Connecticut Custom Airguns
  • Welcome!
  • Hector's Airgun Blog
  • Products and Products Blog
    • One-Off's
    • The "Héctors Special'" scope by Sightron
    • K1050i FT
    • The Hex Louver or "Secret Sunshade"
    • Pellet Path Calculator >
      • Questions, Answers and Comments on P-P Calc
      • Privacy Policy for PP-Calc
    • The Nautilus SideWheel
    • The X-10 TiltMeter
  • Zimmer-Silhouetten
    • Results 2017-2018
    • Results 2016-2017
    • Results 2015-2016
    • Results 2014-2015
    • Results 2013-2014
  • References and Links
  • Contact us
  • Store

Hector's Airgun Blog

Where we discuss, CIVIILY,  anything airgun.

Return Home

Shot cycle Dynamics in 3 Spring-Piston Airguns Chap 6

6/24/2021

7 Comments

 

Does more mass in a springer air rifle result in better accuracy?

Since an air rifle moves a fair amount before the pellet leaves the muzzle, it makes sense that anything that can inhibit that motion could help improve accuracy. An easy way to decrease movement is to add mass to an object. Newton’s famous 2nd law of motion states that F=ma, where F is the force applied to an object, m is the mass of that object, and a is the resulting acceleration of the object due to the force. For a given force, increasing the mass will decrease the acceleration, i.e., a=F/m. It is not too surprising that the accuracy ranking of the LGU (16.3 lbs), FWB 124 (14.3 lbs), and LGV (13.1 lbs) follows the masses of these three rifles. Of course, the difference between first and third place ctc averages is less than a ¼ of a pellet diameter, so the accuracies are quite close. However, after shooting thousands of pellets in these rifles, I think that this ranking is robust. However, these are three different rifles that have differences that go far beyond just their masses. So in this chapter, I will explore how the same rifle, my LGU, behaves when its mass is changed.
Changing the mass in my LGU was easy; I just switched from the homemade heavy FT stock to the original factory stock. The total weight with the FT stock is 16.3 lbs while the total weight with the factory stock is 12.7 lbs. The LGU is bedded in the FT stock with bedding compound and aluminum pillars, so that may help with day-to-day consistency compared to the wood-bedded factory stock.
Also, the beefier FT stock is a bit easier to hold on the sandbags. Despite these advantages, I think that the main difference is just the difference in overall weight.
Figure 6.1 shows the LGU in the a) FT stock and b) the factory stock.
​The four 10-shot groups at the top of the target card in Fig. 6.1c) were made using the heavy FT stock while the four 10-shot groups at the bottom of the target card in Fig. 6.1c) were made using the factory stock. I went back to the FT stock for the 10-shot group at the very bottom of the target card. The groups weren’t great on that day and I’m not sure what was causing the vertical stringing. The main point is that the groups shot with the heavy FT stock were very close to those shot with the lighter stock. It’s interesting that the lighter stock caused a POI shift down and to the right. It’s very reassuring the POI returned to the same place when I put the LGU back into the FT stock for the target at the very bottom of Fig. 6.1c). The average ctc distance for four 10-shot groups using the FT stock was 0.28”±0.09” while the average ctc distance for four 10-shot groups using the factory stock was 0.29”±0.01”.
Picture
Fig. 6.1 LGU in DIY FT stock a) and original factory stock b). c) 10-shot groups at 20 yards from bench using FT stock (first four groups and bottom left group) and original factory stock (bottom right four groups). Total weight was 16.3 lbs for FT setup and 12.7 lbs for factory setup
​Figure 6.2 shows the recoil traces for the two configurations. Not surprisingly, the recoil with the FT stock was reduced, with smaller peaks and dips in the position, velocity, and acceleration of the rifle. Since the moving sled itself weighs 2.4 lbs, we really are comparing a total recoiling weight of 18.7 lbs with 15.1 lbs (not the bare rifle weights). This translates in a weight decrease of about 20% in going from the FT stock to the factory stock. The decreases in the first velocity dip and first velocity peak were around 28% and 25%, respectively, which are a little more than what I would have expected if we simply scale the recoil by the rifle/sled mass. The greater mass also seems to smooth over some of the oscillations that occur in the 0.03s to 0.05s time range.
At longer times, the recoil traces come back together to be almost exactly on top of each other! One might expect the recoil dynamics to be slowed by the extra mass, but except for the second peak in the velocity, there don’t appear to be any clear shifts in time. It’s also interesting that the piston bounce time (when the velocity goes to zero and the rifle stops its rearward motion for the first time) is the same for both cases.” 
Picture
Fig. 6.2 LGU recoil traces showing the position, velocity, and acceleration of the sled-mounted rifle over 200 ms for a lighter factory stock and a heavier FT stock. Note that velocity was measured using the soundcard on a pc, so the signal is ac-coupled and the slower rearward drift of the sled is not captured.
​So if I were shooting groups from a bench I would definitely go with the heavier FT stock. If I was in a Field Target competition where the fit of the stock is important and the extra weight helps steady the rifle, I would also take advantage of the FT stock. The advantages of the FT stock go far beyond just adding weight. The FT stock has an adjustable height cheekpiece (which is critical for the very high scope mount that I’m using), and a buttplate that can be moved forward and back as well as up and down. This allows one to fit the rifle to the shooter and to the particular shooting position. A good fit allows one to relax and let the rifle rest with very little muscular effort. This makes it much easier to shoot the rifle accurately even if the intrinsic accuracy is not greatly changed. However, if I was carrying the rifle for longer distances, the lighter factory stock would make more sense and would produce similar levels of accuracy as the FT stock. 
7 Comments
RidgeRunner
6/27/2021 08:54:39

