Latest ScubaLabs reg test - huh?

[ams511]

Is "DACOR" back in business? This is news to me.

News to me too. It said the company was West Marine which runs retail stores selling boating items here in the US. They must have bought the name from Mares. From what I remember Dacor was supposed to be Mares budget brand but they really didn't do anything with it.

 

[ams511]

pure conjecture, but one could speculate review "points" can equate to advertising $ spent....

I worked for nearly a decade in the magazine industry and can tell you from experience that advertising dollars do affect reviews. Scuba Diving is not Consumer Reports.

 

[ams511]

Also, what is the deal with ease of breathing face-up? I would have thought all regs would have a similar drop-off when turning face-up. Is it legit that some regs would drop off little and others would drop off a lot? Or is that statement in the review just BS?

If you are really interested in regulator theory you should get the "Regulator Savvy" book. I believe the wet breathing is due to what Pete Wolfinger termed as the case geometry fault. It has been a while since I read the book so I would just screw-up the explanation. I would also assume that exhaust valve design and materials would also affect wetness. I have a lot of different regulators and some regs will breath wetter than others in odd positions. However, I really don't do a lot of face up diving so I don't keep track.

 

[scubadada]

Hi @stuartv

Over the years, I have struggled with trying to understand the ANSTI simulator testing of regulators. Some background for the testing equipment can be found at Ansti Test Systems Ltd under products/Life Support Equipment Test Facility.

The graphics results in the recent Scuba Diving article are mislabeled and make it harder to understand. The first parameter listed should be RMV rather than BPM, i.e. 37.5 RMV. The breathing rates used are actually 15, 30, and 25 breaths/min @ 2.5 liters per breath. This generates the RMVs of 37.5, 75, and 62.5 liters per minute, corresponding to 1.32, 2.65, and 2.21 cubic feet per minute.

The 4 standard testing conditions are:

1) 15 BPM, RMV 37.5, 132 fsw/5 atm. This is said to be an aggressive breathing rate at the recreational limit. To put this into perspective for me, this is more than 3.5 times my average RMV and more than twice the highest RMV I have ever had on a complete dive. I have no good idea of the highest instantaneous rates I have achieved on my most strenuous dives.

2) 30 BPM, RMV 75, 132 fsw/5 atm. This is said to be the rate for a single diver at an extremely heavy work load and to simulate 2 divers breathing at an aggressive rate. It is twice the rate in #1, a lot of breathing.

3) 25 BPM, RMV 62.5, 165 fsw/6 atm. This is the European conformance standard EN250

4) 25 BPM, RMV 62.5, 198 fsw/7 atm. This is the US Navy Class A test. The ScubaLab test uses a high pressure supply of 725-760 psi, apparently, the Navy uses a higher pressure that may improve some regulator performance.

Each regulator is rated excellent, very good, good, or fair as outlined by @tbone1004 in post #9. If the inhalation or exhalation resistance exceeds 25 millibars, the test is discontinued and the result is listed as N/A, there are several examples in the results.

So, do I think this testing has a real world correlate? Maybe . Obviously, it depends on the depth of your dives and your RMVs. I mainly dive within recreational limits. Only 1% of my dives have been deeper than 130 feet, with a deepest of 161 feet. I have a reasonably low average RMV with a relatively narrow range. It is not very likely that I am going to push my regulator into the ranges represented by the more strenuous testing conditions, but it is possible. Personally, I'm glad to have the leeway provided by a higher performing regulator, currently a Scubapro Mk25/S600. Looking at your own dive depths and RMVs will give you a rough idea of how the testing results may apply to you.

Again, for perspective, the Innovative Scuba Concepts Honu was the "worst" performing regulator. It was rated very good in ANSTI test #1 but did not complete testing under the other 3 conditions. However, divers rated it very good for ease of breathing in all positions except face-up (looking up), where they rated it good. There you go.

Under the most usual circumstances (within recreational depth limits and a normal range of exertion), nearly any regulator should perform acceptably. At deeper depths and with extraordinary exertion, a higher performing regulator may prove superior. I'd be most interested in hearing from divers with dives meeting these conditions.

Good diving,

Craig

 

[Bob DBF]

They must have bought the name from Mares. From what I remember Dacor was supposed to be Mares budget brand but they really didn't do anything with it.

They wouldn't have to buy the name and set up production if Mares produced the Dacor brand exclusively for West Marine. This would give Mares a new clientele, and West Marine a line of products they haven't had. My money is on this solution.


Bob

 

[BoltSnap]

They wouldn't have to buy the name and set up production if Mares produced the Dacor brand exclusively for West Marine. This would give Mares a new clientele, and West Marine a line of products they haven't had. My money is on this solution.


