exercising the grey matter
i have a AAA .25 condor from Tony, i love the gun, BUT…
my nature will not let me leave well enough alone. so, i got to thinking about building a condor from scratch. here’s the rundown. AF frame, tool steel trigger,( get rid of those stupid tapered pins and tap the frame for real screws), stainless breach, R&L barrell (3 land, 3 groove match), condor tank w/ TT hi-flow valve, now here’s the kicker, do away with the 2 small barrell bushings and instead turn a full length bushing that would extend approximately 1 inch past the frame and include threads to attach the moderator. then add a short bushing to help stabilize the moderator. the idea behind the solid bushing is to cut down the possibility of poi shift due to the realitively small bearing surface of the current system, and to give a more solid mount to the moderator. top it off with a solid one piece stock, ( considering a maddog), and you should have a real tack driver. any thoughts pro-con?
All Replies
Viewing 10 replies - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
PEEK is an abbreviation for PolyEtherEther-Ketone, a high performance engineering thermoplastic
ok, i’lll bite, what’s a PEEK breach? i’ve never heard of one. do you have a picture or a link to source one?
Here’s my 0.02,
The SS breech isn’t a very good idea. Sculling scratching etc of the ss to the barrel reduce o-ring life. It’s also very heavy reducing the systems locktime. I’d opt for a PEEK breech with a thin anodised aluminium breech with the breechnob secured with 2 M3 screws in the sleeve.
A one piece bushing doesn’t do to much for stability. The key is a nice tight slidefit in the frame and a shrink fit on the barrel!
As for the rest apart from the weight all solid ideas. But I have to admit my rifle isn’t the featherweight it was when it left the gunpower factory.
Mine has
-Steel profile over the trigger housing to minimize frameflex
-Thick aluminium scopemounts that stabalize the scoperail to prevent flexing
-Heavy iroko stock.
-Heavy SS shroud endcap
Al resulting in the rifle weighing over 4.5kg.
Cheers,
Marc
i’m getting good accuracy w/ my AAA, NO COMPLAINTS, averaging 3/4-1″ groups at a hundred yds. even managed a 2″ group the other week at 200. the stainless pins sound like a good idea. just wanted to do away with the tapered ones just to make life easier. weight is not a major factor. i like my guns a little muzzle heavy. considered stainless breech for longevity, and it won’t corrode like aluminum would. agree with the weight problem as relates to lock time, though. one piece stock was considered for reasons that you stated. also looked at those carbon fiber ones. they’re cool, but, too shiny for my tastes. all in all, i just wanted to see how far i could push the limits of the A.F. platform. the main fodder for the beast would be slugs, and the extra weight would be more a help than hinderance. as far as making my own stock, i do two things with wood, cut it and burn it. i must be the milkman’s kid. my father and grandfather were both good with wood. i’m shaking the tree to see what falls out. so far, the replies have been insightful and helpful. i expected no less, that’s why i posted. also the reason for the title. when i build a bike, i first do it in my mind, literally BUILD it in my mind, every nut and bolt. it has yet to turn out any way other than i planned. i’m doing the same here. i value the input and i hope it continues. thank you 😀
My $0.02.
Do not try and tap the frame for “real screws” instead of pins. Instead round up some 1/8″ x 1/2″ stainless steel pins. They are very smooth and fit snug in the holes. Trigger action was much smoother after installing these because their surface was mirror-smooth and needed no polishing.
I have these in both of my rifles, courtesy of our own YN who sent them to me. He can probably remember where he bought them.
Stainless breech. I do not see any cons except weight. A few people here are using them, and seem to be very happy with how they work.
*However*, the lightest amount of weight your hammer has to move when it strikes, the better. Lighter breech means you can use lighter hammers and get the same power ratio. Lighter hammer means faster lock-time and slightly less recoil.
One piece bushing. Again weight is the biggest con. I have fiddled around with multiple bushings, various bushing locations ect… until I turned blue with exasperation.
Every time, the most consistent performance came with the STOCK locations and only 2 bushings. I think the key is how you tighten the bushing screws.
Tighten the bottom 2 finger tight, then install the 2 on the side not quite touching the barrel.
NOW tighten the bottom one closest to the muzzle first very snug, then the other bottom one.
THEN barely tighten the side ones just enough so they wont fall out.
This has always worked best for me.
Another thing to consider is a one-piece grip/forestock assembly.
The MadDog stock you mentioned is like this, but is full length. (again, heavier).
You can make one yourself if you have some skill.
Having the grip and forend one piece and secured with both screws seems to cure the frame-flex issue most commonly complained about by most shooters.
The one in my sig pic is unobtainable, but shows the concept I am talking about.
This one is my condor, made of plywood.
Notice that both designs the frame sits in a slot made into the grip. This is essential IMO to reduce flex.
Even I was surprised at how easy it was to make. Woodwork and I do not get along.
the extra weight would be contained primarily in the receiver. keeping the bushing as tight as possible would prevent shifting, and grub screws would be deployed radially at 90 degree intervals at 3 points along the bushing. ( two at the rear in the usual points and one point approx. 2″ behind the forwardmost point of the receiver). two more grub screws woould be positioned on the right side of the receiver, opposite the factory screws and in the front of the receiver one on top and one on the bottom( 12 and 6 0’clock). an extremely tight fit could be achieved by freezing the barrell and heating the bushing, if you wanted to take it to that extreme. that way a differential of as little as .0002″ could be utilized. but , like i said , that would be the extreme. a tight fit between the bushing and the receiver and tapping the grub screw holes through the receiver and the bushing ( utilizing a blind hole at that point), would further stabilize the assembly, and not exert any unwanted pressure at that juncture. like i said, i love the gun i have and i would start from scratch. i just want to see how far i can take the platform. 😎
So essentially you are creating a “super bull barrel” by pinning.
In that case I woudl agree, but how can you gaurantee that the pinning assembly never lossens or puts uneven pressure, as it will add extra weight.
Research and developement…. a time consuming endeavor that may take away from the enjoyment of just using what one has… Been there done that… :1:
i would think the harmonics would be less of a consideration in an air rifle , because you are not dealing with the same chamber pressures as those found in a powder burner. secondly, the majority of the barrell is already pinned inside the full length bushing and the only exposed part of the barrell would be the several inches left sticking out of the bushing past where the moderator threads on . a standard bushing placed 1 inch from the muzzle shouldn’t have that much adverse effect on the harmonics. ??
Skip this part as anything touching the barrel can disturb the harmonics and reduce accuracy.
That’s my 2 cents.
Viewing 10 replies - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Stronger then delrin? I need to make a stronger breech. Going to make an aluminum one. Would like to keep it plastic for wear reasons.