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 55 users online :: 3 registered, 0 hidden and 52 guests


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

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

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

Which is better?

A place to ask general spud cannon related questions.
Sponsored 

Which type of spud gun is the best in your opinion?

Combustion spud guns
5
14%
Pneumatic spud guns
27
77%
Electromagnetic spud guns
3
9%
 
Total votes : 35
  • Author
    Message

Unread postAuthor: starman » Tue May 27, 2008 11:34 pm

n-strike wrote:Pneumatics because they just rule. No, seriously. All others suck. Sorry.


No, all others don't suck. They all have unique and fun features. I've built both combustions and pneumatics and find both can be both simple and challenging depending on the design and performance you're going for.

I'm a combustion/hybrid man myself...just the way nature intended things to be... :wink:

I'm also not the BB or paintball sort...helps drive my preference.
  • 0

User avatar
starman
Donating Moderator
Donating Moderator
 
Posts: 3041
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:45 am
Location: Simpsonville, SC
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Tue May 27, 2008 11:39 pm

Pneumatics here, though I would like to build an advanced combustion sometime.

Pneumatics are just easier to get power from and there are more possibilities.
  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

Unread postAuthor: mega_swordman » Tue May 27, 2008 11:40 pm

Granted I ever get off my butt and start making piston guns, I'm sure I'd have a blast. Currently, I have only worked in the field of pneumatics. When I have the time I would like to build a combustion and as far as the other two, I'm haven't had the time to sit down and figure out what I needed to know. I would however like to build that electromagnetic pistol that (someone help me with the name) built.

tl;dr Pneumatics are awesome but I haven't tried anything else.
  • 0

"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity." George S. Patton
User avatar
mega_swordman
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 2:37 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: ammosmoke » Wed May 28, 2008 12:42 am

I like pnuematics. They work well on any scale, which is ideal for me. Just look at the firing range thread... :roll:
  • 0

<img>http://www.speedtest.net/result/309559995.png</img>
User avatar
ammosmoke
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 1011
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:57 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: TwitchTheAussie » Wed May 28, 2008 3:29 am

Pneumatics just coz it was my funnest build to date.
  • 0

Raise your horns if you love metal.
spudgunning is like sex, once you've tasted, you can't wait til next time.
-
CpTn_lAw
User avatar
TwitchTheAussie
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:23 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: XxtriviumxX » Wed May 28, 2008 3:37 am

I say pneumatics, they are so versatile and easy to control... Not to mention combustions are more illegal here (NSW, Australia). :roll:
  • 0

User avatar
XxtriviumxX
Master Sergeant
Master Sergeant
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:54 pm
Location: Australia
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: CpTn_lAw » Wed May 28, 2008 4:22 am

Since the question points a personal preference, i voted hybrids. They are powerful at least more than pneumatics and combustion spudguns. Once they have the fine tuning it requires, they fire 100% of the time.

In terms of power, an electromagnetic gun will outpower any gun, since the projectile velocity is only limited by the amount of current and the speed of light.
  • 0

"J'mets mes pieds où j'veux, et c'est souvent dans la gueule."
User avatar
CpTn_lAw
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 987
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 9:10 am
Location: France
Reputation: 0

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: Rob Thornton » Wed May 28, 2008 4:33 am

Combustion.

For being uncomplicated.
For ease of construction.
For reliability.
For least expensiveness (not sure if thats a real word)

For a regular Joe who stumbles across this site and decides to give spudding a whirl, combustion is the easiest way to get a spud in the air....

Rob

ps I tried to vote, but don't have enough posts... I've built more than a few cannons though!
  • 0


Rob Thornton
Private
Private
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 1:17 am
Location: Cape Town - South Africa
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: M.J.P. » Wed May 28, 2008 4:38 am

Rob Thornton wrote:Combustion.

For being uncomplicated.
For ease of construction.
For reliability.
For least expensiveness (not sure if thats a real word)


I personally think pneumatics are more reliable than combustions, based on personal experience.

Myself, i am a pneumatic man. You can do so much more with them and i think they are harder to build (which is a good thing).
  • 0

Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
User avatar
M.J.P.
Specialist
Specialist
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 2:36 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Rob Thornton » Wed May 28, 2008 5:06 am

M.J.P. wrote:
I personally think pneumatics are more reliable than combustions, based on personal experience.

Myself, i am a pneumatic man. You can do so much more with them and i think they are harder to build (which is a good thing).


I agree with you to a degree MJP.

The point i was getting at, is that for somebody with few 'cannon building skills' and limited resources such as money and tools - combustion is what he should build..
  • 0


Rob Thornton
Private
Private
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 1:17 am
Location: Cape Town - South Africa
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Launch-Tek » Wed May 28, 2008 9:04 am

My favorite is pneumatic
They are powerful.
Simple to operate.
Reliable.
Portable when used with regulated co2.
Versatile because you can launch things that combustion would singe like t-shirts and confetti.

However combustion get's my vote because they are what most people use/see when they get started in this hobby. Without them how many of us would not have been introduced to spud guns.
  • 0

User avatar
Launch-Tek
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:43 am
Location: New London, Minnesota USA
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: THUNDERLORD » Wed May 28, 2008 11:30 am

I prefer pneumatic. Because they're the most reliable and consistent.
And convenient for public reasons, "how does it work?" "Well I pump air into this 2-liter" for example. Also I owned airguns since age 8.

I had a combustion and it was annoying when it wouldn't fire and it was inconsistent. But maybe some consider that a challenge, and improvements are constantly being made.

I am interested in hybrids because of ideas and thoughts I am sure could be improved on.

I am not voting because "which is better" is a stupid question IMO. :? 8)
  • 0


THUNDERLORD
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1264
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:42 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: fishyfish777 » Wed May 28, 2008 3:09 pm

Meh, Lucky. My EM-CC (Electromagnetic Compressed Combustion) Bolt action cannon cost me the latter side of $500, including case construction, plans, cutting, internals, microcontrollers, etc.

I haven't posted any pics of it yet, as it was a old design. I lost the plans to it, have it locked up in the closet, and I only have one more box of ammo left for it, but it was HELLA AWESOME.

I wonder if it still works. Lets see...


...


Argh, the battery's dead. Figures. I've had that dangerous thing locked up for 2 years now since it knocked down a small tree.

BTW if you want to know how it worked, it was a parallel circuit, controlled by a PIC-1 microcontroller (I think it was named that), with half the electricity going through a compressed cartrige with air and propane in it. The other half, or rather, 70%, went to the coil wrapped around the barrel, made out of ABS. Due to the fact it shoots iron, it is not a spud gun.

I'm severely bad at pneumatics. That's why I made a noobish topic about pneumatics, but electromagnetics are a different story. :roll:

Pneumatics, I'm experimenting with cheap substances. Electromagnetics, I am trying to make a more ergonomic, semi-automatic design.
  • 0


fishyfish777
Private
Private
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 9:18 am
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: rp181 » Wed May 28, 2008 4:31 pm

A SCR is basically an electronic switch, you put in voltage on the gate, and the Anode and Cathode connect. SCR's get fairly expensive in the higher range (one i got was ~110 dollars).

What about electrothermal? There alot simpler than EM guns and provide fairly high power+awesome muzzel flash.
  • 0

User avatar
rp181
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:47 pm
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: Hotwired » Wed May 28, 2008 4:38 pm

  • 0

User avatar
Hotwired
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 2599
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 5:51 am
Location: UK
Reputation: 0

PreviousNext

Return to General Spud Cannon Related

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]

cron
Reputation System ©'