BSA R-10, now what?

[Racing]

Oh
My
God. 



Where do i even start? Really? Well, to those not familiar that there is the stock valve housing for a R-10. No. Nope. Not supposed to look like that, at all.
What gets me is that thereīs *diots that honestly think we should leave well enough alone as that there is a "collectors item". That itīs "patina".
No.
Nope itīs not.
Itīs lack of maintenance, thatīs what it is. The poppet was moving like in syrup. Not kidding.
Yeah.
It gets worse.





No. No, thatīs NOT how itīs supposed to look or work. Havenīt ripped into it yet but just IMAGINE the stock regulator and valve for the feed, which are on the same block.
Geez...
Mind you. This gun is NOT from being "neglected" in a gun safe. This is, stock n unaltered, from just laying around. Since 2011.
U do the math.

That being said iīve had a Q or two as far as them plenums of mine.
Look.
This isnīt "Merlin magic" by any measure. However it IS a matter of doing the math and knowing god well what youīre getting into! DO NOT EVER even contemplate putting a plenum chamber together sans the knowledge needed! EVER!
Yes.
Yes, it IS "engineering 101". No argument there, but the math STILL needs to be done, and the work regarded accordingly. Anything else might very well end up lethal.
No. No, this is NOT something you pull off with a generic piece of pipe and a MIG welder.

That being said then.



Spares as noted. Donīt wanna dig into the parts that are "150th" by any chance. So.. all "spares".



Uhu. This one slightly larger than the one for the 177 just recently pulled. So.. yep. Almost 90ccīs

[Racing]

Hm
Due forum hickup, double post.

[Racing]

@ RKR btw.
Having oogled own the bore (yeah it needed a good cleaning too) weīre in absolute agreement.
Rifling twist is rather slow. All good.

Now. As the need for rifling twist isnīt hardcore limit (read - Miller twist rule and so on) iīll give the stock barrel a shot using short n light slugs.

Ie; Knockouts. Point being that iīve got them around as 216,217 and 218īs.
Thus.
If that effs up from a practical point of view so be it. Then iīll just replace the barrel with another 22 one, but on like 1:16 or there abouts.

No IDEA what twist the stock offering is but.. itīs slow alright.

[rkr]

Rifling twist is 1:18", it will work with light slugs but BSA choke is IMO what kills the accuracy with slugs. Your R10 is prime example from it's time period, even guns fresh from factory had sometimes green coating on brass parts. Leave it in a box for 13 years and you are looking at the result. For a new barrel, have you considered a .22lr blank? Cast your own 35-40 grain bullets and you are in rimfire territory for power and accuracy.

[Racing]

Youīve certainly got a point on a blank.
Iīll give you that much, and i guess it isnīt completely off the table but.. if so weīre talking a bits way out.

Redid the probe today. Albeit it has been claimed that these units wonīt work with pin probes, well weīve proved that false. Trick is, of course, to keep the pin needed short.

Doing so i got around to doing something else iīve had on the to-do list, and thatīs to check what the stock mags will take.
Answer to that is 34īs are in easy while 40īs are not. Believe iīve got some 36īs laying around as well and might even have som 38īs.
But that aside, the point is that as power is jumped for a R-10 itīs safe to use heavier pills with no ills. In that be aware that JSB even markets 34 grain pellets since a while back and what that basically tells is that IF i can get this thing to flow.. well..

On that note. For the 177 one i did just recently i went with an 8mm tube between the plenum and the "valve cup". Ie; on slightly less than 6mm within.
Not so this time out, this time i sprung for the full 10 - which will of course hand way more area to enhance flow as the poppet is struck open.
Ditto.
Prime reason for getting rid of the stock probe end is that it is VERY tight for dimensions for a 22cal gun. Within, where we have the flow path, weīre seeing like shy of 3.8mm
So yeah.

On power, cause is this a quest for that?
No. Not really. Again, tool - and thatīs what it is to me. Thus "fire breather" is off the table, entirely. Iīll be all to happy if this thing sits well with pushing 25,4 Knockout close to the wall - aīla my Reximex Daystar.
On that note, where we are currently at the Daystar HAS to be one of the simplest pcpīs out there to soup up today. They flow well, this much is for sure and even on limited port diameters these things will hand power and then some.
Anyways.

