Page 2 of 3
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 5:54 pm
by D_Hall
jrrdw wrote:A proper disclaimer takes care of that.
Not true. There are certain things that can not be "disclaimered away." Product safety is one such thing. In other words, most such disclaimers discourage lawsuits, but realistically they aren't legally binding.
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 6:03 pm
by jrrdw
D_Hall wrote:jrrdw wrote:A proper disclaimer takes care of that.
Not true. There are certain things that can not be "disclaimered away." Product safety is one such thing. In other words, most such disclaimers discourage lawsuits, but realistically they aren't legally binding.
If you can pay for a good lawyer you can win against a disclaimer, other wise they work well. Thats why any company selling anything has one. It's the idea behind having a disclaimer, or else company's wouldn't pay for legal services like they do. That being said, back on topic.
Are Joel's cannons safe to use, (
in a nutshell) is the question now?
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 7:39 pm
by daberno123
Unisonmind, would you mind posting a picture of the DWV in question?
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 7:57 pm
by jrrdw
daberno123 wrote:Unisonmind, would you mind posting a picture of the DWV in question?
--
here is the cannon.
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:05 pm
by unisonmind
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:15 pm
by Carlman
wow i am truly shocked at this, was joel getting slack?
i reckon he needs to be contacted for 1, to ask him to why theres dwv on a gun and 2, could this have happened to other guns.
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 9:19 pm
by JDP12
huh. thats disappointing.
just to make sure, NSF61 fittings are pressure rated correct?
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 11:56 pm
by Carlman
ilovetoblowthingsup wrote:huh. thats disappointing.
just to make sure, NSF61 fittings are pressure rated correct?
correct
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:35 am
by jr
I have talked with Joel several times in the last few months and I was under the impression that Joel machined all his fittings so there would not be any markings or other factory garbage on the fitting, in turn it gives the cannons a better look then a home built.
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 7:12 am
by unisonmind
ya some of the fittings have been machined down so you cant read anything but i can still read the coupler and besides that the socket does not lie
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 8:55 am
by Velocity
That really suprised me...I guess everyone trusted Joel so much back in the day that no one took a look at his launchers and called him out. Though, many of the pieces that he uses are NSF-pw or NSF-61.
And by the way, nice repair unisonmind; it looks clean.
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 2:51 pm
by unisonmind
ok so its done and going back to marty tomorrow but i have to say besides the DWV parts joel made a bad ass cannon and the valve its self is just so clean inside and out
<a href="
http://s87.photobucket.com/albums/k154/ ... ure252.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="
http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k154/ ... ure252.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
i still have to zip tie the fill hose
<a href="
http://s87.photobucket.com/albums/k154/ ... ure253.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="
http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k154/ ... ure253.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 3:05 pm
by MrCrowley
Nice repair, I too am surprised at the DWV. It'd be interesting to see what Joel has to say.
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 3:57 pm
by psycix
DWV doesnt always mean unpressure-rated.
Though this is more often seen on metal pipe, a DWV, 200psi rated pipe, is fine to use.
DWV usually has a lower rating, but its not said that this always is the case.
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 5:39 pm
by PCGUY
psycix wrote:DWV doesnt always mean unpressure-rated.
Though this is more often seen on metal pipe, a DWV, 200psi rated pipe, is fine to use.
DWV usually has a lower rating, but its not said that this always is the case.
Very true. I still see no pictures of this fitting that isn't pressure rated. I see a picture in this thread but there is no way you can read what it says.
