Kru Sport Pro LJ - available with Hammar inflator ?

B

Boo2

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 Jan 2010
Messages
8,603
Visit site
Hi,

Question as title : can anyone tell me whether the Kru Sport Pro LJ is available with a Hammar type auto-inflator ? I have emailed them but thought I'd ask here in case there's an after-market part which fits...

Thanks,

Boo2
 
Boo2 said:
Hi,

Question as title : can anyone tell me whether the Kru Sport Pro LJ is available with a Hammar type auto-inflator ? I have emailed them but thought I'd ask here in case there's an after-market part which fits...

Thanks,

Boo2
Click to expand...

They are not available with Hammar hydrostatic activation, but more to the point why would you want this..?
 
I am considering the same.
Hammer is less likely to go off if it gets wet. Looking at replacing my lifejackets They are getting old, and one just went off after a wet dingy ride.
Do you have any negative comments about hammer (other than the slight extra cost)?
 
It is not possible to do any type of maintenance which involves the c02 bottle yourself, the offshore industry uses lots of these and they have a very high failure rate when returned for service- why would anyone want a 2" hole in the bladder of their life jacket?
It is very unusual for a well maintained jacket to go off purely because of spray, I would suggest your auto activation device was already severly degraded.
 
Xskipper said:
It is not possible to do any type of maintenance which involves the c02 bottle yourself, the offshore industry uses lots of these and they have a very high failure rate when returned for service- why would anyone want a 2" hole in the bladder of their life jacket?
It is very unusual for a well maintained jacket to go off purely because of spray, I would suggest your auto activation device was already severly degraded.
Click to expand...

It was more waves than spray (It was a very rough dingy ride).
Just to clarify you think the hammer mechanism has a higher failure rate than the pill type auto inflate and the Co2 bottle cannot be changed?
 
Correct- the co2 bottle is inside the bladder and the complete mechanism seals a 2" hole in the bladder with the hydrostatic activator on the outside. This obviously requires a service centre with specialist tools to ensure that the seal is sound, this cannot be attempted with 100% success by the average yachtsman.
Can't comment on the comparison of failure rates but there is certainly more to go wrong, as I said- who wants a 2" hole in their jacket...?
 
Xskipper said:
Can't comment on the comparison of failure rates but there is certainly more to go wrong, as I said- who wants a 2" hole in their jacket...?
Click to expand...

From what I've read most of the premature inflations people experience are from non-Hammar devices so it seems Hammar are much more reliable - if you've deflated the jacket after a premature inflation then reliability of the mechanism is subsequently irrelevant anyway.

And as for the 2" hole, I don't see why that is more of an issue than the seams in the bladder ?

Boo2
 
You are missing the point- why would anyone be concerned with instances of accidental inflation, it is failure rates of the unit when used in anger that is important. I would rather my jacket accidentally inflated 10 times and worked the 1 time I needed it than accidentally inflated 1 time and failed 10 times when I needed it. Exaggeration but hopefully you get the point, the reliability is important when the jacket is needed in anger not in avoiding premature activation which as stated previously will only happen in a poorly maintained jacket.
After accidental inflation of a standard auto mechanism most people can rearm the jacket cheaply, quickly and easily so I would argue that subsequently after accidental inflation the reliability of the mechanism is not irrelevant.
I would say that the 2" hole is more of an issue because it is just that- a hole whereas the seam is a welded join.
Properly serviced a hammar activated jacket should be a robust piece of kit.
But if you want to maintain your own jacket then that is not possible with 100% reliability in a hammar, you will be trusting that the hole in which the mechanism is housed is properly sealed by the service agent and stays that way for a year or a season (however long you choose between services).
 
Last edited:
Xskipper said:
But if you want to maintain your own jacket then that is not possible with 100% reliability in a hammar, you will be trusting that the hole in which the mechanism is housed is properly sealed by the service agent and stays that way for a year or a season (however long you choose between services).
Click to expand...

I understood that the Hammar re-arm kits come with the tool to open the device and remove it from the jacket, and then to replace it.