R-10.
Yeah. With any luck iīll have this up and running tomorrow night, knock on wood, and what it hands will be very very interesting.
I took the stock reg apart and.. it actually seems fine? Sure, a clean up but that aside.. it just looks fine n dandy. No matter, yes i will be replacing it down the line.

One thing thatīs puzzled me a little is that although this is an "export version" in 22cal it still holds the 200cc bottle stock. Now of course the new ca 85cc plenum will help heaps in that dept, but then again.. AFAIK thereīs small diameter CF bottles made on up to 380ccīs of volume to this day.
Could that be a viable option? Cause, as power goes up in this case.. you get the idea.

[Racing]

This.. has become quite the journey.
As i by now presume is all clear thereīs an issue keeping the bolt closed as power goes up for the R-10. Last time out, on that last 177 i did, i solved that "semi" factory in as much that i made a bolt sleeve/bearing entirely out of steel vs the stock delrin plastic setup. That sure works.
Now.
This an "export" model which brings that the front most part of said sleeve actually is out of steel from the factory. This of course helps, loads. But.. itīs not the same as itīs made to handle 100J. And itīs not.
Bolt came to fly open and the pressures involved, as you can see, to the letter made the mag explode!  Not the end of the world and iīll cope no doubt.
Kinda scary as it happens though.
Anyways.

Unit is back together and to state that this works is being modest.



A few different things became apparent however. First up, yes. Yes she provides the goods no doubt.
At first i had bit of an issue with the reg but.. got that sorted simple enough. Itīs still the stock regulator and i indeed plan to replace it. As to with what, undecided yet.
Carls 18mm diameter version sure is tempting, iīll say that much. Point in case being, i plan to hold onto this unit for a while. Thus specific costs are of rather little importance. I want what WORKS.

As i got the reg to settle i came to see like 1065fps @ approx 165bar using 25,4 grain Knockouts. In my book thatīs way decent seeing what this after all is.
As i dialed back on reg pressure to like 125 or so on the added stock BSA gauge (which have turned out to be semi on the money at least, in contrast to many an other stock "Micky Mouse" gauge on our guns) i saw north of 900fps still - using the same 25.4 Knockouts.
To be of note here is that the unit is on a "longer" barrel than any 12fpe version.

This, in short, means that the design goal has been met. As to accuracy, no friggin idea as of yet, but the power is sure there. I mean, even at 910fps weīre still at 65J, which is ample on the *amn rats.
Cause as been stated many a time by now this is NOT an engineering exercise but a matter of a pesting tool, even at extended ranges.

As to not dig into anything of the collectable 150th anniversery BS all parts that i modify are spares. Yep, down to the stock you see in this there last picture.
Work remains.
Going to fab a bracket for the plenum to support it way better. Tonight, to reach the numbers i did, i used an Impact hammer spring, and then far from bottomed out.
As such still reasonable to cock by any measure.

Come next couple of days itīll be about tuning, for maximum accuracy to be had and if that happens to crash n burn.. not the end of the world cause then iīll just adapt a different barrel, and then one on faster rifling twist.

On that note i shoved a couple of 218 diameter Knockouts through the barrel and truth be told that massive choking action RKR tells of.. nah. Not really. Thus itīs going to be real interesting to see how this barrel will handle various slugs.

Then.. Yeah. As iīm lazy (who isnīt?) i opted to just toss one of my earlier home brew mods on there. It soon became evident tho that.. that can sure be improved upon.
As time has gone by iīve come to expect more n more from my moderators and these days i sorts of crave from them that they actually turn puffs "Hollywood silent".
Yes itīs a tall order but it CAN be done, which iīve proven time and again. I see no reason what so ever for a subsonic airgun to be loud about what it does, and that sure became evident tonight as i saw them 1065 on the chrono.
Lately iīve been doing some 5 chamber jobbies on a full 50mm diameter and them just simply work. So.. need to make me yet a couple of them  me believes.

Abeit that blown up mag i have to check today off as a massive success. Really.
Iīm now looking forward to making this thing all it can be - to me - and start counting scalps. By now iīve got a few pcpīs residing in the "bunker" at the shop and truth be told it feels real spoiled being able to pick n choose as i see fit for the evening.

So.
As the saying goes..
...to be continued. 

[Racing]

Alright. So the first, of i hope many, days came and i got around to actually shoot this thing in current guise. As you can see a freshly built can out front, and this time... just an idea of mine.. on a massive 60mm diameter but a lot shorter and due that "only" a 4 chamber job.
Does the trick i believe but as it turned silent at that end.. iīve got a leak somewhere between the valve and the barrel entry. First up itīs not as silent as it CAN be and second up.. that ever present minor *wooosh* upon firing.
Need to adress that.

