Blog Posts

FTRPA's FT season 2026; Off with a great start

5/19/2026

Falls Township Rifle and Pistol Association has been hosting FT matches for a long time.
In fairly recent times, the responsibility passed to John Stellwag and he has done a fantastic job juggling two different disciplines in his dutes as head of the "Adult Airgun" scene at FTRPA.

This last 17th of May, saw the first FT match of the 2026 season, and it was a great match.

Not too hard. With some challenges, but eminently "shootable". I would rate the "pucker factor" at around 7/10

I don't have official numbers, but it felt like a TDR of around 26-27, so, not hard.

Still . . . nobody cleaned it. LOL!

There were, IIRC, 16 or 17 entries (between Rifle and Pistol), and we all had a blast.

Winds were very low (though NOT non-existent) and the main challenges were the dappled light spots of the forest canopy, and the heat. Temp in my scope rose to 97° F while in the sun (it only took a couple of minutes), and went down to 86 °F while in the shade and in the cooling breezes of the lake.

I had a great day, as I was finally able to track correctly the temp shift of my scope, I am using a Vector Optics Continental 6-30X56 FFP @ 16X, and it ranges real well. Taking a look at my temp strip just before taking the shot and correcting for that specific temperature gave good results.

But, enough talking! I know that y'all want to see the pictures. So, let's get the show on the road!

As any good match, it all starts with the MANDATORY, Shooters' Safety Meeting:

I was assigned to start at lane 8 (the farthest down the line) because I was shooting "solo".
Yes, it is a bit annoying, but on the other hand, it did allow me the time to get pictures and track the temp. So, good learning opportunity!
As usual, we present the lane and then the detail of the targets:

Do you like my High Tech Shooting Sticks? LOL!

Clearly presented targets well within the alignment requirements.

Now we walk all the way back and look for lane 10, which was the offhand lane:

A detailed look at the targets:

Now, I'm hearing some of you shouting: "You skipped a lane!, You skipped a lane!, You forfeit all your points!"

Hmmm, well, yes, I skipped a lane, BUT under the direct instructions of the MD. Without questioning, without doubt. The MD is there for the welfare of everyone, so his decisions are not to be taken lightly. Sometimes we may not agree with them, but we all need to abide by them.

Once the lane 10 was done (missed 50% of my standers, :-( )

It was time to shoot lane 9:

Beautiful lane on both sides of the tree (nothing BETWEEN the tree, LOL!)

See if you can find the third target. . . .

Hint:
.
.
.
.
Way back to the right! A challenging shot due to the distance, and also because you had to choose your shooting position well.

From there, we went to lane 1:

This is the long lane at FTRPA. It is also the lane where little wind will create havoc because there is a road back there, JUST before the far target.

Can you see thje road? No?
Well, that is sort of the point.
You need to look for small hints of wind back there because the road behaves like a wind-tunnel, channeling a large volume of wind into a smaller opening, speeds can multiply by themselves easily.

After lane 1, we go to lane 2:

This lane is also long-ish, but it is a lane that tests scopes, this is why:

You see that Black Armadillo, with a dark grey KZ, just resting in the shade?
Well, it is a challenge when the day is bright, you are shooting from a bright spot, the target is in the shade, and there is little contrast between faceplate and KZ.
IF you "click" or have a FFP scope, the solution to the lack of resolution between KZ and faceplate is to reduce the magnification; something that even Hunter shooters can do, as long as when they reset the magnification they do not go past the 16X or immediately lower mark in their scopes.
Reducing the magnification should not affect the POI in a goof quality scope, and in a FFP scope, it will not affect the hold-offs.
I didn't have any problems resolving the KZ from the Faceplate, and that is an advantage of ED glass at the objective lens.
To ME, it is a bit annoying that some of the makers of the "top" scopes for FT are still resisiting the idea of using ED/HD/ULD glass for their objectives, but it is what it is. Caveat Emptor and all that.

After lane 2, we go to lane 3:

And, its detail:

Lane 4 presents the aspect that it is the first lane on the LEFT of the "path", and so, it is partially open to the winds from the lake:

The detail:

Lane 5 is again on the RIGHT of the Path:

Be careful not to mix the squirrels in this one!

Lane 6 returns to the LEFT:

That Weasel was a bit of a challenge for some.

Lane 7 is on the right again:

Was the last lane for me:

Shooting the back rabbit was a bit of a challenge because there were various leaves and weeds that needed careful analyses and a careful placement of one's self to avoid obstacles in the pellet's path.

