I don't believe a TP smaller than 3.0mm ever works in a 12FP springer....

[Shed tuner]

Out of interest what size TP as the AA Pro/elite got ?.
Les..

3.0 x 15mm, and it's too small, even when the bore is reduced down to 25mm. TOok that one out to 3.2, but the accelerometer data indicates it shoudl be opened up a little more.

I'll be doing some experiments with my FAC one next year - I don't have all the tools and equipment with me on this trip - or even a shrono. Will also bring a machined lighter piston. However I have no doubt that 3.0 will be too small for a 30mm tube... 3.4 woudl be my guess..

[les allam]

3.0 x 15mm, and it's too small, even when the bore is reduced down to 25mm. TOok that one out to 3.2, but the accelerometer data indicates it shoudl be opened up a little more.

I'll be doing some experiments with my FAC one next year - I don't have all the tools and equipment with me on this trip - or even a shrono. Will also bring a machined lighter piston. However I have no doubt that 3.0 will be too small for a 30mm tube... 3.4 woudl be my guess..

Thanks for the reply.
Like you,I have a reduced cylinder PE with standard TP, I am happy with the way my one performs.
What would I gain from opening up the TP on my gun ?, reduced recoil?.
Les..

[TORNADOS7]

I think the 80 has a 2.8mm TP standard from the factory, two of mine do.
Les..

My Webley Xocet has a 2.6mm transfer port and produces power easily...

[Shed tuner]

My Webley Xocet has a 2.6mm transfer port and produces power easily...

I bet if you opened it up to 3.0 it would produce power more easily / more efficiently / with less recoil and cocking effort

[Phil Russell]

I am following this topic with interest as there is much excellent information here. I well remember the debate over the LGU TP and how it was best to open it out to 3.2mm for a better performance and, if I remember correctly, to avoid stress on the factory fitted mainsprings.
But I digress. In reading these posts, someone could be forgiven for thinking that manufacturers have got it all wrong ... usually using TPs that are too narrow or, in some cases, too wide for peak efficiency. I have been pondering why this is ... There are several explanations amongst which is the possibility that the manufacturer chooses a TP size without any real research into its performance; a case of 'oh, that'll do'. Or the chosen size may be a production based compromise to use one size for different markets rather than matching a size to a particular market. Did not Walther do that with the LGU with the TP for the USA market being larger than that for Germany (and the UK)? Or maybe the manufacturer tries to provide a solution by using a TP restrictor (K98?).

Thank heaven for people like those on here who do the hard work for us.

Cheers, Phil

[TORNADOS7]

I bet if you opened it up to 3.0 it would produce power more easily / more efficiently / with less recoil and cocking effort

Had considered it buddy, biggest change in shot cycle has been removing weight from the piston, standard it's 273grms, currently 255, looking to reduce a little more yet though...

I hadn't shot it for a while since the weight reduction but picked it up the other day and all the kick that I'd come to expect has all but disappeared...

Shoots/feels better than my .22/95k now...