Pete
 
I have various lifejackets including Crewsaver with the Hammar unit and Kru Sport-Pro with a soluble pill. Having had to replace a pair of the Hammar units because one when off when giving it a rinse and the other was out of date I know now how much they cost and I would not buy again – Expensive to buy, expensive to replace and from has been said here they are not necessarily any more reliable than the soluble pill type.

For what it’s worth the Kru lifejacket is IMO the best and most comfortable LJ around at the moment.
 
prv said:
I understood that the Hammar re-arm kits come with the tool to open the device and remove it from the jacket, and then to replace it.

Pete
Click to expand...

Yes but- what would you feel more comfortable doing A) replace CO2 bottle and activation bobbin or B) replace CO2 bottle, hydrostatic activation device and be 100% sure that the seal in the bladder is sound?

Just to clarify here, from personal experience the hammar device has more scope for failure of operation especially after a period of extended use.

I think in certain applications they may be more suitable (as stated less unintended activations) than other devices but with that you need to consider service regimes etc.
Comes down to weighing up your own situation, experience, knowledge and what you feel comfortable with. I am very experienced in the use, maintainence and servicing of life jackets and would choose a soluble tablet type everytime.

Usual disclaimer applies....!
 
Last edited:
Having tested a Hammar activator by dipping it in a marina on a boat hook, having removed the unit from a life jacket because it was TE, I was surprised to find that the unit took some effort and time to activate, having carefully re armed the jacket, I inflated the jacket to test the seal, it lost all pressure after a couple of hours.

I would not now use a jacket with a Hammar activator unless it had been serviced and re armed at an authorised service centre.

The other types of activators available have, I understand, been developed over recent years to be more resistant to accidental operation.
 
Xskipper said:
Correct- the co2 bottle is inside the bladder and the complete mechanism seals a 2" hole in the bladder with the hydrostatic activator on the outside. This obviously requires a service centre with specialist tools to ensure that the seal is sound, this cannot be attempted with 100% success by the average yachtsman.
Can't comment on the comparison of failure rates but there is certainly more to go wrong, as I said- who wants a 2" hole in their jacket...?
Click to expand...
Unneccessary scaremongering. Perfectly possible for owner replacement, follow instructions provided and test by oral inflation, using pump is best to avoid introducing moisture, unless you are a complete numpty.
 
Got two Crewsavers with Hammer, both failed to seal properly after I replaced the Hammer units and both had expensive repairs at Crewsaver (New Bladders) as a result. Personal experience but would never buy a Hammer inflated lifejacket again.
 
davidwf said:
Got two Crewsavers with Hammer, both failed to seal properly after I replaced the Hammer units and both had expensive repairs at Crewsaver (New Bladders) as a result. Personal experience but would never buy a Hammer inflated lifejacket again.
Click to expand...

I stand by the words of my original post. If I can manage it, almost anybody can.
 
Stork_III said:
Unneccessary scaremongering. Perfectly possible for owner replacement, follow instructions provided and test by oral inflation, using pump is best to avoid introducing moisture, unless you are a complete numpty.
Click to expand...

Not unnecessary scaremongering, perhaps you should speak to some of the service agents, but maybe they are complete numpties.... :D
 
Xskipper said:
They are not available with Hammar hydrostatic activation, but more to the point why would you want this..?
Click to expand...

Hammer type don't inflate when you get hit by a wave. I was on foredeck for an offshore race in rough weather, got hit by a big wave that swamped the foredeck and my LJ went off. Not helpful. Hammer type are much less prone to this. It was NOT a maintenance issue
 
PabloPicasso said:
Hammer type don't inflate when you get hit by a wave. I was on foredeck for an offshore race in rough weather, got hit by a big wave that swamped the foredeck and my LJ went off. Not helpful. Hammer type are much less prone to this. It was NOT a maintenance issue
Click to expand...

Again, someone not reading the thread or not getting the point! So you have revived a 3 year old thread to say what?
It is not difficult:
Hammer, difficult to maintain effectively, complex design means more to go wrong in use but less chance of unintentional activation.

Soluble tablet, easy and cheap to maintain yourself, chance of accidental activation if you like to get neck deep in water (high possibility the lifejacket is doing what it was designed to do).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top