By the time I finished (rather fast, being by my lonesome self), people were still shooting:

All in all, a great day in the forest, with friends and our well loved sport.

Thanks to all that helped setup, takedown, and to all that attended, it makes the sport what it is: a great place full of great People!

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

0 Comments

The 2026 MD State FT Championship

5/13/2026

2 Comments

This year, 2026, marked the 30th Anniversary of the DIFTA (Damascus Izaak Waltton League, Field Target Assocaition) range in operation.
To my knowledge, the oldest FT range in Continious Operation in the US, having started operations in 1996.

Back then the course was simpler, and the shooters were few, here are two pictures from the following year, taken from an old document. I apologize for the quality of the image:

Anybody that has been to DIFTA will recognize the "main path"
And here is another that anyone would recognize:

A trusty HW or perhaps a FWB of the times with a scope, probably a Bushnell Elite AO.

Far from today's equipment, still, we need to reflect on the vision and the accomplishments of the founders, among which were persons that are regarded, today, as foundational personalities in the US airgun scene, like Tom Gaylord, and Jim Maccari

So, 30 years down the road, here we are and we gathered at the DIFTA course for the 2026 MD State Match.
All in all, there were 14 shooters, distributed across Hunter (PCP and Piston), Open (PCP Only) and WFTF (PCP only).
Weather was very agreeable, but challenging due to the shifty winds and sudden calms.
Scores were not high, no information has been released about the layout, so if I had to estimate a TDR for the course, it would be in the 28->30 but it is just an estimation.

I was lucky enough to share the lanes with my friend Toby M. He shot well, me . . . not so much.
The challenges encountered at Atglen surfaced with a vengeance in a more difficult and challenging course.
Match High was a 46/60 (Hunter PCP), and that tells you a lot about the wind conditions.Top WFTF shooter shot a 34 and top Open shot a 39.
DIFTA has the bad habit of assimilating along Divisions, which makes little sense.
There is MUCH more in common between Hunter Piston and WFTF Piston, than between Hunter PCP and Hunter Piston.
Hopefully, the BoG's at AAFTA will soon give more guidance on this.

How did the lanes look?

We started on lane 11, the longer lane in a depresion; so, let's look at them: in the order they were shot.

General view and then detailed view, as always:

Lane 12:

As you can see, Lane 11 is in a depression of the terrain, and lane 12 is on the "left uphil side" of that depression.
The picture also shows that, to the left of the lane, the land opens into pasture/field, allowing the full force of the wind to be felt.
At a certain speeds, the wind not only blows sideways, it start "rolling" over the ridge, with some very peculiar effects on the pellets.
I had my reservations about the near "gopher", so I made a mental note to check on it later.

From there, it's an uphill hike to lane #1:

The second lane of the Match was Lane 3:

Lane 4:

Lane 5 was the Standing lane:

Lane 6:

That little Blue bird in the "Near" position posed a peculiar problem, but more on that later.

Lane 7, with Long Tom at the middle position:

Lane 8:

There was no Lane 9, here is Lane 10, that was the Kneeling lane:

A good Match, with some reserves, but a good match overall.

Somoeone asked in a forum about a picture of the REAR of Long Tom, to replicate the "Heart Attack" target, so here it is:

You can see that there is a LONG paddle that falls on a little "arm", that then pulls the target down.
Target has a stop because otherwise it would not reset well, and the paddle is itself thereset lever, being pulled by the reset string through the faceplate itself.
It's the long distance between the paddle and the little arm what creates the time lag. Just enough to give you a "Heart Attack" thinking you have missed.
Here is another view:

It's a tough target, and it "hides" behind a tree.
Challenging indeed. I've gotten it down a few times, but it wasn't to be this time. Missed it twice.

Now, why was I so bothered by the "near Gopher" in lane 12?

This is why:

A typical, and typically ignored problem, of small KZ's (3/8"s): the concentration of lead after a bunch of people have shot 20 ft-lbs pellets into the same spot. This level of accretion does not correspond to one match, this is a buildup over several.

Here is another look:

Yup!
There is a "buildup" of lead on BOTH sides of the paddle
This connects the paddle to the faceplate in ways that prevent the paddle from falling with less than 20 ft-lbs directly on the paddle.
The slightest contact with the rim of the KZ, and the target refuses to fall.

