Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43

Thread: ISI products

  1. #21
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    656

    Default

    A bit of a zombie thread but I'll play. We had ISI, we had constant problems with sticky air switches, especially in freezing weather. If you're evaluating new packs, I'd suggest trying to check things out in all possible temperatures!

    We have since switched to MSA and couldn't be happier. Scott could have won too, but in the end it came down to who had better service in our area.


  2. #22
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    WE have 4 ISI Z's and love them. We wouldn't use anything else. As far as batteries we have 2 that have had batteries in the for over 2 yrs and still work fine. Yes this reminded me I need to change them. That will be tomorrows project lol. As for SCOTT we hated the Scott 2.2 and 50's You couldn't give me a Scott.
    Let me know if you have the same opinion in TEN years. I'm betting you won't 'cause those ISI's will have given out by then. Our Scotts,some of which are over twenty(20)years old are still going strong. T.C.

  3. #23
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    We have 11 ISI V7's coming Monday. We went through a trial with SCott, MSA, Draeger, and ISI. In the end, ISI and Draeger just about tied for first with Scott and MSA being well behind.

    We liked the voice amplifier, battery pack (with the C cells), air switch, and the visibility. I personally liked the Draeger more, but I would take either over a Scott or MSA. I haven't seen any real innovation out of either comany in a long time. (Remember that the new flat pack is a funded project, and MSA is not risking anything) Draeger and ISI have been completely revamping their packs on their own dime to stay current or even ahead of the times.
    Define "innovation". I could care less about gimmicks and air switches. What I want in an air pack is predictable cost of ownership long term,rock solid reliability and air on demand regardless of conditions. Best of luck,but how many volume/high hour users of Scba run Isi's? Why do you suppose that is? Yeah I'm biased,I've been in Scotts for going on half a century......ZERO fireground failures. Having worn both Drager and an Isi I just don't see what the novelty is,of the two I would take the Drager but I wasn't IMPRESSED with any aspect of the pack. Fortunately for all,we all have choices. T.C.
    Last edited by Rescue101; 08-19-2010 at 03:37 PM.

  4. #24
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Rural Iowa
    Posts
    3,106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    We have 11 ISI V7's coming Monday. We went through a trial with SCott, MSA, Draeger, and ISI. In the end, ISI and Draeger just about tied for first with Scott and MSA being well behind.

    We liked the voice amplifier, battery pack (with the C cells), air switch, and the visibility. I personally liked the Draeger more, but I would take either over a Scott or MSA. I haven't seen any real innovation out of either comany in a long time. (Remember that the new flat pack is a funded project, and MSA is not risking anything) Draeger and ISI have been completely revamping their packs on their own dime to stay current or even ahead of the times.
    Hemlines go and they go down. What's most important is keeping up with the latest in Vogue/GQ. Riiiiiight.

    Scott and MSA have 90% of the US SCBA business for a reason. You can be sure there isn't a ISI or Drager dist. in the US that wouldn't give their 1st born to throw either eurotrash brand overboard in order to carry Scott or MSA. For a reason.

  5. #25
    Forum Member HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    Define "innovation". I could care less about gimmicks and air switches. What I want in an air pack is predictable cost of ownership long term,rock solid reliability and air on demand regardless of conditions. Best of luck,but how many volume/high hour users of Scba run Isi's? Why do you suppose that is? Yeah I'm biased,I've been in Scotts for going on half a century......ZERO fireground failures. Having worn both Drager and an Isi I just don't see what the novelty is,of the two I would take the Drager but I wasn't IMPRESSED with any aspect of the pack. Fortunately for all,we all have choices. T.C.
    When I say "innovation" I mean that they are looking at the new requirements (or to what may come) and designing the pack around them. They are not taking their old technology and adding parts and pieces to make them function under conditions that were not even though of during the original design. They are also trying new or different things to see how they can improve.

    When the Scott dealers came, their big push was that this is the same pack that has been working for the past 25 years. They added this and that to make it meet the new requirements, but under all of that, it is the same pack. To me that means that they took somethign and added this, then added another, then another. Every time you add something, you are adding another chance of failure, and / or maintenance. I would much prefer a more simplified pack that was designed for the current use.

