• Welcome to ScubaBoard


  1. 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. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Servicing costs for old 1st/2nd stages

Discussion in 'Basic Scuba' started by JarrodS, Jul 18, 2015.

  1. oly5050user

    oly5050user Dive Travel Professional

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: Westchester NY
    4,134
    893
    We do.. It's about liability.we can prove we used correct parts by our invoices from purchasing kits from manufacturer..can you see this in court if there is an accident, " no, we use generic o rings and parts to service gear, not what the manufacturer or their engineers recommend".. Right there it leaves an opening to a fault. Even if the diver died because he got hit by a boat. In a law suit EVERY THING is examined to find fault anywhere they can. All about CYA.
     
    kevindsingleton likes this.
  2. redacted

    redacted Guest


    How does your receipt for purchasing a kit prove that the failed 2nd stage o-ring that was found to have contributed to a diver drowning came from one of that kit?

    But I do believe you use kits when you can simply pass 200% of the kit cost off to the customer. Why would you use a $.05 o-ring and charge $.10 when you can use a $2 o-ring and charge $4? Only the most unscrupulous shop would use the $.05 o-ring and charge $4.
     
  3. GrandpaScuba

    GrandpaScuba Instructor, Scuba

    # of Dives:
    Location: Seattle, Puget Sound
    831
    54
    First, it is fair to compare service suppliers on price. But, you have to make sure your comparisons are valid.

    I can see lots of reasons for the pricing difference in your example:
    - Older US Divers regulators were good workhorse designs very basic, very stable. Whereas Oceanic has always been known for being innovative. Some regulator designs are more complicated than others.
    - More complicated designed regulators take longer to service. Their parts kits contain more parts and are more expensive. More complicated regulators tend to have tighter tolerances and require all the replacable parts to be replaced at the same time.
    - Simpler designs are more tolerant of mix-and-match parts replacement. Allowing you to avoid replacing parts that seem to still be serviceable. (Personally, I would prefer complete replacement. If I'm paying for an overhaul, I'd like the result to be as close to brand-new as possible.) Of course, simpler designs are easier to disassemble/reassemble.
     
    oly5050user likes this.
  4. oldschoolto

    oldschoolto Regular of the Pub

    # of Dives: I'm a Fish!
    Location: maine
    2,493
    1,805
    I dive a conshelf XIV with o-rings from 1978 in it... I just want to see how far it'll go...

    Jim...
     
  5. oly5050user

    oly5050user Dive Travel Professional

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: Westchester NY
    4,134
    893
    If something fails I would rather share the liability with the manufacture by following their standards and procedures than have to explain why we went cheap and did not follow manufacturers recommendations.
    More times than not here the part kits are free to the customer so why not do what is correct.?
     

Share This Page