The other target that called my attention was that little Blue Bird on lane 6, and here is why:

In the dappled light of the forest, when the sun hits the KZ, there are reflections from the bare steel dents that create a "difuse" sight picture, to the point where I could not make out the exact rim of the KZ.
I do not know what is the material that this faceplate is made out of, but clearly it is soft enough that lead pellets create some serious dents and deform the KZ to the point where it is no longer truly "round".

As per AAFTA 2026 Handbook, page 6, Section: "Targets", Subsection: "B", and I quote:

"B. Hit-zones shall be round and shall range from 3/8" to 2" in diameter. No fake hit-zones may appear anywhere on the target."

This target should not have been set in the course.

For whatever it's worth I offered help to repair/maintain these targets a week ago, with no answer, yet.

Bottom line for me was that a new rig/system was in order, too much of a handicap shooting the Mauser with the old AEON.

A quick review of the "Hunter Division" rules told me that I could use my LGU with the "Varmint" stock even WITH the hamster attached, so that is what I will use.

FT is a never-ending process of learning, and re-learning; searching and finding; and that is one of the aspects that makes it so fascinating.
The other aspect, is the people that shoot FT.

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

2 Comments

FT at Atglen, PA

5/12/2026

0 Comments

Back in May 2024, I ws invited to a "new to me" Club, about 2 hrs drive from my "local neck of the woods"

A BIG surprise awaited me. A relatively short drive on the highway and, from there, smaller, winding road across true Amish Country, horse-buggies and covered bridges:

I simply fell in love with the place!
The tranquility of the flowing creek, the approach to the Club, the layout of the sighting in range, and then . . . the lanes!
What lanes! Variety and challenge made for a VERY interesting course.

Since then we've been to a few matches, somewhat intermittent, through no fault of anyone, simply life events that get in the way.

Towards the end of last year and with the participation of more members, the Club's FT activities have really taken off.

New lanes have needed to be cut because some forestry operations will take place, and to really care for a forest, you need to steward it. So some heavy machinery will have to come and take out those trees that are too old/non-productive and allow space and light for new trees to really spread out.
Of course there are plans to later use that "road" as part of the FT area ;-)

AND, to clarify, IMHO:
This is the difference between stewardship and outright conservation.
Conservation to the extreme is perfect, when you have thousands of acres and unmolested nature.
When you have a "smaller" (still hundreds of acres) area, where the wildlife has changed, humans are nearby, and it is not precisely and wholy "wild", there's a need for stewardship.
So, Kudos! to Atglen S. A. that is taking the steps to protect the long term health of their forests by careful and precise forestry measures.

And this brings us to the current shoot, held at Atglen on April of 2026

It all started at the sighting in range:

I don't think anyone of us was shooting broadheads, LOL!
Actually we, the airgunners, share the archery range (as is the case in MANY clubs) for sighting in.
You can see, at the top right hand of the picture, where the new lanes have been cut.
And I have to say that there was a "Theme" to the shoot. Let's call it "Through the two Trees", LOL! (not my idea, my idea was a bit rougher around the edges). But we'll come to that.
I had the pleasure and the privilege to shoot with my good friend Mike Harris

Mike is one of the Pillars of FT in the Northeast, Mike used to run the two ranges at Delaware County Field and Stream until health issues prevented him from continuing to do so. Now on the mend, he still finds the energy and the time to shoot.
Congrats and thanks, Mike for all that you did AND do, for FT!
AND, BTW, the man in charge now is Mark King, who is also doing a fantastic job at keeping the shoots alive. But, . . . that deserves its own story.
Back to the shoot, it was well attended (12 shooters) considering the weather forecast (nothing too enticing, but still, we were there!).

The way Trevor designed and executed the course was interesting.
WE were out in the open; for the particular day, it was not a challenge, even with semi-good scopes (I was shooting a MAUSER K-98s with an old AEON scope). The overcast day afforded us a mildly lit area to shoot from into the woods.
Let's wait a few months and we will see how challenging that course becomes in summer, when we are shooting from a brightly lit / sunshined area into the densely packed forest with a full canopy of leaves.
Start preparing to shoot with lower magnifications, LOL!
Here are some typical lanes:

Picture taken at 20X, it transmits the message: Follow your strings, or you will be shooting the wrong target.
;-)
But how does a typical lane look from the shooting gate?
Like this:

Remember "The Theme"?
Can you see the targets?
¿no?
Follow the strings!