Anyways.
All shooting was done at a mere 130 bar, according to that stock BSA gauge now residing on the plenum.
As such i have to admit to being very pleasantly surprised.. cause it didnīt really shoot poorly using ANY of the ammo at hand. All shooting was done at a mere 30 meters so.. not really conclusive but more so will hand an idea.
This said as mine and RKRīs findings differ. No doubt.

Used all three versions of the 25,4 grain JSB Knockouts.. and the pew clearly liked the 216" flavor best.
At that weight i had the thing set such that they came to exit around 960fps, which iīd say is fairly on the money for that given pill.

Then tried the 25,39 Monsters, the pellets, and again.. shot that rather well too. Sorts of one ragged hole at 30 meters.
Then.. for SnG i tried the 33,95 Beasts and judge my surprise as these shot better still! 
Hm.

Seeing that i filled her up with H&Nīs 34 grain hollows and them things shot on par with the 25,4īs easy! 
I was like.. what the eff?



Seeing that then i of course had to try the 40īs too, pill by pill as they donīt fit the mag, and sure enough.

Summary is that THIS R-10 is anything but pill fuzzy, much to my surprise. Impressive!

The caveat here is that RKR and the likes shoot their pews at greater distance (as do I when push comes to shove) why iīm certain some of the choices above will come to fall apart as distances open up.
Hope to be able to try around the 60m mark next time out.

Albeit this an export model and thus carrying that steel "front end" for the probe bearing sleeve... you guessed it, bolt flip.
So i ripped that apart and did what i did to the 177 recently, i welded a "dab" onto that corner where the banjo fitting comes down to "lock". Iīd say approx 2mm worth proud on a longitudal plane.
Doesnīt sound like much, i appreciate that, but it STILL hands that to clear the banjo needs to be thrust FORWARDS to clear and.. you guessed it.
No more bolt flip.

On that note iīd wager by now that we could regard this like "stages", for lack of better words. The stock Delrin plastic thingy wonīt amount to much.
In turn the "export solution" will run out of steam too at some point and.. letīs agree on that that limit iīd say is around the 50J mark or so.
This there solution with a small welded "dab" to the corner in case, it will no doubt handle 100J at will.
The REAL question at that rate isnīt that anymore but more so what that small M3 screw that keeps the banjo in place will handle. I have mine securely set for now but.. itīs STILL just an M3 and it DOES take a brunt of force upon firing.
Hm.
"Well just increase that to M4 then!"
Hoaaa there Hoss! The issue is that at the point of that thread the probe is a mere 5.5mm in diameter rendering that a M4 thread would leave us with 0.75mm material each side of that hole.
Not exactly ideal.
To be added here though is that MINUTE amounts of flex is whatīs up cause the absolute force induced is handled by the actual banjo, out of hardened steel, as it bottoms out vs the probe body.
But. It still doesnīt detract that weīre asking that little M3 screw for a LOT!

Nah. Making fresh probes ainīt the end of the world and the question arises, as i see it, if this isnīt the route to take really? Thereīs nothing that says that that thing needs to be on 5.5mm at that point.
Ditto for the actual banjo.

For now though iīm gonna trace that leak down.. and then i actually might look into a SSG or similar. In turn a larger bottle sure wouldnīt hurt anything either.
Rest of it is all go as i see it. No doubt enough accuracy on the rats no matter pill of choice in turn.

Life on a whole is good iīd say.
Happy. 

[rkr]

Good job there, that's one big can you have.

You can modify BSA magazines for 11.5-12.0mm long slugs if needed, just make a circular groove to the plastic body which allows slug noses to come out of the actual drum.

My tests with slugs and BSA barrels were done with lower speed, I hit a wall with my 15" barrel at 860 fps and the other one was shooting only around 700 fps. That could be the reason of inaccuracy although I was getting on average 1"+ groups at 20 yards which IMO is hopeless.

Increased probe turning angle with stock probe bearing and steel nose is good enough for at least 140 joules, which is close to the highest power you can get from .22 BSA.

