Ramblings on Modifications

Dave1w · June 7th, 2012, 03:02 AM

I know there was a thread on the other place about what a Classic Kiss MK2 or whatever would be like, but I wanted a bit of a discussion here.

Having done the following, add a Golem Shrimp, move the unit closer to my back with a flexy backplate, and change to drom lite bags, do you reckon there is anything else to be done to improve WOB on the classic? Are cooper hoses a noticeable improvement?

I don't think it breathes too bad, but then again, I have only tried one supposedly fantastic WOB breather, and then I didn't really think about it too much. Do peeps think there is some scope for the factory re designing the head maybe, smoothing things out?

Dave

Packhorse · June 7th, 2012, 06:57 AM

I know it goes against the whole KISS thing but how about adding a solenoid.
I love my mCCR ( rEvo) but I really love the fact I can go hCCR or eCCR without changing the whole unit.

While we are at it, how about a dual scrubber set up with the option to use a single full size scrubber. I dont imagine it would be that hard to do, even in a MK1 Classic.

But then I guess you may as well just get a rEvo

I was actually thinking of this earlier today. What is the next step for KISS?
I think we can all agree that the sport is an out dated model and my guess is it doesnt sell much if at all.
Im not sure how many Classics/Explorers are sold these days. But I very much doubt its increasing.

Is the GEM SCR and GEM bailout the future for KISS?

depth · June 7th, 2012, 08:04 AM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w)

I don't think it breathes too bad, but then again, I have only tried one supposedly fantastic WOB breather, and then I didn't really think about it too much. Do peeps think there is some scope for the factory re designing the head maybe, smoothing things out?

Dave

The main reason I sold my Classic KISS was that WOB was unacceptable high in some diving positions. I did some mods to solve this, including building a new lung-casing/travel-frame, added a Shrimp BOV and coppers but WOB was still unacceptable IMHO.

My main concern was that in the event of an emergency where I help my unconscious dive-buddy to the surface or similar, my trim would be off thus increasing WOB considerably. I did a few test ascending from 70 to 40m in a more vertical position and concluded that with a SAC-rate of about 25l/min. I would be in big trouble.

Jetsam needs to gather all they have learned from the two KISS and the GEM and then start from scratch and build a new CCR that reflects what the marked wants. What I want:

A safe, reliable and simple unit
Low WOB
Very easy setup/tearing down
HUD and OLED PPO2 display with deco calc.
Slim profile
BMCL
Reasonable price

Also, Jetsam needs to consider optimizing their service. To order two stainless steel screws for my unit and as a certified KISS diver, they wanted me to fill out, sign and fax-return 5-6 pages before selling. That is just mad IMHO, we are talking about 2 stainless 3/8 screws for g%@ sake.
When I order parts from the rEvo factory, O2 cells and other spares, I send an email, paypal money and wait at my mailbox.

I dive a rEvo IIIh mini right now, I can't see any unit on the marked I would replace it with at the moment for my diving.

/Christian

Dave1w · June 7th, 2012, 08:18 AM

I don't know....

Maybe someone could look at a replacement head, designed with CFD or whatever that accepts the Kiss scrubber and bolts to the the Kiss case. So wider bores, better formed inside the head.

Dave

lizardland · June 7th, 2012, 10:25 AM

I never noticed the WOB until I swapped to another rebreather and must admit, I never really found it a problem. I always wondered if changing the aspect ratio of the scrubber would improve the WOB enough to justify doing it: wider and shorter rather than long and narrow.

Things that would be on my Mk2 KISS:

- a decent BOV
- revert to the stainless MAV
- suicide valve on the MAV as standard
- revert to stainless hoses for O2
- fit helicoils wherever metal screws into plastic
- incorporate the harness into the case so no backplate
- a manual add for diluent
- new handsets. Same simple principle just make them so they don't flood or strip the threads on the calibration port.
- shorter loop hoses as standard
- make the scrubber more resilient
- lengthen the case (backache was one of the reasons I stopped using mine)

The biggie though that I doubt Jetsam would even bother reading, make the price of the unit reflect what it is. Great as a used unit but as a new buy it has to be the worst value unit on the market. I loved my KISS but there is no way on the planet I'd pay what Jetsam are now asking for one. 6 grand? Are they taking the piss?

