Air stripper video
- Thread starter DanB
- Start date
S
shadowalker
Guest
Dan , thanks for the video as you know I have been on this subject for some time as I feel strippers as presently designed are only partially effective. You will notice that most of the air is being stripped off before it overtakes the pellet, a good thing.....however also notice in your video the amount of air still following the pellet. I feel for a stripper to be fully affective all the air following the pellet should be removed also. The pellet cavity is a perfect place for all kinds of stuff to take place. This is why I build a 2 stage stripper. One section to rid the majority of the air as most present strippers do and a second vented chamber to eliminate the air following the pellet.
Great work as usial!
Frank
Great work as usial!
Frank
Last edited by a moderator:
S
shadowalker
Guest
Pete, I am going to give you my opinion from fooling with strippers in my tunnel and what I have learned. Yes, your stating about their tuning weight benefit may be correct but how did you differenciate between it or the splitter's function being the benificial item? To determine that three tests would have to be run. One without the splitter, one with the splitter and one using a weight same length and diameter as the splitter.
Splitters if made right do two things, one is your weight issue if you luck out on it and two they remove the majority of the air propelling the pellet as it exits the muzzle overtaking the pellet in flight subjecting it to a ton of potential problems. This occurs in any ballistic application from pellets to cannons.
This in my mind is the reason splitter use has been so controversial, they have not been designed to allow them do the work the theory intended them to do. Then too the installation must be most precise if full benifit is to be realized.
Present splitters in my mind do only half the job. It does not take a lot of gray matter to understand that a pellet's cavity is the perfect container for air to be trapped in and steered from seeing air is still pushing/following it foward after it exits the crown (see Dan's Video) Any variation in crown squareness or base of pellet squareness, cavity concentricity, pellet design or any combination of these items is going to or at least have the ability to alter the pellets flight pattern. Something we extreme accuracy shooters would like to have removed from the potential problem list and one less thing we need to worry about.
It is helpful to understand the theory of air strippers and their advantages. The object being the removal of all air that might influence the pellets flight upon exiting the bbl. In my mind the real answer for stripper effeciency is to have a 2 stage stripper. One to get rid of the majority of air at muzzle exit, as present ones do, and a second cavity within the splitter to remove the air following the pellet.
If the propelling air is not removed it will batter the pellet as it overtakes it making the pellet multi-task as it tries to maintain or seek stability. The two stage stripper design insures a clean flying pellet exiting the stripper as it vectors into whatever condition is present.
I use splitters because in theory they are an advantage and testing shows my gun shoots better with them on.
.
An easy decision can be made on strippers. If they work well on your gun it is an advantage. If not don't use one.
Hope I have helped.
Frank
Splitters if made right do two things, one is your weight issue if you luck out on it and two they remove the majority of the air propelling the pellet as it exits the muzzle overtaking the pellet in flight subjecting it to a ton of potential problems. This occurs in any ballistic application from pellets to cannons.
This in my mind is the reason splitter use has been so controversial, they have not been designed to allow them do the work the theory intended them to do. Then too the installation must be most precise if full benifit is to be realized.
Present splitters in my mind do only half the job. It does not take a lot of gray matter to understand that a pellet's cavity is the perfect container for air to be trapped in and steered from seeing air is still pushing/following it foward after it exits the crown (see Dan's Video) Any variation in crown squareness or base of pellet squareness, cavity concentricity, pellet design or any combination of these items is going to or at least have the ability to alter the pellets flight pattern. Something we extreme accuracy shooters would like to have removed from the potential problem list and one less thing we need to worry about.
It is helpful to understand the theory of air strippers and their advantages. The object being the removal of all air that might influence the pellets flight upon exiting the bbl. In my mind the real answer for stripper effeciency is to have a 2 stage stripper. One to get rid of the majority of air at muzzle exit, as present ones do, and a second cavity within the splitter to remove the air following the pellet.