About the M3 bolt, some engineer types in old BSAOG did the math and it is good enough for what ever power you can make with your BSA. Of course if you make a custom probe you can easily go for a bigger bolt but as you noted it's the banjo that makes the difference in this case. Old Scorpions didn't have a banjo but just a sleeve around the bolt which also provides a rather good support:

https://www.airgunspares.com/gunspares/airgun-spares/bsa-air-rifle-models/scorpion/scorpion-multishot.html

[Racing]

Agreed.
The common nomer to all pills per above is that the enjoy speed. All of them to my findnings.
Fact is, iīve on occasion even driven some slugs supersonic with no ills really (which is a different topic for another day)

On "lockup".
Indeed the hardened steel banjo will take quite a beating. Thatīs not the issue (fact is if so more the actual low grade material probe is more of an issue but neither will cave in to the forces at hand). To keep in mind here, as an engineer, is that a simple M6 screw has a tensile strength around 1 ton.
The issue, as i regard it, is the bolt flip cause the forces acting on that M3 screw in that particular case is anything but supported. This entails even minute amount of movement, ie - not to be seen with the nekkid eye.
To my findings itīs not the actual screw that goes belly up but more so the threads for it on the probe. As torq due this is lost the issue really just get worse.
As i make the probe ends myself for the slug pin install iīve given thought to making that cut further back to entail said thread-s (for some reason thereīs two holes on the stock probe in there current?) and of course then make that part of the probe out of higher strength steel.

Weīve been over this before, in essence, with the entire bolt flip issue. What happens as the banjo works itself loose is exactly that. The threads on the probe for the M3 screw caves in, and you have an issue.
I guess that could make those not in the know go "Oh well, then just buy yourself an aftermarket probe out of stainless as those are readily available."
Well.. no.
It tells rather nothing of the quality materials used why at least i would rather make that part of the probe out of known high tensile steel. Need to harden it beyond how itīs delivered? Say regular SIS-2172, or even tougher SIS-2241, for instance. Nah, not really. Anything is better than the papier mache stuff the original is made out of. But as stated, if iīm to make one i want to KNOW what material it is. As i thereby CAN do the math.

So what iīm saying is that itīs the radii movement on that banjo n screw that kills the setup upon bolt flip, and i do strongly doubt that either of us are the first boys out there to run into this. By far.

Thing here is, as i plan to keep this puff for a while (it being a 150th and all that) i want to come up with a solution that works long run. Not only use but to take being picked apart and put back together again as well.

On accuracy.
Plz take note that what i saw yesterday was a first trial. I was a bit amazed that none of the pills i used showed poor accuracy, they all delivered to an extent.
That is however not saying that theyīll keep together at 60 meters, which you know as well as i do. However... As i indeed DO have a leak between the valve exhaust and the sealing of the chamber on the barrel i need to figure this out as that too in turn, of course, can and will vary consistency. Ie; affect accuracy in short.
Sorry to say i believe many miss out on this and that mainly as they lack reference. A pcp at 100J that is sealed up and has a well thought out mode of suppression is VERY silent in operation.
Issue, i guess, is that most do not get their puffs to that point, where they become "hollywood silent" and itīs one thing keeping noise level down on these things @ say 15-25 Joules, itīs a completely different ballgame doing so at 100 n up.
Hence why i often go off on a tangent on that suppressors for for instance 22lr is NOT the way to go as you start to push this, and mainly so as the pressure curves act as different as they do.

Iīm rambling.
It still stands as a fact that i do have a leak and i of course need to trace that down. That itīs "minute" in essence just makes it that much harder to trace but it is what it is.

On the 140J. Yeah, i can believe that (working on other puffs - knowing what it takes).
Design goal here though is for a practical long range ratter that can pull the job looking good doing so, so ending up around the 70-90 mark is just fine. Puts less strain on the various parts too, which i hope will help with longevity.

Will tear into it asap to see whatīs to find. Iīm a tad suspicious of the transfer port and the o-rings thereof.

[Racing]

On a whole different note, that there with a bottle.
Seeing how much longer the barrel assy is in this case, would one of them longer 380cc (is it?) 50mm dia bottles... would that still LOOK sane?
I guess, n hope, you know better than me.
Already at the level weīre at more capacity would no doubt be beneficial.

[rkr]

On a whole different note, that there with a bottle.
Seeing how much longer the barrel assy is in this case, would one of them longer 380cc (is it?) 50mm dia bottles... would that still LOOK sane?
I guess, n hope, you know better than me.
Already at the level weīre at more capacity would no doubt be beneficial.