Philippe GERIN · June 7th, 2012, 10:35 AM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w)

I know there wasa threat on the other place about what a Classic Kiss MK2 or whatever woudl be like, but I wanted a bit of a discussion here.

Could you point me to it. PM if you prefer.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w)

Having done the following, add a Golem Shrimp, move the unit closer to my back with a flexy backplate, and change to drom lite bags, do you reckon there is anything else to be done to improve WOB on the classic? Are cooper hoses a noticeable improvement?

Everything you've done is not enough for an individual to feel the difference. It may be quantified on an ANTSI rig though.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w)

I don't think it breathes too bad

Me neither and my other rig is a Meg.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w)

Do peeps think there is some scope for the factory re designing the head maybe, smoothing things out?

Of course, there is but I think they do not need to redesign the whole thing.
As a start I would use the exact same design but increase the dimensions of the gas path and add a radial scrubber. IMO it will suffice to greatly improve the WOB.
I wouldn't mind if my CK head and canister were 1/3 larger. That would give room to increase the inside cavities hence the gas flow. Well, I'm guessing here. I'm not a CCR guru designer.
Best
Philippe

Philippe GERIN · June 7th, 2012, 10:58 AM

Quote:

I know it goes against the whole KISS thing but how about adding a solenoid.

Check! HH that was. The Classic Kiss head is not a good candidate for that. ADV blows on the cells. Say you're hi PO2, dump your right shoulder and ADV kicks in: blows low PO2 dil on the cells. Leccies read PO2 drops and solenoid adds more O2. A bad thing.
The only way in this case is to add dil via the BOV (inhale OC, exhale CC in the loop).
Main reason why I quickly dump the HH electronics on the CK. The other being that I just prefer to have control over my rig.

Quote:

While we are at it, how about a dual scrubber set up with the option to use a single full size scrubber. I dont imagine it would be that hard to do, even in a MK1 Classic.

Check! The "full size" (original) scrubber is long and narrow.
[Pack it too tight and the WOB is affected. By the way, I'd say this is the main reason why people say the CK WOB is bad.]
Anyway, the only way to make , say, a half fill of lime is to reduce the length of the bed. Now, the dwell time is dangerously short and you're a candidate for a CO2 hit.

Philippe GERIN · June 7th, 2012, 11:07 AM

Quote:

I never noticed the WOB until I swapped to another rebreather and must admit, I never really found it a problem. I always wondered if changing the aspect ratio of the scrubber would improve the WOB enough to justify doing it: wider and shorter rather than long and narrow.

I'm with you on the WOB. an in->out radial would be nice.

Things that would be on my Mk2 KISS:
.../...
- suicide valve on the MAV as standard
Please explain "suicide valve".

- incorporate the harness into the case so no backplate
Check! CK Explorer

- a manual add for diluent
Check! CK Explorer

.../...
- make the scrubber more resilient
Please explain further.

Best
Philippe

Packhorse · June 7th, 2012, 11:34 AM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Philippe GERIN)

Check!

Yeah but if it was a MK2 it would be a new design not just throw in a solenoid and machine 2 half scrubbers.

If you are talking about pimping the classic then that has already been done with the explorer hasn't it?

silentbob · June 7th, 2012, 12:18 PM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Philippe GERIN)

[Pack it too tight and the WOB is affected. By the way, I'd say this is the main reason why people say the CK WOB is bad.]

Yes this is my experience.

It actually has very good WOB (whatever value my subjective opinion may hold).

June 7th, 2012, 03:02 AM	#1 (permalink)
Dave1w Site Sponsor Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Jakarta Posts: 132 Thanks: 1 Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts	Ramblings on Modifications I know there was a thread on the other place about what a Classic Kiss MK2 or whatever would be like, but I wanted a bit of a discussion here. Having done the following, add a Golem Shrimp, move the unit closer to my back with a flexy backplate, and change to drom lite bags, do you reckon there is anything else to be done to improve WOB on the classic? Are cooper hoses a noticeable improvement? I don't think it breathes too bad, but then again, I have only tried one supposedly fantastic WOB breather, and then I didn't really think about it too much. Do peeps think there is some scope for the factory re designing the head maybe, smoothing things out? Dave Last edited by Dave1w; June 7th, 2012 at 11:05 AM. Reason: fixed spelling
(Offline)

