Are Mods Really Necessary

[shorty]

Read my "marauder tune easier". Just search it on gta(2014).

Great tuning in stock form with only 4 shots of data.
Marty2 was able to do a 30fpe tune under 3% with his gen2 .22 (stock).

These Marauder's do tune nicely but as everyone points out, a spring or ssg will increase that efficiency by at least 30% or more.

got on the PC, here is the link:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=75909.0

[triggertreat]

Not if you don't want a smoother trigger, a lighter gun, smoother cocking, with higher power that sips air very efficiently producing a tighter ES within a 2% spread instead of a 4% to 7% spread.  Whatever you want out of a Marauder you can have.

[AlanMcD]

Great job getting the gun set up the way you want it.  There is no reason to mod these guns unless you want to.  But since you are insisting that you have no hammer bounce with your tune, I'd like to point out that you almost certainly have at least some amount at the bottom of your string - as the pressure drops, there is no way around the fact that hammer is likely bouncing.  Bounce is rarely an issue on the first half of a well tuned shot string, but it becomes more defined as we continue to shoot the pressure down.

Other than that, many of the other mods are not about "tuning" and more about accuracy through consistency and ergonomics.  I had a Gen I .22 that I shot for years and had tuned very efficiently, and it shot great for hunting/pesting but I wanted more accuracy for paper targets, and that led to the application of a regulator - and accuracy improved. Not through the "tune" / efficiency, or consistency or speed, but by delivering a more consistent shot cycle across the string the barrel harmonics stabillized and accuracy improved (even though you have an acceptable ES, and the speed may be the same for say your 5th shot and 25th shot as tuned, the shot cycle itself is very different - pressure, dwell etc - and a regulator takes a lot of that variation out.

The key is whether you are happy with it or not.  If yes, leave it alone.  And the hammer spring won't wear out from your settings, so don't worry about that . . .

[Ribbonstone]

Fate:

The trick is to know what you want it to do,and stop when you find it.

Anything else is a bottomless pit...there is always a couple of foot pounds more...a shot or two more per fill...a 1/2%less velocity variation....all goals, just be sure they are goals that justify the work getting there.

[Fate]

You guys are incredible. I have plenty to think about and due to your input, that may take a while. Actually I am happy with the way it is and how it's shooting now. I've gone down too many rabbit holes in my life that I'm a little more cautious about taking that first step anymore... and life is smoother and more rewarding overall as a result.

Doesn't mean I won't keep reading and thinking, weighing options, doing the vicarious thing because that's its own kind of fun, sometimes even more than the actual thing. There's more possibilities that way without the regrets of getting what one wants... and living with decisions you wish you never made, especially something new that obviates all the work you've done.

Thank you all for sharing your wisdom, insight, and experience. You've given me peace.

[oldpro]

 I have no use for any gun I cant mod, its half the fun of owning it.

[Tater]

Since your Mrod seems to be set up how you want it, maybe it's time to buy another gun to tweak or mod.   

[AlanMcD]

Jeff,

I will offer one other nice thing about an SSG - not that you need to add one if you don't want to (a gun shoots fine without one, up to a point).

As I mentioned above, almost all well tuned guns do get into hammer bounce near the end of the shot string.  In addition to my Marauders (which I constantly mod and swap parts on as a hobby unto itself) I have a Daystate Air Ranger that is awesome and pretty much unmodified except for two things - I swapped the bottle to CF to save over a pound of weight, and I made an internal SSG for it.

I made the SSG mostly to see if I could, and one of the requirements I set was that it could not require any changes to the gun at all,  I succeeded and found that not only was the gun much more efficient on the back half of the shot string, but since there was no bounce and wasted air, that I could keep shooting at the back end of the tune if I wanted to with no issue other than a slowly declining pellet speed.  My base tune on this gun is about 30 shots of .22 Hades at 890 fps from 1950 psi down to about 1650 fps with about 2% ES, but I can keep shooting all the way down to 1000 psi for over 90 shots if I want, say if I am just shooting close or plinking.  There is very little change in the shot should as the speed slowly drops to about 800 fps or so.  Before the SSG I never would even have tried it as the gun would have been farting air by shot 50 and probably would have dumped all remaining air at some point soon after that.

Anyways, some of these simple mods don't just let you tune the gun differently, they let you use it differently too.  Enjoy!

[Fate]

Alan, I know enough now to understand that. My trouble is, I can't decide if a DIY SSG is better than a JSAR TSS. If I got the TSS I argue that route would be quicker, plus I'd have the stock end cap to take my time modifying into a SSG so I could see the differences.

Jerry, just yesterday my wife looked at my new gun rack, smiled, and asked... "Sure you don't need another one?" She knows me all too well. After all the car crazy she's endured, I guess guns are a welcome change.

Travis, you're preaching to the choir. I've belonged to that church all my life. Too old to change my religion now.

There was a time I didn't feel at home unless I was in a bar. Then it was being among my car buddies, parked side by side by side with opened hoods. Somehow this place has the comforting feel of both...

[AlanMcD]

Jeff,

I have Marauders with both the original TSS and what I believe to be the current one (although mine are all Gen I guns).  The original actually used two springs in it, and it is an awesome piece of kit.  I like it so much that ordered a second one, but that one had been simplified and I really don't know why they called it a "TSS" anymore as it only used one spring - don't know if they are still that way but I expect so.  While it still was much better than the conventional M-rod end cap system, it was no where near as beneficial as the original.  If the current offerings are still the same (only use one spring and don't have the lockable adjusting collar for the main spring) then I would say a SSG is better.  I do feel the original TSS was superior to most SSGs, but not the second one I got.

One of the things I liked about the original TSS is that, while working with a regulator, it allowed me to set of the gun to basically have two power levels - a lower one with the inner spring backed all the way out, and I could gain about 5 FPE with the inner all the way in (when set up with an acorn nut on the adjuster).  It allowed me to swing between JSB Kings and King Heavies in my .25 cal without the Heavies dropping like a brick (although a few more FPE in that swing would have been better.  Just some of the intersting things we can try with some of these moddified parts . . .

[triggertreat]

I agree with Alan 100% on the original TSS being the best over the new revised TSS or the DIY SSG.  The original TSS allowed for independent adjustments of both hammer springs for detailed tuning abilities.  I wouldn't wastes money on the new TSS, except for it does allow for more spring length (for easier cocking effort) and some better spring adjustment over the stock end cap.

Here is a link to a DIY SSG I built.  The adjustments are similar to stock and it will not change the look of your gun in any way externally.  It will make your gun quieter with its efficiency gains, but the efficiency gains will be subject to how inefficient a gun currently is.
 
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=110660.msg1056871#msg1056871

[Ribbonstone]

Have some that are pretty heavily modded. Once I got where I was going....I stopped. 

Others were bought, tested, maybe adjusted a supplied screw, then just stopped rather...were just where I wanted them to be.


BUT...I started with a goal in mind.


Not against modding rifles...but if it does what you want it to do without modding….why would you?



Could be you bought a rifle with some feature you don't like and what to change.  Doesn't matter what you don't like, just that you don't like it enough to change it.

OR a rifle that you already have, but no longer do the type of shooting it was made for.

Or you just like changing stuff.  Maybe for uniqueness…maybe just to see if you can....it's a hobby in itself.



But seriously....as the original posted asked....you don't HAVE to mod anything if it's doing what you want it to do.   He should care that it doesn't do what you want yours to do?

[Fate]

Keith, I'm disheartened to read the above after I sent you a PM earlier asking about it... wouldn't waste your money on it? That's to the point.

The major issue I have with the DIY SSG, from a theoretical POV, is that the OEM hammer is, from all accounts, too heavy... and the DIY SSG makes it even heavier with that bolt. I get the other factors.

What I'm considering is the JSAR TSS, which is a twin spring system. To complement it as well as address that hammer weight is their nylon hammer. Both seem to provide the mean to the ends being supported, i.e., more efficiency, higher but more importantly a consistently effective shot count, quieter operation, and as an overall result more consistent accuracy.

Clear my muddled thoughts here, please. This mind game is getting confusing lol.

[avator]

I believe the single most significant mod I did to my Synrod was upgrade to the JSAR lightweight tube. That completely changed that whole gun. I did other things, such as the TSS and the lighter 'plastic' hammer but, the 1.5lb. weight reduction from changing that tube..... WOW!! .. what a difference.

[Ribbonstone]

Fate: On the way...good...ask questions....just nail down the goals.

Not opposed to mods,just for the ones that aren't meeting your needs for that rifle.

HAve two rifles that use a system like that...spring limiter/light striker....were never really well adjustedby other ways; seemed the quickest way to get  to where I wanted to be.

In my case, wanted more shots,no increase in cocking effort, about the same power....and I accepted the trade off in equal power/more shots for the personal/acceptible cocking force required.

