Re: Custom Marker [TANKS]

["jon s kowitz" <jonskowitz-at-hotmail.com>]

Co2 markers only need between 6-10" of barrell and about 4" of porting.  If 
the unported portion of the barrel is any longer then turbulance will throw 
off the ball's accuracy.  In fact, part of the purpose of the porting is to 
vent the gasses away from the ball so it doesn't get in front of it and 
alter it's trajectory.

>From: "John Barager" <gogetta20-at-hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: tanks-at-rctankcombat.com
>To: tanks-at-rctankcombat.com
>Subject: Re: Custom Marker [TANKS]
>Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:20:33 -0300
>
>Well, I don't plan to use a compressor and home made air tank, I'm going 
>tonuse commercial CO2 bottles. I'm sure they com in larger sizes then the 
>commonly used ones here, and I don't mind getting one that's larger.
>So, if I can get more gas behind the ball, then there should be no problem 
>with the length of the barrell?
>I don't mind having to reload a new CO2 cank with evry paintball reload (or 
>every 2 reloads), I just want range and accuracy.
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: Steve Edwards &lt;sedwards-at-awger.net&gt;
>Reply-To: tanks-at-rctankcombat.com
>To: tanks-at-rctankcombat.com
>Subject: Re: Custom Marker [TANKS]
>Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 11:50:21 -0400
>
>adt22-at-drexel.edu wrote:
>
>&gt;Could that be related to porting? or is all that stuff bs?
>&gt;
>&gt;
>
>Not really related, but it's not all BS either. IIRC, my ProAm with an 
>Armson bbl (rifled + muzzle brake) used CO2 at about the same rate as a 
>shorter spiral-drilled bbl. Basically, the longer the bbl, and the more 
>blow-by / venting, the more CO2 (or air) you'll use for each shot.
>
>&gt;This maybe true for comercial markers, But with the homemade ones
>&gt;you dump alot more air behind the ball where as the comercial ones
>&gt;only use a tiny amount of air.
>
>
>Air works the same in a homemade marker as it does in a commercial marker.  
>:)
>
>CO2 is more dense than air (44 gm/mole vs 30 gm/mole) and has drastically 
>different thermal and expansion characteristics (in a full CO2 bottle, much 
>of the CO2 is liquid).
>
>Markers designed for CO2 expect higher input pressures (250-500psi), use 
>tiny needle valves, and have a short impulse. Commercial markers designed 
>for HPA (high pressure air) also use high input pressures.
>
>Homemade markers designed for compressed air use lower input pressures 
>(80-120psi), large-bore valves, and a longer impulse. Because of the lower 
>pressures involved, it takes longer to pass the pressure through the valve 
>and a &quot;larger charge&quot; is required.
>
>This relationship is analogous to the differences between modern smokeless 
>gun powders and &quot;old&quot; black powders. Modern powders burn much 
>faster, generate higher pressures, and take up less volume for the same 
>&quot;power&quot; as compared to black powder (compare the difference in 
>muzzle energy between a .44 magnum and a  .44-50 -- same bullet, but modern 
>powder pushes it faster than 50gr of old black).
>
>Most of the tanks built to date use a cut-down commercial CO2 marker with a 
>small (6-12oz) bottle. This can last all day if you're not shooting a lot, 
>and I've never seen anyone fire so fast that they had any problems with 
>freezing-up.
>
>Most &quot;air cannons&quot; use PVC as a resevoir for the firing charge. 
>There are multiple kinds of PVC, not all of which are pressure rated 
>(non-pressure-rate PVC can explode violently under pressure). The pressure 
>rating should be stamped on the side; if there's no pressure rating stamped 
>on the side then it's not pressure rated, and you shouldn't use it.
>
>The higher the pressure of your resevoir, the smaller it can be. &quot;How 
>much&quot; higher and smaller is a matter of debate and in any event is 
>limited by your primary pressure source (probably a 12V air compressor). My 
>baseline is a resevoir with twice the volume of my barrel, pressurized to 
>100psi by compressor (rated for 120psi).
>
>Theoretically speaking, as long as the resevoir ratio is maintained, a 
>35&quot; air cannon will have similar performance to a 25&quot; air cannon 
>at the same pressure, but will just be less efficient.
>
>    - Steve &quot;under pressure&quot; Edwards
>
>