• Welcome to the DeeperBlue.com Forums, the largest online community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing. To gain full access to the DeeperBlue.com Forums you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:

    • Join over 44,280+ fellow diving enthusiasts from around the world on this forum
    • Participate in and browse from over 516,210+ posts.
    • Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
    • Post your own photos or view from 7,441+ user submitted images.
    • All this and much more...

    You can gain access to all this absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!

14 mm small ID bands - brands similar to primeline

Thread Status: Hello , There was no answer in this thread for more than 60 days.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.

wahoo1911

New Member
Oct 28, 2023
7
0
1
24
Can anyone tell me how these brands compare to the Primeline 14mm small ID:

- Pathos TNT 14 mm
- Salvimar S400 14 mm
- Rob Allen 14 mm
- Riffe Gorilla 14mm

I can only get these in my area but would like to have the same characteristics as primeline.
 
Can anyone tell me how these brands compare to the Primeline 14mm small ID:

- Pathos TNT 14 mm
- Salvimar S400 14 mm
- Rob Allen 14 mm
- Riffe Gorilla 14mm

I can only get these in my area but would like to have the same characteristics as primeline.
I'm almost certain that the Riffe bands are not small ID and the others probably aren't either. That would make a significant difference in performance. Can you order from Mako? That's where I buy mine.

 
I'm almost certain that the Riffe bands are not small ID and the others probably aren't either. That would make a significant difference in performance. Can you order from Mako? That's where I buy mine.

No, I am based on the canary islands, those are the only brands offered here. Ordering from the peninsulas is insanely slow due to "island customs". You are right, the pathos are not really small ID, I would have to check the other ones to know exactly.
 
Can anyone tell me how these brands compare to the Primeline 14mm small ID:

- Pathos TNT 14 mm
- Salvimar S400 14 mm
- Rob Allen 14 mm
- Riffe Gorilla 14mm

I can only get these in my area but would like to have the same characteristics as primeline.
From primeline, at least in Portugal, you C4 orange and Epsealon. As alternative you also have Sigalsub Extreme and Reactive Evo which also have small ID. For those you mentioned, I have the idea that Pathos and Rob Allen do not come with small ID, great rubber bands though.
 
From primeline, at least in Portugal, you C4 orange and Epsealon. As alternative you also have Sigalsub Extreme and Reactive Evo which also have small ID. For those you mentioned, I have the idea that Pathos and Rob Allen do not come with small ID, great rubber bands though.
I was about to ask for the sigalsub reactive evos in 14.5 mm, I plan on putting double 14s on a 150 cm 7.5mm. They might be a good choice. The other ones are all no real small ID bands.
 
I was about to ask for the sigalsub reactive evos in 14.5 mm, I plan on putting double 14s on a 150 cm 7.5mm. They might be a good choice. The other ones are all no real small ID bands.
I know the SigalSub Extreme 14.5mm small ID work well with 6.6-7mm shafts, however never tested with 7.5mm. For 7.5mm shaft double 16mm bands should work fine (standard ones). For instance Rob Allen makes very good rubber bands.
 
I know the SigalSub Extreme 14.5mm small ID work well with 6.6-7mm shafts, however never tested with 7.5mm. For 7.5mm shaft double 16mm bands should work fine (standard ones). For instance Rob Allen makes very good rubber bands.
For what its worth, I use 14.5 mm small ID bands on Abellan 110 and 120 guns with 8 mm shafts and they work well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr. X and wahoo1911
For what its worth, I use 14.5 mm small ID bands on Abellan 110 and 120 guns with 8 mm shafts and they work well.
Are you talking about the sigalsub reactive or extreme evos?
I know the SigalSub Extreme 14.5mm small ID work well with 6.6-7mm shafts, however never tested with 7.5mm. For 7.5mm shaft double 16mm bands should work fine (standard ones). For instance Rob Allen makes very good rubber bands.
The idea is to get a more progressive power out of the bands, it is also easier to load I think.
 
So far little difference has been discovered between standard and small id bands.

I a lot comes down to marketing and believing probably. Do small ids have a bit more rubber? Yes.
Do the suppliers stick to paper diameters? No, often found that X rubbers are thinner or thicker a little bit that gives a difference one way of another.
My cressi 14 small id out of the box are 13.8mm which is a much bigger difference than the difference in ID could ever be.
Real value of total cm2 of cross section matters more.
A +0.1mm on the inside is less cross section than -0.1mm on the outside by an order of magnitude.
 
So far little difference has been discovered between standard and small id bands.

I a lot comes down to marketing and believing probably. Do small ids have a bit more rubber? Yes.
Do the suppliers stick to paper diameters? No, often found that X rubbers are thinner or thicker a little bit that gives a difference one way of another.
My cressi 14 small id out of the box are 13.8mm which is a much bigger difference than the difference in ID could ever be.
Real value of total cm2 of cross section matters more.
A +0.1mm on the inside is less cross section than -0.1mm on the outside by an order of magnitude.
I wonder if the small id difference is more about the water intrusion than the small amount of extra rubber? i would guess that the smaller COULD have less intrusion due to tighter fit and if there is intrusion less water to hold, all speculation but im guess the compression of water within the band may be hurting performance in the bigger id band.
 
I think the difference is so small if any it will be very difficult for anyone to prove, seems like nobody even tried ;) When things like this happen shit starts to sound fishy for me.

Imo bigger gains than normal or small ID you can probably have from using LIGHTER wishbones and the beads in the rubber. Extra unsprung mass hurts.
For this reason I switched to plastic rubber inserts - lower mass. Oh and if they ever hit my finger its gonna defo hurt less.
 
also i would think that if the bands are stretch that hole will probably get very small and if water had a way to get in it will vacate the space also.

wishbone to the finger sounds very nasty :oops:
 
I think the difference is so small if any it will be very difficult for anyone to prove, seems like nobody even tried ;) When things like this happen shit starts to sound fishy for me.

Imo bigger gains than normal or small ID you can probably have from using LIGHTER wishbones and the beads in the rubber. Extra unsprung mass hurts.
For this reason I switched to plastic rubber inserts - lower mass. Oh and if they ever hit my finger its gonna defo hurt less.
I can give you one direct comparison. When I bought an Abellan 110, which came with two 14.5 small ID bands and an 8 mm shaft, a friend offered to let me use his condo asssociation pool early in the morning before anyone else was likely to be using it. The target was a measured distance of 20 feet from the tip and I put a group of 5 shots the size of my palm around the bullseye. I was amazed but that's not the point of the story.

I owned a 60" Wong Super Magnum and had always used three 16 mm large ID bands at 350% stretch on it with an 8 mm shaft. Recoil was noticeable but easily controllable with my left hand on the butt. It happened to be due for new bands so I made three 14.5 mm small ID bands at 360% stretch and brought it along. On the first shot I had my right elbow locked and my left hand backing up the butt. Recoil was so bad that the knuckles of my left hand hit my chin so hard that it was badly bruised. Muzzle flip was so bad that the shaft went under the entire target. The gun had never acted that way before. So I removed one band. My knuckles didn't hurt my chin and the shaft did hit the bottom of the target, but way below the bullseye. Then we ran out of time and had to leave.

I don't understand why, but this proved to me that the 14.5 mm small ID bands produced a hell of a lot more power. The only other varaiable that wasn't kept constant was stretch ratio. Could that really explain the difference? I doubt it.

And just to prove that the Wong did shoot OK with the 16 mm large ID bands, here is a 62 pound White Sea bass that I took with my first shot with the gun. There is no way I would have hit it it with the small ID bands.
 

Attachments

  • 62.14.jpg
    62.14.jpg
    274 KB · Views: 49
  • Like
Reactions: Mr. X
Maybe one of the points of using the small ID bands is to try to get the maximum capability of a 14 mm band by adding some extra rubber, lower recoil for double-band or even roller guns, while providing easier loading for high stretching factors when compared to larger bands e.g., 16mm normal ID.

Following your comments, I did some calculation of the rubber volume and if we have 14mm bands, by using small ID we have a net gain of 3.6% of rubber, which is indeed not much.
 
From the description thats far from how you should test things. The only way would be to keep things as similar as possible , based on certain aspects similarity and than compare each how each aspect affects other results like recoil, power, load values and penetration.
 
I can give you one direct comparison. When I bought an Abellan 110, which came with two 14.5 small ID bands and an 8 mm shaft, a friend offered to let me use his condo asssociation pool early in the morning before anyone else was likely to be using it. The target was a measured distance of 20 feet from the tip and I put a group of 5 shots the size of my palm around the bullseye. I was amazed but that's not the point of the story.

I owned a 60" Wong Super Magnum and had always used three 16 mm large ID bands at 350% stretch on it with an 8 mm shaft. Recoil was noticeable but easily controllable with my left hand on the butt. It happened to be due for new bands so I made three 14.5 mm small ID bands at 360% stretch and brought it along. On the first shot I had my right elbow locked and my left hand backing up the butt. Recoil was so bad that the knuckles of my left hand hit my chin so hard that it was badly bruised. Muzzle flip was so bad that the shaft went under the entire target. The gun had never acted that way before. So I removed one band. My knuckles didn't hurt my chin and the shaft did hit the bottom of the target, but way below the bullseye. Then we ran out of time and had to leave.

I don't understand why, but this proved to me that the 14.5 mm small ID bands produced a hell of a lot more power. The only other varaiable that wasn't kept constant was stretch ratio. Could that really explain the difference? I doubt it.

And just to prove that the Wong did shoot OK with the 16 mm large ID bands, here is a 62 pound White Sea bass that I took with my first shot with the gun. There is no way I would have hit it it with the small ID bands.
I am not sure I get the whole point. You noticed that 14.5mm small ID produce more power and more recoild for the Abellan, right? Regarding the Wong, you say you would have not hited with small ID bands. That's due to the expected recoil?
 
From the description thats far from how you should test things. The only way would be to keep things as similar as possible , based on certain aspects similarity and than compare each how each aspect affects other results like recoil, power, load values and penetration.
You mean the calculation, right? I agree with you that this should be done on the basis of recoild, power, load and penetration, however since you were talking about the small difference, I just felt like giving such a number would give a more straightforward idea of the small difference
 
You mean the calculation, right? I agree with you that this should be done on the basis of recoild, power, load and penetration, however since you were talking about the small difference, I just felt like giving such a number would give a more straightforward idea of the small difference

This was my response to the guy comparing apples to oranges 14 vs 16mm with unknown stretch ratios.
Jessi Spiller did the tests I think it was 11 different rubber brands and 27 different rubbers for spearfishing (diameters, models, types) and everything was within 3-5% difference so pretty much within error margins at sampling that small. I am not sure, nor I think they checked very thourefully band diameters specs outside of what was specified by the manafucturer spec and it might account for that error one way or another.
They did not however test the rubber in the water as COVID hit... and prevented them to do more sophisticated science.
 
I am not sure I get the whole point. You noticed that 14.5mm small ID produce more power and more recoild for the Abellan, right? Regarding the Wong, you say you would have not hited with small ID bands. That's due to the expected recoil?
You missed the point entirely. Please read the post again. The only reason I mentioned the Abellan was that testing it was the reason I was at the pool in the first place. I wanted to see how it performed with the bands that came with it. The Abellan came with 14.5 mm small ID and that is all I've ever used on it. They work great and I've had no reason to try any other bands for comparison. But I had been using 16 mm large ID bands on the Wong, so I wanted to see how it performed with 14.5 mm small ID. The difference was dramatic. Besides the great increase n recoil, maybe I should explain muzzle flip/muzzle rise. People who use rear handled guns may not be familiar with the problem. Mid handled guns are very popular in Southern California because we often hunt in poor visibility and thick kelp. We shoot big fish so we need power for penetration, but we also need to be able to swing the gun easily. A rear handled gun that is long enough to have the power will be hard to swing in those conditions.

Well designed rear handled guns place your hand very close to the recoil force from the bands. But with a midhandled gun, the handle is well below the force from the bands, so the gun tries to rotate around the handle. The muzzle rises as the shaft leaves the gun and the rear of the shaft is pushed upward, causing the shaft to shoot low. To minimize this effect, we can increase the mass of the gun and/or try to back up the butt so the gun can't rotate around the handle snd cause the muzzle to rise. I had been using the Wong with three 16mm large ID bands for a couple of years and the recoil was controllable with little muzzle flip. I showed the fish photo simply to show that with the first shot of the gun, it was accurate enough to hit that fish.

Now back to the pool. The 14.5 m small ID were so much more powerful that I bruised my chin and muzzle lift was so severe that the shaft passed under the entire target. Removing one band helped, but the shaft still barely hit the bottom of the target. If I had been shooting at a fish, I would had missed completely and probably not realized why.

To summarize- with the same gun and shaft, the 14.5 mm small ID bands seemed to provide a lot more force that the 16 mm large ID bands, even though the cross sectional area of the 14.5 mm is a lot less and wishbones were exactly the same in both bands. I don't know why- I'm just telling what I experienced.
 
DeeperBlue.com - The Worlds Largest Community Dedicated To Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing

ABOUT US

ISSN 1469-865X | Copyright © 1996 - 2024 deeperblue.net limited.

DeeperBlue.com is the World's Largest Community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving, Ocean Advocacy and Diving Travel.

We've been dedicated to bringing you the freshest news, features and discussions from around the underwater world since 1996.

ADVERT