Have I missed anything here:
200 Bar DIN valve
-----------------
Pros:
* Can be converted to Yoke with an inexpensive insert
Cons:
* 4 threads less, so is a 'stronger' connection
* Can't be used safey on HP tanks
300 Bar DIN valve
-----------------
Pros:
* More threads, so it has a stronger connection
* Can be used on HP tank safely
Cons:
* Requires DIN regulators
* Requires DIN for tank fills
In my opinion, the two cons for 300 Bar DIN are huge. In particular, the only tank fills I can get around here use Yoke, so if I had a 300 Bar DIN valve, I'd have to get a DIN->Yoke regulator converted just to get a tank fill.
Since I plan on using LP tanks (again, I can't even get a HP fill locally), the 200 Bar DIN valves seem to be the way to go.
I'm not convinced the extra 3-4 threads make that much difference in the safety margin. (Despite what the WKPP guys say.)
The arguments *FOR* DIN are obvious, but the arguments that state 200 are bad and 300 are good are much less obvious.
I consider the 200 vs. 300 Bar valvues to be one of those religious issues, kind of like the 1/2" port on a 1st stage should never be used. (I'm with Uncle Pug when I say that the addition of a *single* static O-ring in the 1/2" -> 3/8" converter isn't going to make any difference. There's a much greater chance of getting hit by lighting as I crash my car into a tree that fell down because of old age on my way to the dive site.)
In my opinion, having a 200 Bar DIN valve is *more* than adequate and plenty safe. I'd be willing to bet my life on a 200 Bar DIN valve in the exact same environments as I'd be willing to use a 300 Bar DIN valve. I don't think there is any significant safety margin between the two. (Again, with the assumption of using LP tanks that are not way over-filled.)
The only caveat I have is that there are rumors of cave divers in FL buying LP tanks, then overfill them to 3500 or 4000 PSI. I would *never* consider doing this safe, so if you plan on having your tanks filled to high pressures, by all means go with the 300 Bar valves. But, for those of us that struggle to get good 3000 psi fills, I'll stick with the more 'flexible' valves.
Nate
ps. I will say that the arguments against the OMS valve have some validity, but I'm not sure how much.