MacLeod
Guest
I have talked to and read many people's preference for the E8-130 (LP104). Most have said that this stems from its greater empty negativite buoyancy.
Question: Comparing the E7-120 and E8-130...acknowledging the 10 cuft greater gas difference in favor of the 130 and 2.46 inches shorter...
If the E8-130: Empty Buoyancy of -4.8# and Empty weight of 42.2#
and the E7-120 has a Empty Buoyancy of -1.3# and Empty weight of 36.6#...
Wouldn't a 5lb cylinder weight (V-weight) bridge the 130's advantage (again acknowledging 10cuft. less gas).
E7-120: -1.3# + -5#= -6.3# Empty Buoyancy
36.6# + 5#= 41.6# Empty weight
Both the empty buoyancy and empty weight seem preferable to those of the E8-130...ie both slightly lighter on land and more importantly -1.5# more neg. buoyant.
Now that all have same service pressure...why are the 130's dimensions preferred by so many? Is there some inherent benefit to a slightly wider and slightly shorter cylinder?
Thank you.
Question: Comparing the E7-120 and E8-130...acknowledging the 10 cuft greater gas difference in favor of the 130 and 2.46 inches shorter...
If the E8-130: Empty Buoyancy of -4.8# and Empty weight of 42.2#
and the E7-120 has a Empty Buoyancy of -1.3# and Empty weight of 36.6#...
Wouldn't a 5lb cylinder weight (V-weight) bridge the 130's advantage (again acknowledging 10cuft. less gas).
E7-120: -1.3# + -5#= -6.3# Empty Buoyancy
36.6# + 5#= 41.6# Empty weight
Both the empty buoyancy and empty weight seem preferable to those of the E8-130...ie both slightly lighter on land and more importantly -1.5# more neg. buoyant.
Now that all have same service pressure...why are the 130's dimensions preferred by so many? Is there some inherent benefit to a slightly wider and slightly shorter cylinder?
Thank you.