Mares Abyss + MR22/MR52 regset.

[Magnus Lundstedt]

I plan to buy my first set of regulators, i have decided to go Mares Abyss 2nd and either MR22 or MR52 1st stage.

My plan is to buy two 1st/2nd combos, and complete it with spg and short/longhose, I have the possibility to use it with both single tank and doubles. And when i use it in travel/single tank i have an extra 1st as spare.

The thing i still have not decided is what 1st stage to get.

they both have 4 lp-ports, difference is that MR22 have 1 port with DFC and 1/2" and 3 ordinary 3/8" ports. The MR52 have 2 ports with DFC and all the LP ports have the 3/8" fitting,

My question is if it is worth the extra € to buy MR52 where all ports are the same 3/8" fitting, when moving things around, so i don't need to buy hoses for different fittings.

I also question if the DFC is any real advantage or if it is just a marketing gimmick.

The difference in price is not that big, i buy Abyss/MR22 for ~250€ and Abyss/MR52 for ~330€. But i going to buy two of them so ~500€ vs ~660€ for the sets, also, if i buy the MR22 the price of extra hoses going to be little higher.

FYI 100€ ~106$ today

 

[Diver0001]

Just looking at the pictures of them, I think you'll find the MR52 probably has better configuration of the LP ports for hose routing using dual 1st stages.

The MR22 appears to be engineered for use on a single tank. Furthermore the 1/2 inch port is, in my opinion, a reason NOT to want it. I suppose it's done like this because IIRC the abyss has an unbalanced 2nd stage and the assumption is probably that higher air flow will lower the work of breathing.

I'm not sure that you'll notice any difference in practice, however. I don't use Mares regulators so you'll have to get an answer about the reasons for the 1/2 inch port from someone who knows more about them.

R..

 

[Magnus Lundstedt]

The 1/2 port is to tell it apart as the DFC port, so you don't put the 2'nd stage in the wrong port, but with the newer designs Mares went away from that approach and use 3/8" on all ports.

The DFC is some kind of servo, so that you get full intermediate pressure also when the port is flowing.

The second stage is balanced.

 

[Diver0001]

The 1/2 port is to tell it apart as the DFC port, so you don't put the 2'nd stage in the wrong port, but with the newer designs Mares went away from that approach and use 3/8" on all ports.

The DFC is some kind of servo, so that you get full intermediate pressure also when the port is flowing.

The second stage is balanced.

Oh, well if the 2nd stage is balanced then I think it's very unlikely that you'll notice the effect of the DFC or the larger bore size unless you're diving very VERY deep AND working hard.

I looked up that DFC and it appears to use an internal venturi effect in the 1st stage to stop the IP drop from being pronounced. It's not a "servo" in the sense of it being a mechanism. It's just a passive air channel inside the 1st stage that helps pull harder on the diaphragm.

On the video I saw the IP drop on the 1st stage looked impressively low but think about it. If the reg is still giving you 7 (or 8) bar of IP when it's wide open then how deep do you think you'll need to be before it shows up on the WOB while using a balanced 2nd stage?

That's not to criticize the design, just to put it in perspective. The abyss has a very good reputation and Mares makes some very good regulators. Marketing, however, is something else and these "features" often come across to me as more marketing oriented then function oriented.

R..

 

[Magnus Lundstedt]

Thats my opinion to, that the DFC is mostly marketing.


The question thats left is if it is worth the extra € to buy the 52 to get rid of the 1/2" port.

 

[axxel57]

Mares and a balanced 2nd?
No way.......

The 1/2' port is doing the same as the DFC for the primary 2nd, it's reducing the dynamic IP drop, and since all Mares 2nds I know are unbalanced, this feature makes sense.

I don't like the 1/2' hose not much, but to pay that significand amount more to avoid it, doesn't make sense for me.

Important is that both 1st have the orifice as hard seat and the hp seat as soft seat and not vise versa as in some recent Mares models........

 

[Diver0001]

Thats my opinion to, that the DFC is mostly marketing.


The question thats left is if it is worth the extra € to buy the 52 to get rid of the 1/2" port.

Probably not for that. Personally Iike all standard size ports so I can use standard long hoses. ymmv.

The one thing to consider is the hose routing if you intend to use 2 of them for dual first stages. All of the hoses will need to point downward when the regs are on the tanks. You'll need 2 lp and one hp port on one side of the reg all pointing in roughly the same direction. The offset HP port on the MR22 makes me think that your hose routing will look gibbled. The MR52 looks more suitable for this application to me.

Once again, i'll mention the caveat that I don't use these regs so get advice from people using them as well.

R..

 

[Ontwreckdiver]

I actually own a Mares MR22 Abyss reg set. I have owned this set for about 15 years and it hasn't given me a second of trouble. Save your money. The 1/2" vs 3/8" hose is a non issue if you use Mares hoses. IF it ever dies, I will buy another MR22.

 

[Magnus Lundstedt]

I actually own a Mares MR22 Abyss reg set. I have owned this set for about 15 years and it hasn't given me a second of trouble. Save your money. The 1/2" vs 3/8" hose is a non issue if you use Mares hoses. IF it ever dies, I will buy another MR22.

The only thing is that i have to buy more hoses if i sometimes will use them as singles and sometimes as doubles.
And that 1/2" fitted hoses are more expensive than 3/8" ones.

 

[Ontwreckdiver]

I think I have only had to replace one hose in 15 years. You can buy a lot of hoses for the $170 price difference.
You will happy with either reg set though.