Making the .25 Edgun quiet, easily and inexpensively…
The key to the Edgun .25 making less noise is reducing the air pressure at the muzzle. There are a few ways to do this without engaging in exotic baffle designs, or spending money on an aftermarket shroud or moderator.
Here’s how it’s done:
The first step is to remove both the baffle cover, which is unscrewed counter clockwise, by hand, then removing the bottom shroud by removing the barrel bushing/vent nut. Then you can easily enlarge the existing vent holes at the rear of the Edgun shroud with a variable speed hand drill. I made my lower shroud vent holes 2.0mm in diameter:
You can go larger if you wish. If you go too large and begin to hear air “whoosh” out of the vent holes when firing, just wrap some felt around the inside of the shroud, behind the vent holes, to slow the air down. You can touch them up with the tip of a permanent ink black felt tip Sharpie. This is how they look when done, but before the Sharpie touchup:
The next step is to increase the air flow from the front of the Edgun to the rear of the shroud. Now on the R3 this is a bit more complicated because the shroud comes in two parts, so I will concentrate on the R3. Unscrew the top shroud, baffle cover, taking care to remove it easily because the O-ring can be damaged on the threads. Be sure to put silicone grease that O-ring before putting it back on. Note the bottom shroud, and barrel, are held in place by a 19mm nut with vent holes in it. It unscrews easily, counter-clockwise, with a common metric wrench:
After it is taken off, you then enlarge the holes in the nut with a variable speed drill. I went 2.5mm, you may choose to go smaller, but not much larger, as the hole diameter affects the strength of the nut.
After this is done, you simply replace the bottom shroud, then the barrel bushing, being certain that the bottom of the shroud is properly placed OVER the rim of the permanent cone shaped breech attachment. If you ignore this step, you will bend the bottom of the shroud when you tighten the nut…note the bottom of the shroud sitting flush against the cone shaped breech attachment in this picture. The hidden rim inside the shroud is about 1/8″ or so tall, but it must have the shroud placed evenly over it before tightening the nut. When you lift up and remove the bottom shroud, you will easily spot it, as the cone shaped breech attachment remains in place:
Finally, there has been much discussion regarding how much torque must be used to tighten the nut that holds the barrel and bottom shroud in place. This is not a difficult process. First you obtain a Russian Torque Wrench…see below picture:
Placing the 19mm wrench in this handy grasping tool, you tighten the nut to where it is snug against the shroud, then you go roughly 1/2 turn further. That’s all it takes. Remember, this is thin and fairly soft aluminum and will strip threads or bend rather easily. AND…if you have placed the bottom of the barrel shroud over the lip of the cone shaped breech attachment, you will not have bent, or dented, the bottom of the shroud.
Replacing the top shroud (baffle cover) is easily done, just be careful sliding the cover over the O-ring using a light downward pressure and clockwise screwing motion until it gets past the threads on the cover. Snug it up hand tight, no more.
That’s it! You can expect at least a 50% reduction in muzzle blast, which on the Long Edgun makes the hammer slap the loudest noise emitted when shooting the gun. It costs nothing, takes about 1/2 hour, a couple of metric bits, and a variable speed hand drill. Take your time. The existing holes will guide the bit if you proceed slowly, especially when starting the new hole.
Now, for that hammer slap…I’m still working on that one.
Regards,
Kindly ‘Ol Uncle H 😯 😯 t
All Replies
I think Gabe was wondering if the lip at the rear end of the aluminum prototype fits into the forward scope tower? Or does it just rest against the front scope tower?
This lip:
I’m thinking it rests against it.
It fits INTO the forward scope tower. With the slide-on, you remove that adaptor that’s marked on the picture. That’s why the lip is there, to hold the end of the shroud firmly in place against the breech/forward scope tower. The result is a secure, flush fit, and the baffles stay in alignment with the barrel. (moron…. :twak: )
Note from the picture, it fits flush against the breech/scope tower. I have seen this, and done this, with my own eyes and hands. It fits perfectly.
Kindest regards,
Your friend forever….Uncle H 😯 😯 t
The humble and obediant servant of ours may not be as obediant as he´s humble. There´s two versions of this scope tower/breech attachement. You truly should´ve known … :twak:
Hoot,
Intresting point of view, tension free.
But like you sayed: in the end the barrel is mounted with only 2 SMALL hex screws.
I don’t think that is stable enough to make it consistant in the long run.
The tension thing is needed the make the airtube freefloating.
It gives the contruction of the rifle it’s stability.
Your scope has to have a solid connection with the barrel.
The R2.5 had a better construction to try this kind of moderator.
But:
I really like the shroud, looking forward to test results!
Regards, Robert.
Will do Gabe!!!