Bob

Is West Marine that big to make a difference for Mares?

 

[KenGordon]

Hi @stuartv

Over the years, I have struggled with trying to understand the ANSTI simulator testing of regulators. Some background for the testing equipment can be found at Ansti Test Systems Ltd under products/Life Support Equipment Test Facility.

The graphics results in the recent Scuba Diving article are mislabeled and make it harder to understand. The first parameter listed should be RMV rather than BPM, i.e. 37.5 RMV. The breathing rates used are actually 15, 30, and 25 breaths/min @ 2.5 liters per breath. This generates the RMVs of 37.5, 75, and 62.5 liters per minute, corresponding to 1.32, 2.65, and 2.21 cubic feet per minute.

The 4 standard testing conditions are:

1) 15 BPM, RMV 37.5, 132 fsw/5 atm. This is said to be an aggressive breathing rate at the recreational limit. To put this into perspective for me, this is more than 3.5 times my average RMV and more than twice the highest RMV I have ever had on a complete dive. I have no good idea of the highest instantaneous rates I have achieved on my most strenuous dives.

2) 30 BPM, RMV 75, 132 fsw/5 atm. This is said to be the rate for a single diver at an extremely heavy work load and to simulate 2 divers breathing at an aggressive rate. It is twice the rate in #1, a lot of breathing.

3) 25 BPM, RMV 62.5, 165 fsw/6 atm. This is the European conformance standard EN250

4) 25 BPM, RMV 62.5, 198 fsw/7 atm. This is the US Navy Class A test. The ScubaLab test uses a high pressure supply of 725-760 psi, apparently, the Navy uses a higher pressure that may improve some regulator performance.

Each regulator is rated excellent, very good, good, or fair as outlined by @tbone1004 in post #9. If the inhalation or exhalation resistance exceeds 25 millibars, the test is discontinued and the result is listed as N/A, there are several examples in the results.

So, do I think this testing has a real world correlate? Maybe . Obviously, it depends on the depth of your dives and your RMVs. I mainly dive within recreational limits. Only 1% of my dives have been deeper than 130 feet, with a deepest of 161 feet. I have a reasonably low average RMV with a relatively narrow range. It is not very likely that I am going to push my regulator into the ranges represented by the more strenuous testing conditions, but it is possible. Personally, I'm glad to have the leeway provided by a higher performing regulator, currently a Scubapro Mk25/S600. Looking at your own dive depths and RMVs will give you a rough idea of how the testing results may apply to you.

Again, for perspective, the Innovative Scuba Concepts Honu was the "worst" performing regulator. It was rated very good in ANSTI test #1 but did not complete testing under the other 3 conditions. However, divers rated it very good for ease of breathing in all positions except face-up (looking up), where they rated it good. There you go.

Under the most usual circumstances (within recreational depth limits and a normal range of exertion), nearly any regulator should perform acceptably. At deeper depths and with extraordinary exertion, a higher performing regulator may prove superior. I'd be most interested in hearing from divers with dives meeting these conditions.

Good diving,

Craig

I want a regulator which always works rather than one which usually works. I want one which can handle peak, worst case demands, not average demands. It only has to fail to keep up once.

FYI, post a CO2 hit I am supposed to plan bailout use at an RMV of 45l/min. So these numbers are not wildly excessive.

This thread is a textbook example of why viral marketing works.

 

[tbone1004]

the 62rmv is certainly worth doing for CCR bailout conditions when experiencing hypercapnia, that one I'll give you. Probably why it is the CE requirement as it is just over 2cfm. Enough to stress the first stage for two divers in excited conditions and one diver trying to destroy the tank.
That said, the results are going to be skewed because of regulator orientation. I think the machines are designed with the body vertical to replicate commercial diving conditions not recreational diving conditions.
If you look at the A700 from Scubapro it doesn't perform as well as the G260 or the S600 and there are a bunch of other case designs where the regulator orientation weighs in heavily on how well it will perform.

 

[cool_hardware52]

pure conjecture, but one could speculate review "points" can equate to advertising $ spent....

Not a chance. Media companies all erect a perfect "chinese wall" between the editorial department and the advertising sales department.

The two operations are like planets orbiting different Suns.

It might look bad, but such quid pro quo simply never happens.

At least that's what every single media operation has told me.

Tobin

 

[wheeledgoat]

please pardon my n00bness, but why isn't the HOG Zenith on the list? It seems to review amoung the best. As a DIYer I'm attracted to the HOGs for the self-service (once I take the class at my LDS, of course).

Is there still a shunning attitude toward the HOGs for making self-service so accessible, or do you think their omission is more innocent, i.e. they can only review so many, and all the others are still more popular?