Dive Right In Scuba
ScubaBoard Business Sponsor
ScubaBoard Business Sponsor
Scuba Instructor
Divemaster
FS - Old Manifolds - Just Found
- Thread starter Dive Right In Scuba
- 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
Now, those have some decent value, especially the USD manifold look clean. Definitely put them on eBait. Value, between 25 and 100 dollars my guess, each.
N
N
OP
Dive Right In Scuba
ScubaBoard Business Sponsor
ScubaBoard Business Sponsor
Scuba Instructor
Divemaster
OP
Dive Right In Scuba
ScubaBoard Business Sponsor
ScubaBoard Business Sponsor
Scuba Instructor
Divemaster
1- US Divers J-valve sold..... ..other 3 still available
OP
Dive Right In Scuba
ScubaBoard Business Sponsor
ScubaBoard Business Sponsor
Scuba Instructor
Divemaster
vshearer
Contributor
Yea!! Now I just need a pair of 72's.
halocline
Contributor
Someone really ought to make tanks those size again. If you could get the service pressure up to 2400 +10% I think they would hold 77cf, just like an AL80, but more compact, lighter, and and neutral empty.
I guess LP 85s are an "improvement" in that they hold significantly more gas and are only 1" taller and a tad wider.
I guess LP 85s are an "improvement" in that they hold significantly more gas and are only 1" taller and a tad wider.
vshearer
Contributor
The LP77 is 7.25" in diameter, only 23" tall and weighs 32.5 lbs - and they are cold galvanized.
In comparison, the generic steel 72 is about 25.5" tall and 6.9" in diameter and on average weighs about 27-28 lbs.
The LP85 is probably closer at 25" tall, 7.25" in diameter, but it is a lot heavier at 34 lbs.
Faber used to make a 75.8 that was 7.0" in diamter and 26" tall that was very close to being a 2400 psi steel 72.
The Faber 80 was also close at 7.25" in dia, 24" tall and 30 lbs with a 2400 psi service pressure and 78 cu ft at 2640 psi.
All are nice, but a new steel 72 with a 2400 psi service pressure would be great. When you consider that the AL 80 pretty muhc killed off the popularity of the steel 72, that aluminum tanks are now in decline compared to steel, and that the supply of realy good used steel 72's is drying up, there is probably enough demand to warrant production of a 2400 psi version of the old steel 72.
Better still, if the weight penalty could be held to 3-4 pounds (31-32 pounds total) a special permit tank with a 3442 psi servcie pressure and external dimensions similar to a steel 72 would hold about 96-98 cu ft and that would be a sweet tank.
In comparison, the generic steel 72 is about 25.5" tall and 6.9" in diameter and on average weighs about 27-28 lbs.
The LP85 is probably closer at 25" tall, 7.25" in diameter, but it is a lot heavier at 34 lbs.
Faber used to make a 75.8 that was 7.0" in diamter and 26" tall that was very close to being a 2400 psi steel 72.
The Faber 80 was also close at 7.25" in dia, 24" tall and 30 lbs with a 2400 psi service pressure and 78 cu ft at 2640 psi.
All are nice, but a new steel 72 with a 2400 psi service pressure would be great. When you consider that the AL 80 pretty muhc killed off the popularity of the steel 72, that aluminum tanks are now in decline compared to steel, and that the supply of realy good used steel 72's is drying up, there is probably enough demand to warrant production of a 2400 psi version of the old steel 72.
Better still, if the weight penalty could be held to 3-4 pounds (31-32 pounds total) a special permit tank with a 3442 psi servcie pressure and external dimensions similar to a steel 72 would hold about 96-98 cu ft and that would be a sweet tank.
halocline
Contributor
I thought that LP85s are 7.0" in diameter? I have a chart from TDL that lists a Faber and OMS LP85 31 lbs, 7.0", 26" tall w/out valve, 0 buoyancy empty. I was kind of interested in that tank before I went on the LP72 search.
What I wonder is what goes into giving a specific service pressure to a given tank design. I have a feeling that the 3AA 72 is capable of handling as much pressure as the current 3AA LP steel tanks with the 2400 service, maybe more because it's a smaller tank and I would guess that all other things equal, a smaller tank could handle higher pressure. There is the anecdotal evidence of all those cave fills significantly higher than 3000PSI.
I'd be curious to see detailed hydro results from a variety of steel tank designs. IOW, lets say you could hydrotest a 72 at 4000 PSI rather than 3750, and if it passed, is that evidence that the tank could appropriately be given a 2400 service pressure. Of course it doesn't matter for existing tanks, but in terms of manufacturing a new tank it might.
What I wonder is what goes into giving a specific service pressure to a given tank design. I have a feeling that the 3AA 72 is capable of handling as much pressure as the current 3AA LP steel tanks with the 2400 service, maybe more because it's a smaller tank and I would guess that all other things equal, a smaller tank could handle higher pressure. There is the anecdotal evidence of all those cave fills significantly higher than 3000PSI.
I'd be curious to see detailed hydro results from a variety of steel tank designs. IOW, lets say you could hydrotest a 72 at 4000 PSI rather than 3750, and if it passed, is that evidence that the tank could appropriately be given a 2400 service pressure. Of course it doesn't matter for existing tanks, but in terms of manufacturing a new tank it might.
Similar threads