First string from the left goes around the tree and gets to the first target, right "between . . . the TWO TREES!"
For those that like "lifelike" targets, I am sure you are almost salivating over this one.
Thanks to Laura S and Rich B for the paint/decoration.
I have to admit that they are attractive, even if it pains a little to shoot at them. ;-)

Want to see another target?
Here is one for you:

Yes, it is between . . . . TWO TREES!
And another?

Yes, there were also a bunch of targets more "open to view", LOL!
One thing that is peculiar to Atglen is this:

Yup!
There is a Prone lane, designated by the MD as a "forced position" lane.
As per the rules, you can shoot this lane in any other approved "forced position" so, you can shoot it, in order of difficulty: Kneeling, or Standing.
HOWEVER, you CANNOT shoot it sitting.
Why? because sitting is the FT 'Free Position'.
:-)
It was fun and I enjoyed it immensely.
Missed my sling, that Mauser is one heavy gun. Still it was fun!
Now, just to clarify: Do take a good look at my position:
The hand that supports the rifle is NOT supported by the ground, if I had been wearing a glove, it would be the same. The ONLY object that can support the forward hand in a forced position is THE SLING.

Two point sling for Hunters, One pont sling allowable for Open and WFTF.

This is per AAFTA rules (2026 Handbook, page 6, section "Shooting", paragraph B) and I quote:

" Other than using aids permitted by specific AAFTA Division Rules (slings, bipods, etc.), the gun must be supported solely by the shooter's hands and body. The gun may not contact the ground. Any part of the body directly supporting the gun may not rest on the ground. The body may not lean on or be supported by any features other than the ground or the shooting seat".

Didn't do too well, I am "new to the Hunter Class" and still troubled by some shortcomings of the system, mainly the scope. The optics range beautifully, but the mechanics are not consistent enough.
And putting another scope is out of the question because the gun is so heavy in and of itself.
It shoots real well, the Mauser is incredibly stable at longer ranges. The whole architecture, allows for an extremely rigid barrel/action interfase. But it weighs a bit much.
We'll see.

BIG thanks to the Atglen Sportsman's Association, to Trevor D, Ed P, and all others that helped and attended.

After the shoot, we all adjourned to the "Brass Eagle" and shared a great dinner.

If you have the chance, make it a point to go to one of Atglen's shoots.
You will not regret the trip.

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

0 Comments

The DoAll "Dialed Spinner"

4/24/2026

2 Comments

Disclosure:

The first "Dialed Spinner from DoAll was purchased from an online store.
The second version was sent under warranty by DoAll.

A bit of History:
Back in the year 2K, while I was barely starting to scratch the surface of this enormous "rabbit hole" of airguns, I came across an idea that was good, but clearly needed some strong re-development.

Yup!
Crosman used to sell a target comprised of 5 "sectors" that swung independently:
One central "bullseye" and 4 quadrants of a circle divided at 3, 6 and 9 O'Clock.
It was OK, except for two factors:
1.- It had been discontinued for years
2.- It was rated for their CO2 rifles and pistols (so, about a 13-14 ft-lbs max.)

When a year later I saw one at the Little Rock Airgun Show (AR), priced @ $50 (of year 2k $'s), I decided it was time to act.

And so, the "Quadrant Spinner" came to life:

A first production batch was made in Argentina and was thoroughly tested. Back then 20 ft-lbs were more than enough. These spinners were designed to be reactive enough at 12 ft-lbs, and "pellet proof" at 20 because we followed AAFTA's power limits and springers at 10,000 FASL were not particularly powerful. PCP's were JUST coming down in price enough to be contemplated.
This was the year 2002.

Fast forward 7 years and when I started moving to the US, I had to leave my beloved set of spinners behind.

Once established, I set about finding a company that would make the spinners because no one offered the concept.
And I found a company in upstate NY that would build them.
Sent pictures and drawings and even went up there (I was living in CT back then) to see the first prototype.

We agreed on the prototype, and the first small batch was made. That was in 2012.
When they arrived, my heart sunk. The maker had added a horizontal cross member above the upper quadrants "to make it more robust". Fine, but that prevented the spinner from spinning! ¿huh?
He also took the liberty to add a couple of gauges to the material, and make them "extra strong"; based on his experience with shooting, it was needed (I also think it was the material he had at hand). The increase in gauge also created another problem: the counterweights were now not enough to ensure a true "return to vertical" from a low power hit in any of the lower quadrants.
In any case, they were not as reactive as they should have been at lower powers, and the result of a good hit was a bit "underwhelming" when the bullseye didn't circle around even once (due to the "hard stop" added).