    When we evaluated, Scott and MSA were given low scores because of the ergonomics, visibility, and "suggested maintenance" that made the overall cost of ownership go up (this is reallizing that we are going to wear the packs the same amount of times in the next 20 years that FDNY would use them in 6 months or less).

    The argument of "All the big boys have them, so they must be the best" rings especially hollow to me.
    1. If that is all they have ever had, how do they not know something may work better
    2. We all know that purchases of this scale in larger departments are not made by the rank and file that actually have to use the equipment. Purchasing is a process that is full of kick-backs, loyalties, and other factors having nothing to do with the functionallity of the product
    3. There are larger department looking to move from the main two brands (Phoenix - with controversy, Pitttsburgh, Akron, Buffalo - in process, and others)
    4. Larger departments use their SCBA more in a year than our packs will see in a lifetime. While one brand may not work for them, it may last forever for us. This is not a one size fits all situation

    Again, I am not going to say that what we chose would be the best choice for any other department, but with our members, call volume, and other factors, ISI and Draeger are better suited to us.

  6. #26
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Well,Again,I wish you the best of luck. When you say rank and file have no input on packs,you would be,in many cases,Mistaken. I know for a fact that Boston had input from the ground up on their current system. As did Portland and other cities. The "add ons" to the Scott are Gov/Industry MANDATES that Scott was unwilling to compromise their rock solid basic pack to implement. So,as they have done from day ONE,they made modular assemblies to conform which ALSO all allows ANY Scott from 2.2 up to be upgraded to the latest Standard. Research YOUR two favorites and let me know how that works for you. Short answer,it doesn't. On EITHER pack. So Scott MIGHT not be as slow as you think. In any event,enjoy your new purchase. T.C.
    Last edited by Rescue101; 08-20-2010 at 12:24 PM.

  7. #27
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Rural Iowa
    Posts
    3,106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    When I say "innovation" I mean that they are looking at the new requirements (or to what may come) and designing the pack around them. They are not taking their old technology and adding parts and pieces to make them function under conditions that were not even though of during the original design. They are also trying new or different things to see how they can improve.
    ...
    You haven't been involved in product design or engineering management or you'd realize how wrong you are. "Throwing out the baby" and starting with a "clean sheet" always ends up as an abortion. You want proof, research DOD weapons development projects since WWII.

    Can I assume your next car will be a Volt from Obama's Government Motors Company? Same nonsense.

  8. #28
    Forum Member HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by neiowa View Post
    You haven't been involved in product design or engineering management or you'd realize how wrong you are.
    Actually, I am an engineer, so I am very familiar with the product design and management. When done correctly there are set standards and processes that need to be followed. This keeps the new design based on a set of functional parameters. I also know that when something has been adapted with modular add ons so many times, that it is then time to redesign the product.

    Rather than talking hypothetical, let's consider an actual part. How about voice amplification. MSA/Draeger/Scott saw this coming and added a bolt on unit(s) to the face piece and a reciever / mic near the nose. This adds weight to to face piece, another battery to maintain, and another switch to turn on. ISI started with a "clean sheet". They placed the receiver/mic in front of the mouth and used a line connection in conjunction with the air supply. This does not add any (<3 ounces) weight to the face piece, does not require another battery (however it does use the energy from the battery pack), the voice is clearer, and the speaker is directly to the front, not one side. By starting from scratch, they were also able to keep the functionallity of the amplifier while off pressurized air through their air switch.

    I am not an ISI rep, nor do I work for any service related industry. These are things that I looked at when we reviewed air packs. I am not saying that these components are the best out there, the most durable, or the final step in the product evolution, but they will (hopefully) work for us.

    "Throwing out the baby" and starting with a "clean sheet" always ends up as an abortion. You want proof, research DOD weapons development projects since WWII.
    Speaking in absolutes "always" leads to an exapmle of how you are wrong. I can send you a catalog of our products (not fire related) that have been completely redesigned from a "clean sheet" and are now market leaders. Also, you are comparing the progress made by private companies to that of the government. We all know how efficient they are.

    Can I assume your next car will be a Volt from Obama's Government Motors Company? Same nonsense.
    I also believe that change for the sake of change is not good, but refusal to try something new because it is different is equally as wrong. Oh, and I drive a Mercury Grand Marquis.