Look here for the looks and valve extensions, I personally think a 400CC or 500CC aluminium bottle wood look best:

https://www.bestfittings.co.uk/shop/fill-probes-adaptors/buddy-bottles-valves/bsa-r10-bsa-r10-regulated-bsa-r10-shrouded-extra-capacity-aluminium-and-carbon-fibre-buddy-bottles-no-stock-modifications-required/

As for the transfer port, when I took that 140j out of my .22 BSA I was using a steel transfer port with 7mm x 1mm o-rings. That got me 5.6mm transfer port channel matched to 5.6mm channel in the valve block. That's about the biggest channels you can get in a BSA without making a new custom valve block.

[Racing]

Yeah well, guess i pinpointed the leak
Turns out the stock internatskola for the shroud, n to work as moderator, out of plastics supported by springs doesn't take kindly  to the power level.
Plastics ruptured, nope..no baffle whip, and this to the point where it even worked the barrel loose in its fitting on the receiver.

So. Fresh setup will be a proper diffusor. Means barrel will come out n get threaded 1/2" and so on.
Will still use the stock shroud tube and hand it the spacers n filler needed and of course baffles to that.
Shroud will see filler as well

As I presume the relative modernt on the barrel has brought me a busted upper o-ring on the transfer port, which such a case explains the noise level...
RKR
Any idea what max length is for the transfer? Might as well turn a fresh one out if dteel set to fit length exactly.

Pics of internal mayhem coming up as I get home

[Racing]

Reading that post, sorry guys but the T9 on my phone which is in Swedish, sure pulled a number on me.

Regardless.



Those of us having taken an R-10 apart, weīre all to familiar with that there. For some reason BSA decided on that spring loaded parts was the bees knees i guess, and truth be told on the shorter barrel options that doesnīt sport that massive amount of parts this one does.. it might just be that it works - as in not being blown to pieces. Cause, apart from whatīs to be easily spotted most of the plastic parts now sports cracks.

However. As power goes up and all of that stuff is supposed to work back n forth.. not so much.
At all actually, and to be quite honest i didnīt spend even the slightest thought on this.

No matter accuracy all of a sudden started suffering major, or more so conistancy i guess, and the culprit was simple.. part in the way for the bullet.

To be blunt that there amount of parts in turn does a rather poor job of muffling the unit down, so IMO in practice.. kind of good riddance. Really.

I will, for now at least, stick with the stock shroud tube. Yes, itīs on a smaller dia than most of us see n use today, no argument there, but on this particular unit it kind of comes with the territory in my mind.
As the tube in case however is way longer than the barrel is iīll put the "added" length to good use and simply add moderator stages as i see fit, which will of course at the end of the day hand me an even more silent puff in operation.

In turn the setup in practice really lacks what weīd call a diffusor today. Thus iīve already set it up to take one, just this time as itīll all be housed within the tube just as tight fit vs the innards. At least.. thatīs how i see it right now (read - no o-ring to seal)

I got a bit worried though, cause it sure seems this thing has slammed its innards around rather violently which per noted above.. the actual barrel can now be wiggled around where it sits.
Barrel is held in by two small allen M3īs and that sure should suffice as i regard it but.. apparently not.? As it has wiggled itself loose, i absolutely bet that is the culprit as far as that minor leak i bring up per above.

Hope to have all this sorted by tomorrow night, will of course report back.

[Racing]

So.
This didnīt turn out well, it turned out REAL well.

I cut the barrel 1/2"-20 UNF. The threaded a "proper" diffusor on there, and in all honesty was a bit weary to that the through hole was on the large side for 22cal to be quite honest.
Then reasoned as such that.. itīs all "internal" in this case so no harm no foul, kinda.
Dressed the barrel with kitchen Wettex rags secured by regular electricians tape.

Then went to cutting up some steel sheet metal mesh that i shaped to a 10mm diameter round tube...



...and dressed that with the same kitchen rag stuff. I know this sounds VERY shade tree but the truth of it is that as long as the rag is well supported by that steel mesh it truly works wonders. It really does. Further this is simple to pull off and in turn costs of "nothing".
Turned all in all 3 small baffles out of Delrin, made in all 3pcs of the mesh on 40mm length and then one small on 19mm (which is the one ya see in the picture).

Indeed the barrel had worked loose, and i bet from that massive movement by that stock stack of parts in there. No more of that, and sure enough the top o-ring for the transfer port had seen sorts of battle, so that got replaced too.

Nah. On a whole... we were there. So on that massive 60mm dia can went and..



...as i pulled the trigger i wondered if something had broken? It was SO quiet it was simply unreal. 
This of course had me repeat the stunt, same outcome.
Hm.

Put a pill in there, set the FX brick up, connected that to the phone.. Nope. 960fps alright.
Happy as pie cause as is when on the actual gun what omits the most "noise" is the hammer pin hitting the end of the poppet! 
D*MN itīs quiet!

Took a few pops like that.. sure. Just.. sure.
Hammer spring in there right now is one for an Impact. Itīs on the verge of being to much really, cause dialed all out i see like 940 using them Knockouts and this, read from the stock BSA gauge on the plenum, on a mere approx 130bar.

What that leaves, will be, is that.. just up the reg pressure n follow up with hammer spring n weīre DEEP into "34-40 grain territory".

To me though, be that as it may, iīve for now kind of arrived on using the lighter (and by any measure cheaper) Knockouts on 25,4. It shoots them well, accurate and at decent speeds. Energy enough to smack the *amn scaly tails into the ground like thereīs no tomorrow i bet.

Nah.
Need to pick yet a bipod up that attach to the stock sling stud up front. Then a couple of fresh mags i guess, and take it from there.?

REAL happy with where this is at! Have to say.

On that "hammer noise". I know some of the Brits tend to install a plastic end to the hammer. Would that be a viable option in my case? Thinking, itīd be nice to get it more quiet still (in essence noiseless) but.. seeing the 2mm end on the poppet.. and me at WAY different HS levels than the 12fpe gang runs, would that live? At all?

[rkr]

PEEK tip for the hammer certainly reduces the action noise. This is how I've been doing it, steel tube that fits around the hammer nose, 2mm thick disc from PEEK, epoxy:

Peek-hammer_zpsxtk5u6fb by abbababbaccc, on Flickr

It's easily reversable if you have trouble. I don't think I've tried it with 2mm valve stem though so that could be a problem - or then not, give it a go and see how it works. Thicker piece of PEEK could be more quiet, I'll try that on my next build if I can afford lost strike length.

What type of steel mesh did you use, any photos?

[rkr]

While talking about noise reduction, make delrin or ptfe end caps for the hammer spring.

[Racing]

I hear you.
Loud n clear.

On the mesh, iīll snap a picture for you but itīs just some generic steel mesh iīve had laying around. Iīd say within reason itīs of less importance as far as the actual mesh as long as itīs "tight" enough in how itīs laid down.

On noise.
Indeed i turned a thin POM washer for each end of the main spring. The hammer, i took to installing a brass pin guide i had made up previously, and at the other end at the adjuster i turned a POM washer that fits within the adjuster and has a spring guide protruding from it.
Thus both ends of the spring now resides on plastics, and... seems to work rather well.?

On the striker face in turn.
PEEK might very well take the heat, to be honest.. dunno? On the other hand, the issue is - as i regard it - that we let steel hit steel. What iīm saying is that the unit loading on the striker surface from that 2mm pin.. hm. For instance a striker face on the hammer out of aluminium would just as well CHANGE the ring, while plastics for the most part would.. kill it.
Like you iīm by now of "sufficient" shank stick out ( in my case iīd say like 5mm approx) why thereīs no real room to "dress" the end of the shank, i believe we need all of it.
In turn, when i at first ran the setup on a very soft poppet return spring i experienced blow out as reg pressure went down. Due this i installed the contrary, a rather stiff proposition for a spring why in all honesty it might be an idea to readress that and settle for somewhere in the middle maybe?
Reason is of course simple, to keep striker surface from overload when i opt to go "softer" on it. A "railway stiff" spring sure wonīt help at that moment.

On a general whole though where iīm at iīm very very pleased. What weīre talking of here, striker noise, is after all details to say the least and.. self critisism i guess can be the decent thing to apply from time to time.
What iīm saying is that from many an aspect weīre into splitting hairs now really.

Nah. Next thing, which iīm to adress today, is a simple Harris bipod. Needs it, what can i say and then a flavor which attach to the front stud for the sling.

[Racing]

@ RKR



Here ya go.

Sorry to say rest of the story isnīt all laughs exactly. Just... why o why... *sigh*
Got the Harris and installed that so time to put this thing through its paces right.
So. There i was. Shooting along, and as i had fired maybe 100 pills... you guessed it. Bolt flip. Last shot MASSIVE such, handing me a good burst of air right in the face.

To be said here is that i have welded in a "dimple" to that stock sleeve piece ONLY thus far. A few lessons are to be learned here though cause that in itself, alone, coupled with the export "nose" piece out of steel obviously isnīt enough as power goes up. Just doesnīt cut it.
To hand that numbers i was firing regular Knockouts at approx 960fps.

Upon teardown n inspection indeed the small M3 screw had given way, threads are about ruined and so forth. As the to be new locking angle is to be set a new nose piece will be needed anyways right as the threads needs a different angle vs the dimple cutout for the ball bearing.

So.
This a 150th anniversary or no, mill time. Will cut that window into the receiver i did for the 177 ones and thereby increase bolt locking angle/throw. Priority here being a puff that actually WORKS.
Atop that i will cut the locking surface at an ever so slight angle and while at it reshape the banjo slightly to cater. Then increase that "dimple" as far as i can take it, making for something the banjo has to pass to open up. Hence, ditto as far as the mating surfaces.
Cause enough of this already.

I will replace the part of the sleeve still out of plastic with one out of steel and then TIG weld the stock "nose piece" to the one iīm to make and thereby have one entirely out of steel. Enough of this moving around under load.

@ RKR.
Got me thinking there.. with a different barrel, then it struck me.. iīve actually GOT one that shoots well and is threaded right off and that lacks any and all choke. The one on the Evanix AR, a puff i never got to terms with. So iīll fabricate a "thimble"/breech piece for that and try it out for size.
Dunno if you recall but i had accuracy issue with that puff as the pills went on their way from the revolver cylinder and made the jump for the barrel. Loading the pills by hand accuracy was outstanding.
Well. Barrel threaded to a M12*1 thimble/breech piece i figure all of that will go away.. and the barrel will become "dual purpose".
Will report back.

[Racing]

@ RKR



Here ya go.

Sorry to say rest of the story isnīt all laughs exactly. Just... why o why... *sigh*
Got the Harris and installed that so time to put this thing through its paces right.
So. There i was. Shooting along, and as i had fired maybe 100 pills... you guessed it. Bolt flip. Last shot MASSIVE such, handing me a good burst of air right in the face.

To be said here is that i have welded in a "dimple" to that stock sleeve piece ONLY thus far. A few lessons are to be learned here though cause that in itself, alone, coupled with the export "nose" piece out of steel obviously isnīt enough as power goes up. Just doesnīt cut it.
To hand that numbers i was firing regular Knockouts at approx 960fps.

Upon teardown n inspection indeed the small M3 screw had given way, threads are about ruined and so forth. As the to be new locking angle is to be set a new nose piece will be needed anyways right as the threads needs a different angle vs the dimple cutout for the ball bearing.

So.
This a 150th anniversary or no, mill time. Will cut that window into the receiver i did for the 177 ones and thereby increase bolt locking angle/throw. Priority here being a puff that actually WORKS.
Atop that i will cut the locking surface at an ever so slight angle and while at it reshape the banjo slightly to cater. Then increase that "dimple" as far as i can take it, making for something the banjo has to pass to open up. Hence, ditto as far as the mating surfaces.
Cause enough of this already.

I will replace the part of the sleeve still out of plastic with one out of steel and then TIG weld the stock "nose piece" to the one iīm to make and thereby have one entirely out of steel. Enough of this moving around under load.

@ RKR.
Got me thinking there.. with a different barrel, then it struck me.. iīve actually GOT one that shoots well and is threaded right off and that lacks any and all choke. The one on the Evanix AR, a puff i never got to terms with. So iīll fabricate a "thimble"/breech piece for that and try it out for size.
Dunno if you recall but i had accuracy issue with that puff as the pills went on their way from the revolver cylinder and made the jump for the barrel. Loading the pills by hand accuracy was outstanding.
Well. Barrel threaded to a M12*1 thimble/breech piece i figure all of that will go away.. and the barrel will become "dual purpose".
Will report back.

[rkr]

Hmm, one more thing I would suggest is to make the rear of the banjo flat as that would give you lots of added friction + contact surface. I'd probably make one out of aluminium, enough support and not as bouncy as steel. Based on my experience the delrin probe bearing works well with the steel nose piece, less friction for the bolt and won't break at 100+ joules.

Before you install that barrel measure the twist rate, that will give you an idea for the slug lengths you can use.

That mesh looks good for silencer use, where did it come from?