Doubling Faber FX40s

[Deep South Divers]

Pffffttttt... You remembered!

Hahahahaaaa... Don't get me kicked outta here.

 

[divad]

You're the expert. I'm just hanging around to see what happens. I'd be FLABERGASTED if you were kicked out of here.

 

[Deep South Divers]

I was when I was. So were a lot of people.

...But hey, a different time, a different username.

I'd rather discuss FX40s.

---------- Post added December 2nd, 2015 at 11:27 PM ----------

Hey, just curious, agilis... What wing did you use for those 40's? Was the rig small enough to use with a singles wing? Was a doubles wing too wide?

 

[John Beach]

I Have a small set of Faber 45cf. I love them I'm short so the reason I went with the 45s instead of the 50s you can find them cheap. I believe their is a set in the classifieds already banded.

 

[Deep South Divers]

Got a link?

 

[John Beach]

These Don't Have Isolator valves but for the price not bad.
I just used a standard 185mm manifold for my set and bands form NESS
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/cl...nd-bands/518489-46-cf-tiny-doubles-400-a.html

 

[Deep South Divers]

Thanks!

 

[John Beach]

No problem let us know how it goes also the seller has a website which inspired me to build my set to bad he wasn't selling them then lol.
Tiny Doubles

Best of Luck
Also what South Carolina are you from?

 

[Rich Keller]

Anyone tried this yet?

My recent love-love relationship with my latest drysuit purchase (there's been many, but this one I'm marrying) has allowed me to exercise some weighting fine-tuning. I'm thrilled, as I always am, to further minimize gear size and weight.

Interestingly, Faber's FX80 turns out to have the exact buoyancy characteristics that I'd need to be able to drop that last bit of lead off my rig and overall end up having a rig nearly 10 pounds lighter - not to mention shorter - between the lighter tank and no more necessary lead.

...So despite the cost, I'm committed to making the switch. I'm aware of the fact that I will need to pay closer attention to the tank's coating than before due to the nature of steel vs. aluminum in salt water. Getting fills to 3500 psi is not a problem for me, as I own my own extensive fill station and compressors.

Faber recently introduced the FX40, though... 1 3/4" smaller diameter and even shorter than the FX80. To me, a short, lightweight tank works just fine - in fact, is preferable - as I don and doff overhead and never set my rig upright on a stand to don or doff. Yes, light is very good.

Doubling these mini tanks would impressively improve trim and clearance, saving some 4" overall to the "thickness" of a rig like this... Overweight me by about 2 lbs, which would be nice in case I wear a little thicker undergarment... Allow for a redundant first stage (not important in my job)... And still allow for 80 cuft of gas (I don't need - or want - more gas). Best of all, I'd have a LOT more clearance everywhere for getting up into nooks and crannies for doing my job. Doubled FX40's manifolded would be about 2 pounds heavier than a single FX80, but the advantages in streamlining, trim, buoyancy and size I feel would be worth that. It'd still be a rig weight savings of like 8 pounds over the single AL80's I'm using.

In short, it seems expensive to do compared, say, to keeping the load of AL80's I've got sitting around... But it seems like it'd dive positively badtothebone, and be the lightest, smallest, most compact 80 cuft of backgas I've ever had.

The closest comparison I can make is a pair of Faber LP50's, which have been praised many times as the nicest-diving tank setup bar none. The introduction of the FX40 would be a shorter, even lighter set... Same idea, just a new tank.

I bet an all-black "microdoubles" set would look awesome.

Has anyone done this yet? I'd be interested to know how the rig dove - and what bands and manifold you used and where you got them. I'd be interested in a manifold WITHOUT an isolator valve.

Also... What wing did you use with them? They may be small enough to dive with a singles' wing of the manifold and bands are small enough...

I have done this a couple of ways. First with a set of triple 30s that I used as a bailout for narrow pipe penetrations. I got rid of the original back pack setup and made a harness that I attached directly to the tanks bringing my clearance down to 4.87".



This was not a comfortable setup though so I only used it on the job and only when needed. Later is worked well for surface supply diving from a kayak as the curve of the tanks fit perfectly into the front of the kayak I was using. Years later I broke down that setup and used 2 of the tanks for a small set of doubles that were much more comfortable and well suited for shore diving and surf entry. Attached to a commercial diving harness the profile was still 4.87".

 

[Deep South Divers]

Wow! Now, isn't that a sweet little rig! No wing?

How was the head clearance with the bar? An improvement over an AL80 single?

I like that rig a lot! Where'd you get that cool valveless "L?"