Canadian Airgun Forum

The #1 Community for Airguns in Canada!
It is currently Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:05 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


The Canadian Airgun Forums are a place for people to discuss and learn about airguns and the airgunning sport in Canada. There are lots of discussions about airguns, airgun accessories, reviews, modification and repair information, airgun events, field target and free classifieds!

 

You need to register before you can post: click the register link to proceed. Before you register, please read the forum rules. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own pictures, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free! To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.






Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 09, 2021 11:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2020 4:07 pm
Posts: 36
Location: Lanaudiere, Quebec, Canada
Hi everyone!

I have a .177 Phantom 1000 for a while now and its a really precise and fun rifle to shoot as it is, with it's original spring.

I recently acquired a Phantom in .22 caliber but a Canadian legal (no PAL) version which shoots very steadily at 495 fps. Its actually impressive how consistent it shoots to 495.

I want to convert it to a Phantom 800, the high velocity version of the same rifle. I know i can get a kit for it, a spring and piston/seal that will make it into what i desire - something around 700 fps.

My question is this... is there a nitro piston "kit" available in the wild which would get me to around the same velocity as the Phantom 800 (~700fps) as i would like to try nitro rather than a spring kit.

I have tried switching the .177 barrel to the .22 barrel and i am overjoyed with the accuracy and fps i get from the Phantom 1000 (.177) "receiver" with the .22 barrel. It was a bolt-on project with no big manual involvement. Just as simple as it gets.

However, i would like to try nitro and maybe the experts around could let me know where to aim my research. I am fully legit as far as PAL goes but i figure it is not an issue to have information in any case.

Thanks for your time!

_________________
Benjamin H17
Umarex Legends M1911A1, DX17
Beeman QB78
Dan Wesson Silver 8" (dev. stock)
Marksman Repeater(s)
Crosman 1077s, 795, GI 911BBb, Phantom .177/.22
KWC Taurus PT92
WE Beretta 84FS Cheetah
RO72 Bullseye Target


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 10, 2021 3:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 8:30 pm
Posts: 1625
Location: Eastern Townships
I only know of Scopes&Ammo which have a conversion kit: https://scopesandammo.com/storefront/pr ... 1000-p-471 . But if you want to buy the parts individually, Crosman Canada could be a good starting point for what you need: https://crosman.ca/

You need to know which parts will be required for the conversion, so here you go. You can use about any full-power gas ram and small parts from a similar B18/19-platform gun, the Crosman Nitro Venom is a good ''donor''. You can download the parts diagram here: https://support.crosman.com/hc/en-us/ar ... 1-Current-

You'll need items #3, #4 and #5 in the list, namely the gas ram, the plain plate and the back spring guide. However, there's a small difference between the regular steel spring and nitro piston compression tubes, the cross pin hole isn't in the same position so the threaded hole for the trigger pack won't align. So the back spring guide needs a small modification to work: you install it in the tube 180┬░ from its ''normal position'' (threaded hole hidden), center punch the position of the trigger pack hole in the back guide and re-drill and tap a new hole (the threads are metric: M8 x 1.25). Also a small recess has to be machined in the actual piston inner front wall, this is needed to center the gas ram rod in the piston.

All this work CAN be done with relatively common tools - drill press, a 3/8'' drill bit, a center punch and the correct drill bit and tap for the trigger pack hole. Only ''special tool'' needed would be a centering bushing for the drill bit when making the recess in the piston's front wall. If you decide you'll do the mod, I could easily make a bushing and send it to you quick and N/C, I live in the Eastern Townships :wink: . Also if you need more detailed infos on the conversion, either in this thread or by PM, just let me know.

There are other ways of doing this conversion, this is the one I used successfully in the past for friend's rifles.

Hope that helps,

Francois

_________________
If everything's so lovely yeah, then why don't I, why don't I, why don't I, why don't I feel lovely?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 10, 2021 10:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 4:20 pm
Posts: 2010
Location: Spruce Grove AB
So I have been putting a phantom 500 barrel onto a nitro venom, or quest nitro piston. Now I'm not sure. Anyway, the barrel blocks are different, as are the latch pin and locking lug? Anyway, look closely at the parts before you commit. You may need a round bastard file :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 17, 2021 2:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2020 4:07 pm
Posts: 36
Location: Lanaudiere, Quebec, Canada
It doesnt seem like you are talking exactly the same as i meant, which essentially doesn't need to take the barrels into consideration for a 'receiver' or internal 'power plant' swap. There could be issues with barrel blocks not being the same from one model to another but essentially, the insides, the guts of the piston/spring are more than likely similar

In any case, here are some informations about barrels/locking methods on the Phantom in both .177 and .22

I have successfully swapped, as far as barrel goes, from one to another Phantom .22 to .177 vice versa without any hitch. The only 'issue' i somewhat faced is, and that is my own opinion, both 'receivers' are of different generations. As mentionned, the closing latch is different on them (receiver side only, barrels are identical except for markings).

My Phantom .177 orginally came with about the same locking lug on the receiver than on the barrel block. I guess i could call them 'detents' as they are both spring-loaded. This makes it very smooth to break open before cocking.

As for the .22 i just purchased, the 'receiver' has a straight, thru pin as a locking lug, paired with the exact same detent style on the barrel block than on the .177. This is truly horrible as i need to hit the barrel quite stoutly to break up the rifle before cocking. After some shots, about 30-ish in a close sequence, its does get to a point where i can break it without having to slap the sh** out of it.

Of course, that only leaves a few pellets of easier breakage since at this point, one needs to take a breather. Then the detent on the barrel lock cools down enough that i need to hit it again once i get back to shooting.

Hahha.

From the provided picture... which is newer, you think? Any serial number gurus? I would think that the pin locking method would have been the first release then they fixed it with another detent but... the receiver with the pin has the hole ti receive a detent like the other.... so.. odd. weird.


Attachments:
File comment: Phantom locking methods and markings differences
20210817_155210.jpg
20210817_155210.jpg [ 669.59 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]

_________________
Benjamin H17
Umarex Legends M1911A1, DX17
Beeman QB78
Dan Wesson Silver 8" (dev. stock)
Marksman Repeater(s)
Crosman 1077s, 795, GI 911BBb, Phantom .177/.22
KWC Taurus PT92
WE Beretta 84FS Cheetah
RO72 Bullseye Target
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2021 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:27 am
Posts: 1278
Location: Thunder Bay,On.
Actually no conversion kit needs to be purchased...except for the high power gas ram...with a couple mods which allow you to reverse the gas ram and use the standard short piston from the the spring driven Phantom...I've done it to all my Crosman spring guns.... Basic Chevota 101 mods really.
Cheers :)

_________________
The cave you fear to enter....holds the treasure you seek


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2021 12:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:17 pm
Posts: 2823
Location: Kingston, ON
oldfart wrote:

From the provided picture... which is newer, you think?


Attachments:
breach.jpg
breach.jpg [ 538.64 KiB | Viewed 141 times ]

_________________

Duke ))))----//----------==
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2021 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2020 4:07 pm
Posts: 36
Location: Lanaudiere, Quebec, Canada
Okay.. so this basically goes against what i originally thought about the different locking methods. I would have thought that one would go for simplest, cheapest way to lock at first and then realize that a thru pin is hard to break open and that a better method would be welcomed.

The dual detent method seemed to fit the progression, development stages of a quality product. First start with what is tried and true, the pin/detent lock and then realize dual detent gives the best results and ease of use.

I am baffled to see that its essentially the contrary.They went from functionally great to absolutely garbage in my opinion. Although it doesn't fit my model of a respectable company being proud of their products and keeping with trying to better themselves and their products.... it DOES certainly fit a capitalistic modek where a couple cents saved, over a bunch of product built and sold, increases profits somewhat immensely.

There is also a fair bit of deception with how this is done, in my opinion. Profiting from an already acquired notoriety of a product, via users experiences and reviews, to then go and cheap out on some very essential functionnal things that would have been noticed earlier in experiences and reviews.

Its like they have played consumers real good by releasing a functionnal product and then switching parts, functionnal, hands-on user experience parts/mecanisms with something of a lower grade, hoping it would fly under the radar as there isn't the initial heat of a new product being released and attracting as much attention. It already had whatever repytation it had, set in stone, if i can say that.

I might be wrong, too. Maybe there are some benefits to using a pin versus a detent combo as far as forces and movement is concerned. I am ready to give them the benefit of the doubt if only i had more data about both the locking techniques. One could say a harder to break barrel will yltimately seal better and/or be more accurate as it very much limits all movements but... as far as im concerned, the forces generated are never enough to have such a critical impact.

Also, and by far, the 177 is more accurate than the 22 at similar, short to medium range - all within reason. Too short of a range is very accurate but doesnt scale upward (inrange) as sometimes pellets have not reached their yltimare high spots of flight trajectory so trying a longer range will result in over shooting. It might not make sense to others the way i explain it but... after changing scopes and sighting at 20 feet, the rifle was basically unusable at longer range. I was alaays hitting WAY WAY higher than expected/anticipated. Enough that it frustrated the sh*** out of me and had to stop shooting for the time being, until i could sight at a more decent distance of about 37-40 feet. Then the rifle is accurate at its familiar used range. And is now a great shooter.

I realize the whole thing is subjective but thinking about the locking methids, i wonder which model they followed. By your response and my tests, it seems they cheaped out on the locking method to save a couple bucks overall.

Anyways, thanks for reading and taking some time to reply!

_________________
Benjamin H17
Umarex Legends M1911A1, DX17
Beeman QB78
Dan Wesson Silver 8" (dev. stock)
Marksman Repeater(s)
Crosman 1077s, 795, GI 911BBb, Phantom .177/.22
KWC Taurus PT92
WE Beretta 84FS Cheetah
RO72 Bullseye Target


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
News News Site map Site map SitemapIndex SitemapIndex RSS Feed RSS Feed Channel list Channel list

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

phpBB SEO