Canadian Airgun Forum

The #1 Community for Airguns in Canada!
It is currently Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:24 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 This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 10:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:47 pm
Posts: 1726
Location: canada
CJN wrote:
Those who are...making...rules for the CFC are not stupid.

I disagree with this one point... :wink:

_________________
“You don't get anywhere by standing on the sidelines waiting for somebody else to take action.” Please join the CSSA today!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 1:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:38 am
Posts: 591
Location: Kitchener / Waterloo
Quote:
below 500fps with intended pellet.


That is kind of what I was getting at. I know all of this is only for fun but the rules should be made clear before it comes up in a competition. And if I can help it along by opening my big mouth, so be it.

Yes I do believe it would be cheating that is why I asked first, rather than go ahead and just doing it. I think it would not only be cheating but against the law as Walter and others have stated. But when has that stopped anyone before.

Jeff.

_________________
Some people are like slinkies, not much good for anything but they put a smile on your face when you push them down the stairs.


Make a fast friend. Adopt a greyhound.
WAGG. Waterloo Area Greyhound Group.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:56 pm
Posts: 420
Location: Ontario
windbag wrote:
CJN wrote:
Those who are...making...rules for the CFC are not stupid.

I disagree with this one point... :wink:


:lol:

_________________
Canadian Airgun Field Target Association (CAFTA)
CAFTA Governor
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 11:03 pm
Posts: 5330
Location: home of the Marshville Festival, Ontario, Canada
Voltar1 wrote:
Pellets used to determine PL would be the manufacturers choice and they DO NOT use heavy pellets to determine fps.

I wouldn't bet on that if I were you - because you'd lose.
On the original box for my non-PAL Diana 24C it states:
"Certified less than 500 FPS with H&N Barracuda pellets".
H&N Barracuda pellets are a heavy pellet - IIRC, around 10.3 gr. in .177. Far heavier than the average 8.0 grain .177 pellet.

In my experience, manufacturers do indeed make use of heavier pellets to conform to Canada's sub-500 FPS laws.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:55 pm
Posts: 6834
Location: Rocky Mtn Hse Alberta
Suprmatic wrote:
Voltar1 wrote:
Pellets used to determine PL would be the manufacturers choice and they DO NOT use heavy pellets to determine fps.

I wouldn't bet on that if I were you - because you'd lose.
On the original box for my non-PAL Diana 24C it states:
"Certified less than 500 FPS with H&N Barracuda pellets".
H&N Barracuda pellets are a heavy pellet - IIRC, around 10.3 gr. in .177. Far heavier than the average 8.0 grain .177 pellet.

In my experience, manufacturers do indeed make use of heavier pellets to conform to Canada's sub-500 FPS laws.


That is very interesting Supr, never heard that one before especially on a gun that has never been PAL rated or offered as PAL rated. (may be mistaken on that one too)

What velocity will your 24C shoot 7.9 grain Crosmans at?

I had the 'manufacturer selects the pellet weight for the velocity' part correct eh? :)

If I was doing a standard for velocity testing it would be the lead roundball weight applicable to the caliber.

Cheers,
Walter....

_________________
Image
Walter


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 4:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:19 pm
Posts: 8935
Location: Coalmont BC
Quote:
If I was doing a standard for velocity testing it would be the lead roundball weight applicable to the caliber.

^X2

Bob

_________________
Dominion Marksman Silver Shield - 5890 x 6000 in 1976, and downhill ever since!
Airsonal;
Too many! Springers, Pumpers, CO2, but I love my PCPs and developing them!
Proud Member of the 2000+fps Club!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 4:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:42 am
Posts: 4080
Location: Somewhere In Time
Mac wrote:
Can't see why staying within the rules would be considered cheating. I call it innovating.

Since targets can easily withstand 20 ft/lb and not be damaged, there are no issues there. We try to set the targets for sub 500fps matches to go down with a 2 ft/lb paddle hit and stay up with a 12 ft/lb face hit. That should pretty well cover any innovating that can be done.


I would agree with this.....

If the CFC has not given a standard weight of pellet (specific to caliber) to be used in velocity testing that is their fault, not mine.....If my gun is shooting below 500FPS and meanwhile not exceeding 5.4Joules of power I am not breaking any law, plain and simple.....Until proof of said law is shown I am following their "laws"

I'm sure the argument here will be "Well if you shoot a light pellet it will be over 500FPS".....well yeah, maybe it would be, but I am not shooting light pellets, and all the pellets I have with me our 10.3gr....weird.... :butthead: That's like a cop pulling you over and saying "you know your car could go over the speed limit, if you push the gas too far"..... :lol:

I don't think it is playing the rules when you follow them in a different way than the standard person, provided you are actually still following them. If I didn't have a Chrony I wouldn't do it, as I could never be sure of actually energies and velocities. But shooting a pellet below 500FPS and 5.4Joules is perfectly legal, no matter what pellet you use, they wrote that law, not me. I am/will follow their laws exactly as written, they say nothing about pellet weight, so people assuming a "standard weight" is doing nothing but hurting yourself......Who cares about "manufacturer tests...or recommendations" until I see that on the CFC site, in this law, it is of no relevance

It seems almost sensible that one would adjust their gun with the pellet they intend to use, to the best legal trajectory they can acquire, which is obviously just under 500FPS.....and unless in doing so you produce over 5.4Joules you are perfectly legal :|

:rolleyes:

_________________
"Are you guys silly? I'm still gonna send it..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:55 pm
Posts: 6834
Location: Rocky Mtn Hse Alberta
jgoodz420 wrote:
Mac wrote:
Can't see why staying within the rules would be considered cheating. I call it innovating.

Since targets can easily withstand 20 ft/lb and not be damaged, there are no issues there. We try to set the targets for sub 500fps matches to go down with a 2 ft/lb paddle hit and stay up with a 12 ft/lb face hit. That should pretty well cover any innovating that can be done.


I would agree with this.....

If the CFC has not given a standard weight of pellet (specific to caliber) to be used in velocity testing that is their fault, not mine.....If my gun is shooting below 500FPS and meanwhile not exceeding 5.4Joules of power I am not breaking any law, plain and simple.....Until proof of said law is shown I am following their "laws"

I'm sure the argument here will be "Well if you shoot a light pellet it will be over 500FPS".....well yeah, maybe it would be, but I am not shooting light pellets, and all the pellets I have with me our 10.3gr....weird.... :butthead: That's like a cop pulling you over and saying "you know your car could go over the speed limit, if you push the gas too far"..... :lol:

I don't think it is playing the rules when you follow them in a different way than the standard person, provided you are actually still following them. If I didn't have a Chrony I wouldn't do it, as I could never be sure of actually energies and velocities. But shooting a pellet below 500FPS and 5.4Joules is perfectly legal, no matter what pellet you use, they wrote that law, not me. I am/will follow their laws exactly as written, they say nothing about pellet weight, so people assuming a "standard weight" is doing nothing but hurting yourself......Who cares about "manufacturer tests...or recommendations" until I see that on the CFC site, in this law, it is of no relevance

It seems almost sensible that one would adjust their gun with the pellet they intend to use, to the best legal trajectory they can acquire, which is obviously just under 500FPS.....and unless in doing so you produce over 5.4Joules you are perfectly legal :|

:rolleyes:


You perhaps do not remember the ruling and the reason for the energy level being added.
It was to allow for the shooting of light weight pellets in a non-PAL airgun that exceeds 500fps but not the 5.4 Joules.
The pellets to determine the speed were a) manufacturer specified b) standard weights
AND so for .177 that is 7.9 grains and in .22cal 14.3 grains.

In the case of the Diana of Supr's they specified the pellet on the manufacturer statement. Especially important as it deviates from the 'standard' pellet readily available.

These things were the hot topic back in the early 80s as I recall. Mainly as the registry was gearing up and they made the grab at adult airguns as firearms.

_________________
Image
Walter


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:42 am
Posts: 4080
Location: Somewhere In Time
Voltar1 wrote:

You perhaps do not remember the ruling and the reason for the energy level being added.
It was to allow for the shooting of light weight pellets in a non-PAL airgun that exceeds 500fps but not the 5.4 Joules.
The pellets to determine the speed were a) manufacturer specified b) standard weights
AND so for .177 that is 7.9 grains and in .22cal 14.3 grains.

In the case of the Diana of Supr's they specified the pellet on the manufacturer statement. Especially important as it deviates from the 'standard' pellet readily available.

These things were the hot topic back in the early 80s as I recall. Mainly as the registry was gearing up and they made the grab at adult airguns as firearms.


I have never seen these pellet weights referenced in their laws, do you have a link? (Seriously...)

The pellet weight should also be referenced in the actual law itself to remain viable, or at least say "when dealing with XXXXX pellet"

_________________
"Are you guys silly? I'm still gonna send it..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:42 am
Posts: 4080
Location: Somewhere In Time
Voltar1 wrote:

You perhaps do not remember the ruling and the reason for the energy level being added.
It was to allow for the shooting of light weight pellets in a non-PAL airgun that exceeds 500fps but not the 5.4 Joules.
The pellets to determine the speed were a) manufacturer specified b) standard weights
AND so for .177 that is 7.9 grains and in .22cal 14.3 grains.


Just though of something though....

What is the difference of using a light pellet over 500FPS and under 5.4J and using a heavy pellet under 500FPS and under 5.4J???

The heavy pellet exceeds neither.... :|

_________________
"Are you guys silly? I'm still gonna send it..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:55 pm
Posts: 6834
Location: Rocky Mtn Hse Alberta
jgoodz420 wrote:
Voltar1 wrote:

You perhaps do not remember the ruling and the reason for the energy level being added.
It was to allow for the shooting of light weight pellets in a non-PAL airgun that exceeds 500fps but not the 5.4 Joules.
The pellets to determine the speed were a) manufacturer specified b) standard weights
AND so for .177 that is 7.9 grains and in .22cal 14.3 grains.


Just though of something though....

What is the difference of using a light pellet over 500FPS and under 5.4J and using a heavy pellet under 500FPS and under 5.4J???

The heavy pellet exceeds neither.... :|


The determination is it must break both barriers to be PAL rated.
you gotta use real life examples instead of what-ifs to sort this out.

14.3 grains at 499fps is 7.95fpe = 10.78 Joules..... non-PAL

7.9 grains at 499fps is 4.4fpe = 5.96 Joules ....... non-PAL

Now if either of those shoots a super light pellet that exceeds the 500fps but does not exceed 5.7 Joules it is still non-PAL
if it exceeds both then it is PAL.

EDIT TO FIX MATH

_________________
Image
Walter


Last edited by Voltar1 on Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 6:47 pm
Posts: 1021
Location: brantford ontario
Voltar1 wrote:
jgoodz420 wrote:
Voltar1 wrote:

You perhaps do not remember the ruling and the reason for the energy level being added.
It was to allow for the shooting of light weight pellets in a non-PAL airgun that exceeds 500fps but not the 5.4 Joules.
The pellets to determine the speed were a) manufacturer specified b) standard weights
AND so for .177 that is 7.9 grains and in .22cal 14.3 grains.


Just though of something though....

What is the difference of using a light pellet over 500FPS and under 5.4J and using a heavy pellet under 500FPS and under 5.4J???

The heavy pellet exceeds neither.... :|




The determination is it must break both barriers to be PAL rated.
you gotta use real life examples instead of what-ifs to sort this out.

14.3 grains at 499fps is 7.95fpe = 5.86 Joules..... non-PAL

7.9 grains at 499fps is 4.4fpe = 3.2 Joules

Now if either of those shoots a super light pellet that exceeds the 500fps but does not exceed 5.4 Joules it is still non-PAL
if it exceeds both then it is PAL.


so technically if a rifle does not breach both factors you really dont need a pal for them?
yet you cant buy a 500+fpe rifle without a pal even tho its only a part of the equasion?
that sucks

_________________
"So long and thanks for all the fish!

Dave[/color]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:42 am
Posts: 4080
Location: Somewhere In Time
Voltar1 wrote:
jgoodz420 wrote:
Voltar1 wrote:

You perhaps do not remember the ruling and the reason for the energy level being added.
It was to allow for the shooting of light weight pellets in a non-PAL airgun that exceeds 500fps but not the 5.4 Joules.
The pellets to determine the speed were a) manufacturer specified b) standard weights
AND so for .177 that is 7.9 grains and in .22cal 14.3 grains.


Just though of something though....

What is the difference of using a light pellet over 500FPS and under 5.4J and using a heavy pellet under 500FPS and under 5.4J???

The heavy pellet exceeds neither.... :|


The determination is it must break both barriers to be PAL rated.
you gotta use real life examples instead of what-ifs to sort this out.

14.3 grains at 499fps is 7.95fpe = 5.86 Joules..... non-PAL

7.9 grains at 499fps is 4.4fpe = 3.2 Joules

Now if either of those shoots a super light pellet that exceeds the 500fps but does not exceed 5.4 Joules it is still non-PAL
if it exceeds both then it is PAL.

Hmmm.....I understand this to a point

Why is a 28.4gr @ 499 = 15.71FPE illegal then? it is not breaking both barriers. You said they mention standard pellet weights? this leaves me at a blank as I have searched their laws for exactly that, a pellet weight, and found nothing......I guess that's my issue at this point, no where have I seen them list in black and white "7.9gr and 14.3gr"

_________________
"Are you guys silly? I'm still gonna send it..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:55 pm
Posts: 6834
Location: Rocky Mtn Hse Alberta
[quote="Voltar1 wrote:
jgoodz420 wrote:
Voltar1 wrote:

You perhaps do not remember the ruling and the reason for the energy level being added.
It was to allow for the shooting of light weight pellets in a non-PAL airgun that exceeds 500fps but not the 5.4 Joules.
The pellets to determine the speed were a) manufacturer specified b) standard weights
AND so for .177 that is 7.9 grains and in .22cal 14.3 grains.


Just though of something though....

What is the difference of using a light pellet over 500FPS and under 5.4J and using a heavy pellet under 500FPS and under 5.4J???

The heavy pellet exceeds neither.... :|


The determination is it must break both barriers to be PAL rated.
you gotta use real life examples instead of what-ifs to sort this out.

14.3 grains at 499fps is 7.95fpe = 10.77 Joules..... non-PAL

7.9 grains at 499fps is 4.4fpe = 5.96 Joules ...... non-PAL

Now if either of those shoots a super light pellet that exceeds the 500fps but does not exceed 5.4 Joules it is still non-PAL
if it exceeds both then it is PAL.

Hmmm.....I understand this to a point

Why is a 28.4gr @ 499 = 15.71FPE illegal then? it is not breaking both barriers. You said they mention standard pellet weights? this leaves me at a blank as I have searched their laws for exactly that, a pellet weight, and found nothing......I guess that's my issue at this point, no where have I seen them list in black and white "7.9gr and 14.3gr"[/quote]

Standard weights were determined and thereafter presumed to be understood since about 1980

there are some math mistakes in my quote above. Fixed in an edit.

_________________
Image
Walter


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 6:47 pm
Posts: 1021
Location: brantford ontario
if you think about it they probably keep it vaugue on purpose...keep people guessing .....keep em scared of breaking the law if they are good law abiding folk

_________________
"So long and thanks for all the fish!

Dave[/color]


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 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