Question Mares Regulator Performance Data

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!

Using a piston device to perform the same function as a diaphragm is nothing new. White Stag did a very similar design in the 60’s.

The US Divers (now Aqua Lung) UDS-1 triple tank system has a what they called a Conshelf 1st stage regulator built right into the triple tank manifold. But instead of a diaphragm it actually had a sliding piston to perform the diaphragm function. It appears that it was done to facilitate assembly in to the valve. ...

I like diaphragms… they work so well that we use them in all current production second stages (we did use some bellows is some second stages in the 50’s). Try using a piston on a second stage and let me know how that works for you. The reason it doesn’t work may not be intuitively obvious, but that is a different discussion.
Old designs can be improved. Look at all the interest in the Atomic TFX.

I have no idea if this design works better than the conventional way of environmentally sealing a diaphragm first stage by using a second diaphragm. Especially at recreational depths. But I do think it's worth a look. Mares actually bought an ANSTI testing machine to aid in their reg development. As a result of this, any of their first stages that can be fitted with this, even the budget 15X, are now certified to meet the Norsok U-101 standard at 200m. That means impressive stability at very high flow rates, even accounting for the lower density of the 97/3 Heliox mix that is specified by the standard.


But what I really want to know is what @rsingler thinks of Mares' new generation of balanced adjustable second stages. The Dual Adj is the workhorse of their current lineup. They also have an all-metal version called the Atlas Adj. The downstream Atlas (without the "Adj") is presumably their replacement for the Abyss so a comparison would be useful.

To round it out, I'd like to hear his thoughts on their Twin Power System. It's sort of a dive/pre-dive switch which they have on both a downstream second (the Ultra) and a pair of balanced adjustable seconds (Ultra Adj and Epic Adj). To my mind it's an unnecessary gimmick and potential failure point.
 
Old designs can be improved. Look at all the interest in the Atomic TFX.

I totally agree. I am just pointing out that the concept is nothing new.
I don't even think that is a bad idea.

But I still think it is a solution looking for a problem. A non-existing problem at that (just my opinion). :)
 
Diaphragm first stages often have lower flow capability than a piston and are less responsive (small orifice), for example, the advertised flow rate for the AL first stages is 1500 lpm vs 6000 lpm for a Mark 25 type and 3000 (-) lpm for the little unbalanced piston Mark 2 Evo. Most, if not all, diaphragm first stages use a wire push pin to off set the HP seat upstream from the volcano orifice and that wire pin must go through the orifice therefore partially occluding it. Then there is the ambient diaphragm, which can leak, tear or burst or slip out if not installed properly and even then over time the material can compress and leakage/slippage becomes possible. And, while we are discussing balanced diaphragm first stages, true, the balancing reduces the force needed to open the seat, the HP seat is still being pushed open upstream by a wire pin connecting the HP seat to the ambient diaphragm. Diaphragm first stages also tend to have a lot of (moving) parts or springs and the perishable ambient diaphragm.

My latest infatuation is with the cute little AL Core Supreme/Helix Pro diaphragm first stage, tiny, well balanced, fully sealed and with some good improvements and some simplification vs it's evolutionary predecessor, the Conshelf. The Conshelf, egads, uses a circlip to retain the guts, geeez!!!!! If the circlip groove is damaged, the clip looses it's compression or is installed upside down or one of the springs internally below or above the crown block balance chamber becomes coil bound (overly long wire pin) the innards can eject themselves. And there have been at least a few cases of buckled or bent wire push pins. Modern AL first stages remove the crown block balance chamber, remove the circlip, remove one of two springs (the spring above the crown block, compared to earlier designs) and incorporate those things including the balance chamber into a threaded plug in the body and removed the slip ring from the ambient diaphragm and shorten the wire push pin by nearly half. And they put in ACD! How neat is that, almost a cool as the new Mark 2 Evo flow by piston :poke:.

Piston first, diaphragm second, the right tool for the job :wink:.

I think that Mares having invested in their own ANSTI machine (?) means they want to put their $ into actual improvements instead of just new decal sets.
 
Diaphragm first stages often have lower flow capability than a piston and are less responsive (small orifice), for example, the advertised flow rate for the AL first stages is 1500 lpm vs 6000 lpm for a Mark 25 type and 3000 (-) lpm for the little unbalanced piston Mark 2 Evo. Most, if not all, diaphragm first stages use a wire push pin to off set the HP seat upstream from the volcano orifice and that wire pin must go through the orifice therefore partially occluding it. Then there is the ambient diaphragm, which can leak, tear or burst or slip out if not installed properly and even then over time the material can compress and leakage/slippage becomes possible. And, while we are discussing balanced diaphragm first stages, true, the balancing reduces the force needed to open the seat, the HP seat is still being pushed open upstream by a wire pin connecting the HP seat to the ambient diaphragm. Diaphragm first stages also tend to have a lot of (moving) parts or springs and the perishable ambient diaphragm.


My latest infatuation is with the cute little AL Core Supreme/Helix Pro diaphragm first stage, tiny, well balanced, fully sealed and with some good improvements and some simplification vs it's evolutionary predecessor, the Conshelf. The Conshelf, egads, uses a circlip to retain the guts, geeez!!!!! If the circlip groove is damaged, the clip looses it's compression or is installed upside down or one of the springs internally below or above the crown block balance chamber becomes coil bound (overly long wire pin) the innards can eject themselves. And there have been at least a few cases of buckled or bent wire push pins.

These are incorrect statements (I am referring too all the bolden statements). Not only they are incorrect, they have no basis in reality and no substance to back it up. I am sorry my friend, but you should be embarrassed of repeating such nonsense which I can prove as totally incorrect.