Hector,

This is really good information. With this testing you have shown that it is a pretty good assumption that if a sproinger is inherently accurate, it can be modified for FT and do quite well.

Your target also shows that it takes a few shots for you to get settled in. ;)

Reply
Hector Medina
7/1/2021 08:08:03

Hello RR!

Took care of that improper post, thanks for alerting me.

John has done all the work. But yes, we ALL need a few shots to get "settled in", LOL!

What I like about shooting FT with a spring - piston airgun is that the "arms race" can only take you so far.
Beyond a relatively "primitive" point, it's all on you:
How you prepare the gun
How you prepare yourself
How you tackle the inevitable "happenings" during a Match.
How you keep an "even keel"

Quite different from shooting PCP's.

;-)


Thanks for reading!




HM

Reply
RidgeRunner
7/3/2021 09:43:55

Hector,

I too find myself playing with sproingers far more than my PCPs. Many of my sproingers are antique. One I shoot regularly is over 116 years old. The truth is that though there have been a few little tweaks here and there, the basic design of the sproinger has not changed.

How many break barrels do you know of that have a true lock up mechanism? I have one that was patented back in 1905. Most of those do not exist anymore because of the extra cost involved.

My 1906 BSA has an underlever. The side lever has been around longer than your beloved Dianas. The only true innovations that can be pointed to these days is the gas spring, which is still a spring and the multi-shot mechanisms.

Hector Medina
7/4/2021 11:59:32

Hello RR!

I would take the "unchangeabililty" of the basic airgun design as a sign that the system works. ;-)

DIANA has been around for 130 years (first airgun came out of production in 1890). And it is still making airguns, unlike BSA .

Now, beyond the brands, what HAS changed is our UNDERSTANDING of how the shot cycle works: The difference between "blowguns", "popguns", and "diesel guns". And the way different design factors affect the working regime of each airgun.
So, while these are not "quantum leaps" of technology, the current "State of the Art" does exceed in efficiency and performance the old guns. I will not talk of smoothness because, as we saw in the case of the old LG55 we have already studied, the smoothness is more a result of the long-term use than of a considered design and a polished execution.

Break barrel guns with locking mechanisms that WORK, I know of three:
The DIANA 65/66
The Walther LGV of the 1950's
The Walther LGV of the 2010's. And they are sufficiently different to take them separately.

The other locking mechanism in existence is good enough for iron sights, but fails when using high power scopes.

I do understand the cost of the locking mechanism, that is why I am advocating for it to be an ADDITIONAL and OPTIONAL item. Not everyone needs it, but if it could be available, some of us would use it.
Now adding things is not THAT complicated if the SPACE has been planned for it, but if you don't have the space, then it becomes an impossibility.

;-)

Keep well and shoot straight!






HM

Reply
KevinTK
8/4/2021 17:07:31

I've loved reading these studies as they are very new and unique way of looking at the accuracy issues in spring rifles. I sent you a Linkedin invite as to chat or email you as I have another technical aspect you have yet to consider.

Reply
Hector Medina
8/5/2021 11:04:04

Hello Kevin

Thanks for your kind words and for reading John's articles.

Easiest way to contact me is through the contact page in this website, we can then exchange EMails and continue the conversation:

https://www.ctcustomairguns.com/contact-us.html

Keep well and shoot straight!





HM

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    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

    Archives

    August 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    February 2022
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    March 2017
    December 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    March 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013

    Categories

    All
    Events
    Gear
    Hunting
    Tests

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly