Project Argonaut, totally new, vintage style DH regulator

[macado]

Why would you not use your Phoenix HPR for deep diving? That is my regulator of choice as my primary for all deep and decompression dives.

I do use Conshelf first stages with Scubapro 109 second stages for deco bottles and for my alternate post on my doubles, but My Phoenix HPR is always my primary.

Don’t get me wrong, I do realize that modern plastic regulators are very reliable, but they certainly have many more failure points than a Phoenix RAM.

Take a look at this thread:
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/vi...atest-technical-diving-regulator-phoenix.html

I agree with you completely. I would totally trust my DH on deeper dives but it's more of a matter of convenience right now with the way my gear is configured. My doubles rigs are already setup with Apeks DS4 first stages and decent second stages. I'm more of a traditionalist when it comes to my doubles setups and prefer a Hogarthian configuration.

I guess I should practice what I preach, although I have never used my DH for any "technical diving." Had no problems in Cozumel down to 140' and that was even without the HPR second stage.

 

[Luis H]

There was a question at VDH about how the new Argonaut will work with doubles. My response was as follows, but I will add some more pictures later.


I intentionally optimized the ports orientation for single tank diving, but as much as possible I considered provisions for different configurations. I have not dived it with doubles yet, but I did try it in various configurations.


The HP port and the LP port at the top right were designed with enough clearance to easily add a variety of adapters (90 degree elbows and T’s). Even with a 90 degree swivel or a T, the ports are streamed lined enough to keep the regulator from looking like a kludge.


With a high pressure swivel you can also use a wireless transmitter. That is what Bryan used during our trip to Cozumel. My understanding is that it worked great.


The picture below is just one possible configuration with double. The HP swivel that is shown is also a 7/16” to 3/8” male adapter, therefore, I had to add a second 3/8” to 7/16 adapter to make it work for this picture. If you use a straight 7/16” to 7/16” HP swivel it will be more compact and streamlined.


In the picture there is also a T on the top right LP port, but it is not really needed. I was just trying different configurations.


I tried to make the design as clean and as versatile as possible, but as always, there are some compromises when it comes to fitting all possible configurations. In the case of double tanks, I don’t see any big issues. As a matter of fact, without the hookah port sticking back it actually works better than the basic Aqua Master or Royal Aqua Master.

 

[Luis H]

It was asked if this regulator would work in cold water or if it was only good for Cozumel… Well here is the answer.


I took my new Argonaut for an ice dive last Saturday. Below are some surface pictures of my dive gear and dive preparation (and more will follow).


As I expected it performed without a flaw. I actually pushed the limits by intentionally (and also unintentionally) inducing a free flow on the surface and stopping it at will by lowering the mouthpiece in the water. I intentionally leaned back on the surface and raised the mouthpiece to induce a free flow, but stopping it was no issue. This was expected, but it is always nice to confirm it.


As expected from a double hose, the cold water doesn’t tend to affect it since both the first and second stages are normally dry.




There was no surprise on the performance of the double hose, what was surprising was the performance of my alternate regulator. I use an environmentally sealed Conshelf for my alternate first stage and a Scubapro 109 for the second stage. When I got in the water I accidentally induced a wild free flow in the 109 and with my clumsy gloves it took me a few seconds to grab it and turn it facing down in the water. That stopped the free low immediately. I have yet to see a plastic second stage perform like that, even one with a metal barrel.




More later


Here is my new set of little doubles with the Argonaut. This is the first time I used this doubles. They were a lot heavier in the water than my other little tanks. I was way over-weighted, but managed.

Notice the Argonaut with a new chrome finish.

Cutting the hole.

The chainsaw was not long enough for the ice thickness so we had to finish with a hand saw.

We did have the advantage of all the power toys (notice the tracked four wheeler and a sled) and we had a nice cabin on shore to be able to change in a nice warm dry place.

Getting ready to dive.

Here are the other divers in the group.

 

[John C. Ratliff]

Luis,

It would be nice to see the Arganaut adopted for use at McMurdo Station, Antarctica for their diving operations. I am positive that it would be more reliable than any single hose regulator that they are currently using, with both stages enclosed within the box and exposed only to air.

SeaRat

 

[Luis H]

I have been asked a couple times if I was using the Mentor as a model when designing the Argonaut. The question has come up again recently with the recent pictures of the Mentor in another thread. The short answer is: no.

The longer answer is that the Mentor and the Argonaut both follow the long heritage of the Royal Aqua Master.

The similarities can be easily explained from the theory of converging evolution or converging design evolution. It is not uncommon that two or more designs converge on very similar solutions when they are given the same requirements and similar or the same constraints.

I can’t speak for Aqua Lung, but my observation is that we share very similar design philosophies of backwards compatibility. This will explain why we are both using the exact same first stage design introduced (by Aqua Lung/ US Divers) in 1965. Several other companies also use the exact same or a very similar design.

My 2005 Phoenix design also uses the same first stage mechanism (with the replaceable volcano orifice).

One of the advantages of using that first stage is the availability of replaceable parts from multiple sources. The same (fit and function) first stage seat was used by Voit and now by Mares.


The second stages of the Mentor and the Argonaut look similar, but there are a number of differences in detail. Both second stages are downstream demand valves, but most of the similarities stop there.

My second stage is an evolution from my HPR design with some subtle (but important) improvements. One improvement that I will share at this moment is the use of a replaceable and adjustable volcano orifice.

Anyone familiar with the HPR knows that the venturi flow is also adjustable.

I will explain many more of my second stage (and main body) design details and features later, but for now I will just say that every design detail was carefully considered and optimized for performance, simplicity, reliability, and ease of fabrication.

Some of the details in the Mentor are beautiful, but it also reflects a huge budget difference when designing and fabricating a regulator specifically intended for the US military.

I have not tested a Mentor, but based on all the testing I have done with the Argonaut (and many other regulators), I have a very strong opinion that the performance of the Argonaut is very hard to beat… at a fraction of the production cost of a Mentor.

 

[trapezus]

I got a new and un used AMF Voit Trieste 2 in original box. It has same ports . I am interesting black T-shirt with logo La Spirotechnique where it is sold ?

 

[Boiler_81]

I got a new and un used AMF Voit Trieste 2 in original box. It has same ports . I am interesting black T-shirt with logo La Spirotechnique where it is sold ?

Shirts: http://thescubamuseum.com/apparel/apparel.htm

 

[trapezus]

Yes it is new ! I bought from ebay.. un used un opened box ! at least in the original, I'm diving deep sea not a shallow lake or lay lay lom ) sea side sand dog party..
I do not trust trumped-up systems.. I would look deeper than 200 feet what gives the result of a regulator..

 

[John C. Ratliff]

The Trieste II that I have was bought by me new in the early 1970s, and now has been modified a great deal in order to make it into a good regulator. The AMF Voit Trieste and Trieste II (Two-Hose Regulator R-22 and R-22J) had three design defects which you should consider before anyone should try to use it in strenuous or deep diving:

--The venturi is under-designed and results in this regulator, as manufactured, to not provide the amount of air needed for hard exertions. A dive shop in Vancouver, BC modified mine to give it better a venturi effect.

--The diaphragm has about a 2 inch resistance to breaking pressure. This is built into the dome shape of the diaphragm. I understand that there is a new silicone diaphragm being produced for the Trieste, but I have not tested it. I have been told that it too has some resistance to movement, but do not know whether this is true.

--There is a item number 25 (stock number 85-603) "Set Screw-Locking 2nd Stage Housing" meant to lock the item number 21, "Housing--2nd Stage Valve" which allows this housing to move, and it may not always be oriented with the opening down the intake hose.

The photos below show the changes I had made and made myself (such as the home-made diaphragm) to allow this regulator to perform well. With these design changes, at the surface I recently tested the breaking inhalation resistance at 0.5-0.8 inches of water, and a hard inhalation at 0.2-0.5 inches of water. I had to insert a baffle plate into the mouthpiece to prevent blow-by.

You can get by one of the defects (the diaphragm) by buying the Trieste cans and a new silicone diaphragm at The Scuba Museum, but that still leaves you with the venturi problem.

Rather than do this, I would now buy the Argonaut, as Luis has done a lot to design a very good double hose regulator with a modern first and second stage. This is better than trying to modify the Trieste II to meet modern standards. Without the modifications, the Trieste regulator will not meet a diver's demands. Luis' design is not a "trumped-up system..." but rather the Trieste meets that description and was never very successful because of these design deficiencies.

SeaRat

 

[trapezus]

Mr.Jonh C Ratliff, thank you very much for your information.I am 40 years experienced diver and scuba collector halfway around the world
I respect everyone's labor ,not discredit anyone goal. I know Luis is one of the venerable and helpful I respect him.
I have 19 differents brands Doublehose regulator.All of them are working, and I'm diving deeper.
My choice as the original factory, in which the performance of the regulator in deep water.For example I prefer Royal Mistral for deep water 200+ feet.I have all La Spirotechnique equipments .
I never live any problem with them.
I do comparisons between the original state regulators;the best results are doing factory. A prototype is a matter of choice.
Only I donn't want that this site Bryan's site and his manufacturing lack of advertising space. Many people think that same.
I donn't know how I explained with my bad english. I would like to agree with everyone who loves regards here.