Regulator kits

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

I completed Zeagle's training seminar at DEMA 2003. Since then I've have serviced about 30 Zeagle Regs and a few BCs with little or no problems.

There are a couple of things I'd consider changing:
1). When I went through a competitor's seminar several years ago we were required to pass a written (t/f, multiple choice) test before they presented your certificate. I thought this was a good idea and out of the 6 manufacturer's seminars I've attended, this is the only one that required a test.
2). A little more time and actual demonstrations on fine tuning Intermediate and Cracking Pressures. The manual is very clear, but I think it should be part of the "hands on".

Other than that, I left with enough confidence to service my families equipment, which says a lot.
 
Scott,

I know your probably tired of this thread but could you give us an update when Zeagle discusses this issue? I'm interested in hearing all the pros and cons reguarding this.
It would be nice to hear something about this. I just hate for the thread to die and not knowing what Zeagle said about any of it.

Thanks again Scott for the ear.....
 
I'm curious about the issue of changes or recalls on parts, and whether or not it should impact the decision by a company to make its parts available to the public.

specifically, here's a Zeagle example:

some time back (a couple years ago i belive) Zeagle has a recall on the seat used in some of their regulators, and service kits. My reg in fact was affected by this. I got one of the bad seats when my reg was in for it's annual service.

Seems to me that a benefit of confining sales of parts to authorized dealers would be that Zeagle could relatively easily notify thier dealers, and pull back all the 'bad' stock of service kits.

In reality, is that the way it works? i dont know. Hopefully someone here can comment. What is the impact if they had sold these kits to the public... ?? Of course recalls shouldnt happen in the first place, but all mfg's have them sometimes.

Further, the question is not really about the bad regs that make into a divers possession... because that problem exists either way. I'm simply curious about whether or not it poses additional complexity to have parts affected by a recall in the hands of individuals, and not easily re-captured by the Mfg.

Thoughts?
 
osb:
Seems to me that a benefit of confining sales of parts to authorized dealers would be that Zeagle could relatively easily notify thier dealers, and pull back all the 'bad' stock of service kits.

It's an interesting point but still no different from cars, guns and airplanes, all industries of which sell parts to the general public. Nobody has ever explained what the difference is supposed to be.
 
doole:
It's an interesting point but still no different from cars, guns and airplanes, all industries of which sell parts to the general public. Nobody has ever explained what the difference is supposed to be.

The difference is this: auto manufacturers, for one, don't require that scheduled maintainance be performed by a specific facility in order to keep the warranty in force. The reason they don't is that it is a violation of federal law to require specific parts by specific facilities in regards to warranties. So far, the scuba equipment manufacturers have been flying under the radar. All it would take is one class action lawsuit against a larger concern, such as Johnson Outdoor (ScubaPro) and all of the other manufacturers would rethink their stance. Another issue is the unique nature of diving. We could argue endlessly about the value and quality of training provided by the average LDS, but as things stand today, gear sales are mostly to certified divers. Without LDS's doing training, who would buy scuba gear? I bet 90% of gear sales are to the newly certified divers. If you owned a LDS, would you want to rep a gear line that sold service items to your customers?
 
yknot:
All it would take is one class action lawsuit against a larger concern, such as Johnson Outdoor (ScubaPro) and all of the other manufacturers would rethink their stance.







Okay. How do you start a class action suit and how much does it cost?
 
evad:
Okay. How do you start a class action suit and how much does it cost?
I don't think it would take more than a couple of people to act as injured parties AND an attorney willing to take the case. Mass tort lawyers would rather sue international drug companies than scuba equipment manufacturers. They not only have deeper pockets but it's easier to gain some sympathy from a jury when someone has died vs. convincing them how you've suffered because ScubaPro wouldn't sell you a rebuild kit. You wouldn't be paying anything out of pocket in this type of suit, just giving up 40% or so to the lawyers. The key to this issue, at least from a legal standpoint, is the language in warranties that states you must have your service done by a brand "X" servicing (and selling) dealer while using only brand "X" parts. I'm not aware of any written policy preventing a LDS from selling you a kit- they just won't do it. Thinking along those lines, there aren't, AFAIK, any state or federal rules stating you have to be "certified" to get an air fill-again, they just won't do it.
 
osb:
Further, the question is not really about the bad regs that make into a divers possession... because that problem exists either way. I'm simply curious about whether or not it poses additional complexity to have parts affected by a recall in the hands of individuals, and not easily re-captured by the Mfg.

Thoughts?

Yes. Keep in mind that by the time a manufacturer issues a product recall, some of the product will most likely be in the hands of consumers. Regarding product remaining somewhere in the supply distribution channels, it will be, as you said, fairly easy for the manufacturer to contact its authorized dealers, for example, in order to prevent additional product from reaching consumers. This is equally applicable to any distributors and independent dealers supplied by a manufacturer. The manufacturer does not need an exclusive authorized dealer relationship with the retail outlet for this corrective action to take place and be effective.

Once some of the recalled product has reached the consumer, then it becomes more complex. It may be difficult or impossible to identify every consumer who has received a recalled product, as you can imagine. Press releases, ads, and other means can be employed in a diligent attempt to reach the affected consumers.
 
Scuba:
Yes. Keep in mind that by the time a manufacturer issues a product recall, some of the product will most likely be in the hands of consumers. Regarding product remaining somewhere in the supply distribution channels, it will be, as you said, fairly easy for the manufacturer to contact its authorized dealers, for example, in order to prevent additional product from reaching consumers.

Happens just the same. Happened to me. Call me dim but I can't see how it's a reason not to sell rebuild kits to consumers.
 

Back
Top Bottom