June 7th, 2012, 06:57 AM	#2 (permalink)
Packhorse New Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Auckland NZ Posts: 165 Thanks: 4 Thanked 14 Times in 10 Posts	I know it goes against the whole KISS thing but how about adding a solenoid. I love my mCCR ( rEvo) but I really love the fact I can go hCCR or eCCR without changing the whole unit. While we are at it, how about a dual scrubber set up with the option to use a single full size scrubber. I dont imagine it would be that hard to do, even in a MK1 Classic. But then I guess you may as well just get a rEvo I was actually thinking of this earlier today. What is the next step for KISS? I think we can all agree that the sport is an out dated model and my guess is it doesnt sell much if at all. Im not sure how many Classics/Explorers are sold these days. But I very much doubt its increasing. Is the GEM SCR and GEM bailout the future for KISS?
(Offline)

June 7th, 2012, 08:04 AM	#3 (permalink)
depth New Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Denmark Posts: 58 Thanks: 0 Thanked 11 Times in 8 Posts	Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w) I don't think it breathes too bad, but then again, I have only tried one supposedly fantastic WOB breather, and then I didn't really think about it too much. Do peeps think there is some scope for the factory re designing the head maybe, smoothing things out? Dave The main reason I sold my Classic KISS was that WOB was unacceptable high in some diving positions. I did some mods to solve this, including building a new lung-casing/travel-frame, added a Shrimp BOV and coppers but WOB was still unacceptable IMHO. My main concern was that in the event of an emergency where I help my unconscious dive-buddy to the surface or similar, my trim would be off thus increasing WOB considerably. I did a few test ascending from 70 to 40m in a more vertical position and concluded that with a SAC-rate of about 25l/min. I would be in big trouble. Jetsam needs to gather all they have learned from the two KISS and the GEM and then start from scratch and build a new CCR that reflects what the marked wants. What I want: A safe, reliable and simple unit Low WOB Very easy setup/tearing down HUD and OLED PPO2 display with deco calc. Slim profile BMCL Reasonable price Also, Jetsam needs to consider optimizing their service. To order two stainless steel screws for my unit and as a certified KISS diver, they wanted me to fill out, sign and fax-return 5-6 pages before selling. That is just mad IMHO, we are talking about 2 stainless 3/8 screws for g%@ sake. When I order parts from the rEvo factory, O2 cells and other spares, I send an email, paypal money and wait at my mailbox. I dive a rEvo IIIh mini right now, I can't see any unit on the marked I would replace it with at the moment for my diving. /Christian
(Online)

June 7th, 2012, 08:18 AM	#4 (permalink)
Dave1w Site Sponsor Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Jakarta Posts: 132 Thanks: 1 Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts	I don't know.... Maybe someone could look at a replacement head, designed with CFD or whatever that accepts the Kiss scrubber and bolts to the the Kiss case. So wider bores, better formed inside the head. Dave
(Offline)

June 7th, 2012, 10:25 AM	#5 (permalink)
lizardland New Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: North Posts: 273 Thanks: 81 Thanked 106 Times in 36 Posts	I never noticed the WOB until I swapped to another rebreather and must admit, I never really found it a problem. I always wondered if changing the aspect ratio of the scrubber would improve the WOB enough to justify doing it: wider and shorter rather than long and narrow. Things that would be on my Mk2 KISS: - a decent BOV - revert to the stainless MAV - suicide valve on the MAV as standard - revert to stainless hoses for O2 - fit helicoils wherever metal screws into plastic - incorporate the harness into the case so no backplate - a manual add for diluent - new handsets. Same simple principle just make them so they don't flood or strip the threads on the calibration port. - shorter loop hoses as standard - make the scrubber more resilient - lengthen the case (backache was one of the reasons I stopped using mine) The biggie though that I doubt Jetsam would even bother reading, make the price of the unit reflect what it is. Great as a used unit but as a new buy it has to be the worst value unit on the market. I loved my KISS but there is no way on the planet I'd pay what Jetsam are now asking for one. 6 grand? Are they taking the piss?
(Online)

