old LP80 steel vs new AL80

[eelnoraa]

I am looking at these tanks right now. I don't know which one to go for. Option 1 is Faber LP80, manufactured in 94, current hydro/vis. Options 2 is AL80, manufactured in 07, current hydro, need vis. What would you guys pick?

My home diving is NorCal Monterey, so cold water, and with at least 7mm wetsuit. I need 12-14lb of lead with AL80 (rental). I think by going to LP80, I can lose 6lb. This is defnitelly a benefit. My concerns are 1) age of the tank. 2)underfill/hot fill with LP tank can dramatically reduce capacities. I want to know what your guys think.

 

[halocline]

The steel tank is only 16 years old. It's still a baby. You might have a look inside it to see if there's any rust. That's the only thing that might present a problem.

AL80s get hot fills all the time too. In fact, you're likely to get some 3000PSI fills on the LP80 from tank monkeys that don't know any better.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

What's the price difference between the two tanks?
How many more years on the current hydro for the LP80?

After taking a look inside the LP80 (to ensure there's no rust -- bear in mind that tumbling can cost $20-$30), I'd probably be inclined to get the LP80. The LP80 will only be a couple of inches shorter than the AL80, so the tanks would probably trim out similarly. As you mentioned, by going with the LP80, you would have the benefit of shifting more ballast to your tank (approx. 5-6 lbs.). The fact that the LP80 has a current vis means it's dive-able today without paying for a VIP. It also probably means that it has been used and cared for within the past year. What's not to like?

I would discount your concerns about the LP80 being an "old" tank. A properly maintained/cared for steel tank will likely outlive your diving career. Getting a good fill usually isn't an issue with LP tanks. As mattboy pointed out, you may end up getting an overfill.

 

[Gombessa]

Steel tanks are the standard in Monterey (you need so much exposure protection that you'll require a heavy weight belt regardless of tank choice, so why not save some land weight as well as in-water ballast by getting the more negative steel). Depending on the price, an in-hydro/viz steel is a much better option than a used AL80 (I'd only pay about $70 for an AL80 that was in hydro and out of viz).

Steel tanks last forever, I would not hesitate to get an LP80 made in 1994.

There are some shops in the Monterey area that will look at a non-plus-rated steel tank, and only fill to 2400. The majority of shops in the bay area will fill standard LP tanks to 2640, and we've already talked about where you can go to get overfills if needed I would not forgo a good deal on an LP steel for fear of hot fills/underfills.

 

[JBRES1]

All things being equal I would go with the steel cylinder if it is in good condition.

The steel 80 will hold more air than the al80
The steel 80 will outlast the al80 if cared for.
The steel 80 is smaller than the al80
The steel 80 will allow you to remove about 5 to 6 lbs from your weight belt.
And the most important fact is that you will look cool with the LP80.

Jim Breslin

 

[deep in jersey]

Either tank will be fine.First make sure the person you are buying the steel from will give you a refund if it fails hydro.Most people overfill lp steels which will kill your tank.I have alumium tanks that are over 30 years old so dont worry which one will last longer.Plus how old is the valve on the steel.If everything is good on the steel and the price is good then I go with it.

 

[spectrum]

The steel will lead to a much nicer configuration. The risk or rust is low but you do want it inspected just in case. This feature applies to the HP 80 CF cylinders but similar logic and math applies to a LP cylinder.

The whole hot fill thing applies to all cylinders. The HP cylinders see it a little more but it's not as significant as you may think. In any case this is a LP cylinder and will be no worse than any. If you can allow time to cool and get a top off any cylinder can be filled spot on.


Pete

 

[knowone]

And if you ever want to twin up steel 80s are BEAUTIFUL.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

The steel will lead to a much nicer configuration. The risk or rust is low but you do want it inspected just in case. This feature applies to the HP 80 CF cylinders but similar logic and math applies to a LP cylinder.

The whole hot fill thing applies to all cylinders. The HP cylinders see it a little more but it's not as significant as you may think. In any case this is a LP cylinder and will be no worse than any. If you can allow time to cool and get a top off any cylinder can be filled spot on.


Pete

@spectrum: Thanks for linking to your essay on the comparison between AL80 and a HP80. On your webpage, you discuss most of the important differences between the two tanks. There was one glaring omission, however.

Even in my local temperate water, if given the choice between an AL80 and HP80, I would almost always choose the AL80. You know why? Trim. The physical dimensions of a HP80 are short and squat when compared to the AL80. I would have to shift a bunch of my weight to my waist, which would be a hassle. I'd rather maintain my current weight configuration (weight belt, BP, weight pockets on tank cambands), distribute the extra 6 lbs. appropriately, and use the AL80. Yeah, I'll be carrying an extra 10 lbs. of dry weight...but the rig will feel more balanced trim-wise in the water.

For people shorter than me (5'11"), the HP80 might be an excellent choice.

I think calling an AL80 "evil" is being a little over-the-top. Personally, I like 'em.

 

[spectrum]

@Bubbletrubble
You are right that I do not speak to the stoutness of the cylinder and how that may not be the best choice for taller divers. IMO, that's with the HP100 is for I do have plans to do a buoyancy/trim feature at some point and that would be a topic. In writing the page my primary intent was to demonstrate what cylinder specifications can mean when comparing cylinders or adjusting configurations.

If you are already in a limited lead configuration I do cut the AL80 some slack in paragraph 2.

With regard to weight placement I contend that the only weight that should be part of your rig is that required to be on your upper body to establish trim. The HP 80 will inherently make some weight go away and may shift some to your belt since it will be biased to the upper body. That's my preference and suggest we not go down that path in this thread. The only thing that really matters is that we all have configurations that work for us.

Over the top with Evil? I'll gladly accept that it's a little dramatic and perhaps borrowed from the Google mantra. If it makes people think I'm good with that. I do know a number of converts that share my enthusiasm.

Just to show I'm a good sport, I do own 2 AL80s, one Luxfer and one Catalina. They are my cylinder of choice when making a fresh water dive in trunks or a shorty in a vintage configuration. They are also handy as back-ups, loaners and for powering air tools.

You have made some good points and this thread has benefited form it.

Pete

@spectrum: Thanks for linking to your essay on the comparison between AL80 and a HP80. On your webpage, you discuss most of the important differences between the two tanks. There was one glaring omission, however.

Even in my local temperate water, if given the choice between an AL80 and HP80, I would almost always choose the AL80. You know why? Trim. The physical dimensions of a HP80 are short and squat when compared to the AL80. I would have to shift a bunch of my weight to my waist, which would be a hassle. I'd rather maintain my current weight configuration (weight belt, BP, weight pockets on tank cambands), distribute the extra 6 lbs. appropriately, and use the AL80. Yeah, I'll be carrying an extra 10 lbs. of dry weight...but the rig will feel more balanced trim-wise in the water.

For people shorter than me (5'11"), the HP80 might be an excellent choice.

I think calling an AL80 "evil" is being a little over-the-top. Personally, I like 'em.