice.

But sure! Cry "Unauthorized"!!! I'm sure that will sell another newer (but not significantly better) regulator. My shop will service them all.
Unless you're a SB regular, you'll never be able to tell the difference between a G250, an A700 or a C370. Cracking effort? What's that?

Stop frightening people.

I agree entirely.
I was trained to service SP regulators 40 years ago in their Italian factory in Casarza Ligure (near Genoa).
They did train me how to repair their older regs using parts from the new ones. They even gave me a sheet with the "replacement list", containing the correspondance between old and new parts.
I know that this list has been updated also in the following years.
Furthermore SP released a number of documents describing the steps for ugrading older models to newer ones.
These included 109 to BA (not to 156, BA was designated with a different number which I do not remember just now), Mk10 to M10plus, mk15 to mk15+, something about the mk20, G250 to G250HP.
So these upgrades are authorised by SP and do not break the warranty if operated by an authorised SP shop or technician.

 

[lexvil]

One of the best points about SP is the wide range of part compatibility over many models and years for the second stages.

 

[rhwestfall]

"Is" or "was"?

 

[lexvil]

"Is" or "was"?

This remains to be seen

 

[buddhasummer]

"Is" or "was"?

I think mostly "is"

 

[Nemrod]

What? Oh baloney macaroni. "Healthy" as how do you come up with this? We are just going to have to agree to disagree. You have opinions based on your prejudices to justify an untenable position and I can appreciate that you do based on your life experiences. But again, the breathing cycle and WOB consists of three parameters:

Cracking effort
Venturi and inhalation effort
Exhaust and exhalation effort

Picking on the 109 is never popular, it is a pretty regulator, and a favorite because it is simple to work on and parts supported and it is factually a very good regulator and to this day at least it can be serviced and dived with confidence. But it does have a measurably higher exhaust effort compared to newer regulators and while not important to you exhaust effort is a consideration in WOB and I notice it most assuredly.

Just for a fun comparison, even more dramatic than the 109 and CE BA 156 comparison, AL must have decided the 1085 was unhealthy enough that they stuck a huge in comparison to the original exhaust valve in and then redesigned a much larger exhaust tee on the regulator and added a plenum. The original 1085 was judged to have been very unhealthy.




It is infuriating when scuba shops are purposely obtuse and refuse to service regulators for customers that still are serviceable and perform well, or, in the case of the Scubapro 109, well enough . Sometimes just being a pretty face is enough and makes up for other short comings . The G250 et al is ugly looking and industrial but it has a pretty soul. Pretty is as pretty does.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

What? Oh baloney macaroni. "Healthy" as how do you come up with this? We are just going to have to agree to disagree. You have opinions based on your prejudices to justify an untenable position and I can appreciate that you do. But again, the breathing cycle and WOB consists of three parameters:

Cracking effort
Venturi and inhalation effort
Exhaust and exhalation effort

Picking on the 109 is never popular, it is a pretty regulator, and a favorite because it is simple to work on and parts supported and it is factually a very good regulator and to this day at least it can be serviced and dived with confidence. But it does have a measurably higher exhaust effort compared to newer regulators and while not important to you exhaust effort is a consideration in WOB and I notice it most assuredly.

Just for a fun comparison, even more dramatic than the 109 and CE BA 156 comparison, AL must have decided the 1085 was unhealthy enough that they stuck a huge in comparison exhaust valve and redesigned and much larger exhaust tee on the regulator. The original 1085 was jusdged to be very unhealthy.




It is infuriating when scuba shops are purposely obtuse and refuse to service regulators for customers that still are serviceable and perform well, or, in the case of the Scubapro 109, well enough .

You’re absolutely right.
We don’t have any muscles per se to inhale except for pulling our diaphragm down to cause somewhat of a low pressure that will pull a second stage diaphragm down enough to crack the flow. Once that happens then it’s between venturi effect and pressure to keep flow going. Our lungs fill with pressure of external atmospheric pressure not sucking air in forcibly with muscles.
Exhalation on the other hand is a different baby.
We use muscles to push air out and if there is resistance those muscles have to work harder actually tiring you out.
Everybody always focuses on inhalation effort when they should actually be more concerned about exhalation effort.

 

[Nemrod]

You’re absolutely right.
We don’t have any muscles per se to inhale except for pulling our diaphragm down to cause somewhat of a low pressure that will pull a second stage diaphragm down enough to crack the flow. Once that happens then it’s between venturi effect and pressure to keep flow going. Our lungs fill with pressure of external atmospheric pressure not sucking air in forcibly with muscles.
Exhalation on the other hand is a different baby.
We use muscles to push air out and if there is resistance those muscles have to work harder actually tiring you out.
Everybody always focuses on inhalation effort when they should actually be more concerned about exhalation effort.

I should not have made that post because now I am going to get more lessons in how to breath more healthy or something and encourage further nonsensical defenses. Brilliant and talented and handsome people can sometimes be wrong just as in this case, dumb and stupid people can occasionally be right. It does happen. I am one of the later and I ain't very smart and what little I know I learned by having it repeatedly banged into my head by the School of Hard Knocks, a proud graduate . EEM, exhaust effort matters.

 

[lowwall]

EEM, exhaust effort matters.

I'm going with this.

Look at it this way. Has a reg manufacturer ever made an exhaust valve smaller?

[Read the question in the voice of Vincent asking Jules if he's ever given a guy a foot massage.]

 

[Angelo Farina]

EEM, exhaust effort matters.

Of course exhaust effort matters. But for the human body, contrary to the EN-testing machine, 1 Joule of exhalation energy is not the same as 1 Joule of inhalation energy.
Energy spent inhaling is "unhealthy", as it sucks blood in your lungs, reducing the performances of alveoli. and increasing the risk of oedema. And is produced by inefficient muscles, so the real energy demand is probably around 4 Joules, due to the inefficient performance of our inhalation apparatus.
Instead 1 Joule of exhaust energy is much more "healthy": it pushes blood away from your lungs, makes the alveoli to expand and work better, and counter-effects the risk of oedema. Furthermore, exhalation muscular apparatus is much more powerful and efficient, so the real energy demand required is probably just 1.5 Joules.
Hence, if I have to choose between high inhalation effort and high exhalation effort, definitely the second is preferable.
Of course, reducing BOTH efforts is a very good thing. But, as inhalation effort is always present, I prefer to have AT LEAST the same amount of exhalation effort. If not, the average pressure on the whole respiratory cycle becomes negative, and this is VERY UNHEALTHY.
Conclusion: the 109 modified to BA is an healthy regulator, as it has low inhalation effort (not zero) and slightly larger exhalation effort - which is fine.
Unhealthy regulators have larger inhalation effort than exhalation effort, and this is truly dangerous.

Please note that these opinions are not directly my ones, but come from one of my best friend, Marco, also an instructor.
He is a medical doctor specialised in pneumology and cardiology, and was working in the hospital of Mantua during the Covid breakout.
His background as scuba diver and his knowledge of the biological effects of the pressure during the respiratory cycle helped him to provide suitable ventilation strategy, with positive pressure, to his patents, saving many of them.