Classic Army Steyr Aug A1 discussion

MacAonghusa

Tigger wrote: »

you can buy pre-upgraded mech boxes and motors and its an easy job to swap them out
really the only skill is in rebuilding and shimming the box
but if yer one workd well just do what letahal reckons and swap out the barrell thats a 5 minute job

Thx.
I didn't know that about upgraded mech boxes; i'll keep it in mind for future.

Tigger

on chronoing

air pressure humidity and density probably affect figures +-10fps

but humidity affects fps because it affects the density of air not because the water molecules get in the way

as dex sez standardising temperature pressure and humidity (walk in humadoir anybody) is the only way to be sure but i reckon aiming for a 315 fps reading is the best way to go in a real world enviroment


and a 310 - 400 fps fluxuation was probably a fly in the sensor happend to me once

MAD Ozzie

Ok I can believe that, so how as site operators can we standardize the chrono process, so these problems become not so common,(as best we can) You dont want to have to re-spring AEG's just to play in Galway!! (As this prob is not fair for the players, site operators, and airsoft shops)

Can you understand how I misunderstood!!


Thank you for that Dex

NakedDex

Tigger wrote: »

on chronoing

air pressure humidity and density probably affect figures +-10fps

but humidity affects fps because it affects the density of air not because the water molecules get in the way

as dex sez standardising temperature pressure and humidity (walk in humadoir anybody) is the only way to be sure but i reckon aiming for a 315 fps reading is the best way to go in a real world enviroment


and a 310 - 400 fps fluxuation was probably a fly in the sensor happend to me once

Humidity is water droplets, albeit small ones. A round in flight is slowed down, exactly as Hive said, by having to force it's way through vaporised water if various particulate size. The friction caused by these millions of micro-impacts is the cause of reduction of speed and range, it's gaseous viscosity. I'm not sure where you got that +/-10fps figure, I can only assume you've researched it to come to such an arbitrary conclusion, but from my experience it can go quite further than that. Now if you have evidence otherwise then I'll dismiss my own results.

Ozzie, the only things that can be readily done is to ensure the chrono is of good quality, is placed level (as is the rifle to be tested) and is shaded from all direct light. Be sure, also, to chrono with the hop off only. Chronoing with the hop on gives a false result. A rifle doing 345 with the hop off is still hot if it's doing 325 with the hop on, and should therefore be disallowed regardless of any conditions. Vigilance is key.

MacAonghusa

NakedDex wrote: »

A rifle doing 345 with the hop off is still hot if it's doing 325 with the hop on, and should therefore be disallowed regardless of any conditions. Vigilance is key.

Can I question that? Surely the 1J limit applies to the energy at which the gun expels the bb. Therefore whether this is influenced by a spring, gas seal, hop-up or tight bore barrel is irrelevant; what's important is the resulting energy of the bb.
I'm probably wrong but that would seem more logical to me.

NakedDex

The 1J limit refers to the maximum power the unit is capable expelling. If the unit is capable of expelling over 1J but hop is applied to bring it under, it is still capable of expelling the projectile over 1J. This is how it is interpreted in law.
Modifying the spring to a lower power means the unit is no longer capable of expelling over 1J, and is therefore legal.

Shiva

MacAonghusa wrote: »

Can I question that? Surely the 1J limit applies to the energy at which the gun expels the bb. Therefore whether this is influenced by a spring, gas seal, hop-up or tight bore barrel is irrelevant; what's important is the resulting energy of the bb.
I'm probably wrong but that would seem more logical to me.

Actually, I would tend to agree with you.

The muzzle energy of an airsoft gun is measured by the speed of the bullet leaving the barrel. See that bit there ? LEAVING. Even the very term says it all, in my opinion - "muzzle energy". Thats the energy at the muzzle, not in the hopup chamber.

