The 3300 PSI Al 80 is definitely of interest to me since I prefer to dive with those type cylinders. Wonder what the retail pricing is.
New Aluminum Cylinder Manufacturer Now on the Market: Hy-Mark?
- Thread starter rakpix
- Start date
Please register or login
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
Hymark quotes buoyancy when full and at 500 psi. In an AL 80, that 500 psi adds about .85 pounds and as such reduces the swing weight by that amount, so it is not really an apples to apples comparison to other weuight charts.
The fact that they also do not indicate whether this includes or excludes the valve also makes it difficult to get meaningful data. Looking at the tank weight, buoyancy and gas volume combined, I suspect the number include the valve.
I was a big fan of the S-72 for stage use as the thinner diameter handles better in the bottle and the early high mark tanks were not as tail light when low on gas as a Luxfer AL 80. But I noticed that my latest Hy-mark S-72 has a significant amount of metal milled out of the bottom, and that tank is also a bit too light in the tail just like an AL 80. From talking to Mark at VA Scuba it appears that was done on the recommendation of rebreather divers who like them for bailout but found them to be slightly too heavy.
In the real world, the S-72 is in fact neutral in fresh water with 500 psi in it with a stage reg attached, so the +1.08 pound buoyancy stated at 500 psi is ballpark accurate.
The fact that they also do not indicate whether this includes or excludes the valve also makes it difficult to get meaningful data. Looking at the tank weight, buoyancy and gas volume combined, I suspect the number include the valve.
I was a big fan of the S-72 for stage use as the thinner diameter handles better in the bottle and the early high mark tanks were not as tail light when low on gas as a Luxfer AL 80. But I noticed that my latest Hy-mark S-72 has a significant amount of metal milled out of the bottom, and that tank is also a bit too light in the tail just like an AL 80. From talking to Mark at VA Scuba it appears that was done on the recommendation of rebreather divers who like them for bailout but found them to be slightly too heavy.
In the real world, the S-72 is in fact neutral in fresh water with 500 psi in it with a stage reg attached, so the +1.08 pound buoyancy stated at 500 psi is ballpark accurate.
Panga Man
Contributor
Indian Valley, Have you had anyone double up those C80's yet? If so how did they like them?
Leadking
Contributor
There are now two new players in the scuba market, Hy-Mark from the U.S. and KCR from Korea.
Thanks. Very tempting but I just paid my property tax installment. Maybe once I recover!
Yep, pretty big error, and no, the fact the "empty" value is at 500psi does NOT account for the error, it is WAYYY too big for that.
Ken
Q1988
Registered
I have been trying to buy 2 for the last 3 weeks. The problem is I want them cleaned for Nitrox. When the UV light goes in something on the bottom fluoresces (sp) green. Nothing has been put into the tank by the shop and right out of the box.
Has anyone else seen this and what can you suggest.
Has anyone else seen this and what can you suggest.
Similar threads
