[dirty_canadian4894]

Originally Posted by warbeak2099

AGD patented that with their V2 Warp that never came out. It was going to be an underfed gun.

i also designed an "underfed" gun but it was closed bolt and used an mq valve, the design is amazing but warp feeds arent very available anymore so it would be useless.

[snoopay700]

Originally Posted by Ri0T

Assuming this ever sees production, I would definitely like to leave that open.

If this incarnation works well, I plan on making another version using Merlin extrusion, which I'd have a lot more room to mess around with a cartridge based valve.

The only problem i foresee with production is that after testing it, who would want a marker where you can't sight down the barrel? I mean it's a cool idea, and i'm interested to see how it works, and i'd love to play with it, but i personally care about being able to look down my barrel at the guy.

[clemsonpaintball2121]

Originally Posted by snoopay700

The only problem i foresee with production is that after testing it, who would want a marker where you can't sight down the barrel?

At this stage i dont really care about the sight line over the barrel i just want to see it shoot!!!

[snoopay700]

Originally Posted by clemsonpaintball2121

At this stage i dont really care about the sight line over the barrel i just want to see it shoot!!!

Well yeah, it'd be cool, and i'd like to see the feed mechanism, but it just doesn't seem practical to me.

[Ri0T]

I completely agree with the sighting concerns. It's very unusual. I had a 12" Cobra barrel on it, and picked up a 14" barrel yesterday, which makes a huge difference in sighting. Maybe I'll rig a better way to take a pic of the sighting view.

I'm most interested in seeing if the theory of the various systems I'm incorporating will work. If so, it may not be practical at all, but should be absurdly capable. It has the potential to shoot, with paint, faster without eyes than anything else does with, and I can still use at least a reflective eye. Break beam I'm working on the design of.

Onto good news... I just saw the first 2 pictures of the feed wheel, and I found a part I made and lost during a move, which I now only need to clean up. This is the housing for the "bolt system". That takes it down to 3 parts plus the valve (though 2 of those parts consist of a couple smaller parts each).

[warbeak2099]

Hhhmm, this was posted on Pbstar a while ago:
http://www.paintballstar.com/pn/modu...d=659#gun2.jpg

This isn't too similar is it? The "Revolve"...

EDIT: More Info:
http://paintballheadlines.com/2007/0...prototype-gun/

[snoopay700]

Originally Posted by Ri0T

I completely agree with the sighting concerns. It's very unusual. I had a 12" Cobra barrel on it, and picked up a 14" barrel yesterday, which makes a huge difference in sighting. Maybe I'll rig a better way to take a pic of the sighting view.

I'm most interested in seeing if the theory of the various systems I'm incorporating will work. If so, it may not be practical at all, but should be absurdly capable. It has the potential to shoot, with paint, faster without eyes than anything else does with, and I can still use at least a reflective eye. Break beam I'm working on the design of.

Onto good news... I just saw the first 2 pictures of the feed wheel, and I found a part I made and lost during a move, which I now only need to clean up. This is the housing for the "bolt system". That takes it down to 3 parts plus the valve (though 2 of those parts consist of a couple smaller parts each).

I'm really interested to see what your design is, though i won't press because i know what it's like to worry about your design. One thing though, it's won't be the fastest firing marker without eyes, there are some that can fire fast without eyes.

[Hellopeople]

Originally Posted by Ri0T

I completely agree with the sighting concerns. It's very unusual. I had a 12" Cobra barrel on it, and picked up a 14" barrel yesterday, which makes a huge difference in sighting. Maybe I'll rig a better way to take a pic of the sighting view.

I'm most interested in seeing if the theory of the various systems I'm incorporating will work. If so, it may not be practical at all, but should be absurdly capable. It has the potential to shoot, with paint, faster without eyes than anything else does with, and I can still use at least a reflective eye. Break beam I'm working on the design of.

Onto good news... I just saw the first 2 pictures of the feed wheel, and I found a part I made and lost during a move, which I now only need to clean up. This is the housing for the "bolt system". That takes it down to 3 parts plus the valve (though 2 of those parts consist of a couple smaller parts each).

get a periscope.

[Ri0T]

Originally Posted by snoopay700

I'm really interested to see what your design is, though i won't press because i know what it's like to worry about your design. One thing though, it's won't be the fastest firing marker without eyes, there are some that can fire fast without eyes.

I said WITH paint and without eyes. It is possibly, theoretically, for this design to soar past 50 bps into the 60's, but only time will tell.

It's not too similar to the Revolve, but there are some obvious similarities. If they kept working on the revolve until the problems were worked out, they might have ended up on the same track. Hell, my design started as a pneumatically driven belt fed loader for a gun whose bolt slid around the paintball. It's evolved pretty damn far from that. You never know where your ideas will take you.

[snoopay700]

Originally Posted by Ri0T

I said WITH paint and without eyes. It is possibly, theoretically, for this design to soar past 50 bps into the 60's, but only time will tell.

It's not too similar to the Revolve, but there are some obvious similarities. If they kept working on the revolve until the problems were worked out, they might have ended up on the same track. Hell, my design started as a pneumatically driven belt fed loader for a gun whose bolt slid around the paintball. It's evolved pretty damn far from that. You never know where your ideas will take you.