The forces which act upon it before it leaves the barrel should be irrelevant - once a .2g BB is travelling at less than 328 feet per second when it leaves the barrel, surely the gun is firing at less than 1 joule. Am I misunderstanding something ?

This has been an issue with me for some time, but I kept quiet about it because of the potential of an issue like this to cause widespread outrage, panics, flaming and banning.....but since this is a nice civilised discussion, whats the chances of the mods moving these off-topic posts into a seperate thread where this issue could be discussed, and the various points of view could be shared ?

Shiva

NakedDex wrote: »

The 1J limit refers to the maximum power the unit is capable expelling. If the unit is capable of expelling over 1J but hop is applied to bring it under, it is still capable of expelling the projectile over 1J. This is how it is interpreted in law.
Modifying the spring to a lower power means the unit is no longer capable of expelling over 1J, and is therefore legal.

Ok, I know I'm being pedantic, but...

If we're interpreting the law in that way, i.e., the devices capability to expel the BB, surely the gun is capable of firing at over 1 joule if a new spring is installed, a tighter barrel is installed, or the air seal is made better? Whether these modifications are made or not, the capability is there.

The point I guess I'm trying to make is this - Why are we treating the appliance of hop-up, which is in effect a modification to the power, as something completely different to the installation of a weaker spring, which is also a modification of the power. The power may have changed, but the capability is still there.

And just to be clear - I'm not advocating that we ignore the 1 joule law, or lobby for an increase in the limit.

Hivemind187

Shiva wrote: »

Ok, I know I'm being pedantic, but...

If we're interpreting the law in that way, i.e., the devices capability to expel the BB, surely the gun is capable of firing at over 1 joule if a new spring is installed, a tighter barrel is installed, or the air seal is made better? Whether these modifications are made or not, the capability is there.

The point I guess I'm trying to make is this - Why are we treating the appliance of hop-up, which is in effect a modification to the power, as something completely different to the installation of a weaker spring, which is also a modification of the power. The power may have changed, but the capability is still there.

And just to be clear - I'm not advocating that we ignore the 1 joule law, or lobby for an increase in the limit.

There is a slight difference.

What Dex is talking about is the device "in its current configuration" rather than being altered, which in effect changes it to a different device.

If there is no modification to the power (i.e. hop is set ot off) then the device is producing its maximum potneital energy measured in that specific atmosphere.

Thereby being compliant with the law.

... you#re right. this is waaaay to complex for a review thread.

Shiva

Hivemind187 wrote: »

What Dex is talking about is the device "in its current configuration" rather than being altered, which in effect changes it to a different device.

Yeah, but being pedantic again, if I may....

If it shoots at 340 with the hop off, then its illegal in its current configuration. No argument there.

If it shoots 327 with the hop on, can it be argued that its now shooting legally, because with the hop applied, its shooting 327 fps in its current configuration, said configuration having been altered by the application of hopup ?

kevteljeur

MacAonghusa wrote: »

<snip />
As for the Steyr, can I recommend the following to Aug fans:

- SA80 Sling: they're the absolute biz and work very well on a Steyr IMO. (also on a G36C btw)

- Laylax Aug side rail: too expensive for me unfortunately (due to shipping) but it's the only Aug rail i've managed to find and looks deadly.
http://www.tokyohobby.net/store/product_details.php?p=154

One thing I need to get for my Aug is a way of mounting a 20mm rail on top of the built in sight. I have a few ideas of my own but if anyone has any good ideas i'm all ears.
I also need a way of mounting a monocle to the sight but might just go with a simple universal barrel mount.

<snip />

*cough* JG *cough* AUG A3 *cough*
Seriously, between the rails, shorter body length and JG upgraded mechbox, it's a good piece of kit for less than the price of an upgrade. If your budget loosens up, you could even get it and strip what you want from it. The rails aren't actually as useful as I had thought, but that's because I haven't got stuff to attach yet.

