lpk truth told

Gpacker4686 wrote: ok people i am at a cross road. i have heard that the LPK is almost pointless and not worth the money. But i resently have been told to go with a lpk. Now i would like to know everything about the LPK is it worth it or not. Also i now have an ebolt(it wasn't untill i got the ebolt that people told me to go with the LPK) also i want to know all the pros and cons. PLEASE DON'T JUST POST "DON'T GET IT" tell me why/whynot and pros and cons thanks in advanced

If you had said you wanted to know the value of the LPK in a standard marker I would be one of the first to suggest that it is not worth the cost. Little to no noticeable improvement with the standard mechanical marker. BUT, you have the E-Bolt kit!!! Different story altogether!

Now, all of this info has been posted...most of it by me. But I'll run through it again.

With the standard bolt there is a certain amount of blow-back gas needed to force the rear bolt (hammer) back to its cocked position. Because of that needed blow-back gas you cannot adjust the pressures low enough to really reduce gas consumption or reduce the report from the muzzle.

With the E-Bolt installed the need for blow-back gas is eliminated. At that point you can play with the ram pressure, dwell time of the ram and regulator pressure to the valve to really improve performance. On my 98C I have been able to lower my operating pressure to as low as 140 psi while maintaining 275 fps ball velocity. Pressure varies with ball diameter (closer ball to barrel diameter fit requires less pressure to accelerate the ball to desired velocity.) Even when using small diameter paint I hardly ever exceed 170 psi.

The marker with the E-Bolt and the low pressure kit (actually only the valve and the volumizer are needed with the E-Bolt) becomes much like an Angel in performance (mechanical principles are closely the same) The only limitation is the 13 bps cap, but few people can actually shoot that fast in semi-auto.

Flatland,

Do you realize how difficult that is to read with no capitalization or paragraph breaks? When trying to elucidate for the masses, effort should be made to present it so it can be read as easily as possible.

Ravenguard - "Sorry but that is not true.  First of all, what recoil?!  I don't know how the recoil of a tippmann is enough for people to complain about, I dont even notice it.

Secondly, there will NOT be increased range nomatter how you want to say it.  Any marker chronoed at the same speed will have the same range without the flatline effect."

if you use a Custom 98 with RT, you will notice a recoil.  i don't believe i was complaining about the recoil.  i simply commented that, what recoil there is, is eliminated by the LPK (for verification, see quote below from Tippmann).

and for range, i should have mentioned that i do have the flatline.  adding the LPK "seems" to increase the distance a bit more than a normal flatline.  i have outshot my friends who do not have the LPK (see explanation below).

Bruce A. Frank - "Hmmm, you comments about the marker's improvements with the addition of the LPK make me wonder if you actually have experience with the LPK. First off, the "recoil" perceived by most people is actually the mass of the rear bolt (hammer) slamming back and forth as the marker cycles. The slightly lighter LPK hammer makes virtually no difference in marker movement.

As for increased range, before you make such ridicules statements read up just a little. Unless you are using a barrel designed to impart backspin on the ball, the velocity of the ball at the muzzle is the only thing that affects distance. If the velocity is set and chronographically verified to be the same from the LPK marker and a marker without the LPK, the distance the ball travels is the same.

As for decreased report, if the LPK allows you to reduce your operating pressures from 850 psi  down to 300 or 400 psi, there is little perceived change in loudness. You have to get down into the 200 psi range before the drop-off in decibel level is measurable.

Now there is a potential for improved accuracy at really low pressures, lower than can be accomplished without the installation of the E-Bolt, but the research proof is limited at best."

first of all, with all due respect, i don't care if you think i have experience with it or not.  i have it, i use it, and i enjoy it.  i don't need to justify myself to you (especially when all you seem to care about is insulting those with whom you disagree).

firstly, "the "recoil" perceived by most people...", means there is a recoil.  perception IS reality.  the LPK reduces the pressure in marker which in turn reduces blowback, etc., all of which reduces recoil (see quote below from Tippmann).

secondly, before you ridicule someone about their "ridicules statement", make sure you can actually spell "ridiculous".  there is this little button with an "abc" and a checkmark that will help you with that.  now, to answer your "informed" statement about distance, let me quote from Tippmann directly:

"Designed to minimize recoil and improve consistency in shot velocity, this kit will increase efficiency by keeping pressure between 300 and 400 psi."