If I had wanted more power,would have looked to valve mods to decrease the closing force of the valve and a cleaner/less cluttered air flow....eventually adjusting to the same cocking force but more power.

Rifles I had messed around with for years, getting to do what I wanted by other ways, didn't really take to the changes well enough to keep.

[triggertreat]

Keith, I'm disheartened to read the above after I sent you a PM earlier asking about it... wouldn't waste your money on it? That's to the point.

Well don't stop there read the rest of it.  "except for it does allow for more spring length (for easier cocking effort) and some better spring adjustment over the stock end cap".

[avator]

I believe the single most significant mod I did to my Synrod was upgrade to the JSAR lightweight tube. That completely changed that whole gun. I did other things, such as the TSS and the lighter 'plastic' hammer but, the 1.5lb. weight reduction from changing that tube..... WOW!! .. what a difference.

I feel I need to qualify this a little better..
I'm not a big power guy. If I do mods on a gun it's for shot count, accuracy and better triggers. But again, I don't like a heavy gun... for one reason I've had total shoulder replacement on my left arm. That JSAR tube was just the ticket for the Synrod.

[Fate]

I'm surprised, and impressed by the classy people here. You're direct but diplomatic, helping without being critical. Frankly, I expected to be confronted, to be asked to put up or shut up. But of all the respondents only one has indicated that attitude.

I hate to waste my best pellets, the 18.13 gr JSB Heavies, and usually only shoot every 10th shot with one, the rest being the JSB Jumbo 15.89 that I have the most of. But I just shot a string to see if the tune duplicated earlier results. I don't have a fancy chronograph, just my little clamp-on $30 Chinese one. Nor do I have any programs that, once I translate MPS into FPS with an app then use an online facility to compute FPE, that can be displayed in these refined pages. All I have is my raw data on a Post It sticky.

That said, if I post a picture of that note, can I hope for some advice and response? I trust the numbers will be familiar to everyone... it's the format I'm ashamed of. With hope you'll treat me kind, I'm taking the chance and attaching a picture of my string. All comments are welcomed.

This is part of my ongoing research for direction. Like I've said, I'm happy with the gun and tune as-is, but I note as I shoot its lack of sophistication as well. Maybe with this information some of you will be better able to confirm my choices going forward or steer me in a better direction. That choice right now is the JSAR TSS and nylon light weight hammer. After learning just this afternoon that our valued member Travis, who I believe was the originator of the TSS, was a part of JSAR, my confidence in these choices got a big boost.

Here's the pic. As can be seen I got 40 shots at 30 fpe or over between about 2900 psi and 2100 psi  (which I see I didn't record, but noted when I filled it). I always fill to 3000 and shoot a couple shots to make sure where POI is before putting the chrony on the barrel which always changes it a little. However, this string was started at 3000, and took 3 shots to reach 30 fpe... valve harder to open I presume. With that in mind, were I to take a working tune outside I'd make sure it was at 2900 when I put a mag in.

[Ribbonstone]

I got use to working in list format....just easier for me,other people prefer to visualize in graphs/bell curves(or venn diagrams for all I know).

Really hard to read the little inexact gagues...so assume asmuch as a 100PSI errorcould creepi,both ways.But even if that were 3000-2000psi, it's still a quite good tune....if 2900-2100,it's a great use of air (figuring on the normal MRod air volume).

Really not much to be gained on that front.

Yeah the long spring....seems to translate into stiffer cocking.  IF I'm looking for power,I'll go with better air flow without the stiff springs.

[Fate]

I'm so used to lists, combined with an electronics background where mental imaging brings scope displays up, the numbers work for me. I quote my gauge for reference purposes, I accept something is up because I use my Yong Heng's gauge to pump to 3000, which is always 3200 on the gun. Not knowing which is closer to fact, I use the gun's gauge as my reference.

And as to reading gauges... there were no digital anything during my earlier years, just interpolation of mechanical gauges. I got my first slide rule at 12 in 1952, so I'm careful on analog things. What I reference is what that gauge says.

I hear that on the cocking effort... but I've turned the spring down to zero several times to see what difference it makes. And honestly, it's not much different to me... not easy by any means either way. My normal cocking is done with the gun on my shoulder, and it's become routine... not invisible, but not an issue either. Cocking effort really doesn't impact my thinking one way or another.

After doing several multi-hundred pellet sessions in my D48, anything is puny by comparison.