They DID their job; and that was to allow people to "sight in" without needing to constantly change paper targets, without making a mess of used paper, and allowing fine tuning of FT skills because the "bullseye" followed WFTF recommendations: ½", ¾", 1" and 1½"
A few friends still have those.

Our design then was copied by a few companies.
Yes, people are like that. Without any improvement, redesign, or even name change, some outlets started marketing them.

Issue with those crudely made ones (to comply to a low cost barrier), was that 0.177" pellets could get in BETWEEN paddles and not indicate any hit.
Of course, by then the user had used the target and there were no refunds.

"Caveat Emptor" and all that.

But I always kept a soft spot in my heart for the concept. I tried to resurrect the production to no avail (cost was prohibitive), and the idea went dormant.

One day, looking at other things (as usually happens), I came across DoAll's version of the old Crosman 444:

I started using it with good success at Palmyra, when we started shooting LR FT.
And it held well for airguns in the 50-60 ft-lbs range.
So, on an outing to check out some very accurate 22 RF rifles (a DIANA 22R bolt action, and an SPA Toggle Bolt), I took it along.

Hmmmm, the target had reached and exceeded its limits:

Even at 100 yards, these rifles can keep their impacts very close together, if not in the same spot, and that created a problem, especially when hitting a bit "high" on the bullseye.
Things look even more dramatic from the rear:

Even packing the target becomes a problem when it cannot lay "flat":

Now, we did manage to "pound it into submission" with a good "dead-blow" mallet and some paint:

But clearly, the targets could not be sold as "rated for RF's" without creating some sort of customer dissatisfaction.
And, it was in this spirit that I wrote to DoAll.
I stated that the targets worked marvelously well with airguns up to 50-60 ft-lbs, and that they COULD be rated for 0.22" RF Short, but not for LR, even Standard Velocity.

I had to admit that I wasn't expecting a personal answer from a large company, like DoAll but, surprise, surprise!

I received an answer in 2 days and the kind person that answered showed me their "improved" version:

I asked what gauge material they were using and he responded, candidly, that he didn't have that datum, but that he would send me one to test.
WOW!
Clearly someone interested and, knowledgeable of the MARKET, if not of the product itself, of the MARKET (and that is really his job as customer relations). He understood he was talking to a person that was willing to go the extra mile.
I promptly furnished my postal address and waited. Not much, the target arrived, just in time for the first snowfall..... grrrrrrrrrrr.

Over the winter there was no opportunity to test it at the appropriate range (100 yards), and THIS PAST winter in Maryland was peculiar: Early snowfalls, then a sort of very short "indian summer", then more snowfalls separated by a few days in such a way that the range was closed for most of the season.

Range started opening in earnest a few weeks ago.

So, taking advantage of a sunny and not quite calm day, but with tolerable wind, I headed out to the range and tested.
Using Aguila 40 grs, standard velocity ammo (about 1,080 fps) in both the "Competición" and the "Super Extra" grades in my two favourite RF's (an old Voere bolt action, and the SPA Toggle action), this was the result:

There are 30 shots in that target, see if you can count them.

Several hits were aimed at corners and edges and results were good.
Important part is that repeated hits at three different points in the vertical support of the "bullseye" created NO distortion.
There are 6 hits in that vertical portion, three pairs, exactly ¼ mildot (milDOT, not mRad) apart.
Reason for that is I wanted to see if the inertia of the heavy bullseye was enough to act as a "hold" on the rotating part, therefore creating a "bend", therefrom the three chosen places tested for a "mid-weight" hit, a ¼ skewed weight hit and an extreme top hit.
None of them had any effect.
The vertical element is as straight as ever:

AND, BTW, that steel is a full 6 mm's thick, just shy of ¼" thickness.
The twists and bends do act as reinforcing points in an effective manner.

Does this version of the target reacts as well as the older one for airguns?
A bit. It does flip completely over at 50 ft-lbs and 100 yards, but not as "energetically" as the older one.

I will keep both because they BOTH have a role to play in my shooting, if you come across some of the older versions, and you are interested more in airguns of 60 ft-lbs and under, do get it, it is a lot of fun and very useful.
If you are more into RF's or airguns in the 70-150 ft-lbs, do look for the new version.
Retailers are not making much of the difference, so it is up to the customer to ensure they are getting the "Ver 2.0". THE thing to look for are the twists and bends in the vertical supports and that the only welds are the spacer tubes between vertical hangers in the targtet. There are no other welds.