this answers the question about recoil and distance, since "improved consistency in shot velocity" will indeed increase your distance over a marker without the LPK due to the normal drop off in pressure due to increased ROF.  in other words, if i consistently shoot at say 300 psi without dropoff, but someone i am playing against drops from 300, 290, 280, etc. with each repeated shot, i will no doubt out-distance him after the first shot. 

and, again, with the "perceived" change in loudness...i don't know where to begin.  first, the LPK closes the hole in the side of the marker, which helps to lower the sound.  second, lower pressure means less noise. and third, perception truly is reality.  everyone i play with plays with normal custom 98s.  we all agree that my marker, with the LPK, is much less noisy than theirs.

you should try being nicer to people.

flatlandpercy wrote:

Scientific my butt. I am a professor of your world.
Decibal calibration chart would, my guess, show what
you have told me. But my brain tells me that the sound
is less. Green Lasers appear the be brighter than
blue lasers that are actually measured to be exactly
the same brightness, this is because our eyes are able
to capture more the green color spectrum than the blue.
So my brain tells me that sound has decreased, in the
same way it would decrease in the ears of the opponents.
I am a mammal, by the way, incase you were wondering.
This means that you are not familiar with the jewish
deliberation of estetic moph. It was once brought forth
by te great settlers of the arcticaarcticaca, and they
once told of such truths that nobody around them, other
than there peers themselves would believe. In fact it
was once done, by scientific experiment, that jerousilum
conducted such a study and detered that only those infected
with the virus itself were capable of expresing that it
in fact exists as well as the degree in which it procurrs
the imagination of the mind. Now this was back in the
time that nobody had cerebral cortexes so our judgement
was, in all means, true beyond reasonable doubt. That is
until the jewish settler himself first stepped foot on
our moon, giving teh agobonis of asparagus vegetary.
And, shall I add, at will, that this single event was
the proliteration of as great of an algorythmic magnitude
as ever was before the cerenral cortex was born. And
such facts lay ALL AROUND US, waiting for the correct eye,
the correct angle to understand them propperly. And this
is why people like myself are here, to work so hard at
identifying the underlying truths, the underlying causes
of the microcausms that make this world roll along into
an infiniti and beyond the doors that subsequently establish
our society as the very deity that runs the hypocricy that
you all have had the gift to partake upon. But let it
be known that along with your esoteric sub-vanquished
relevancy's come a more forboden sense of altered perception
entirely in excess of the universal sufferage expressed
by one's inner most revelations as those given to the
priveleged during times of distress. Over the span of
the lifetime doctrine of a new world order living is
expected to drop into the rediculum of neandarthalific
progress, easing under cylinders that are said to carry
the vitamin of gross exageration within itself alone.
THis is the statutory holiday that we became to know as
Christmas. But now that we understand it, the more profound
lesson is that things that seem to be entirely different
at first can really be manifestations of the same
underlying phenomenum. Before =MC squared, before Einstein
there was no even possible thought that a hunk of material,
any old hunk of material, if you could harness it, contained
enormous quantities of energy. That was not something
that people even though about of, that if you could harness
if correctly, it could power an entire city for millions
of years. When first encountering reletivity, what
really struck me more than anything else was acutally
how incredibly simple the underlying ideas were. The
deep point wasn't hidden in some deep mathematics or
these stunningly striking assumptions: that the speed
of light is constant, that physics looks the same in
all frames of referance. And from these two seemingly
inocuous assumptions come this incredibly different world
view than the standard newtonian picture. I could go
on, but i'll leave that up to you, as you probably
get my message by now.

__________________________________________________________

In english please

darkmaster wrote: I thought that was going to make sense so i read all of it and now i am pissed because i wasted 3 mins reading it and i want my 3 mins back. NONSENSE!  what did that have to do with the LPK

It was intended to be nonsense with obviously nothing to do with analysis or scientific theory or even decent field observations...just gibberish to fill the page.

Gpacker4686 wrote: i have a stabilizer and i was wondering if i do get the lpk would have have to get the low pressure kit for my stabilizer or could i just use it the way it is now

No, you don't have to get the LP conversion for the Stabilizer. It works just fine down into the very low range. Palmer had the LP conversion kit on sale a while back so I bought and installed it, but I can see no difference in performance of the Stabilizers ability to hold a pressure setting even as far down at the 140 psi. The original Stabilizer was just a precise at that pressure level.