Canadian Airgun Forum

The #1 Community for Airguns in Canada!
It is currently Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:43 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 Mar 02, 2015 7:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:27 am
Posts: 1108
Location: Thunder Bay,On.
Been following the Phantom spring length thread and was wondering if anyone can venture a guess why companies use so many different methods for detuning the same air rifle.....short spring...long spring....piston hole..no piston hole, etc.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 8:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 9:51 pm
Posts: 257
Location: Dryden, Ontario
MyCrosman wrote:
Been following the Phantom spring length thread and was wondering if anyone can venture a guess why companies use so many different methods for detuning the same air rifle.....short spring...long spring....piston hole..no piston hole, etc.


Exactly....one has to wonder of the need for air gun manufacturers to complicate matters by constantly " switching things up"..when they have already found a satisfactory method of detuning.If it works , it works...why change it? It DOES seem that not ALL change is done for improvement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 8:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 7:49 am
Posts: 125
Location: Brampton, Ontario
My assumption is the factory is building to a particular spec, but they probably have some leeway as to how they achieve that spec.

This week they have a bunch of weak springs so that's the cheapest solution. Last week they only had strong springs, so venting the pistons was the cheapest solution.

I'm sure it all comes down to what's the cheapest way to do a given production run.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 8:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 1253
Location: Brant County
different detuning methods for various production years is my guess, long piston-strong spring, weak spring-no vent, strong spring-vent... not sure why but ive seen many different combos in the B18 variants and all do the same thing and maybe saving a few bucks while doing so lol

_________________
It's better to die quick fighting on your feet, then to live forever begging on your knees - Lamb Of God


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 11:28 am 
Offline
Site Moderator

Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:25 am
Posts: 3432
Location: Ontario, Canada
It's likely a production cost issue. They started with the long pistons and that worked fine to reduce swept volume and velocity. Maybe they figured out that there is no sense tooling up for a long piston when a regular length one with a hole will work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2015 11:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:35 pm
Posts: 6016
Location: P.G. B.C.
TCooper wrote:
It's likely a production cost issue. They started with the long pistons and that worked fine to reduce swept volume and velocity. Maybe they figured out that there is no sense tooling up for a long piston when a regular length one with a hole will work.



That is probably quite close to the reasons for so many different methods - whatever the company figures or finds out is cheapest (easiest) for them. At one time, having different parts, ie: different spring lengths or pistol lengths worked well when prices were low and the same, but as time goes on, prices change and thus cheaper methods are sought out in order to remain competitive with the market - thus easier usually means cheaper ways are developed and utilized. A hole punched in a piston on the assembly line is easier than having to have different casting moulds for different lengths of piston.

_________________
Best Wishes
Daryl


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 9:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:16 pm
Posts: 1787
TCooper wrote:
It's likely a production cost issue. They started with the long pistons and that worked fine to reduce swept volume and velocity. Maybe they figured out that there is no sense tooling up for a long piston when a regular length one with a hole will work.


I think this is spot on. As far as I can see, a large percentage of the changes in Crosman guns over the years has been to reduce costs. Probably a necessity to remain in business, but sad to see none the less. Detuning by drilling a hole in the piston is such a bad solution it verges on the offensive - an insult to the customer. Same with the bleed hole in the back of the 1377 valve.


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 1 guest


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