This target allows you to sight in and practice all at the same time.

Thanks to DoAll for their customer support and for putting on the market a product that does a needed job well.

Now, if they made a set of four.............LOL!

Keep well and shoot straight!

HM

2 Comments

It seems that the "Efficiency" thing might become a "Hot Button".- A proposal on how to measure it

2/25/2026

6 Comments

Joint Blog entry between Don Hansell and Hector Medina

First of all, thanks to Don for having a very slow "sticktion" and getting things done in a jiffy!
;-)
So, let's start at the beginning:

WHAT is efficiency?

The dictionary has one definition that helps us:
" - the ratio of the work done or energy developed by a machine, engine, etc., to the energy supplied to it, usually expressed as a percentage."

Well, we will not use a percentage because in this context, we are dealing with different "forms" of energy.
I would propose to follow engineering criteria and express the efficiency of a PCP airgun as the ratio of the CC-BAR's needed to generate ONE ft-lb at the muzzle.

Before we continue with the discussion, it is important to clearly explain WHY we can compare a combined "unit" (CC-BAR) to another (ft-lb).

Well, we'll start by observing they are BOTH ways to measure ENERGY, and "energy" and "work" are identical concepts. Physics 101 tells us that "Work" is the "change in energy" of an object.
In a pellet, the energy at the muzzle is the work that the gun has exerted on it. IF the pellet was already travelling, we would have to subtract the initial energy from the muzzle energy, but since the pellet is stationary, the change is exactly the muzzle energy.
Now, WHY can we use the Ft-lbs as a measure of energy?
Think about lifting an object (by pleasure or not): If you lift a mass of 1# over 12" , you have just exerted 1 ft-lb of work. If you release that object at the time of hitting the ground, the object will transmit to the ground 1 ft-lb of kinetic energy.

An example from our world: We tend to think of 12 ft-lbs airguns as "Nerf" guns, that's for the Brits. We like guns with multiples of that energy, what on Earth could you possibly do with "just 12 ft-lbs"?
Well, consider this:
You go bowling, and the bowling balls at your lanes are all 12#. The channel where the balls come out is a bit low, for aesthetic purposes, and the channel is located at 12" above the floor.
Your girlfriend has never been bowling, and she does not really know how to take the ball, you approach her when you see that she is using just two fingers. She cannot really lift the ball and the ball is perched at the edge of the rail.
When you get to her, he turns around to face you and the ball drops on your small toe.

You have just been hit by 12 ft-lbs., and I doubt you have the same concept about what "Just 12 ft-lbs" is.

;-)

So, we have established that Ft-lbs IS a unit that measures ENERGY.

But, what about CC-BAR? How could that be an energy unit?

Well, C-C stands for Cubic Centimeters, that means cm³, and it is = cm x cm x cm (length x width x breadth).
And BAR is a pressure, so it is a FORCE applied over an AREA, in unit terms, we can say that 1 kg of mass, resting on a square that is 1 cm per side = approx 1 BAR (0.98 to be precise).
And so, if we Multiply cm³ X kg/cm², we get kg-cm, which is a unit of energy/work because it is force exerted over a distance; exactly the same way that ft-lb is. Remember that in multplication, the order of the elements does not affect the result, so kg-cm is the same as cm-kg, or, within the different systems ft-lb.

Just a note here: ft-lb IS DIFFERENT from lb-ft, the former is a unit of energy, the latter is a unit of TORQUE.

We have now achieved the understanding that we are measuring a PROPORTION of energies:
The energy that goes out of the air tank/tube/bottle and the energy that comes out as a speeding pellet.

In THIS context, our "efficiency" measure is perfectly reasonable. AND since we are observing HOW MANY cc-bar's are needed to create ONE ft-lb at the muzzle, it makes for easy comparison across platforms.

Obviously, the LESS cc-bar's are used per ft-lb, the higher the efficiency of any given system is.
Remember: a LOW value is GOOD in this context.

Some writers want to go the "strict physics" way and divide the total energy output by the pressure excursion, but that does not take into account the volume of the chamber (tube/tank/bottle), so it is only useful as a comparison for THAT specific situation, and changes under this method can be tricky to interpret.

OK, so now, armed with our knowledge, let's take some examples from the real world.