I'm talking about with paint, and if it can feed balls that fast i still doubt that the marker will be able to cycle that fast (just going off of the info and equipment you're using right now, if you change it you might theoretically be able to cycle into the 40's, but i still doubt it could sling paint faster than the 30's just from mechanical limitations as far as the balls making it out). There is one marker that i know of that can fire into the 30s without any chops and it's all mechanical, but it's the only gun like it that i know, and that's the main reason that i based my design around using that bolt (not the spyder bolt). The main thing i went for with my design is making it compact (smaller than the mini) and fast cycling, which i'm pretty sure it can do both, the only limitations it'll have for cycling is how fast the solenoid can cycle and as for how fast it can sling paint, the normal limitations will apply. The other thing i really like about my design is that it doesn't need a foregrip regulator, so with a lightweight foregrip it's got the potential to be the lightest yet, which people seem to love. This all stemmed from trying to make a design that had the breech well behind the trigger, but it's come to my attention that that's not marketable.

[Ri0T]

This is all theoretical. I'd end up using a different board and reg. The MAC 43 series solenoid should cycle very fast.

The big speed boost is that I've eliminated altogether the time it takes for the ball to drop into the chamber. To elaborate, this is from a post on page 3...

Originally Posted by Ri0T

I won't have an issue with the ball stack, actually. I've found a way to mitigate those issues. Yes, I'm being discreet.

The cycle time woud looke something like this...

4 ms for the valve (with the MQ)
4 ms for solenoid on
Easily as low as 6 ms for "bolt system cycling"
6 ms for solenoid off.

By the time the solenoid is off, the bal will be in place (I have a way).

With proper programming, there could even be some overlap so that while the MQ is firing, the solenoid to move the bolt system begins opening, and while that solenoid is closing, the MQ begins to fire. That being said, I could shave another 4ms off of the cycle.

Feel free to catch me on AIM with any questions you have on this.

[snoopay700]

Originally Posted by Ri0T

This is all theoretical. I'd end up using a different board and reg. The MAC 43 series solenoid should cycle very fast.

The big speed boost is that I've eliminated altogether the time it takes for the ball to drop into the chamber. To elaborate, this is from a post on page 3...



Feel free to catch me on AIM with any questions you have on this.

Even so the main thing i was talking about is just being able to get so many balls out in such an amount of time before they just start pushing each other out. I'm a strong believer that the limit on getting balls out is in the mid 30's (just due to only being able to get so many balls out of the barrel, not your system) but cycling is virtually limitless. Anywho, i may try to pry about your design a bit just to try to figure it out, because now you've got me interested.

[warbeak2099]

Originally Posted by Ri0T

It's not too similar to the Revolve, but there are some obvious similarities. If they kept working on the revolve until the problems were worked out, they might have ended up on the same track. Hell, my design started as a pneumatically driven belt fed loader for a gun whose bolt slid around the paintball. It's evolved pretty damn far from that. You never know where your ideas will take you.

Ah good. I can't wait to see the finished product of this thing. Different hopper modules could be offered for it to accommodate different capacities lol. Just a thought!

[snoopay700]

Yeah, i really want to see this thing shoot now to see if it lives up to my expectations, especially since i had a similar idea and want to see how well it works, and just be glad someone worked it out.

[Ri0T]

First post modified with a new rearview pic.

[ProMaster0077]

I have to say that I'm not to worried about sight path down the barrel, especially for speedball. Most guys aim by watching where there first couple of balls are heading and then adjust accordingly. I personally shoot with my gun leaned in toward the bunker to avoid hopper hits, so I'm basically sighting down the side of the marker, not over the top. If you "sight" over the top, you will get your hopper blasted quick.

Riot, this is all very interesting. Keep up the good work...(like you needed my encouragement to keep going.)

[snoopay700]

Originally Posted by ProMaster0077

I have to say that I'm not to worried about sight path down the barrel, especially for speedball. Most guys aim by watching where there first couple of balls are heading and then adjust accordingly. I personally shoot with my gun leaned in toward the bunker to avoid hopper hits, so I'm basically sighting down the side of the marker, not over the top. If you "sight" over the top, you will get your hopper blasted quick.

Riot, this is all very interesting. Keep up the good work...(like you needed my encouragement to keep going.)

I sight down the side of mine too, the main thing though is that the hopper prevents you from even doing that, that's what i was talking about.

[Ri0T]

While at work today, I was playing around with the inards of a radioactive beta sensor, and found a better way to mount the ram than what I'm doing now. The same ram concept used to open the shutter on a radioactive sensor could just be the ticket to a smoothly functioning, easily built setup.

I think that was an excellent use of company time, since I came into the office at 6:30 AM and didn't leave until after 7:00 PM.

I've got a couple of ideas I'm still throwing around for the smallest/fastest method of cycling the bolt system.

[bobfromaccounting]

I think i read one time that in order to feed about 50bps, you have to move them with enough force to break them. While this depends greatly on paint quality and set-up, it's something to ponder.

Also, like a camera shutter? Must be interesting working outside the confines of a tube, the possibilities are limitless.

[Ri0T]

I'm sure in a traditional loader design, the forces on the ball to feed it at 50 bps would break it. However, I don't believe that to be a major factor in my design.

How long do you think it takes the ball to move from being at rest to the chamber? What kind of force must be imparted on the ball during this?

As for the shutter on the sensor... yeah, it's pretty interesting. They basically just use a .5" thick or so piece of tungsten to block the radiation. The rest of it is shielded with thick lead walls. The beam tungsten piece moves, unshielding the radiation.

[snoopay700]

Originally Posted by Ri0T

I'm sure in a traditional loader design, the forces on the ball to feed it at 50 bps would break it. However, I don't believe that to be a major factor in my design.

How long do you think it takes the ball to move from being at rest to the chamber? What kind of force must be imparted on the ball during this?

As for the shutter on the sensor... yeah, it's pretty interesting. They basically just use a .5" thick or so piece of tungsten to block the radiation. The rest of it is shielded with thick lead walls. The beam tungsten piece moves, unshielding the radiation.

Just out of curiosity, have you tried your loading system out yet? There's just a few problems that i think you could run into unless it's how i think it is.