Scubapro DIN conversion kits: 200 vs 300

[jale]

I have used some AP 3L tanks with 300 bar valve.
I also used to have a manifold with 300 bar valves.
On these valves, there is no way to use an insert as anyway it is too large to fit an INT.
Now, it is true it is not that common and you should be happy with your 200 bar conversion

 

[Angelo Farina]

All tanks I have ever seen with DIN valves had always the insert and were adaptable also to INT (yoke)...
It is true that I never went diving in Mexico. Very far from here...

 

[Couv]

I think @JackD342 has pretty well summed up the 200 vs 300 bar issue. Here is a link to the DGX article that goes a little more into detail.
SCUBA Valves | Dive Gear Express®

 

[Belzelbub]

Agreed. The 200 bar regulator side fitting is pointless. I went to DIN a while ago, and after using the adapter for a while on my yoke tanks, I decided to change the valves on my AL80s to DIN. Valves are rated to 3000 PSI (as are the tanks), but the valve itself is the 300 bar thread. Conversely, my steel tanks (3442 PSI) came with pro-valves, so have the yoke dimple and insert and 200 bar threads.

 

[Angelo Farina]

Agreed. The 200 bar regulator side fitting is pointless. I went to DIN a while ago, and after using the adapter for a while on my yoke tanks, I decided to change the valves on my AL80s to DIN. Valves are rated to 3000 PSI (as are the tanks), but the valve itself is the 300 bar thread. Conversely, my steel tanks (3442 PSI) came with pro-valves, so have the yoke dimple and insert and 200 bar threads.

Why did you use 300-bars DIN valves on 200-bar cylinders? This impedes to use yoke regulators, to fill the cylinders at shops who have compressors with yoke hoses, or with 200-bars DIN hoses, etc...
Wasn't the conclusion of previous posts that is always better to employ 200-bars DIN valves on cylinders rated at 200-232 bars, for getting maximum compatibility?

 

[kelemvor]

My wife's steel 80 is a 300 bar (3500psi) tank. They're rare but do exist. Since you already bought the 200, then I'd just use it. If you'd thought about it before hand then 300 is the obvious choice because it will work on either valve.

 

[Angelo Farina]

My wife's steel 80 is a 300 bar (3500psi) tank. They're rare but do exist. Since you already bought the 200, then I'd just use it. If you'd thought about it before hand then 300 is the obvious choice because it will work on either valve.

???
3500 PSI is 240 bars, not 300. Which valve is mounted on that cylinder?
The Scubapro DIN conversion kits are inexpensive. So if it gives advantages I can easily swap my one with a 300 bar one. But I still do not see the point, as it appears that these 300-bars valves are very rare...
And a 300-bar converter is longer, meaning that the regulator will protrude more towards my head, and it will fix to the 200-bar valve with only part of the threads, which appears slightly less safe to me.

 

[Belzelbub]

Why did you use 300-bars DIN valves on 200-bar cylinders? This impedes to use yoke regulators, to fill the cylinders at shops who have compressors with yoke hoses, or with 200-bars DIN hoses, etc...

Price was right. They are older AL tanks, and really only used by my kids now. They all dive DIN. Never had an issue getting them filled. But, overall, I agree. It would have made a lot more sense to go with convertible valves. I just wanted to get the yokes off, and these were available and inexpensive. Oh, and as I said earlier, these aren't true 300 bar valves. Valve is labeled as rated to 3000 psi. It's just not convertible.

When it comes time for new tanks, they will most likely be convertibles.

 

[JackD342]

Why did you use 300-bars DIN valves on 200-bar cylinders? This impedes to use yoke regulators, to fill the cylinders at shops who have compressors with yoke hoses, or with 200-bars DIN hoses, etc...
Wasn't the conclusion of previous posts that is always better to employ 200-bars DIN valves on cylinders rated at 200-232 bars, for getting maximum compatibility?

I'm not sure there is a meeting of the minds here yet.
At least in the US, you cannot use a 300 bar DIN valve on a 200/230 bar cylinder - the cylinder neck threads are different. Please read the link provided by @couv in post #13 for an in depth explanation.

A 300 bar DIN regulator (7 threads, 2 more threads than a 200 bar fitting) can be used with a 200 bar cylinder valve, a 300 bar cylinder valve, and with a DIN/yoke adapter on a yoke cylinder valve. Yes, a couple of "extra" threads are exposed, and it will be slightly closer to your head than a 200 bar regulator, which is slightly closer to your head than a yoke regulator. But all options are otherwise open to you. Both mate with a 200 bar tank valve using the same five threads, it is just that a 300 bar regulator fitting has two left over and exposed.

What you can NOT do is use a yoke of any kind on a 300 bar valve, regardless of how your regulator is configured.

There are only two DIN types, commonly referred to as 200 bar and 300 bar. In the US, DOT (Department Of Transportation) regulates compressed air use and requires that at 3500 psi (240 bar) and above only a 300 bar valve and regulator fitting can be used, and a yoke can NOT be used for those higher pressures.

 

[Storker]

I am supposing that all these dual-purpose valves are 200 bar.
Is this true?

Yes. If you can insert a DIN->yoke plug and are able to mount a yoke reg, your valve is most definitely a 200/232 bar valve, not a 300 bar valve.

I confirm that the 300 bar version is substantially useless, as it is impossible to find cylinders equipped with Din300 valves.

Um, no. A proper 300 bar reg can fit both 300 bar and 200/232 bar valves. You'll have two reg threads visible if you mount it on a 200/232 bar valve, but that's all. 300 bar tanks are found east of the pond, typically 10L, 12L or twin 7L. I've seen a bunch of them. And if the tank is 300 bar, the valve has to be 300 bar.