Weird Faber tanks

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!

Maybe early prototypes? Or Custom made when everyone was a little less sue happy?
 
FWIW - I doubt there are additional markings. Which is odd. I say that because the rest of the finish on the cylinders is just too smooth. If there were additional markings there would probably be deviations. That is my experience in inspecting cylinders especially with the old vinyl coated 72s.

@Bamared64 what did the shop say when you returned them?
 
This sounds a little nuts but if you look closely, the spacing and the alignment on the lettering is all over the place (not like the typically evenly spaced and clean stamping typical of Fabers). Also, every pic of a Faber tank I can find shows "FABER MADE IN ITALY"
Agreed. I've got two Fabers, and used to own two previously. They all stated "FABER MADE IN ITALY", and the letters were more evenly spaced, and a bit wider spaced, than the ones on these mystery tanks.

Rather than looking like this:
FABER ITALY

They look more like this:
F A B E R___M A D E___I N___I T A L Y

Note: _ added between words to maintain spacing. Forum compressed them.
If that was the case, I'd almost guarantee they would be stamped "not for use"...
I would definitely agree here. When dealing with government regulations and requirements, there needs to be clear indications of status. I would expect that they would only get the DOT markings after they've passed required tests. As the initial hydro would be required to fill, I could see a possibility that they may mark the hydro date separate from some of the others, but if it were intended as a demo, it would be labeled accordingly.

As an example. I work with facilities that produce screws and plates for orthopedic implants. I know the FDA is different from DOT, but there would be some similarities related to fines for not following appropriate control processes. These facilities do sometimes produce prototypes and samples that are not intended for use. These are always marked "Not For Human Use" or "NFHU" for the smaller ones. One such sample made me chuckle. It was a screw intended as a display. It was exaggerated in size. Probably 10X what the actual screw would be. It was at least a foot long and at least 1 inch in diameter. Despite clearly not being able to be implanted in a human, it was clearly marked "Not For Human Use."
 
What was the verdict on these tanks? I'm a little curious as I just read 5 pages worth of post's.
 
What was the verdict on these tanks? I'm a little curious as I just read 5 pages worth of post's.
Bottom line: No one knows where they came from. They cannot be commercially filled in US without a DOT certification stamp. They are worth several dollars for scrap or might make some nice bells.

Moral: It's worth learning how to read the stamps on scuba tanks before buying used.

 
Bottom line: No one knows where they came from. They cannot be commercially filled in US without a DOT certification stamp. They are worth several dollars for scrap or might make some nice bells.

Moral: It's worth learning how to read the stamps on scuba tanks before buying used.

That sucks from the pwrspective of wanting tanks, but finding out what thay are is a fascinating mystery!
 

Back
Top Bottom