Yes, I have data and plenty of analysis and substantial facts to back my statements. Please notice that when I am sharing an opinion, I always mention something like “IMHO”, but in this case I have plenty of data to show that the stamens above have no basis in reality.

In a balanced diaphragm regulator like the Conshelf, the Titan, the Royal Aqua Master, and many others, the only thing that keeps the first stage valve closed is the spring. The force provided to keep is closed is about 8 pounds (I have measure it many times) and it is not affected by tank pressure. I have measured this many times as a function of changing tank pressure.

If the spring is not strong enough to create a good seal, it is not uncommon for a Conshelf to operate and seal perfectly well with tank pressure of 2000 psi or lower. But if the closing spring is weak, it will free flow with higher tank pressure. The tank pressure does not have any tendency of closing the valve. I have tested and proven that many times.

The higher tank pressure actually tends to open the first stage valve seat not close it. That is a fact that I can show you on any Conshelf. That is not the same as in a non-balanced Aqua Master.


BTW, I have also done plenty of buckling calculations on the pin and the statement that a pin can buckle under the required opening force is total and complete BS.

I do have pictures of one buckled pin that was way over a 1/4 inch too long and the guy installing it, used the threads on a Phoenix during installation to apply the king of compression force required to buckle the pin. It really requires that type of stupidity to buckle the 0.06” diameter stainless steel pin. This is not a wire and trying to call it a wire is complete BS.

Yes, I have done plenty of elastic instability analysis to determine the maximum length the pin can tolerate. We are not even close to a buckling failure. I will be glad to show you actual facts and data, so that you stop talking BS… The aspect ratio of length to diameter describes it a slender column, but by definition, it is a structural column. Yes, it is a very small column, but the aspect ratio is not much different to other columns that you would never question.

If you have some actual pictures of the bent pins I will be glad to do a failure analysis. Yes, I know of the one BS article that has no actual substance of facts to back it up (that you like to quote). That one article has received a lot of mileage and it really only shows one persons opinion of how one regulator failed, but it has no pictures or actual data to back any substantiated failure analysis. That article is total nonsense and (INHO) technically embarrassing.


I will leave all the other nonsense alone for now.
 
Diaphragm first stages often have lower flow capability than a piston and are less responsive (small orifice), for example, the advertised flow rate for the AL first stages is 1500 lpm vs 6000 lpm for a Mark 25 type and 3000 (-) lpm for the little unbalanced piston Mark 2 Evo.

OK, I am going to have to share the personal email I sent Nemrod about this flow rate nonsense. Yes, we also have some of these ridiculous debates in personal email... :p

I see that you are highly impressed by completely meaningless marketing numbers… lol 😊


6000 lpm is 212 cfm in some absurd theory that would empty an aluminum 80 in 23 seconds (if the valve allowed it).

1500 lpm is 53 cfm in the same type alternate reality this would empty an aluminum 80 in about 90 seconds.


If you look at the third link in this thread link below, you will see that an Argonaut Kraken is very capable of emptying a steel 72 or a steel 85 in just a few minutes. If that is not good enough for you… man, you really suck!… lol lol 😊 😊

Argonaut Mechanism - diagram and parts list


I can tell that you really fall for those marketing numbers, don’t you?... 😊



So back to reality, I am glad you are happy with your MK-25. I just serviced 10 of them and I would love to have one… they do fine as wall hanger conversation piece… I had to show Julie the value of having a cheater pipe when working on Scubapro regulators. I am just saying… These people (in the giga-yacht) do not baby their regulators like you baby yours… They do not soak it for hours and spray salt-off and other scents like you do your gear. 😊 Looking at the dings and dents on them (specially the A700) I can tell you that they don’t get the soft pillow treatment either. The cover on the A700 looks like a pretty rugged structure and to make those dents it must have taken some impacts, but at least they still work just fine.
 
:wink: I will stay with exactly what I said :poke:. (I love that little pokey stick man. I poked a yellow jacket nest today to see if any where home, they were)



:cuddles: I love you Luis but the Conshelf type first stage is just an old flame that I am moving on from.

Edit to add, this Mares could be my new flame to aspire to:


Like where did that new hotness come from :shocked:.
 
Today, I rebuilt a couple of Scubapro Mk-2 (for that gigayacht I told you about, that is in in port). The best thing about the Mk-2 is that they haven’t changed much in the past 50+ years since I started servicing them. It was like an old friend, a very old friend… :cool:

I also serviced a few “Spare Air” for the same yacht (totally new to me). But guess what, they are just a balanced single stage regulator, like the 1960’s US Divers Royal Mistral. Including the compound lever system. They do work a little better than the old Royal Mistral (maybe not a lot better). What is old, is new again… :oops:

I think you need a Spare Air… It will go well with all that modern stuff... lol :poke:

We are probably a bit off topic, but this thread was dead anyway…
 
I'll share my answer here. I'd take the 62X because it's their new standard recreational first stage. It's a lightened evolution of the 22. Along with their other current first stages with the TBP kit, it's EN250A certified and meets NORSOK U-101 requirements at 200m. Both of these are unusual for midrange regs.

OTOH, I certainly wouldn't mind seeing a breakdown of the 82X (or 28XR which is the same reg internally). This is their current flagship first stage with LP ports on a turret.
Where do you get this info that 82x and xr28 are the same reg?
 
If you add the TBP option to the 82x (yellow circled item from the 28XR schematic below), they're internally almost identical.
Screenshot_20231227_120542.jpg


Screenshot_20231227_120349.jpg
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/peregrine/

Back
Top Bottom