Price check on faber steel 120s

[Nathan Doty]

I'm in melbourne fl. I was having trouble reading the stamps on them with the gloss white paint. He said they were filling to 4k psi but I don't know for sure. 4k psi in a 120... I think my 2 tank dives would end up being a 1 tank dive with some air left over

 

[tbone1004]

@Nathan Doty what they're filling to is pretty irrelevant. If they're low pressure, or high pressure, their buoyancy is reasonable. If they're medium pressure, then they're bricks.

 

[Skulmoski]

Or buy new if you think the risks outweigh the cost.
GJS

 

[chorse]

You'll be able to drop some weight from your belt or bc pockets to compensate for the negative buoyancy of the steel tanks. Some would argue that negativity is really a positive in this case.

 

[Mr. Manfrenjensenden]

Thanks everyone.
I'm going to pick them up sunday. But... Looking at the weight I'm not sure how easy they are going to be for me to use. I've only dove with al80's, using them I only dive with 8ish pounds on me, no wetsuit.. Specs say they're -16 full and -8 empty. I'm worried I'm going to hit bottom like a rock. I don't float very well, in the pool I can dive with 0 pounds.

Not to highjack the thread, but this issue is something I've been trying to figure out for a liveaboard trip I have coming up, which offers steel 100s and 120s in addition to Al80s. The weight difference between the aluminum and steel tanks means if I opt for steel I will likely have to shed all my ditchable weight and maybe even make me always have some air in my BC at all times (I normally don't inflate the BC at all other than at the surface). This seems like it would be more of a hassle than it's worth and I'd also lose the safety factor of ditchable weight, or am I missing something about how to deal with the added weight of the steel tank?

 

[tbone1004]

@Mr. Manfrenjensenden there is no safety advantage to ditching weight.

 

[MaxE]

@Nathan Doty what they're filling to is pretty irrelevant. If they're low pressure, or high pressure, their buoyancy is reasonable. If they're medium pressure, then they're bricks.

What are the medium pressure tanks? What is their rating?

 

[2airishuman]

Hi folks

So those are indeed HP cylinders but they are not the newer exemption cylinders. They are 3AA3180 rated for use in the USA and Canada and other jurisdictions that recognize those countries certifications. With a "+" rating at hydro they can be filled to 3500 PSI (well, technically, 3498 PSI).

Because they are 3AA cylinders and not exemption cylinders they have a much greater wall thickness and, as noted upthread, are quite negatively buoyant. I have a similar HP95 from PST. These cylinders are useful for dives in 7mm or a drysuit where a good deal of weight is necessary and where the negative buoyancy does not pose a hazard. I would not use them for warm water dives or as part of a twinset.

In the 120cf size these would also be heavy cylinders to handle topside.

As for LP72s, I have quite a few of those, and use them where many people would use an AL80. LP72s are neutrally buoyant when empty and have nearly the same capacity with less weight topside and with less lead on your belt. They are good cylinders for the money if you can get them cheaply as is often the case. In new production they have been replaced by LP85s which have similar properties but are slightly longer and have a slightly thicker wall, and by HP80s which are much shorter.

 

[tbone1004]

What are the medium pressure tanks? What is their rating?

what @2airishuman said. If they're 3aa3180, they're bricks. Can be a very useful thing, especially in cold weather. Be very careful with them in warm water with little exposure protection

 

[scubafanatic]

Many years ago I bought my 1st tanks, a pair of single LP Faber 120's, they were massive (tall and heavy) and I ended up selling them as they were just too bulky.