• Welcome to ScubaBoard


  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Faber 3180 plus rated HP tanks ?

Discussion in 'Tanks, Valves & Bands' started by idive2, Jul 9, 2013.

  1. idive2

    idive2 Contributor

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Palm Beach County
    978
    138
    While checking buoyancy on a couple steel Faber 100 rentals I came across two different
    100 cf Faber steel tanks. They showed an HP100 and an FX100. After looking at the rental
    it did not indicate HP or FX but did show a 3442 service pressure so I'm assuming it's the
    FX100. The rentals are 2009 tanks so not very old. Are these other 3180 Faber tanks older
    tanks ? They are much more negative than most of todays steel tanks. The 3180 is actually
    14.7 lbs negative full compared to the 3442 tank at 8.4 lbs negative.
     
  2. rjack321

    rjack321 ScubaBoard Supporter ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Port Orchard, Washington State
    11,331
    6,160
    They still make the wicked heavy 3180+ tanks. And the much less negative 3442psi tanks. So no they are not necessarily even different ages. The 3180+ tanks are good as singles in a drysuit. They make terrible doubles. The 3442 tanks are fine as doubles or singles.
     
  3. Scared Silly

    Scared Silly ScubaBoard Supporter ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: on the path to perdition
    5,995
    1,647
    Blue Steel - the US distributor for Faber cylinders used to bring in a the whole 3180 series but now it looks like just the M100DVB

    Blue Steel Scuba - Cylinder Specs

    rjack321 comments above are spot. Fine for singles, not for doubles.
     
  4. idive2

    idive2 Contributor

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Palm Beach County
    978
    138
    The 3180 might not be a bad tank for those colder waters when wearing a full 7mm or more.
    I dove the 3442 Faber 100 today and its' buoyancy was very close to my LP85's. What's with the
    narrow wobbly boot on those Faber tanks ? I found the tank to trim and dive well and other than
    the boot it is a tank I could see having but my LP85's will be around for a while.
     
  5. lindenbruce

    lindenbruce Contributor

    # of Dives: 100 - 199
    Location: Linden, Ca.
    360
    57
    So the M100 3180+ tank does not make for a good set of doubles because of their heavy weight? Because, I have one already and was thinking of getting a second to make a set of doubles for diving here in California with my drysuit or 7mm wet. Thoughts? B.
     
  6. Scared Silly

    Scared Silly ScubaBoard Supporter ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: on the path to perdition
    5,995
    1,647

    Do the math and you would find that as set of doubles they are bricks:

    -14 lbs full x 2
    -4 lbs bands and valves
    -3 Al back plate

    Right there is 35 lbs negative. So unless you need 35lbs to offset yourself and your drysuit yer going down like a bloody Led Zeppelin as you have no ditchable weight. As for doing some like that with a wet suit - are fricking kidding? It has basically zero buoyancy at depth.

    BTW there is a well known accident from 8-10 years ago that was partially attributed to using such cylinders which the divers went down and had no way to control their buoyancy at depth cause they were too negative.
     
  7. idive2

    idive2 Contributor

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Palm Beach County
    978
    138
    Did you have any ditchable weight when using this as a single and a 7mm ? I can see as doubles that it would be probably to much
    negative buoyancy. The thick wetsuits become difficult to calculate due to the greater amount of compression and buoyancy lost at depth.
    The single would also be to negative in a 3mm or less. I wear two pounds of weight with a 3mm and a steel worthington LP85 so this heavy
    faber 3180 would be much to negative even as a single. A 7mm would require more to sink but then you get into the buoyancy lost at depth
    from wetsuit compression which can be a fair amount with a thick wetsuit.
     
  8. lindenbruce

    lindenbruce Contributor

    # of Dives: 100 - 199
    Location: Linden, Ca.
    360
    57
    SS - That's what I was confirming, just to much weight for doubles. Got it.

    i2 - Yes, I use it as a single with an Oceanic Probe BC with ditchable weights and a 7mm. I don't use it much and dive my LP95 way more often. I guess it's time to sell it and get a set of HP100's that aren't as heavy for doubles. In tropical environments I use a 3/2 full length wetsuit. But in California only a 7mm with hood and gloves or my drysuit. B.
     
  9. cbrich

    cbrich Contributor

    # of Dives:
    Location: Austin
    853
    203
    Another way to tell the difference is the DOT specification. DOT 3AA are the 3180 psig, and the DOT SP 13488 are FX series. The DOT specification are always stamped on the cylinder shoulder, but might be hard to read.
     
  10. imjustdave

    imjustdave Registered

    # of Dives: 25 - 49
    Location: Seattle WA
    32
    4
    What would the opinion be for the 3180 tanks in doubles with a dry suit? Im not quiet to the point of doubles but that is my plan. Will I regret having 3180 tanks?
     

Share This Page