New Kirby Morgan reg?

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

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

The only real interest I had in the new KM reg was the extra wide rubber exhaust tee's that might result in less bubbles around the face/ ears?
As long as they don't flap in a current and make you look like an angry bull elephant!
 
... The conshelf 12s & 14s are also Kirby Morgan designs that US Divers just stuck their labels on after they bought Kirby Morgan....

I'm far from privy to everything that went on but that seems inconsistent with the little bits of the puzzle I was exposed to. US Divers started selling the Conshelf 6 (never a fan of roman numerals) regulator in 1965 and the gear licensed from Kirby Morgan first appeared in the 1970 catalog. The Conshef 6 switched to the same Chrome cover sold today the same year. USD was selling the Conshelf 14 by 1980 (maybe before?) when they and Bev were not on the best of terms.

A little background for others: History | Kirby Morgan

The US Divers (now Aqualung) version of the Band Mask was the KMB 8½ (scroll down the list a ways).

I first met Bev Morgan in 1969 and visited the shop near the Santa Barbara Airport. It was my graduation day from high school, which I skipped to see the factory. Bev was a legend well before then, even though he is one of the more gracious and modest men in the industry.

As best as I recall, they were buying parts from US Divers and modifying them for the KMB-8 Band Mask. The arrangement was a little uneasy but KMC was too small to tool up to make all the regulator parts. Late that year or early the next Bev entered a licensing deal with US Divers, basically getting out of the business. I understand Bob Kirby had already largely left to work on aircraft development.

The US Navy and the commercial diving industry were, shall we say, dissatisfied with US Divers customer service and R&D so Bev started Diving Systems International somewhere in the 1975-76 timeframe to stop the incessant pleading. US Divers effectively abandoned commercial diving gear market in 1988. US Divers legally controlled (owned?) the Kirby Morgan name, thus Diving Systems International. I'm not sure what had to be done to get the Kirby Morgan name back, but it didn't happen for decades.

With all that said, there is a great deal I don't know about all this and am always interested in learning more about how products evolved.

... Every piece of commercial diving equipment US Divers tried to make after Bob Kirby & Bev Morgan left was a total failure...

For sure, it was like General Motors trying to make the handmade Morgan sports car (no relationship). A totally different business and model, though not many people appreciated it at the time. Lots of guys in the Navy were happy about it because purchasing from really small companies was a bureaucratic nightmare in those day... worse than today.
 
The conshelf 12s & 14s are also Kirby Morgan designs that US Divers just stuck their labels on after they bought Kirby Morgan.

I have to agree with Akimbo. That statement contradicts all the published information that I have seen.

Don't get me wrong, US divers made some equipment in the 70's that was not what I consider... lets say prize winning material (I am being kind).
Some examples: The Deepstar II (I heard people lost their jobs for letting that regulator go to market), the Rocket fins, the UDS-1, the wetsuit heater (I got one recently, you add fuel, light it up and it goes inside your wet suit :shocked2:), etc. That is just a few of the items that I remember.

But, all the publish information that I have seen puts the basic Conshelf design before their affiliation to KBC. The Conshelf was originally advertised as using many of the same components as the venerable Royal Aqua Master (that was around 1965 or 1966).

Added: I also don't have any inside information to the history of either company, but I think I know at least one person that may know more about it. I will try to ask him.
 
Last edited:
I only use all-metal regs myself. The conshelf 12s & 14s are also Kirby Morgan designs that US Divers just stuck their labels on after they bought Kirby Morgan. Every piece of commercial diving equipment US Divers tried to make after Bob Kirby & Bev Morgan left was a total failure. I never bought another piece of US Divers equipment once I found out how they treated them.

Not picking on you and I am not completely sure the level of cross pollination but the Conshelf I am pretty dang sure predates the current KM designs which are for practical purposes hot rod versions of the Conshelf with an adjustment feature etc., not the other way around.

N
 
The conshelf name precedes US Divers purchase of Kirby Morgan but the design of the reg was changed starting with the 12s to incorporate the improvements US got from KM. Just take apart a KMB-8 and a conshelf 12 and you will see they are exactly the same, the parts are interchangeable. What I heard about US and KM came from Bev Morgan when he visited my commercial diving class in 1979.

PS: Just to be clear he was talking about the relationship between US and KM not the design of the 12.
 
