Walther LGV ... Just how HOT can they shoot ?

[Motorhead]

  Interesting question being the last 2 or so years they have been out most have found there generally tuned quite conservatively with those in the USA market being 11-13 ft lb power rifles with most in my findings on the lower side of this range.

Had a tune job request that had me revisit the potential of the platform to get a baseline on NON OEM spec springs to get a handle on going after a specific tune.

While i am not going to disclose specifics, will say that the OEM spring is an @ .129/.130" wire spring with modest pre-load.
Test went with a .120" wire spring tho much greater pre-load. * This fitted to a custom spring guide.

  Wow ... shooting a JSB 8.4 pellet velocity was 960 fps at 17.27 ft lbs power !!!
Smooth shot cycle tho VERY snappy.

Point being & reason to share, The LGV / LGU platform with it's bore & stroke can make a lot more power than they come set from factory.


FYI & nothing more 
Scott
 

[Mateo74]

Thanks for the Information, I have a Maccari spring that I have been debating about putting in it measures 33 coils x .125 wire  .562 ID

[Yogi]

Scott,

Thanks for the info.  The German Walter website talks about a 16 joule version and a 23 joule version.  Not sure what that works out to in FPE, or what the difference in spring is.  Do you think the 2 versions use the same transfer port size?
Please keep us updated on your "hot rodded" LGV.  Would you expect similar gains with the .22 version?  Still a smooth shooter?
Thanks,
-Y

[Motorhead]

Actually tune we were after was less than the initial test made with the .120 wire spring.
Frankly with the smaller wire was figuring a reduction in power in spite the greater preload.


So there won't be any long term results from this post.  As stated was JUST A FYI on power found that came quite unexpectedly.

That said .. on the .177 & .22 guns transfer size has been the same. With such a dramatic power increase found with the spring change IMO would NOT want a larger port due to being cautious of excessive piston to roof of comp chamber impact.

Doing the same to a .22 caliber action ... see no reason for differing results.

[K_sqrd]

Joules to FPE conversion results in 16 J ~ 11.8 FPE and 23 J ~ 17 FPE.
Sounds like FAC and Non FAC versions of the same model.

[Motorhead]

Joules to FPE conversion results in 16 J ~ 11.8 FPE and 23 J ~ 17 FPE.
Sounds like FAC and Non FAC versions of the same model.

Interesting that we have not seen or heard of the FAC power model here in the states
Having tuned dozens of these over the past couple years, NONE have been at the higher output.
So sounds like I just stumbled blindly in that realm of the FAC set up ... O'well as we were 

[Gear_Junkie]

Actually tune we were after was less than the initial test made with the .120 wire spring.
Frankly with the smaller wire was figuring a reduction in power in spite the greater preload.


So there won't be any long term results from this post.  As stated was JUST A FYI on power found that came quite unexpectedly.

That said .. on the .177 & .22 guns transfer size has been the same. With such a dramatic power increase found with the spring change IMO would NOT want a larger port due to being cautious of excessive piston to roof of comp chamber impact.

Doing the same to a .22 caliber action ... see no reason for differing results.

Scott - do you think the transfer port is oversized to begin with (especially for the .177)?

[Motorhead]

Actually tune we were after was less than the initial test made with the .120 wire spring.
Frankly with the smaller wire was figuring a reduction in power in spite the greater preload.


So there won't be any long term results from this post.  As stated was JUST A FYI on power found that came quite unexpectedly.

That said .. on the .177 & .22 guns transfer size has been the same. With such a dramatic power increase found with the spring change IMO would NOT want a larger port due to being cautious of excessive piston to roof of comp chamber impact.

Doing the same to a .22 caliber action ... see no reason for differing results.

Scott - do you think the transfer port is oversized to begin with (especially for the .177)?

DOES NOT APPEAR SO ... shot cycle vibration seems to be very good with the piston coming to rest on a cushion of air as it should.

[56S]

The question on many of our minds right now is did you turn an accurate rifle into a scattergun?

[mista meener]

The question on many of our minds right now is did you turn an accurate rifle into a scattergun?

what??

[Gear_Junkie]

I'm still lusting over an LGV Master Ultra.  I just have a hard time getting over the very poor machining on the interior of the piston.  It leaves me wondering where else they cut corners on the build quality.  Also, the fact that there are no aftermarket springs or seals available from Vortek or ARH is a pretty big bummer.

[IRONWORKER]

Maccari makes a replacement spring for the LGV.... The 25mm Maccari 25mm seal as well as the Vortek 25 vac seal will work so I've been told

[Grover]

The question on many of our minds right now is did you turn an accurate rifle into a scattergun?

Scott: +1?  was it accurate?  Have a friend with an LGV in .22

[Gear_Junkie]

Maccari makes a replacement spring for the LGV.... The 25mm Maccari 25mm seal as well as the Vortek 25 vac seal will work so I've been told

Good to know, thanks!

[Motorhead]

As stated ... TUNE we were after was NOT at this power.  So no accuracy testing was done while at this power.
But will say shot cycle remained quite low in jump & vibration tho was VERY snappy and truth be told very likely NOT as accurate as a lower power tune.
LGV's are still spring guns and follow the same rules as any other ... more power ya coax less stable is the shot cycle degrading accuracy.

[OKHunter1]

Off topic,but if the LGV piston is a drop in replacement for the TX200 piston in attempting to short stroke using the Vortek Vac25 piston seal , could this tune of the LGV show promise, reversed as it were to the TX platform? Probably a stupid question, but just read a very long thread on short stroking the TX then saw this and just made me wonder.

[Motorhead]

No clue ...
Being Walther replacememnt parts would need to come from Umarex ( Yuck ) that effort alone tastes bitter.
If swap does work and stroke is less than a TX is stock, you wont likely find equal power

Tx's can when tweaked correctly make 17+ ft lbs power ... sadly there JUMP becomes excessive and they too enter the realm of a light magnum gun with only So/So accuracy.

JMO ....

[Rocker1]

 point given Scott  bigger is not always better same with all things.  David

[Gear_Junkie]

Scott,

I hope you don't mind me asking (and I'm not looking for you to give up any of your trade secrets), but what lubes did you use in what places when tuning the LGV?  Did you use any tar on the spring, or did you leave it bare?  Also, do you see the poor machining of the piston interior hanging up the spring at all, or affecting performance in any way?  (The images that I've seen of the piston interior look like it's full of rough ridges.)

Attached is a pic of the piston interior, taken from:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/79537/thread/1354832478/Found+these+LGV+Pictures+...quality+is+not+in+line+with+price+point

Thanks!

Zack

[Motorhead]

Pistons get spring cavity liners along with custom fitted spring guide .... Lubes are minimal.
Few other tricks in use & we're not going there.

Lol,