  9. #29
    Forum Member medic190's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Stuyvesant Falls, NY
    Posts
    328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    When we evaluated, Scott and MSA were given low scores because of the ergonomics, visibility, and "suggested maintenance" that made the overall cost of ownership go up (this is reallizing that we are going to wear the packs the same amount of times in the next 20 years that FDNY would use them in 6 months or less).
    I'm very familiar with SCOTT, since I am a certified service technician, responsible for approximately 1,500 4.5 AP50's and now AP75's across the State. What are these "suggested maintenance" items you speak of? I do a simple annual flow test and if it passes, that's it for that pack. Many of the packs have had NO parts even adjusted (much less replaced) and many of these units have literally not been opened (maintenance wise) since purchased in 2003. I operate an average parts budget of under $1,000.00 per year for these 7 year old packs: approximately $7,000.00 invested in parts (which includes a stock supply, mind you) for 1,500 SCBA's. I'd consider that EXTREMELY good cost of ownership! Less than $5.00 per pack on their lives so far...

  10. #30
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by medic190 View Post
    I'm very familiar with SCOTT, since I am a certified service technician, responsible for approximately 1,500 4.5 AP50's and now AP75's across the State. What are these "suggested maintenance" items you speak of? I do a simple annual flow test and if it passes, that's it for that pack. Many of the packs have had NO parts even adjusted (much less replaced) and many of these units have literally not been opened (maintenance wise) since purchased in 2003. I operate an average parts budget of under $1,000.00 per year for these 7 year old packs: approximately $7,000.00 invested in parts (which includes a stock supply, mind you) for 1,500 SCBA's. I'd consider that EXTREMELY good cost of ownership! Less than $5.00 per pack on their lives so far...
    Hands down, I don't think there is another air pack that will take the punishment a Scott will and be as economical to maintain. As I alluded to earlier we have a LONG history with Scott and find their cost of ownership to be VERY cost effective. We get EXCELLENT service from IPS,They come in and bench our units annually,in and out in two days. As I said earlier,in the 42 years I've been here we have NEVER had a Fireground failure. T.C.

  11. #31
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    Hands down, I don't think there is another air pack that will take the punishment a Scott will and be as economical to maintain. As I alluded to earlier we have a LONG history with Scott and find their cost of ownership to be VERY cost effective. We get EXCELLENT service from IPS,They come in and bench our units annually,in and out in two days. As I said earlier,in the 42 years I've been here we have NEVER had a Fireground failure. T.C.
    Tim... IPS is also our provider for services other than what our scba technician handles in house. They also provide the same services for the Massachusetts Fire Academy.
    Last edited by DeputyChiefGonzo; 08-21-2010 at 05:00 PM.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  12. #32
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Golden City 1 hour south of fort smith
    Posts
    543

    Default

    This is a perfect example of some of the issues with in the fire service. Firefighters hate change. SCOTT is the name that has the default button on it. Some will never except any other company. Now yes everyone has differant things that want and need in a SCBA but it's when firefighters only want one brand or one tactic becuase " that's what we have always done" that is becomes a problem, that's when we stop progession. In the modern world we are now in, there is a great possiblity that another company will have or can make a better overall pack then SCOTT. Only time will tell. But I haven't see much inovation or change for the better in Scott so were trying something else. So far we have had GREAT results.

  13. #33
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    This is a perfect example of some of the issues with in the fire service. Firefighters hate change. SCOTT is the name that has the default button on it. Some will never except any other company. Now yes everyone has differant things that want and need in a SCBA but it's when firefighters only want one brand or one tactic becuase " that's what we have always done" that is becomes a problem, that's when we stop progession. In the modern world we are now in, there is a great possiblity that another company will have or can make a better overall pack then SCOTT. Only time will tell. But I haven't see much inovation or change for the better in Scott so were trying something else. So far we have had GREAT results.
    Do you have a SCBA in mind or is this just a general statement?

  14. #34
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SW Missouri
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    As for the ragging on SCOTT that this become. I ask this question why fix something that isn't broken?

  15. #35
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    This is a perfect example of some of the issues with in the fire service. Firefighters hate change. SCOTT is the name that has the default button on it. Some will never except any other company. Now yes everyone has differant things that want and need in a SCBA but it's when firefighters only want one brand or one tactic becuase " that's what we have always done" that is becomes a problem, that's when we stop progession. In the modern world we are now in, there is a great possiblity that another company will have or can make a better overall pack then SCOTT. Only time will tell. But I haven't see much inovation or change for the better in Scott so were trying something else. So far we have had GREAT results.
    Riddle me this... why do some SCBA manufactures come out with "new and improved" versions of their unit each and every year?

