PDA

View Full Version : Comments on a Genesis



LadyIce
August 21st, 2002, 09:56 AM
Hi All,

I would like to get some input on the Genesis GS2000. I tried one the other weekend and found that the adjustment for the breathing rate was a really nice feature. The reg itself performed very nicely. I have been using a Sherwood Brut and have found it to be a good reg. as well. But did find in the cold 47-55 deg. it was a little harder to breath. Maybe it was just me and not the reg. once I was in the warmer water it was easier to breath. Any comments good or bad would be greatly appreciated.

LadyIce

MikeFerrara
August 21st, 2002, 10:50 AM
The sherwoods have always been good work horse regs, though not high performance. The brute, being unbalanced, can be a bit of a dog. Per the Crammer and Decker sales rep, they distribute Genesis and Sherwood, the gs2000 was designe to compete with the sharwood. That was before they new they would end up on the same side. The gs2000 is a piston reg that uses a dry air bleed (don't remember what they call theirs) similar to the sherwood to keep the first stage dry. Both regs use the same HP seat. The seats in these regs do not, in my experience hold up as well as some others. If a sealed reg is important for you I feel their are better choices. I prefer a real seal to that of a air bleed. It just seems to me to be a more robust design. Although, the only sherwood air bleed failures I have seen have been due to neglect or misuse. I tend to faver the diaphram regs like the Zeagle and the Apex. I have never seen a seat fail, their high performance, a true sealed design and cometitivly priced. I really like the new Zeagles.

You may not know it but, for a few bucks your brut can be upgreaded to be a balanced reg. You would then have a reg as good as the gs2000, IMO. This is a modification that is sanctioned by the factory and carries no additional risks for the tech or shop that does the work. If I were you I would do that before buying a gs2000.

oxyhacker
August 21st, 2002, 08:35 PM
There's two reasons for balancing a first. The obvious one is that is makes a reg breath "flatter" - that is to say, be less effected by tank pressure. But the important one is that balancing allows using bigger air passages to deliver more air - on a non-balanced first, the designer must make a tradeoff between how much air it can flow, and how much the IP will change from full tank to empty, both being detirmined by the orifice size. If the stage is balanced the designer can make the orifice as big as he pleases, since it will be (relatively) uneffected by the swing in tank pressure.

So adding parts to a 1st like the Brut which was designed as a non-balanced stage, to balance it, may make it breathe flatter , but will not gain the higher performance normally associated with a from-the-ground-up balanced design. This explains, by the way, why few Sherwoods can really quality as high performance regs, as admirable as they might be in other respects, since they are essentially non-balanced designs which have had a balancing feature added.



MikeFerrara once bubbled...
You may not know it but, for a few bucks your brut can be upgreaded to be a balanced reg. You would then have a reg as good as the gs2000, IMO. This is a modification that is sanctioned by the factory and carries no additional risks for the tech or shop that does the work. If I were you I would do that before buying a gs2000.

MikeFerrara
August 21st, 2002, 11:32 PM
oxyhacker,

Looking at the drawings it seems clear that the sherwood brut, magnum oasis or blizard were not designed as balance regs. I say that because of the use of spring washers rather than gas presure (or lack of) to balance. Maybe it should be another thread but I would be interested in the history of that design. Should they even be calling them balanced? I had never considered the effect of orifice size but after you mentioned it seems kind of obvious. Thanks (banging head on wall).

Mike


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1