Catalina Compact Series Al tanks

[Ed Palma]

Tried searching this forum for some feedback - no hits.

Anyway, with the demise of my steel tank, and the lack of alternatives around here, I've been looking at Catalina's compact series Al tanks. Their C80 is around 0.2 negatively buoyant when empty - starting from a full weight of -5.9 - so I won't have that swing into the +4.0 that usually occurs with the regular s80. I dive tropical waters in a 3/2 full wet suit, so the amount of weight I need isn't that much.

Does anyone else out there have anything to say about it?

 

[dannobee]

My daughter loves to use that one (in the pile of many out in the garage). It's a couple of inches shorter than the other cats, but the pressure is higher (3300psi) and can be a problem getting full fills in some areas.

 

[Hoosier]

Catalina is a little bit better and heavier for the water buoyancy. But, if you put the 3~4lb weight on the lower part of tank, you don't get any problem with a regular luxfer tanks (cheaper)...

 

[Ed Palma]

So... raves? A good buy?

Thanks for the input. the negative buoyancy sure has me interested...

 

[Hoosier]

So... raves? A good buy?

Thanks for the input. the negative buoyancy sure has me interested...

No. Ed, You are on the right track.....

But my opinion is to get the regular luxfer tank and add some weight for your trim and negative buoyancy because I haven't seen any that much good deal on the compact AL tank deal. In addition, you can use it as a deco bottle later if you plan to move to the tech somedays. In that case, luxfer tank is more popular in the market...

 

[TheRedHead]

I don't like them because of the length. It messed with my trim in my Zeagle BC with limited options to adjust the placement of weights. I could have trimmed out better with it in a BP wing though, but I didn't have one at that time. I wouldn't buy one until you dived it. The X7-100 HP steel tank is a much better option.

 

[Ed Palma]

Thanks Red, that's always a good idea. I'll see if I can finagle the shop into letting me try it in another pool (they don't have their own for testing). As it happens, most shops and resorts around here use standard S80s. I'd have liked the steel option (my old tank was an LP steel 100) but pickings around here are slim...

 

[spectrum]

The neutral 80 presents itself as an alternative to a steel cylinder however it really provides none of the benefits.

The weight you you add to compensate for the buoyancy of the common AL80 is simply built into the cyinder. Given the stouter stance and thicker walls (less interior volume) you are driven to a 3300 PSI fill making it more difficult ot get a good fill.

A HP80 or HP100 are much nicer cylinders in all regards.

Pete

 

[brownick]

I would have to second the short fills comments. Any time I'm not the one actually doing the fills, I make it a point to notify the shop its a 3300 not a 3000. That seemed to reduce the short fills a bit.

The only other negative to it is that if I use that tank with any of my other S80 tanks on a dive boat I have to adjust my weight during surface intervals to accommodate buoyancy differences.

If money is a concern I wouldn't recommend the C80 as its cheaper just to get a S80 and add your own weight changes. If the above reasons don't deter you, I say go for it. I love the tank and don't plan on selling it any time soon. Hope that helps!

 

[dannobee]

If the neutral 80's 3300 psi fill presents a potential problem, the HP80 or HP100's 3500 psi rating would REALLY be a problem.