"fruit salad" (meaning apples to oranges) look at regulation.

[Ribbonstone]

OK...one last test between a 65cc's of 15 foot pound  .22 regulated carbine air and 65cc's 15 foot pound .22 unregulated carbine air.  Same day, pellets from the same tin, and same dumbazz pulling the trigger.

to get here, I retuned the P-rod a little bit....a little less striker weight, a little more striker spring tension...and stopped once I got to aout the same 650fps.15.9gr. speed as I had set the AirMax MKI to.

It's a "mixed fruit salad"...same volume, same speed, but one is a repeter...one is regulated...one if shorter/lighter than the other...one has a 12" barrlel and one has a 9+ inch barrel....one has a "name brand" barrel.




Using 10 shot groups at 20 yards. The longer I play with airguns, the more I think 10 shot groups are "it".  I do know that with a 10 shot group, 80% of the shots are ignored, and only 2 shots count (the two farthest apart).....but isn't that what we SHOULD be looking for?






And a numeric calculation of the above:



Conclusions:

1.Given 50 2.2% shots for a 3K fill is better than 30 4% shots..at least in the length of the shot count.

2. The regulated version gave about 80% less velocity varation, yet it still lost the accuracy test.

3. Accuracy is likely controlled more tby "other factors" than just the velocity variation.

4. The amont of effort in vs. energy/shots out is pretty ding-dang equal.   Pumps in vs shots out....pretty much equal.  40% more shots was pretty much the same 40% increase in pump strokes to refill.

TWO QUESTIONS:

1. Of the two, which would you think groups better at 40 yards?  Will the 2% velocity varation make up for the slightly less accurate regulated carbine, or will the "winner" at 20 yards still be the unregulated winner at 40 yards due to better barrel/more weight?

2. Just how far would you trust a 15 foot pound/ 650fps .22 for little-critter hunting anyway way?  Know the UK 12 foot pound guns look to about 40 yards as "it"...so maybe 15foot pounds (about 1/4th more) would be good to 1/4th longer range (if accurate enough)?

[LDP]

4. The amont of effort in vs. energy/shots out is pretty ding-dang equal.   Pumps in vs shots out....pretty much equal.  40% more shots was pretty much the same 40% increase in pump strokes to refill.

For me thats why I would want a regulated pcp if I was pumping. Id rather shoot longer and pump less often. Other people will think less pumps more often better suits them.

1. Of the two, which would you think groups better at 40 yards?  Will the 2% velocity varation make up for the slightly less accurate regulated carbine, or will the "winner" at 20 yards still be the unregulated winner at 40 yards due to better barrel/more weight?

If you are trying to show a difference in accuracy between regulation vs un regulated you cant use two different rifles. You need to have one test bed that you test unregulated then test regulated preferably inside a building to keep wind from effecting the outcome. Using two different rifles with one regulated doesnt truly show if the regulated one is more accurate or less or if there is an advantage to either. I also would think different rifles will have a different amount of impact by having a regulator. I can only guess that some rifles wont gain any accuracy or atleast enough to truly see by adding a regulator and some may have a large impact on accuracy. I do believe that the longer you stretch the distance the more likely the 2% variation will start to perform better. I could be wrong but thats my opinion.

[Ribbonstone]

So far, hasn't been enough difference either way for my uses, even at longer ranges....one works just about as well as the other.  If there is a noticeable plus for the regulated carbine, it's overshadowed by all the other things that happen to a pellet from here to there.


Agreed....it's a fruit salad...two different rifles.  Regulation by itself doesn't make one better than the other.

[LDP]

True allot of things play into the accuracy game with airguns. I wonder if someone went to the absolute extremes of pellet sorting to get extreme consistency in pellets if that would have any factor for having better accuracy from the 2% over the 4% strings.

[triggertreat]

I do sort by weight and head size when I am wanting the tightest groups possible and yes there is a difference in group size compared to unsorted in my tests.   I do my testing at 50 yards with an ES under 2%.  If testing at 25 yards or less, it will be harder to detect the differences.


I don't believe there is any difference as far as regulated vs unregulated though.  A tight ES is a tight ES.  The only differences that may show up would be in the unregulated tunes that typically use heavier hammers and springs which potentially have extra vibrations overall compared to regulated tunes that typically use lighter springs and hammers for the same given velocities and therefore have less vibrations within the shot cycle.


There are so many other factors involved with accuracy and one days groups can differ from another.  I like to try and rule out some of the varations by tuning for a low ES and sorting pellets along with smoothing out the trigger pull and learning my gun and tune in detail.  Barrel cleanliness/condition is another factor to pay close attention to.  I get very detailed and like knowing within a very small margin where my pellets will land.  My many hours of practice and tinkering has really paid off for me and have found that my .22 is a lot more powerful when it is pinpoint accurate and can take down critters much larger than it is typically designed for.

[Motorhead]

2 different guns, different barrels & pellet preference  .... interesting enough tho near worthless data

[FuzzyGrub]

1. Only a guess, I'll go with the Prod at further distances.  The other seems to have some horizontal stringing, which would be worse further out, and the 4% Es on the Prod shouldn't be significant.

2. 50yds is the max distance for my near stock prods, tuned to 16FPE w/14.66g

[nervoustrigger]

Hmm, maybe if you had acknowledged the obvious caveats of this experiment, it wouldn't have been met with such criticism. 

I mean it's a veritable fruit salad.

[Ribbonstone]

2 not equal in nearly any way, other than the air volume, the pellets, and the velocity.

Really wasn't  done with a point other than seeing which would do better.....but then thought "better" in what way?

Better (longer) shot count? AirMax
Better (smaller) velocity varation? AirMAx
Better (smaller) 10 shot groups: P-Rod
Better air use/efficiency: Tie

Pleasantly surprised the AirMAx did as well as it did...that super skinny Chinese barrel isn't bad, the efficiency is quite high for both of them.

But for which one is "better"....thinking P-Rod.

[nervoustrigger]

BTW, I hope the fascetiousness was apparent. 

But the one I would take on a hunt is the one with which I had developed the most confidence.  In my experience, that is a better predictor of success than the one that puts down groups a tenth of an inch smaller. 

[Ribbonstone]

With you on that.  Away from the bench, using catch-as-catch-can rests or just knealing, can't find a rat's rump of difference.  Biologic factors way more limiting than mechanical.

[anti-squirrel]

BTW, I hope the fascetiousness was apparent. 

But the one I would take on a hunt is the one with which I had developed the most confidence.  In my experience, that is a better predictor of success than the one that puts down groups a tenth of an inch smaller.

This for me.  Whatever airgun I have the most confidence in is my most accurate over time.

There's one other factor neglected to be mentioned- cost.  In that department, the Airmax blows away the PRod.  So "accuracy for dollar in similarly tuned same volume with same power and pellet" easily goes to the SPA pistol.  For the dollar, I don't think there's any airgun that can touch it when it comes for features, which in turn help teach the relationship between each factor (hammer spring tension, TP, etc). 

I'll add that when I started my search for my first PCP, I wrote down all the things I was looking for and used a spreadsheet to determine my choice- the PP700 just edged out the PRod and the finally determinant was price.

[Ribbonstone]

Even worse...that P-Rod got treated to an LW barrel, which certainly greatly added to the cost (the original barrel wasn't a "keeper").


Then again, how badly would a $35-$40 P-17 have to shoot at 20 yards to justify the cost-to-group ratio (ignoring power for a moment and just looking at group size)?