Maybe silly

[BlueC5Kitten]

I would say I have seen it about 1 out of every 20 divers. Many folks have din reg with yoke adapter, and you can't tell unless you looked closely.

:classic: Not saying that FisherDVM is stupid, but I do agree...the tank I use is a DIN with yoke adapter...it is a feature on a high pressure steel 80cft tank that is used/sold by my LDS. Very popular with folks who start out recreational and transition to the "dark side." One of my dive buddies uses them for doubles, too.

 

[fisherdvm]

:classic: Not saying that FisherDVM is stupid, but I do agree...the tank I use is a DIN with yoke adapter...it is a feature on a high pressure steel 80cft tank that is used/sold by my LDS. Very popular with folks who start out recreational and transition to the "dark side." One of my dive buddies uses them for doubles, too.

I think you are talking about Din tank valves with yoke screw in insert. I was talking about din first stage with a screw in yoke insert.

Ofcourse, you can mate them, and have a din to yoke, yoke to din party. Kind of a kinky foursome !! All screwing around at the same time....

 

[ScubaSarus]

Let me add I have had 3 O-ring yoke blowouts LUCKILY ON SHORE and my buddy had 3 in one day (one at 20 ft) (maybe a bad batch of o-rings as I swapped him out with viton and all was well).

Both me and my buddy now dive DIN.

 

[Nick_W]

Let me add I have had 3 O-ring yoke blowouts LUCKILY ON SHORE and my buddy had 3 in one day (one at 20 ft) (maybe a bad batch of o-rings as I swapped him out with viton and all was well).

Both me and my buddy now dive DIN.

I think you just have the magic touch.

 

[ScubaSarus]

lOL Nick

I tell ya my buddies O-rings were blowing out of the groove as fast as I was putting them in. He had bought a cylinder capsule of O-rings frome the dive shop. Im wondering if the rings were counterfit or something like that.

My issue was over a period of 5 years his was all in one day.

 

[David P]

Evidently the 'yoke' setup is satisfactory for 99% of divers since I've never seen a DIN setup being used so far.

come diving here in SoCal, except for students, I don't see anyone using yokes.

 

[DwayneJ]

come diving here in SoCal, except for students, I don't see anyone using yokes.

Also in SoCal - In my small group of divers, we are all DIN.

 

[plclark196]

Most tech divers , cave - wreck etc - , prefer the added security of the din connection due to the increased possibility of hitting the first stage reg in an overhead environment and possibly even knocking the reg off the tank valve. 300 bar are deeper threads (more) and can be used in a 200 bar valve with some threads showing ... however, a 200 bar cannot be used in a 300 bar valve as it does not penetrate deep enough to seal.

 

[sschlesi]

I switched my regs to DIN after a trip to Egypt where most of the tanks were DIN valves with screw in adapters for Yokes, and some regular yoke valves. What I found was that a few of the DIN valves were slightly too wide for my Yoke to fit properly. The real motivator is that all the tanks were heavily used with various nicks and dings about 1 in every 4 or 5 tanks I hooked up to would leak when I first cracked the valve, and I would have to mess around carefully seating the yoke. With DIN there are no annoying seating issues, if there is a good O-ring and it screws in it will seat properly. I also used to occasionally lose an o-ring in a yoke valve when opening the tank to blow moisture off regs/dust caps which obviously doesn't happen with DIN valves.

Overall my impression after the switch is that from a conveinence perspective (not safety/reliability) DIN if just a little nicer all around, but not vastly superior. If buying new equipment anyway I'd recommend going DIN and getting a Yoke adapter for dealing with yoke only tanks. I wouldn't spend much money on replacing exsiting regs/valves for the minor conveniences.

It's worth noting that on my own tanks that don't have significant wear and tear I've never had the finicky seating problems with yoke.

 

[JohnnyH]

My two cents:

DIN are by far the safer connection method. Not only is the o-ring trapped and therefore less likely to extrude (i.e., blow) but the connection between regulator and tank is MUCH more secure with a threaded interface then a compression interface. Think about it - a yoke connection only has two points of contact holding it to the tank. Furthermore, the profile of a DIN connector is smaller than that of a yoke and therefore presents less of a target for banging.

So why doesn't everybody use DIN connections? Short answer is that they take much more patience and care when connecting the reg to the tank, and the time to connect the reg is slower than when using a yoke. You have to make sure you don't cross thread the interface and you have to keep it clean. Small items, sure. But in the dive industry as a whole, where there are ALL types of divers running amok with their gear (or a dive resort/shop's gear) it's sorta easy to understand why the yoke is the more popular of the two, here in the States anyway.

Keep in mind - this only applies to recreational diving. I would never dive in my technical role with yoke valves or have a member in my team with a yoke. And this applies to every tank in the kit.

The 200 BAR vs 300 BAR difference is merely in the number of threads in the interface. Therefore a reg with a 300 BAR rating (more threads) will fit into a tank with a 200 BAR valve, but a 200 BAR reg, though it WILL screw into a 300BAR tank valve it won't seat against the O-ring and will therefore not make a seal and won't work.

1 BAR is roughly 14.5 psi, and therefore roughly 1 atmosphere imperial. So a 200 BAR tank can hold gas at 2900 psi (really 3000 psi), where a 300 BAR can hold gas at 4350 psi. More pressure, more gas for a given volume.

There is nothing about depth directly relating to either valve type (yolk or DIN). But there is indirectly - meaning the deeper you go the more complicated the dive is and chances are you are operating with a virtual overhead (deco commitment) and therefore you have no direct access to the surface. If the odds are lower for a gear malfunction for one form of gear than another - you go with that - no questions asked...

Hope this helps,
John