June 7th, 2012, 10:35 AM	#6 (permalink)
Philippe GERIN New Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Orléans, France Posts: 115 Thanks: 17 Thanked 17 Times in 8 Posts	Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w) I know there wasa threat on the other place about what a Classic Kiss MK2 or whatever woudl be like, but I wanted a bit of a discussion here. Could you point me to it. PM if you prefer. Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w) Having done the following, add a Golem Shrimp, move the unit closer to my back with a flexy backplate, and change to drom lite bags, do you reckon there is anything else to be done to improve WOB on the classic? Are cooper hoses a noticeable improvement? Everything you've done is not enough for an individual to feel the difference. It may be quantified on an ANTSI rig though. Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w) I don't think it breathes too bad Me neither and my other rig is a Meg. Quote: (Originally Posted by Dave1w) Do peeps think there is some scope for the factory re designing the head maybe, smoothing things out? Of course, there is but I think they do not need to redesign the whole thing. As a start I would use the exact same design but increase the dimensions of the gas path and add a radial scrubber. IMO it will suffice to greatly improve the WOB. I wouldn't mind if my CK head and canister were 1/3 larger. That would give room to increase the inside cavities hence the gas flow. Well, I'm guessing here. I'm not a CCR guru designer. Best Philippe
(Offline)

June 7th, 2012, 10:58 AM	#7 (permalink)
Philippe GERIN New Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Orléans, France Posts: 115 Thanks: 17 Thanked 17 Times in 8 Posts	Quote: I know it goes against the whole KISS thing but how about adding a solenoid. Check! HH that was. The Classic Kiss head is not a good candidate for that. ADV blows on the cells. Say you're hi PO2, dump your right shoulder and ADV kicks in: blows low PO2 dil on the cells. Leccies read PO2 drops and solenoid adds more O2. A bad thing. The only way in this case is to add dil via the BOV (inhale OC, exhale CC in the loop). Main reason why I quickly dump the HH electronics on the CK. The other being that I just prefer to have control over my rig. Quote: While we are at it, how about a dual scrubber set up with the option to use a single full size scrubber. I dont imagine it would be that hard to do, even in a MK1 Classic. Check! The "full size" (original) scrubber is long and narrow. [Pack it too tight and the WOB is affected. By the way, I'd say this is the main reason why people say the CK WOB is bad.] Anyway, the only way to make , say, a half fill of lime is to reduce the length of the bed. Now, the dwell time is dangerously short and you're a candidate for a CO2 hit.
(Offline)

June 7th, 2012, 11:07 AM	#8 (permalink)
Philippe GERIN New Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Orléans, France Posts: 115 Thanks: 17 Thanked 17 Times in 8 Posts	Quote: I never noticed the WOB until I swapped to another rebreather and must admit, I never really found it a problem. I always wondered if changing the aspect ratio of the scrubber would improve the WOB enough to justify doing it: wider and shorter rather than long and narrow. I'm with you on the WOB. an in->out radial would be nice. Things that would be on my Mk2 KISS: .../... - suicide valve on the MAV as standard Please explain "suicide valve". - incorporate the harness into the case so no backplate Check! CK Explorer - a manual add for diluent Check! CK Explorer .../... - make the scrubber more resilient Please explain further. Best Philippe
(Offline)

June 7th, 2012, 11:34 AM	#9 (permalink)
Packhorse New Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Auckland NZ Posts: 165 Thanks: 4 Thanked 14 Times in 10 Posts	Quote: (Originally Posted by Philippe GERIN) Check! Yeah but if it was a MK2 it would be a new design not just throw in a solenoid and machine 2 half scrubbers. If you are talking about pimping the classic then that has already been done with the explorer hasn't it?
(Offline)

June 7th, 2012, 12:18 PM	#10 (permalink)
silentbob New Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: New Zealand Posts: 89 Thanks: 27 Thanked 14 Times in 3 Posts	Quote: (Originally Posted by Philippe GERIN) [Pack it too tight and the WOB is affected. By the way, I'd say this is the main reason why people say the CK WOB is bad.] Yes this is my experience. It actually has very good WOB (whatever value my subjective opinion may hold).
(Offline)