|
|
Post by vance on Apr 5, 2017 16:03:44 GMT -8
Excellent! Thanks, JB!
|
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Apr 5, 2017 16:24:11 GMT -8
If I dismember correctly: it will fit on a 3"x5" index card. Make a dummy of it to make sure things fit before committing to metal. I used I think .025 stainless, but .015 brass will work too.
JB
|
|
|
|
Post by tomcatpc on Apr 18, 2017 17:42:04 GMT -8
 Here are two spare Healthways mouthpieces I have. The one of the right has a stiff clear plastic insert in the centre. My other two Healthways Mouthpieces do not have this. Not sure if my other two are missing this, or there were different versions? Just wanted to share this. Just saw this addressed on the first page of this topic...looks like two of mine have had the plate removed and one not? I'll actually use the mouthpiece without the plate. Mark Save |
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Apr 18, 2017 20:46:09 GMT -8
Mark,
The ones which had the baffle plate were originally made for the third generation Gold Label SCUBA. The second generation did not have it, nor did it need the baffle plate in the center of the mouthpiece. This baffle plate was engineered into the mouthpiece to keep Venturi air, which was piped into the mouthpiece by the Gold Label at high velocity, from bypassing the diver and going into the exhaust loop. You will know whether the specific mouthpiece was designed for having a baffle plate if there is a mold groove for it in the center of the mouthpiece.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by tomcatpc on Apr 19, 2017 9:27:30 GMT -8
Thanks for clearing that up. I was planning on using the mouthpiece without anyway, but hoping I find a Gold Label SCUBA in the future.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on May 11, 2017 16:02:06 GMT -8
I was looking at the HW catalog for 1960 and I saw something that was a bit high and outside:  I was thinking, "Huh, I've never seen one; I wonder if anyone has one..." Then it struck me: HW put stuff in their catalogs that were never produced, like...   and the infamous Scubamaster DH  so what they did offer was...   Which proves ya gotta pay attention! I love how funky and weird HW was, it's fun to play detective  JB |
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on May 13, 2017 8:22:04 GMT -8
I put this into a different thread, but thought it should also be here.
I feel now that these old Healthways hoses for their double hose regulators probably should not be relied upon in open water. This hose had good compliance, and still all on its own came completely apart. There are a lot of good new hoses out there now, which are longer and some are "super-flex" hoses too. It's a win-win to replace these old hoses for active, open water diving.
John
John
|
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on May 13, 2017 8:39:25 GMT -8
John, thanks for adding this: I think now that people are looking at things differently, and willing to explore; a few people can make a huge difference in making things safe for people who want to use something uncommon!
JB
|
|
|
|
Post by vance on May 30, 2017 9:34:45 GMT -8
As per JB's request I'm going to list here the differences I have recently discovered in the Scuba regulators. Below is the link to another thread which has pictures illustrating some of them. vintagescuba.proboards.com/thread/4280/healthways-scuba-restore?page=7The Scuba came in two "models": the one designed for use with a K valve, and the one intended for use with a J valve. There is little apparent difference appearance-wise between any of the original Scubas, aside from the obvious change in clamp rings in the later serial # regs. The early version of clamp is stamped stainless sheet metal with a nut and screw retainer, and the later is a chromed brass ring with brazed on ends which use only a screw to retain it. The major operational difference is a restrictor "button" inside the HP valve. This is shown and discussed at length on page 5 of the above linked thread. One is a machined part with a small hole, the other is stamped sheet metal with a larger hole. Fred Roberts mentions the K and J types of restrictors in his discussion of the Scuba Deluxe; however, I could not find any reference to two in his discussion of the Scuba. I believe the stamped one is for use with a tank valve with a reserve lever (J) and the machined unit is for ones without (K). Perhaps John can confirm if I'm correct. The following is supposition. I have nothing but observational data from 7 regulators I have taken apart. This is further confused by the swapping of "K" and "J" restrictors by users due to their own requirements. The units with the machined restrictor have an HP valve body that is about 3mm longer than the other. It also has different threads, requiring a different yoke nut. Also, t he yoke is possibly machined slightly differently. The spacer is longer, and the valve plunger is different to make up the length internally. This leads me to suspect that the longer valve body is NOT required to accommodate the machined restrictor. If this is correct, and the restrictor plate is not the reason for the different valve bodies, the reason is a mystery to me. Another difference one will find is whether or not there's a third exhaust valve required due to drillings in the exhaust horn, and the external length of both horns. There are also more exhaust drillings in the earlier cans than the later ones. Be aware that while the HP valve can readily be switched around from one Scuba to another as a complete unit (including nut, spacer, and yoke), swapping parts and/or installing repair parts can require care in matching them exactly to the originals, or they will not work properly. |