Hoot,
Check to see if the scope-to-barrel alignment is not compromised by tapping the scope after each shot. I’m pretty sure the gun will shoot accurately without tension. As long as nothing moves during a shot, there shouldn’t be any problems. Which got me to think about a benefit which tension might really have to offer. The integrity of the scope to barrel alignment in respect to lateral movement. Remember, with the cricket and old edgun design the scope is essentially locked into alignment with the scope. Something to consider during your test tomorrow.
Again, I’m in agreement with Neil’s assertions but it wouldn’t hurt to see if the scope and barrel stay true after handling it. Try taking it in and out of the case, picking it up by the scope, laying it on the ground, or whatever comes to mine. Give it a good work out without abusing it if you know what I mean. That sound bad 😈
I still like the carbon fiber shroud. I a little bit of tension is not bad IMO.
I’ll up early waiting patiently alongside my computer or iphone.
Gabe G.
Dear Dope…
I really believe you could put a 24″ to 36″ barrel on your FT Edgun, and have Neil make you a one piece shroud that would fit it like a glove. It would be super quiet at that length. Further, you could even ask him to put in an additional barrel bushing for an extremely long barrel’s lateral stability. If you go the nut-in-the-shroud route, you would have to have a machinist thread the barrel for you with the proper thread first. Either way, you win. The only difference would be cost.
Of course, it would cost a bit more, but at $150 for a standard, aluminum, powder coated, custom sized, slip-on shroud, without the nut, you could probably work a deal with Neil for a “one off” nut-in-a-shroud to satisfy any pre-tension obsession you have. Why, I’ll bet Neil wouldn’t charge that much more to permit pre-tension of your nuts till they sing like a trio of sopranos!!! I’d “tune” them for free…just send me the airline tickets!
Our original intent was to quiet the Edgun Long. We never expected, or intended, to get involved with the “floating” barrel discussion. But, remember…there is no recoil, and the barrel is screwed into a butt plate, which is then secured to the breech with two hex screws. One might ask, with a barrel bushing midpoint in the shroud to keep the barrel from wobbling up/down/sideways, is another hard point connection required? There is no appreciable forward or backward movement of the barrel when shooting. The only movement possible would be laterally down the length of the barrel (wobble). If the mid-point barrel bushing holds the barrel laterally in place, it doesn’t seem likely that it could wobble!
Tomorrow I will do a careful test to see what kind of groups we get. I’ll run multiple groups to ensure we get a good idea.
Interesting subject. We may be right, we may be wrong…who knows? Both sides of this discussion have good points to argue.
Accuracy will tell the tale. I’ll get on it first thing.
Your Arch Nemesis….
Kindly ‘Ol Uncle H 😯 😯 t
Note from the picture, it fits flush against the breech/scope tower. I have seen this, and done this, with my own eyes and hands. It fits perfectly.
Ah! Excellent idea and thanks for clarifying Hoot, from your earlier description I couldn’t tell if the grub screw was on that part or if it was against the barrel.
And I couldn’t tell from the picture, it’s kinda small on my massive monitor… 😉
I NEVER said it would come apart. I don’t even want it to come apart.
Like I posted above, I WANT to add a longer barrel to my EdGun and if this untensioned barrel idea works then i’m golden!!
You are arguing with yourself…
The .177 standard gun may be very quiet but you need to hear the 25 caliber long version, even with Horace’s holes it sounded horribly loud to me. I still do not get this barrel tension thing you keep talking about, barrels do not need to be held in tension. There is no point in my arguing this with any of you any further, you want to believe the gun will come apart without the tension, nothing will change your mind and I am fine with that. I will tell you now if this was my gun it would have a single one piece shroud on it and I would not lose any sleep over using it, Neil.
I think Gabe was wondering if the lip at the rear end of the aluminum prototype fits into the forward scope tower? Or does it just rest against the front scope tower?
This lip:
I’m thinking it rests against it.
It fits INTO the forward scope tower. With the slide-on, you remove that adaptor that’s marked on the picture. That’s why the lip is there, to hold the end of the shroud firmly in place against the breech/forward scope tower. The result is a secure, flush fit, and the baffles stay in alignment with the barrel. (moron…. :twak: )
Note from the picture, it fits flush against the breech/scope tower. I have seen this, and done this, with my own eyes and hands. It fits perfectly.
Kindest regards,
Your friend forever….Uncle H 😯 😯 t
It wouldn’t hurt to email him the length from the breech to the tip of the OEM shroud. The length of the barrel is important as well, and I’m guessing in “Standard” the barrels would all be the same length. I believe we’ve established the barrel diameter is identical on all the LW barrels.
