Login    Register
User Information
Username:
Password:
We are a free and open
community, all are welcome.
Click here to Register
Sponsored
Who is online

In total there are 65 users online :: 3 registered, 0 hidden and 62 guests


Most users ever online was 155 on Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:40 am

Registered users: Bing [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

Combustion sniper?

Post questions and info about combustion (flammable vapor) powered cannons here. This includes discussion about fuels, ratios, ignition systems, safety, and anything else relevant.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

Combustion sniper?

Unread postAuthor: Strake » Sun Apr 13, 2008 6:19 am

hello all.
for some time ive been thinking of building a pneumatic sniper rifle but it would take to long to refuel and would have less power than a combustion sniper which would take a lot less time setting up for the next shot. i would be planning on shooting marbles.

to my questions if i was to build one outta metal what would be the chance of it going F*&king bang in my face?

and i would i need a larger chamber for better air to fuel ratios?
  • 0

This Message Brought To You By Strake.

Strake
Specialist
Specialist
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: Australia Baby
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Carlman » Sun Apr 13, 2008 6:35 am

a pneumatic would have more power than a combustion per given parameters.

there is all types of metal around to make one out of, not really any chance of it going F*&king bang in your face unless you made it out of aluminum foil.

It would be easier to get the right mix if its a 'spray and pray' if he chamber was larger.
  • 0

Image
Aussie spudders unite!!
User avatar
Carlman
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1618
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 1:18 am
Location: Western Australia
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: bluerussetboy » Sun Apr 13, 2008 8:58 am

It looks like you need to do plenty more research. Like carlman has already said pneumatics are more powerful than combustions. Large advanced combustions are temperamental, smaller metal combustions are down right finicky pains in the @sses. It is mostly getting the consistent fuel mixture. This isn't so hard if you use a metering system.
Smaller pneumatics are more versatile and powerful. For example, a small barrel sealer with a 6 cu in. chamber with a 60" X 1/2" barrel with a 2.5 gram projectile(baby carrot) pumped up to 150 psi should give you somewhere 600-700 fps. Fill that same launcher to 300 psi and you'll get ~900 fps. Fairly powerful for such a small launcher. Pumping the small chamber up to 150 psi with a bike pump only takes about 8 strokes. Not much time at all.
  • 0


bluerussetboy
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:25 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: SpudFarm » Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:10 am

not much work with the eight strokes eighter..
  • 0

"Made in France"
- A spud gun insurance.
User avatar
SpudFarm
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 9:39 am
Location: Norway Trondheim area
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: DYI » Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:15 pm

I don't think that a small metal combustion would be too difficult to get working, provided you do an accurate liquid volume measurement of the meter and chamber.

It brings to mind the question though, is it really worth it? It will be too weak even for plinking. For a launcher as small as you want, you either need a high pressure pneumatic or a hybrid for decent power.
  • 0

Spudfiles' resident expert on all things that sail through the air at improbable speeds, trailing an incandescent wake of ionized air, dissociated polymers and metal oxides.
User avatar
DYI
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2861
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 8:18 pm
Location: The People's Republic of Canuckistan
Country: Turks and Caicos Islands (tc)
Reputation: 9

Unread postAuthor: Strake » Mon Apr 14, 2008 1:27 am

thanks for the responses,
i never new that pneumatics where more powerful than combustions. i've always really like pneumatics but i was led to believe that they are a pain in the rear having to refill them every time. thats why i wanted to build a small combustible. ive got a pneumatic rifle at home (not posted) that gets to about 100-130psi, i shoot a projectile and it wont go barley any. i suppose if i had better ammo it would be not to bad i was using 13 cm darts they worked alright then i was using nails that i made fit snuggly into the barrel and they would shoot probably 10 meters tops. this pneumatic was a pain to fill up also because the chamber was a reasonable size, (small fire extinguisher).
  • 0

This Message Brought To You By Strake.

Strake
Specialist
Specialist
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: Australia Baby
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: hyldgaard » Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:10 am

You could make yourself a refilling tank, then refilling of a pneumatic would be even quicker than refueling a combustion. Ofcourse you would have to spend some time pumping before actually being able to shoot, but reload times would be lower. As an alternative to pumping you could get yourself a fridge compressor to do the work for you.
Gippeto got some co2 fire extinguishers for free to use as storage tanks, just to give you an idea :) http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/high-pressure-storage-free-co2-and-bonus-parts-t14027.html
Casper.
  • 0

User avatar
hyldgaard
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 4:21 am
Location: Denmark
Reputation: 0

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Return to Combustion Cannon Discussion

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'