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Jul 25, 2017 14:39:18 GMT -8
Phil and I have been doing some, as he calls it, "horse tradin'". I swapped him one of my snorkel-jets for one of his duck-bills for my original model Scuba. While playing with it, I noticed that the diaphragm was warped and know that this could be a potential cause for a leak, not so much anymore with the new duck-bill, but thought I'd take the warp out of it just because I can! I took some heavy duty cardboard matting material, the type used to frame a picture, and cut four pieces, two each side. The image will explain the rest:  I have the whole assembly on top of my stove where it will get very warm. Before I did any of this, I gooped it up with silicone grease so that it will be absorbed into the neoprene when it gets warm: it will also help to keep it from oxidizing when it does get hot while being flattened to original form. Jaybird |
|
|
|
Post by SeaRat on Jul 25, 2017 17:03:39 GMT -8
Jaybird,
This will help, but the duckbill won't do anything for the leaking problem. That is totally on the diaphragm, and its seal. Straightening this diaphragm will help seal the tube, but that too won't solve any leak problem into the ambient chamber of the regulator. What will help is having a good seal on the diaphragm against the metal flange.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by tomcatpc on Jul 25, 2017 19:42:47 GMT -8
I ended up putting two layers of rubber glove material on my SCUBA Ex. Dia. The last time I dove it, for an hour at that, I opened it up the next day and it was dry inside. I think I will quit whilst ahead at this point. I will still open it up after dives, but unless it starts to "totally flood" I will leave it alone. I can deal with a drip drip leak, nature of the beast until someone develops a good repro exhaust diaphragm.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by tomcatpc on Jul 25, 2017 19:44:24 GMT -8
My next potential material for a diaphragm will be a bike inner tube piece, if it comes down to that...so far so good!
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by nikeajax on Jul 26, 2017 9:12:55 GMT -8
Something struck me this morning:  If you look at the nomenclature on the label, this second generation had a "B" prefix, unlike the others though. This makes me think that they had A, B and C models, the very same way the Divair had them. I think to keep things clearer, I will refer to them as such hereafter  JB |
|
|
|
Post by vance on Jul 28, 2017 0:04:30 GMT -8
Phil and I have been doing some, as he calls it, "horse tradin'". I swapped him one of my snorkel-jets for one of his duck-bills for my original model Scuba. While playing with it, I noticed that the diaphragm was warped and know that this could be a potential cause for a leak, not so much anymore with the new duck-bill, but thought I'd take the warp out of it just because I can! I took some heavy duty cardboard matting material, the type used to frame a picture, and cut four pieces, two each side. (edit) I have the whole assembly on top of my stove where it will get very warm. Before I did any of this, I gooped it up with silicone grease so that it will be absorbed into the neoprene when it gets warm: it will also help to keep it from oxidizing when it does get hot while being flattened to original form. Jaybird I believe JB was concerned with leakage into the exhaust hose. The duckbill will stop this from being a problem, but the regulator might freeflow in certain positions if the diaphragm doesn't seal the end of the air horn. This is what John has said will happen due to the disparity of the exhaust diaphragm's position relative to the main diaphragm since it isn't centered in the can. Turn it upside down and the pressure relationship changes. John is correct about leakage into the can. I am fairly certain this is difficult to stop in the version "A" regs, as I have seen evidence of fairly significant levels of water having been allowed to sit in the reg after use even on ones with lots of glue around the exh diaphragm. The ones I've rebuilt using original diaphrams without glue have leaked into the can. Since, I have been diligent about gluing the original diaphragms in with rtv. My innertube diaphragms seem to seal pretty well w/o glue. Phil (at breakfast in Lisboa!) |
|