I’m fairly certain Ed is aware of our modifications on this thread. His input would be valued, but unless we are totally off track, there is not much to say. If we can make the Edgun quieter, then good for us with that specific need. Ed’s already got more orders than he can fill as the gun currently exists. If “Quiet” becomes a big deal, then he will make it quieter…but that’s not a factor for many shooters. Ed can’t make the gun perfect for everyone’s specific needs…that’s why we modify. That’s half the fun of owning a pcp…
Regards,
H 😯 😯 t
Neil, since you are here.
I think Gabe was wondering if the lip at the rear end of the aluminum prototype fits into the forward scope tower? Or does it just rest against the front scope tower?
This lip:
I’m thinking it rests against it.
From what Ed explained the whole system surrounding the barrel (the back part of the shroud, the scope tower and the barrel cover from the scope tower to the breech) is working in compression to hold the barrel in tension….
“very loud shroud that come with”, perhaps on the larger calibers, mine is super, super quiet being only 177. 😉
For the record, to date Hoot hasn’t been happy with ANY shroud for use with his nosy neighbors… 😆 But Hoot changes rifles like most people change underwear. 
If he is saying that the tension makes the gun more accurate then Horaces tests will tell if this is so or not. Attaching anything to the barrel with the threads will pull the barrel forwards and not push the barrel against the block as has been suggested. I can not say until the testing is done by Horace whether or not the tension will effect the accuracy, that is why a prototype has been made for testing, but I will argue till the cows come home that the barrel does not need tension to hold it in place. It is more than adequately anchored with the allen screws and where it leaves the breach block at the front. I have improved many designs over my years in design, makers do not always get it right, if we all believed that something was perfect they would never be improved upon.
Horace had asked me if I could improve on the shroud without effecting accuracy, I have improved on the efficiency of the shroud now all we can do is wait until he posts the accuracy reports when he is done testing. Remember none of us know everything, we all make mistakes, look at all the recalls that get put out by multi million dollar corporations, if this works and accuracy is the same then it is up to you if you want to try it or stick with the very loud shroud it comes with, it is all about choice. As I told Horace it does not matter to me if I get orders or not for this gun, I am swamped with work and just wanted to take on the challenge of making this for Horace,to prove to him that it is possible to make them quieter, that has been achieved very well, lets just wait and see how the accuracy is. Neil.
Did I ever say it wouldn’t work?
Nope.
Just wondering how it works once things the original designer did to make it work as best it could had been eliminated. 😉
In fact this is the kind of news I have been waiting for. I was told by Ed that I couldn’t put a longer barrel on my 177 due to the tension issue. If it doesn’t matter then I will be able to do what I have wanted to do all along.
Ed had put so much emphasis on how important the tension was I just find it unusual that it doesn’t matter AT ALL… As far as I know this is the first time this has been done and it hasn’t been fully tested. My ‘doubt’ has nothing to do with your ability or ideas.
Your work, which is excellent speaks for itself. :8:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
This recess modification on the back baffle of the shroud ain’t there on the early R3 with steel bolt action & breech but present on the late model R3.x with alu action and breech.
On examining my R3.0 if I take away the silencer part with the tensioning nut there’s nothing left that keeps the barrel from unthreading itself apart from friction in the threads in the breech. Between the housing part with the “scope towers” and the barrel there’s a few 1/10 of a millimeter clearence and the barrel is rather “wobbley” in lack of a better word so to keep the POI and the wobble repeatable and consistent I’m leaning towards the need of some tensioning of the barrel and you could imagine the surprise if when you pull the trigger and goes pop and flies away.
Here’s two pictures to show the recess or the lack there of…
On the matter of the multishot conversion kit of which I’m the proud owner of the first in the western world I would like to say a few things…
The action was rough and not indexing 100% when I first got it but with a little TLC it’s now smooth and would be worth the investment.
Some say it’s “hard cocked” and yes it is. With that said it’s heavier than the singelshot but then again there is a bit more going on when you cock the multishot but it’s not too hard I think. If you like to it’s easy to put a longer retention screw in the loading handle to get an action more like the AR (two fingers).
Another reason it’s heavier is at least on my R3.0 with the old two screws trigger assy is that the pin that pulls the hammer back is engaging lower on the hammer than the block style on the older steel action but there’s a remedy for that to.
Either shorten the pin so much that it still engage and cocks the hammer but does so higher up on the hammer or make a bigger radius on it, the effect is the same.
If you with R3.x will experience the same as me with the conversion kit I don’t know and if it’s an issue with the R3M remains to se.
hOOtylicious
You’ve lost me somewhat on this thread that started out as an interesting DIY thread on doing it cheap & dirty but now has evolved into an “high end” fabricating outsourcing thread… 😉
My three herrings
Your 👿 (sorry for my grammar but I don’t speak your imperial language only metric)