Hold sensitive springer Update

[les allam]

I had exactly the same on my 97K recently. Extremely tight with a V-Mach seal after putting the piston extension on. When I get round to it I’m going to sand down the extension piece so it doesn’t flare out the seal.

Tinbum said he would adjust the ext to fit the v-Mach seal if I sent them to him, but I just got a new hw seal and the jobs a goodun.
Les.

[TonyL]

Did you manage to get any range time in yesterday, Les?

[les allam]

Did you manage to get any range time in yesterday, Les?

Hi Tony
Unfortunately no mate,I had a few things to do 😌,I am in Venice at the moment 30th wedding anniversary . I haven't found any gun shops yet 😉.
I will have a proper play with it next week (the gun).
Atb
Les..

[TonyL]

Hi Tony
Unfortunately no mate,I had a few things to do 😌,I am in Venice at the moment 30th wedding anniversary . I haven't found any gun shops yet 😉.
I will have a proper play with it next week (the gun).
Atb
Les..

Happy Anniversary, Les!

Love Venice. Been there a few times, although I can't remember stumbling across any gun shops, too. There are sure to be some hiding somewhere, though.

Now, if you could organise a day trip to San Marino (can't remember exactly, but maybe only a couple of hours away), there are LOADS of them!

Have fun!

[les allam]

Happy Anniversary, Les!

Love Venice. Been there a few times, although I can't remember stumbling across any gun shops, too. There are sure to be some hiding somewhere, though.

Now, if you could organise a day trip to San Marino (can't remember exactly, but maybe only a couple of hours away), there are LOADS of them!

Have fun!

Thanks mate
I will put the San Marino idea to the missus and see what she thinks 😊.
Les..

[dtdukok]

So if you have a V-Mach tune you cannot short stroke the rifle without either losing the V-Mach seal or re-working the extension to accommodate it.

Is that correct?

I have a 97K that is much improved after fitting the V-Mach kit but recoil is still an issue that affects accuracy.

I need all the help I can get so was thinking of trying the short stroke option but don't want to lose that expensive seal.

Any helpful suggestions or advice?

Cheers,

Darren

[les allam]

So if you have a V-Mach tune you cannot short stroke the rifle without either losing the V-Mach seal or re-working the extension to accommodate it.

Is that correct?

I have a 97K that is much improved after fitting the V-Mach kit but recoil is still an issue that affects accuracy.

I need all the help I can get so was thinking of trying the short stroke option but don't want to lose that expensive seal.

Any helpful suggestions or advice?

Cheers,

Darren

Hi Darren
I wanted to use the V-Mach seal, but found it was not a correct fit for Tinbums ext(increased diameter).
Tinbum did give me the option of sending him the v- Mach seal for alteration on his extension.
Give Tinbum a pm and ask the question.
I got my self a new Hw seal because my v-Mach seal was about 7 years old. It's still in good condition so will keep as a spare.
My 98 as a V-glide tune, so is super smooth but is easier to shoot after the short stroke ext.
Les..

[dtdukok]

Thanks Les, appreciated.

TBT - Nick, delete some PM's

Cheers,

Darren

[tinbum]

Thanks Les, appreciated.

TBT - Nick, delete some PM's

Cheers,

Darren

Done!

[dtdukok]

Interesting- Mr Pope shared his thoughts on short stroking with me the other day...

“Tests we have conducted with short stroke set ups, change the recoil cycle and make it quicker but in many cases they actually increase the recoil levels!
If you think about it this way, you are adding weight to the piston with the extension, and by reducing the stroke you are making it less efficient- this means more mainspring to compensate, as you are adding more moving mass ( weight by extra coils) as well as higher cocking effort.

What actually happens is the faster lock time gives the perception of less recoil in many cases because the shooter is unable to register the recoil as easily, which is over more quickly and therefore the perception is, it recoils less, when in fact often ( though not always) measured recoil is actually higher. The odd thing is, all of this tends not to be considered, and if shooters are more confident with this set up- ill advised or not, they may actually shoot it better- the short stroke with faster lock time can be a bit more forgiving to shoot than a very long stroke action, but it depends by how much you were to reduce the stroke by, but less recoil- generally not the case.

The best way to actually reduce recoil is, where power is plentiful, to reduce piston mass to varying degrees according to make model and calibre, and keep stroke the same if it is around 80mm. The 97 factory piston is about 40 grams heavier than our steel V-Glide piston, and in .22 set ups we have the option to utilise an alloy piston at close to 150 grams, with larger ports to compensate for light mass, we get full power, fast lock times and very low recoil, but we keep standard stroke.

More confused now or less!

We dont make extensions for the above reasons, but food for thought ?”

So Steve’s learned opinion is that the improved shot cycle, if you experience one, is more perceived than actual.

I’ll let you know what my own thoughts are when I get mine fitted.

Cheers,

Darren

[Shed tuner]

we measured recoil with accelerometers, so perception isn't the issue. There's a whole thread on this...

Also he's quite right about piston mass.. but you can't reduce piston mass with a long stroke, or you get horrendous bounce.

Finally, it's not short stroking it's stroke optimising. All you do with a TX is take it back to where the original TX was for UK power levels - which is the same as the original HW77. I don't recall Venom lengthening the stroke of the original 77, so how can they say making something the same stroke as the 77 is too short and inneficient

So let's rename short stroking to "stroke optimisation for 12FP". In some cases this means stroke increases too. Problem solved.

The issue, as with many things in life, and as per Jim's excellent article in AGW this month, is when people go too far...

[TonyL]

And 80mm is mentioned up above, Jon.

And eagerly awaiting Dr Jim's next instalment; it must be dropping through the letterbox today or tomorrow?

[robs5230]

we measured recoil with accelerometers, so perception isn't the issue. There's a whole thread on this...

Also he's quite right about piston mass.. but you can't reduce piston mass with a long stroke, or you get horrendous bounce.

Finally, it's not short stroking it's stroke optimising. All you do with a TX is take it back to where the original TX was for UK power levels - which is the same as the original HW77. I don't recall Venom lengthening the stroke of the original 77, so how can they say making something the same stroke as the 77 is too short and inneficient

So let's rename short stroking to "stroke optimisation for 12FP". In some cases this means stroke increases too. Problem solved.

The issue, as with many things in life, and as per Jim's excellent article in AGW this month, is when people go too far...

I fit Nick's gear in all my springers but I don't use the SS extensions. Tried it and sort of came to the same conclusion (though not as well thought out) as Mr Pope.
I think the additional spring energy needed to compensate for the SS feels noticeably harsher.
A couple of years ago when I was experimenting with TX's I had a mk2 spec rifle (genuine mk2 piston) in .22 and a mk3 .177. Both tuned exactly the same by me and the mk3 shot way nicer. Considering the mk3 was .177 its should have been harsher but it just wasn't.
I loved the TX but its no field rifle (even the HC) so I parted with the TX's. (I sold you all my spares).

I have tried a SS in a TX and a 95. Both came back out.

[Shed tuner]

And 80mm is mentioned up above, Jon.

Yeah, 80ish mm for 25mm bore is not short stroke - it's just sensible. As is ~75mm for 26mm bore

[Shed tuner]

I fit Nick's gear in all my springers but I don't use the SS extensions. Tried it and sort of came to the same conclusion (though not as well thought out) as Mr Pope.
I think the additional spring energy needed to compensate for the SS feels noticeably harsher.
A couple of years ago when I was experimenting with TX's I had a mk2 spec rifle (genuine mk2 piston) in .22 and a mk3 .177. Both tuned exactly the same by me and the mk3 shot way nicer. Considering the mk3 was .177 its should have been harsher but it just wasn't.
I loved the TX but its no field rifle (even the HC) so I parted with the TX's. (I sold you all my spares).

I have tried a SS in a TX and a 95. Both came back out.

Problem comes when you reduce the stroke without reducing piston weight. Many of these factory long strokes have heavy pistons, as you need to stop the bounce those long strokes would give you. For the TX, a piston weight of 200g and a stroke around 83mm is very sweet. So that means throwing the piston weight away (around 35g), and ideally skimming a further 30g off the piston.

As for your 95 experience, that's unnusual... Witness the following the HW99s has on here, with it's 73mm stroke (26mm bore).. short stroking the 95 from 86 to 76 (same 26mm bore) brings it close to the 99 spec, job done.