D420! How about that?
- Thread starter axxel57
- Start date
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
Meanwhile, I PM'ed @tbone1004 (one of my trusted cavers) about this turret vs right angle connector controversy.
He feels pretty strongly that the right angle connector is a less reliable failure point. He notes stripped threads and connector issues , because the right angle includes a swivel. So it's more than one internal connection. Additionally, he points out the ability of the turret to rotate slightly under certain air sharing conditions.
Bottom line? It looks like I shouldn't use my XStream, much as I like Poseidon first stages. So for me, my twinsets have Deep6 turrets right now, and I'm still going to keep looking for that Mk19.
@buddhasummer , put me down for two Mk19/D420's as you ponder a bulk purchase.
He feels pretty strongly that the right angle connector is a less reliable failure point. He notes stripped threads and connector issues , because the right angle includes a swivel. So it's more than one internal connection. Additionally, he points out the ability of the turret to rotate slightly under certain air sharing conditions.
Bottom line? It looks like I shouldn't use my XStream, much as I like Poseidon first stages. So for me, my twinsets have Deep6 turrets right now, and I'm still going to keep looking for that Mk19.
@buddhasummer , put me down for two Mk19/D420's as you ponder a bulk purchase.
If you need to unload those dangerous Poseidon regs I’m ready to sacrifice myself (only to help 
)
More seriously, the info on that mk19 are few and far apart on Scubapro official websites. The spec are interesting though
)More seriously, the info on that mk19 are few and far apart on Scubapro official websites. The spec are interesting though
Just so folks are clear re: what axxel is suggesting here...
Mk17: environmentally sealed diaphragm with no turret and high flow port
Mk18: non-sealed diaphragm with turret (different, thicker diaphragm than Mk17/19)
Mk19: environmentally sealed diaphragm with turret
New 19: adds high flow port?? to answer @rhwestfall 's concern about longer flow path. Dunno. I wouldn't automatically discount the potential decrement in performance compared with a direct high-flow port, especially at high air densities, or two stressed divers in an OOA scenario at depth.
Haven't seen the new 19 schematics. You have a diagram, @axxel57 ?
look at the flow path of a 17 vs. a 19. It is longer and more bends for the 19. That equates to losses....
Just like a 5th (end) port on a turret flows better than the others. It is the straightest exit line...
Just like a 5th (end) port on a turret flows better than the others. It is the straightest exit line...
Rob, no I don't have it.Just so folks are clear re: what axxel is suggesting here...
Mk17: environmentally sealed diaphragm with no turret and high flow port
Mk18: non-sealed diaphragm with turret (different, thicker diaphragm than Mk17/19)
Mk19: environmentally sealed diaphragm with turret
New 19: adds high flow port?? to answer @rhwestfall 's concern about longer flow path. Dunno. I wouldn't automatically discount the potential decrement in performance compared with a direct high-flow port, especially at high air densities, or two stressed divers in an OOA scenario at depth.
Haven't seen the new 19 schematics. You have a diagram, @axxel57 ?
I checked again my data, and it seems I looked wrong. Sorry!
There was a difference in dynamic IP at 10 SCFM Flow for both 1sts..
MK17: 143psi IP at 600psi tank pressure, 137psi IP at 10 SCFM Flow
MK19: 145psi IP at 600psi tank pressure, 132psi IP at 10SCFM Flow
So that's a significant difference in performance, probably not for the diver if he dives a balanced 2nd (+0,1 inch/h2O), but with an unbalanced 2nd that would translate in 0,1 to 0,3 inch/h2O more Cracking Effort in comparison to the diver with a balanced 2nd.
Still I don't believe that a longer (within a 1st) or bended air path has any practical influence (or loss) on the performance of that 1st.
The venturi of the high flow ports, yes, but how could a very little longer or bended LP air path effect the performance, and which performance?
Similar threads