If the propelling air is not removed it will batter the pellet as it overtakes it making the pellet multi-task as it tries to maintain or seek stability. The two stage stripper design insures a clean flying pellet exiting the stripper as it vectors into whatever condition is present.
I use splitters because in theory they are an advantage and testing shows my gun shoots better with them on.
.
An easy decision can be made on strippers. If they work well on your gun it is an advantage. If not don't use one.
Hope I have helped.
Frank
Last edited by a moderator:
Pete Wass
Well-known member
Thank Your Frank,
I can appreciate what you have said. Sometime soon I will make a stripper for my EV 2, although I will say it shoots pretty dern good with a mid- barrel tuner I have on it. I'm not saying there can't be improvement but I didn't seem to see it on the CZ. Doesn't mean my Stripper is made correctly either. I have tried a Weight only on the muzzle and a weight mid-barrel. The weight only seemed too heavy for the barrel until it was brought back to the mid-section of the barrel, there it seemed to tune about the same as I saw with the Stripper installed and adjusted for tune. This is what prompted my question.
Last edited:
S
shadowalker
Guest
Pete, what is that car you have pictured in your post each time? I need to see a great photo of that jewel
On mid bbl. tuners, I have a beautifully made scaled down 22 RF tuner that was a gift to see if they would work and I cannot get it to work. In fact we had a couple of them and neither of us could get results we needed out on the end. Maybe they are too light or too heavy we just do not know at this time. In desperation I then tried a series of brass weights from 2 oz to 4 as mid bbl. tuners and they do work. I have one on both my modified 22 Steyr and my .177 EV2......However, they are touchy as hell meaning you have to move them in very small increments same as an end 22 RIMFIRE tuner. I struggled for months before I learned that lesson. I had a million marks on my bbl where I thought I had success. Once you get the thing so it is producing smaller groups than previous play with it on both sides of that mark......move it very small amounts from 1/8 to 1/16 to .030 to .015 to .007 to .001 to perfection. A tube is almost a must for this kind of work.
EV 2's seem to work at about 5 inches back from the muzzle. The gun Tod Banks has is operating at that distance and he has moved it all over the place and seems to come back to that dimension. I played with his gun a long time finding where it was happy when I owned that gun.
The ideal one in my mind would be a weight with a threaded outer ring that could cut down the tuning time and allow for temperature, barometer and humidity ( air density) changes much as done on rimfire tuners but we do not have the space between the weight and fill tube. I made a beauty that I can't get on for that reason but feel that line of thinking will be necessary when all the facts are known. Probably a little late night thinking will remedy the problem.
Frank
On mid bbl. tuners, I have a beautifully made scaled down 22 RF tuner that was a gift to see if they would work and I cannot get it to work. In fact we had a couple of them and neither of us could get results we needed out on the end. Maybe they are too light or too heavy we just do not know at this time. In desperation I then tried a series of brass weights from 2 oz to 4 as mid bbl. tuners and they do work. I have one on both my modified 22 Steyr and my .177 EV2......However, they are touchy as hell meaning you have to move them in very small increments same as an end 22 RIMFIRE tuner. I struggled for months before I learned that lesson. I had a million marks on my bbl where I thought I had success. Once you get the thing so it is producing smaller groups than previous play with it on both sides of that mark......move it very small amounts from 1/8 to 1/16 to .030 to .015 to .007 to .001 to perfection. A tube is almost a must for this kind of work.
EV 2's seem to work at about 5 inches back from the muzzle. The gun Tod Banks has is operating at that distance and he has moved it all over the place and seems to come back to that dimension. I played with his gun a long time finding where it was happy when I owned that gun.
The ideal one in my mind would be a weight with a threaded outer ring that could cut down the tuning time and allow for temperature, barometer and humidity ( air density) changes much as done on rimfire tuners but we do not have the space between the weight and fill tube. I made a beauty that I can't get on for that reason but feel that line of thinking will be necessary when all the facts are known. Probably a little late night thinking will remedy the problem.
Frank
Last edited by a moderator: