Regulator testing

[halocline]

If I was buying a used car I would have it inspected before I purchased it. By your logic who ever service it last did a crap job anyway so it needs service. The manufacture have a set time for their product to be serviced you may disagree but you have insufficient data prove the manufacture wrong and it comes down to this you won't reimburse anybody for the expense they incurred from your advice if something goes wrong.

1. The manufacturers' logic for setting up a service interval is almost certainly motivated by more than simple safety or product design. There are economic factors here, not the least of which is getting customers in the shop on an annual basis.

2. There's all kinds of data that prove the manufacturer 'wrong' if you mean to contend that well-designed and maintained regulators need to be rebuilt annually. If that were really true, there would be an epidemic of regulator failure way beyond anything we currently see. Many thousands of regulators routinely go far beyond the one year interval without failure. In fact, that's very likely the norm, not the exception.

3. A big part of the reason some of us feel strongly about this is that we have all experienced the unfortunate fact that regulators are more likely to have problems immediately after service. There is essentially no professional standard (at least none worth mentioning) in training for dive shop regulator techs, and basically its a crapshoot whenever you hand your reg over to one of these 'professionals.' Like many of the DIYers, I started this because I got sick of the LDS charging me to screw up an otherwise perfectly functioning regulator.

4. Regulators are nothing like cars. Cars are very complex machines with thousands of parts that take all sorts of abuse in everyday use. Regulators are very simple devices that can be easily disassembled, inspected, and put back together with few tools and a little mechanical savvy. And BTW, there's nothing wrong with re-using o-rings and seats that are not visually worn out. It's very easy to visually inspect o-rings and seats with a little care and a magnifying glass. It's just not economically feasible for shops to do this; 90% of the true cost of regulator service is labor. The parts 'cost' is so minimal as to be insignificant, so they might as well be replaced. It's just that the retail mark up on these parts is insane.

 

[NCadiver]

@JRC11 sorry for highjacking your thread.

1. The manufacturers' logic for setting up a service interval is almost certainly motivated by more than simple safety or product design. There are economic factors here, not the least of which is getting customers in the shop on an annual basis.

2. There's all kinds of data that prove the manufacturer 'wrong' if you mean to contend that well-designed and maintained regulators need to be rebuilt annually. If that were really true, there would be an epidemic of regulator failure way beyond anything we currently see. Many thousands of regulators routinely go far beyond the one year interval without failure. In fact, that's very likely the norm, not the exception.

3. A big part of the reason some of us feel strongly about this is that we have all experienced the unfortunate fact that regulators are more likely to have problems immediately after service. There is essentially no professional standard (at least none worth mentioning) in training for dive shop regulator techs, and basically its a crapshoot whenever you hand your reg over to one of these 'professionals.' Like many of the DIYers, I started this because I got sick of the LDS charging me to screw up an otherwise perfectly functioning regulator.

4. Regulators are nothing like cars. Cars are very complex machines with thousands of parts that take all sorts of abuse in everyday use. Regulators are very simple devices that can be easily disassembled, inspected, and put back together with few tools and a little mechanical savvy. And BTW, there's nothing wrong with re-using o-rings and seats that are not visually worn out. It's very easy to visually inspect o-rings and seats with a little care and a magnifying glass. It's just not economically feasible for shops to do this; 90% of the true cost of regulator service is labor. The parts 'cost' is so minimal as to be insignificant, so they might as well be replaced. It's just that the retail mark up on these parts is insane.

Halocline I suppose you are working for free at your job?
What service period would cover the most users and liability for a business? Ifyou're doing annual service the service kit are free from most manufactures andlabor cost only go to the Dive Shops not the manufactures.
On most regulators it ever other years for service so that a 2 year serviceperiod not a one year.
In your open water book it show you how to inspect a regulator before you takeit out of the Dive shop which most people don't do and would stop all thoseproblems. I have seen more DIYers screw up there regulator more than dive shopand you will see a lot of them on this board. Now if you have time to go over aoring with a magnifying glass you should have time to interview the servicetech and make sure he knows what he is doing.
If Scuba is such a lucrative business why aren't you in it? You could setupyour own service repair shop half as much or less than your local shop andsaves your fellow divers from that bad repair tech.

 

[jar546]

1. The manufacturers' logic for setting up a service interval is almost certainly motivated by more than simple safety or product design. There are economic factors here, not the least of which is getting customers in the shop on an annual basis.

Don't agree. There is a bigger picture that has to do with safety and liability. You can thank litigious society for that. Changes in manufacturer's requirements are driven by litigious history and reducing future risk. Not all people are smart and they don't give an IQ test to every regulator buyer. Thank every person that you know that benefited from a BS lawsuit. How many litigation attorneys do we actually need in this country anyway?

3. A big part of the reason some of us feel strongly about this is that we have all experienced the unfortunate fact that regulators are more likely to have problems immediately after service. There is essentially no professional standard (at least none worth mentioning) in training for dive shop regulator techs, and basically its a crapshoot whenever you hand your reg over to one of these 'professionals.' Like many of the DIYers, I started this because I got sick of the LDS charging me to screw up an otherwise perfectly functioning regulator.

Incorrect statement. I have had both manufacturer specific training and general training on regulator repairs. There is factory, manufacturer training available for just about all regs currently sold. The maintenance and repair manuals are for the most part, very specific in procedures. Do all shops take advantage of this? No, of course not. Just don't generalize, please.

 

[redacted]

@JRC11 sorry for highjacking your thread.



Halocline I suppose you are working for free at your job?
What service period would cover the most users and liability for a business? Ifyou're doing annual service the service kit are free from most manufactures andlabor cost only go to the Dive Shops not the manufactures.
On most regulators it ever other years for service so that a 2 year serviceperiod not a one year.
In your open water book it show you how to inspect a regulator before you takeit out of the Dive shop which most people don't do and would stop all thoseproblems. I have seen more DIYers screw up there regulator more than dive shopand you will see a lot of them on this board. Now if you have time to go over aoring with a magnifying glass you should have time to interview the servicetech and make sure he knows what he is doing.
If Scuba is such a lucrative business why aren't you in it? You could setupyour own service repair shop half as much or less than your local shop andsaves your fellow divers from that bad repair tech.

I don't believe anyone is contending that scuba is such a lucrative business. I beleive the contention is that there are some aspects of some scuba retail that are almost scam-like in their implementation. One of those aspects is the all too common cry of liability.

I have never seen gear messed up by a DIYer but I'm sure that it occurs. At least it is his/her own gear. I have seen gear messed up by an LDS tech on quite a few occasions. But I am impressed by your obvious concern for the well being of DIYers (and dive shops techs).

Don't agree. There is a bigger picture that has to do with safety and liability. You can thank litigious society for that. Changes in manufacturer's requirements are driven by litigious history and reducing future risk. Not all people are smart and they don't give an IQ test to every regulator buyer. Thank every person that you know that benefited from a BS lawsuit. How many litigation attorneys do we actually need in this country anyway?

Ditto. Is this another case of your not knowing of any specific incidents but you are sure they are out there?