Last edited:
I still have and use early Conshelf regs and I also have a brand new one and a couple of inbetweeners. The mechanical bits are essentially unchanged. The exterior design evolved but the basic design of the mechanisms remains unchanged. Now are parts interchangeable all the way back, no, well, kinda, no, maybe, yes, sorta. Now, the design, as I mentioned of the housings changed, exhaust valves got larger, the slip on tee replaced the one with two screws, the metal plenum came along at the same time. The first stage innards did not change particularly in design but the housing evolved to accommodate a screw on yoke, multiple LP and HP ports etc and the strength of the housing/yoke was bulked up to handle the 3,000 psi standard.

We can argue as to what came first and who said what and did what. I have no doubt that USD incorporated design changes and KM engineering into their products including the Conshelf after purchasing the company or whatever that particular arrangement was. But fact is, I have a 1966 Royal Aqua Master that uses the same parts in the first stage as my newest and last Conshelf and fact is the second stage demand lever, downstream seat and basic layout of the Conshelf was cemented before the KM venture and actually goes back to the early 60s Calypso. Does all this matter, not really, just something to talk about.

I interchange levers, seats, diaphragms and first stage components, pretty sure, to keep the older ones going. I like the older versions because they have a lower profile and this is useful for a secondary/pony/octopus regulator.

The newest KM might breath like a jet engine, but the rubber cover is a long term concern, I would prefer the traditional all metal KMs.

Recently a certain publication challenged my company with a design claim that were not the originator and that we bought another company to obtain the design. True, we bought that other company, in the late 50s, because they had engineered some improvements and patents being long expired the only way we could stop them was to buy them and in fact we needed their engineering team. Well, a simplification. However, the publication insisted, at which point, the vault of secrets was accessed and the napkin (yes) with the basic design that was patented with pencil drawn mechanical layout of the components and dated and signed 1927, was laid before the doubters. I am not sure if the big boss asked if they wanted carbon dating! At which point, they tucked tail and ran.

Companies buy other companies or merge etc. all the time, to eliminate competition, or to obtain market share, or to obtain engineering or proprietary data or improvements or new designs or just because they complement one another and are a good fit to share resources in a competitive marketplace.

N
 
Maybe one of you guys know, was there any difference besides labels on any of the US Divers second stages by the time the Conshelf 6 came out in 1965? As far as that goes, why was the first one called #6?

They look identical in the catalog to my bifocal'd geezer eyes.

For younger divers, Conshelf was named after Cousteau's Continental Shelf Station Two experiments in Saturation Diving popularized in his full-length feature film, World Without Sun.
 
I have a question. It has an incredible pedigree, but at depths less than 250 (my deepest dive) would the performance of this regulator exceed the servo assisted designs of Hollis, Oceanic Omega or Poseidon? Would it have any other advantages?
 
I have a question. It has an incredible pedigree, but at depths less than 250 (my deepest dive) would the performance of this regulator exceed the servo assisted designs of Hollis, Oceanic Omega or Poseidon? Would it have any other advantages?

According to the latest ScubaLab report in Scuba Diving Magazine, several regulators slightly exceed the servos in a few categories. Their "scale" is more of a summary than a true test report from the breathing machine. Can a mere mortal perceive the difference... highly unlikely.
 
I have a question. It has an incredible pedigree, but at depths less than 250 (my deepest dive) would the performance of this regulator exceed the servo assisted designs of Hollis, Oceanic Omega or Poseidon? Would it have any other advantages?

Having owned several Omegas and still have several Tekna T2100s, the answer is that while the Tekna and Omegas were good breathing regs the Hollis and new Omega III, alleged to be a reworked Omega II, are unknown and I doubt seriously they exceed the WOB of a top line SP or the AL Legend or for that matter the AL Titan LX. WOB is not just inhalation, but it includes exhalation, the total breathing cycle.

Besides, I will toss it out there, especially the opinion of my wife, the Omega II is a wet, okay, dare I say, very wet breathing regulator. She much prefers her AL Legend. I concur.

Without having access to reports, I have used KM regs, the answer is no, they are a commercial grade, rugged brute with excellent WOB on par with the best from the usual suspects but not really any better. If anybody can show different with actual test reports, please feel free to provide the data.

N
 

Back
Top Bottom