My good friend Stephen Archer has just published an article on the tuning of the Micro-Strike, I do encourage you to read it in full. Since we cannot insert here any of the txts, figures, or charts, I will quote the numbers on two interesting tests that are summarized in this table:

As you can see, the efficiency of the system is pretty consistent whether the starting pressure is 300 BAR, or 207 BAR.
The difference between 33.9 and 34.0 can easily be explained by the rounding of some numbers.
These "settings" (hammer force strike and regulator pressure) then need around 34 cc-Bar/ft-lb

Along some discussions, some friends have pointed out that it is not too "scientific" to mix unit systems, and I agree, but (always a big but somewhere), if we were to unify the systems to either all metric, or all SAE, we would be doing a dis-service to the users.
¿Why? because current literature available already uses a MIXED system of units.

If you go to the Pyramyd AIR page corresponding to the Micro Strike, you see this:

Sorry for the size, but if you want to consult the source page, its here

In any case, you can clearly see that the MOST COMMON data available for tank capacity is CC's and the most commonly available data for air pressure is in BAR

On top of that, I want to make it clear to everyone that we are not measuring the TRUE efficiency of our airguns, that would depend on the compressor used, the amount of electricity it draws for the compression of the air needed to fill the tank (we MAY do another entry regarding that), and the electricity itself is not the "PRIME ENERGY". In the US, where about 1/3->1/4 of the energy is still derived from coal, burned in electric plants that are relaitvely far away from the population centers, we would need to consider the effiiciency of the powerplant, then the transformation, then the transmission, then the transformation, then the distribution, and then the local losses of the energy grid from the post/vault transformer to the house.
How much is that? You would be ashamed of how badly we in the USA use our energy.

BUT, that is not the aim here, the aim here is to evaluate JUST THE LAST LEG of the energy between the PRIME energy and the pellet exiting at some given speed.
So, for THAT purpose I have chosen to use cc-bar/ft-lb to make it familiar to my esteemed readers.

If someone wants to burn me for "Scientific Heresy" my answer would be: "E puoi si muove".

;-)

Now, coming back to the Stephen Archer's article and the "Max Power" tune of the little carbine, here would be the numbers:

The efficiency is now about 36.4 cc-bar/ft-lb

IS that a BIG difference in respect to the 34?

Well, it is 10%. To each his own.

If we look at Steve Sciali's tune, we get a little different numbers:

There ARE "nuances" to these numbers. Basically the "definition" of a good shot.
In the above case, at shot #9 the carbine "dropped off" the regulator, shot #10 was a little low, and shot #11 was high. WHY? because once the regulator is off what is "backing" the valve is the full capacity of the tank, not only the regulated section.
This happens in ALL regulated guns, and is not exclusive to any specific architecture.
AND, if we are too strict, the efficiencies can go down to almost 40 cc-bar/ft-lb, but we need to understand and acommodate those "pushing the envelope".

So, NOW we have a solid ground to work on.

Regardless of the "tune" we can say with some certainty that the Micro Strike is a 34->38 cc-bar/ft-lb gun.

Hopefully, if we can agree, we can start following the different brands and models and see how things "shake up" with the "crowd sourcing of info".
It would be nice to have airgunners advocating for the airgunners as a group.

Now, do we have other examples?

Yes, one is the "Nano Strike" which is the entry preceding this one and that is what started pretty much this whole train of thought.

The other example at hand, in the comments of the above mentioned entry is Don Hansell's "Black Bandit"
and I quote:

"Volume measurements are approximately,
Plenum length is 5.700" x .745" I/S dia, from the top of the valve to the end of the pressure tube = 40.72 cc
minus the gage block, Gage thread length is 1.100" x 7.45" = 7.86 cc
which leaves a total length of 4.600 = 32.86 cc
Hole length in gage base is .710" x .435" diameter = 1.73 cc
Total plenum = 34.59 cc
If I figured it right??

I obtained these results, from the 177 cal w/10.5gr pellets, thru a 17-3/4" bbl, no reg in the pressure tube, OEM stock except for the Flat Wire SSG installed and set med setting for power.

I filled the gun to 1550psi (as close as I could get),
checked the gun gage to see where it read at,
then filled the gun to 3010psi (accurate gage),
then shot these 3 mags over the chrono, to get these mps/fps results/readings.