    Is it because they were improperly engineered in the first place?
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  16. #36
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    Riddle me this... why do some SCBA manufactures come out with "new and improved" versions of their unit each and every year?

    Is it because they were improperly engineered in the first place?
    VF034,
    I'm not opposed to change.BUT.....When I have a product that has performed reliably day in,day out for over 30 years,has a PREDICTIBLE annual repair cost,and has NEVER failed me on the Fireground.........I ask you this: WHY WOULD I CHANGE? So I can have a PRETTY Blue bottle,or a low air whistle(that is PRONE to failure) Or more lightweight plastic components to break? NO THANKS! I LOVE my Scotts for the SAME reason I like Hale pumps. When I need 'em to work...........THEY DO! Reliably,EVERY TIME,ON DEMAND! I'm NOT a believer in the change for the sake of change; we've tried other brands of equipment but we keep coming back to Globe, Cairns,Hale, and Scott for time tested long life,reliability,dealer support and SERVICE LIFE VALUE. Why would you stray from a WINNING system? T.C.
    Last edited by Rescue101; 08-21-2010 at 05:51 PM.

  17. #37
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    This is a perfect example of some of the issues with in the fire service. Firefighters hate change. SCOTT is the name that has the default button on it. Some will never except any other company. Now yes everyone has differant things that want and need in a SCBA but it's when firefighters only want one brand or one tactic becuase " that's what we have always done" that is becomes a problem, that's when we stop progession. In the modern world we are now in, there is a great possiblity that another company will have or can make a better overall pack then SCOTT. Only time will tell. But I haven't see much inovation or change for the better in Scott so were trying something else. So far we have had GREAT results.
    And NO they won't. At least it hasn't happened yet. Scotts are the pack OF CHOICE in the country's heaviest use cities for a reason. Reliabilty and LOWEST overall cost of ownership over the long haul. The jonny come latelys are still trying but the top two are STILL Scott and Msa. T.C.
    Last edited by Rescue101; 08-21-2010 at 06:02 PM.

  18. #38
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Golden City 1 hour south of fort smith
    Posts
    543

    Default

    My statement was a general one using Scott as an example. We used Scott for many years we just felt we liked the ISI Z7's alot better then the present scott's plus the rep. was alot more helpful to our small department then the Scott rep. ( yes I know that's a local issue not a national one)

  19. #39
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volfireman034 View Post
    My statement was a general one using Scott as an example. We used Scott for many years we just felt we liked the ISI Z7's alot better then the present scott's plus the rep. was alot more helpful to our small department then the Scott rep. ( yes I know that's a local issue not a national one)
    Fair enough. We agree to disagree. Dealer is a very important factor in overall satisfaction and service life. T.C.

  20. #40
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Was at FDIC a few years ago, when Scott came out with the Scott50. I heard they had a "new" pack and I went by to see it. The guy at the booth said the only "new" item in it was the "disconnecting" regulator. He kept calling it the Dayton Ohio Union Issue. He went on to explain that the union in contract negotiations asked for and got detaching regulators issued to each person with a mask.

    I later found out MSA had gotten a OSHA interpretation letter

    http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owad...ONS&p_id=22641

    The letter is a direct attack on Scott. All SCBA have a cross contamination issue, MSA included. To prove my point, my dept recently purchased SCBA and in MSA's demo I asked the question of cross contamination and was told, specifically not. My response question was then why in the product build sheet is the option for a detachable regulator "for those departments worried about cross contamination". Page 11. If there is no possibility, then why offer it? After the demo the guy told my chief I was correct but he just had to give an official answer.

    There is the Lawsuit started in 07 against Scott and Fisher Scientific (I think) in Miami Dade

    There is the case of Surprise Air with its new name in St Louis that caused one of the more drastic changes in the 2007 changes

    San Antonio with the Interspiro issue

    All of them have their problems. If you could take ideas from each and put them all together you could have a great scba
    Am I being effective in my efforts or am I merely showing up in my fireman costume to watch a house burn down?Ē (Joe Brown, www.justlookingbusy.wordpress.com)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts