an idea for the tinkerer

just a thought...i thought this would be kinda cool to do to a 98c...i drew it the best i could...i have messy writing...questions are cool...suggestions are cool... if u must flame me than proceed, i am a secure person and wont be emotionaly injured.

 

lmk if u think it would work or if u would loose to much air flow with the two power tubes connected with like some macro line or something.

 

http://putfile.com/pic.php?pic=9/25514082248.jpg&s=x1

 

http://putfile.com/pic.php?pic=9/25514084072.jpg&s=x1

the benefits of this would only be that it was short and that it would be weird

 

so to clear things up...when the rear bolt is tripped..everything that is connected to the rear bolt is the valve which is inside the power tube...and the "front bolt"....the two power tubes would be connected with a large i.d tube of some sort that would be long enuf to be able to travel with the power tube housing the valve

Edited by coops1387

shmavistime wrote: That would be prety pricey to get working right, and Im guessing it would still be very hard to do it. Try doc nickel and ask him if it is possible.

 

how would it be pricey...the only thing other than everythign ud get with a stock tippmann...is another powertube...and some metal u could bend for some linkage arms....and maybe some bondo after all the welds were done...unless some other idea was figured out that could join the tubes temporarly

SuzukiRider987 wrote: Cool. TriggerHappy1 had a nice drawling along the same lines as this a little while ago.

o.................... well then

i dont know

^^ no basically what it would be is that instead of the hammer hitting the valve...the valve moves with the hammer and then the valve pin is actuated when it hits the bolt or set screw or anything that can be screwed in and out...and then the air is tranfered out the back of the power tube....(so if there was nothing connecting the two power tubes...the air would shoot u in the face)...and diverted into thet other power tube where the bolt has already finished its forward motion and thus propelling the ball...why did i say thus? weird

Monk wrote: Trigs would work but yours would need heavy modification to the valve. Wait...Wheres the air source go into? I dont think your will work at all.

 

im pretty positive that it would work....what do u mean where does the air source go into...like from the tank to the valve? what r u asking....if ur unclear on a part of this than say what it is cause there may be something im overlooking although i dont think so...thanks...all i need is some time away from school to do this......so ill prob get around to it this summer...ha

Yeah, expect more complicated than it needs to be. Pretty much a modified standard blowback design.

coops1387 wrote: Monk wrote: Trigs would work but yours would need heavy modification to the valve. Wait...Wheres the air source go into? I dont think your will work at all.   im pretty positive that it would work....what do u mean where does the air source go into...like from the tank to the valve? what r u asking....if ur unclear on a part of this than say what it is cause there may be something im overlooking although i dont think so...thanks...all i need is some time away from school to do this......so ill prob get around to it this summer...ha

From the asa to the valve. If its attached to the valve then I know it would not work. That hose would have to move back and for with no obstruction.

Ok, it would work, but its really not feasible. Too much friction, too many outside moving parts. In fact, Im not sure you entirely know how the 98 valve works.

If you were to try this, I would sugest Trigs version.

Ah, I took another look at your pic and I read all the comments. Im sorry I insulted your intellgence, and I apologize.

However, it would still have alot of friction. And I think the distance from where the air comes out of the valve and to the ball is too long.
I think it would be a gas hog.

Im not saying it didnt take alot of thought. Im just saying that its not very efficient.