pneumatic vs combustion

Talk about what ever......keep the political bantering in the "Politics" section.

Postby An Apple Pie » Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:18 pm

Sgort- I am not really sure if you are talking to me, but I am going to assume so.

When did I ever say pneumatics were more portable? While a small pneumatic with a bike pump is probably more portable than a combustion with equal power, pneumatics as a whole are less portable. Also notice how I said-
"except if you are using compressed air of course"
While I did say compressed air I would hope you are smart enough to figure out that I was referring to compressed gas of any sort, like CO2. So I was in no way comparing how long propane lasts to how long CO2 lasts. I would like to see a propane tank last longer than a compressor though, but sadly enough I never am.

I did not bring up portability in my post for a reason. I was sying the pros of pneumatics and portabilitly is not one of them.
An Apple Pie
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:05 pm
Location: USA

Postby TurboSuper » Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:10 pm

The chicken/egg thing can easily be answered- the egg came was supposed to be whatever species of bird came before the chicken (no matter how small the difference, there is a line to draw somewhere), and a chicken hatched by some mutation.

Back on topic...

I'm anything but an expert on this...but i've built both a pneumatic cannon and a combustion cannon...and I noticed this:

Combustion: Easier to build, launches a larger projectile more easily.

Pneumatic: Just as easy to build for a small projectile...more complicated for a bigger one. It can propel a small projectile at extremely high velocities. Also, you can control the power.

So if you like shooting grapes and AA batteries...a pneumatic is for you. If you like shooting bigger stuff, then I would go for a combustion.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 3:29 pm
Location: Canada

Postby joannaardway » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:24 am

The chicken/egg dilemma is "answerable" - but someone else will always disagree with you (creationists say the chicken, evolutionists the egg).

<i>If you're interested, I'm an evolutionist.</i>

Drawing the line is also difficult - If I showed you the entire visible spectrum, and asked you to pinpoint the exact point where there was a line between red and orange, and you put the line in one place, some guy called Joe Bloggs/John Smith will put the line elsewhere.

Drawing the line between "chicken" and "not chicken" is probably even harder.

It's the same for the combustion/pneumatic debate. No matter how you argue it, some other person will always have a different answer, or a different way of drawing the lines.

I was comparing in the sense that they are both opinions, because expressing an opinion as fact is to say the least, impolite.
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:34 am
Location: United Kingdom

Return to General Discussion