Ken abucs
Contributor
I have the exact same situation, 1 PST 100 & 1 Faber 100. I add or subtract 6lbs based on which tank I'm using. I also labled each tank with the amount of weight I need for a salt water dive, so I don't get it wrong.
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
Good point. Yes, real world results don't match up with theory every time. I will be sure to experiment before attempting any advanced dives.CoolTech:Ok,
Used to need 12 lbs. before the Faber... now, 0 lbs.
Tank empty empty bouyancy is not -12 lbs, and the positive bouyancy of the al S80 doesn't make up the difference.
I mentioned this so you understand that not everything will always work out the way you plan it.
Yeah, I did the math.
I found myself descending like a rock. And, using air in the BC on ascent with as little as 4 lbs of weight
The math may not work. It didn't in my case.
CompuDude:Good point. Yes, real world results don't match up with theory every time. I will be sure to experiment before attempting any advanced dives.
That said, as I mentioned, looks like it's not a Faber after all, but an older, painted PST. Didn't know there was such a thing... unless the paint job was end user-applied.
The real question is: do I put air in my BC or not while doing the test.lamont:heh, if that's true its a really good reason to test your weighting on shallow dives -- you might have done a missile to the surface after taking 6# off....
CoolTech:I dive faber blue 133 with no weight and no wetsuit. I am 6.00 ft and 265. The reason I bring this up?... everyone is different. What works for you, may not work for others. Reduce/increase weight based on your situation. if you need less weight, reduce it on the next dive.... until it works for you
CompuDude:The real question is: do I put air in my BC or not while doing the test.
bradshsi:I don't dispute your observation, but your conclusion seems curious to me.
Tank buoyancy is pretty standard engineering. Assuming the manufacturers quoted values are correct, I would not expect large departures from the norm (only small ones due to manufacturing tolerances).
Which leads to the conclusion that either Faber's values are off for the 133 or you changed something else at the same time you changed tanks.
In my limited experience I have found no weight surprises when changing tanks.
CompuDude:Then why bother listing weights in the specs? I'm pretty sure it does make a difference.
I have GOT to find out what kind computer you use!Packhorse:Woops. My bad. I was at 100meters and narced when I answered the question. sorry.
CompuDude:I have GOT to find out what kind computer you use!
Hmm... anyone know what kind of range an 802.11g router's signal will give you underwater?