Controlling the Hammer, Breech and valve stem Bounce
Guys,
Has anyone messed with the controlling of the bounce in these parts to help cut the waste of air in the tank and if so, what did they do and/or the outcome of it???
All Replies
Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
The O-Ring under the top hat is a good way to help reduce the valve bounce from the impact of the hammer.
I was just thinking more along the line of a Inertia Weight and/or Spring…
I know my Rapid has these that help make the hammer blow more of a dead impact blow. Like the way a dead blow hammer works…
The Rapid setup works at the moment of impact from the hammer the
Inertia spring and weight is set off the opposite direction to counter the hammer blow and make this more dead blow or one solid blow…
Just to have much better management of the air is note worthy, but my way of thinking with the AF product and the amount of force from the hammer and the amount of the hammer movement before it strikes would have to affect how the rifle is held in place while shooting as well.
Just me thinking out loud here and I have some art work from what I have done yesterday while digging through all the parts and pieces looking for stuff I might could part with on the forsale side of this forum.
I am using a double hammer setup now and I have two hammer springs as well. Still in the growing stages just yet, but with the amount of impact I am in need of to blow the seat open on this much enlarged valve stem I am messing with, will most certainly affect things in a big way such as the POI and POA, as well as the valve bouncing open more than once LOL…
i haven’t but I would think removing resistance to open the valve and use the lightest spring and hammer would be a good place to start.
hmmm… You say control bounce and waste air in the same sentence and they are mostly opposites.
No waste of air would mean all energy transfers from the hammer to the valve (a.k.a No Bounce) AND only the needed air to push the pellet to the end of the barrel is used.
Controlling of air would be by the correct amount of energy imparted by the hammer.
Bottomline is not letting your tophat strike the valve body, then moving the tophat out further, equal to the thickness of the o-ring that you will slip underneath the tophat (because your striking force will vary).
Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Interesting. Typically with a HDD application, you get a slight decrease in velocity, but nothing very noteworthy.
In seeing some of the gains to be had in smaller PCP’s, one would think that the gains would be exponentially larger on a bottle gun.
I think though, that given the hammer hits the breech, rather than a valve stem, that any bounce or chatter would be minimized inherently.
The inertia weight is something I’ve never really considered but sounds in theory to be a viable solution… I would imagine a heavy medium to be inside the hammer to allow for the inertia? ….but would think that depending on the angle the gun is held, the contents may could shift causing a small inconsistency in how hard the hammer hits. Would be small, mind you.