I SEE THE FUTURE
I can envision the future airgun:
It incorpoates a McMike pressure regulator (but maybe not intank?).
It uses a light weight, easy to find, 4500 PSI, carbon fiber tank(maybe a standard paintball, 47 cubic inch).
The tank would be offset from the axis of the barrel (lowered), so the scope would not need to be too high.
The Bigger, 4500 PSI tank, provides lots of powerfull shots.
The McMike regulator would provide consistent power.
Mounting the tank on a tube shaped regulator underneath the normal shroud tube, makes room for the fatter tank, and lowered scope rail.
I think these ideas are a natural evolution of some of the homebuild work here, and McMike’s research.
What do you think??
Mark
All Replies
Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
I think it only depends on the size of the post regulator storage size.
I think 22 and 25 cal. would be no problem, judging by what I saw of McMikes work.
What do you say Mr Mcmike?
Mark
Would the regulator be capable of putting out enough air for big bore calibers?
Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
It incorpoates a McMike pressure regulator (but maybe not intank?).
It uses a light weight, easy to find, 4500 PSI, carbon fiber tank(maybe a standard paintball, 47 cubic inch).
The tank would be offset from the axis of the barrel (lowered), so the scope would not need to be too high.
What do you think??
Mark
Most all of the tank and regulator solutions could be rolled into one. Paintball has done the research for consistent high flow regulation but noone has carried it over into airguns yet. I think intank (or screw onto the tank) and use of a common paintball tank already on the market would decrease cost.
At the same time you could mount the tank lower to allow for the lower scope etc. All you would need to do is route the air through the grip allowing the lower bottle while still lining everything up.