At the 219, 228, 229 reading is 1550 psi, (bottom reading per column)
any shot after this would have been below the 1550psi limit.
Shot in this order > meters per second > fps then fps
MPS------------------FPS
316- 320- 323 > 1037 -1050 -1054
304- 309- 311 > 997 - 1014 -1020
296- 299- 301 > 971 - 981 - 988
289- 282- 291 > 948 - 925 - 955
274- 280- 281 > 899 - 919 - 922
264- 267- 265 > 866 - 876 - 862
249- 253- 252 > 817 - 830 - 827
235- 239- 249 > 771 - 784 - 817
219-228- 229 > 719 - 748 - 751

316 = 1st shot >219 = 9th shot, = 271 mps/889 fps av
320 = 10th shot > 228 = 18th shot, = 275 mps/902fps av
323 = 19th shot > 229 = 27th shot, = 277 mps/909 fps av
for a total average of 274 mps for the 27 shots/899 fps av.

I had to fill the gun after each 9 shot string to keep uniform pressure."

So, given the data above, these are the numbers:

Remember this is a NON-Regulated gun, but we still know the STARTING and ENDING pressures of the string. AND the number of shots in the string.
We also know the capacity of the tank in cc's and the output velocities for a pellet weight.
We have all the data needed to calculate the efficiency of the system.

Considering it is a non-regulated gun, I would say it is reasonably efficient.
The differences between Magazines 1, 2 and 3 are easily creditable to changes in temperature in the tank. Every time we refill a tank, it heats up, as we shoot it out it cools down, compressors and gauges also suffer differences due to temperatures.
As an old Physics teacher of mine used to say: "Everything is a thermometer".
Still, we do have a solid ground to compare platforms.
Effiiciencies in the "twenties" beat efficiencies in the "high thirties's / low forties".
And between an efficiency in the mid-teens to efficiencies in the high 30's, there is 100% difference.

Mentioning other guns, for example
- I just finished a DIANA Outlaw Gen "0", and it showed an efficiency of 12.3 cc-bar/ft-lb shooting at around 30 ft-lbs
- Or, a Stormrider, that made its appearance in the "SouthPaw Super Plinker" entry exhibits an efficiency of 10.2 cc-bar/ft-lb.shooting at 13-15 ft-lbs
- Or an Avenge "X" that yields an efficiency of 16.7 cc-bar/ft-lb at 52 ft-lbs at high power, or 16.4 cc-bar/ft-lb when shooting at 20 ft-lbs.

There are MANY factors affecting the efficiency of a PCP airgun: from barrel length to architecture of the barrel/tank connnection through the valve, to the hammer and valve itself, to the TP itself.
Each element needs dedication and care to optimize and maximize the "return for investment" in an airgun.

Whether you pump by hand, or use a compressor, the efficiency of your gun will dictate in large measure how much you can really enjoy it.
It's good to work hard to play hard, but it is even better to work smarter to play hard.

;-)

Simple fact of life.

Hope you enjoy the read, keep well and shoot straight!

HM

6 Comments

<<Previous

Forward>>

Hector Medina

2012 US National WFTF Spring Piston Champion
2012 WFTF Spring Piston Grand Prix Winner
2013 World's WFTF Spring Piston 7th place
2014 Texas State WFTF Piston Champion
2014 World's WFTF Spring Piston 5th place.
2015 Maine State Champion WFTF Piston
2015 Massachusetts State Champion WFTF Piston
2015 New York State Champion WFTF Piston
2015 US National WFTF Piston 2nd Place
2016 Canadian WFTF Piston Champion
2016 Pyramyd Air Cup WFTF Piston 1st Place
2017 US Nationals Open Piston 3rd Place
2018 WFTC's Member of Team USA Champion Springers
2018 WFTC's 4th place Veteran Springer
2020 Puerto Rico GP Piston First Place
2020 NC State Championships 1st Place Piston
2022 Maryland State Champion WFTF
2022 WFTC's Italy Member of TEAM USA 2nd place Springers
2022 WFTC's Italy
2nd Place Veteran Springers
2023 WFTC's South Africa Member TEAM USA 1st place Springers
2023 WFTC's South Africa
2nd Place Veteran Springers

Hector's Airgun Blog

FTRPA's FT season 2026; Off with a great start

The 2026 MD State FT Championship

FT at Atglen, PA

The DoAll "Dialed Spinner"

It seems that the "Efficiency" thing might become a "Hot Button".- A proposal on how to measure it

Joint Blog entry between Don Hansell and Hector Medina

Hector Medina

Archives

Categories