Life Support Equipment - Regulators

[Wayward Son]

I would like some, or even one, examples of an inferior reg that is unsafe. And why it's unsafe.

not something that went off the market 30 years ago, regs that are made & sold new, right now.

 

[svyper]

....alrighty, here's one diver who 'walks the talk' ...anyone else out there who's not a hypocrite ?

I disagree with the 'hypocrite' comment. Sometimes you only know better after the fact and wish you had not listened to the clever sales guy and wasted all that money.

But to answer your question, I dive a tusa rs230, which is probably not a premium reg (at least it was not price wise at $200).

 

[redacted]

I'm headed for Cozumel this PM so I better get my 2 cents in now.

I doubt if there is a regulator made that will not safely handle uneventful recreational diving. I also doubt if there are any that can not be overbreathed if a diver overexerts himself.

 

[theduckguru]

I'm headed for Cozumel this PM so I better get my 2 cents in now.

I doubt if there is a regulator made that will not safely handle uneventful recreational diving. I also doubt if there are any that can not be overbreathed if a diver overexerts himself.

I guess this could be used for some information.

www.xsscuba.com/downloads/muscle_regs_11_05.pdf

 

[ReefHound]

To me it seems clear-cut. The human body requires oxygen to sustain life. A regulator is a primary device that is part of the system that delivers that oxygen in an environment where no other means of getting that oxygen is available. This makes it life-support equipment. What am I missing?

You're missing the fact that no competent diver puts himself in a situation where there is no other means of getting that oxygen and where regulator failure means loss of life. That is why we always dive with some form of redundancy, be it a dive buddy or a pony bottle or twins.

 

[halocline]

....alrighty, here's one diver who 'walks the talk' ...anyone else out there who's not a hypocrite ?

Single tank, MK5/D300 (paid about $50), doubles 2 MK10s/D300/109 (paid $84 for one, about $40 for the other 1st stage, maybe $25 for the metal 109). I'd use MK5s for doubles if I had the DIN connector for them, but the MK10s work fine. I also have a MK15 that I rarely use, but it's actually a very nice reg. I use a MK2/R190 for a pony on the rare occasion I use one, and will use that set up for a stage reg when I get going on deco diving.

For local diving I sometimes use a USD royal aquamaster, which is 40+ years old but was in its day a very high end reg.

BTW, nobody's a hypocrite for buying new expensive regs. If someone wants to dive with an expensive reg, what's the problem with that? The problem is the assumption that old and/or cheap regs are dangerous.

 

[FishOutUvH2O]

You're missing the fact that no competent diver puts himself in a situation where there is no other means of getting that oxygen and where regulator failure means loss of life. That is why we always dive with some form of redundancy, be it a dive buddy or a pony bottle or twins.

Actually, no. I get the point. But, what are you going to breath off of from your buddy, or that pony tank?! A regulator. The problem lies more in how/when a few people choose to use the term. And what cause and effect they try and draw. Such as the one you mentioned; That "if your regulator fails, you're going to die." Obviously, that's possible, but if you're trained and enact that training you just simply go find another source of oxygen, whether it's a buddy's regulator, a pony bottle's regulator, or the surface. there also seems to be a premise that only your regulator is life-support. If one regulator is classified as life-support then all regulators are classified as life-support. From just an average recreational divers point of view, of which I'm one, it just seems some people have distorted the definition of life-support equipment to mean just the one they use. And others try and use it as a scare tactic. And at least one person, a divemaster no less, doesn't seem to understand the definition of life-support at all. This was reflected in their idea that a snorkel was somehow a part of the SCUBA life-support system. That one is still baffling. A snorkel is a device used on the surface, how would it help provide the oxygen on a dive? Is there some secret way to use one to breath off of a tank?

Again, as just an average diver, if someone tells me that my regulator is life-support, I just simply look at them with a blank stare and then ask, "And? What's your point?"

But, on the flip side, if someone says that regulators are not life-support, you get the question I asked earlier in the thread, "how is a regulator not life-support?" The answer in this thread seems to be, because the term is to alarmist and scary. As someone who still has a lot to learn and spends some time listening, this isn't an answer, but a bizarre reason, not to use the term.

If looked at in a more day-to-day kind of way, I really don't run into situations where there is a need to break SCUBA equipment down into classifications, such as; life-support, convenience, safety, or whatever.

On a different note: I definitely agree that if the OP is going to push a conclusion, he might want to give some type of evidence or premises in support of that conclusion. I have no idea what he means by an inferior reg?!

 

[captain]

....alrighty, here's one diver who 'walks the talk' ...anyone else out there who's not a hypocrite ?

My newest regulator is a 1984 Scuba Pro MKV but I haven't used it in the last 5 or so years. I have been using my assortment of two hose regulators dating from 1957 to 1968 exclusively

 

[Tigerman]

....alrighty, here's one diver who 'walks the talk' ...anyone else out there who's not a hypocrite ?

Im diving a coltri sub C11000 (cold water reg) at the moment - only because I live in Norway and it tends to be bloody cold here for 6-8 months of the year..

 

[ReefHound]

Fish, I think we're pretty much all on the same page and the reaction is due to the way the term "life support" is bandied about by dive professionals in order to scare divers into thinking they have to buy the high end high dollar model of everything. Scaremongering, in my book, is when someone tries to scare or create a sense of alarm over something without providing supporting evidence or data. As in this case, warning about diving with inferior regulators without defining that or giving examples. None of us would advocate diving with unsafe gear.