MAD Ozzie wrote: »

my apologies.!! (The words come out before thinking) The out ya asses bit!!, it was not meant at anyone, or rely to offend people in any way.. So Im Sorry, and Im eating my FAL now (Its an Aussie thing.)

<snip />

I figured you probably saw me as justifying poor standards - apologies fully accepted! And post some photos of you eating the FAL please, it'll help with my hurt ego and my AEG cookery website

horgan_p

OK ive stayed clear of this (which is the worst case of thread hijacking / spoiling i've seen in a while if not ever )so far , however it seems to me to be accepted practice to chrono airsoft devices with the hop OFF.

from http://www.texasairsoft.org/index.php?page=chrono

step 2 in their chroning guide : "Staff member #1 is responsible for ensuring player's hopup is turned off and weapon is clear."

From Airsoft Retreat :
http://www.airsoftretreat.com/forums/index.php?topic=57854.msg605696

"Most fields to, my understanding, require hop-ups to be turned off before chronoing to prevent hot shooting. Only after the chrono can the hop-up be dialed in. A consequence of this is that BB's have a lower velocity than they did at the chrono due to the increased friction and the transfer of energy to rotation that the hop-up causes."

To be fair the rules are the rules , you dont have to like them but they are the rules.

If a site wishes to chrono any way they choose , that's their choice. as much as it's each individual players choice to play there.If you're not happy with a site's methods then dont play there,its that simple.

If a retailer wants to chrono or not , thats their choice , most if not all responsible retailers will. in my store , we chrono when the aegs come in and when they go out - even if the initial chrono is well under 328 fps , none escape: we check the maruis the same as the star same as the CA etc.

Hivemind187

Shiva wrote: »

Yeah, but being pedantic again, if I may....

If it shoots at 340 with the hop off, then its illegal in its current configuration. No argument there.

If it shoots 327 with the hop on, can it be argued that its now shooting legally, because with the hop applied, its shooting 327 fps in its current configuration, said configuration having been altered by the application of hopup ?

I see what you are saying however:

The hop mechanism is part of the devices construction and therefore it is part of the "current configuration". True.

However.

It's purpose as part of that configuration has the side effect of reducing the physical velocity (by means of transfering energy from the BB on contact with the hop "nub"). As such, when switched to the "off" position, the configuration of the device is not changed merely a component has been turned off (rather than removed).

In other words, the device is measured at its peak physical energy output for its current assembled (perhaps this would have been a better choice of words for distinction) configuration (i.e. with a component whose side effects alter the velocity of a BB reduced to it's minimal possible state).

If you add a new internal mechanism, or subtract a current one you have changed the configuration.

I'll run this by Fayer and see what he thinks.

TheDoc

If only all "contraversial topics" could be spoke of this way

Thoroughly civilised and very informative.

Shiva

Hivemind187 wrote: »

I'll run this by Fayer and see what he thinks.

Yeah, I'd be interested in that, thanks.

However....what you've said makes sense, and its a solid argument for chronoing with the hop off.

horgan_p wrote: »

If a retailer wants to chrono or not , thats their choice , most if not all responsible retailers will. in my store , we chrono when the aegs come in and when they go out - even if the initial chrono is well under 328 fps , none escape: we check the maruis the same as the star same as the CA etc.

I agree with you 100%. We too chrono with the hop off, because thats how the IAA say we should do it, and we're affiliated, so we have to follow the rules.

This method of chronoing with the hop off always kinda bothered me a little though, because I always looked at it from the point of view that we should be measuring the velocity off the BB as it leaves the barrel, and using that figure in the formula to calculate energy. However, Hivemind has kindly explained the thinking of the IAA on this, and its set my mind at rest.

Who says debate isnt healthy ?

I'd still be interested to hear Fayer's opinion, purely as an academic exercise.
I'd also be interested in an opinion therefore, on the measurable power of a gas rifle with an adjustable gas valve installed. The valve would be part of the devices configuration, but adjusting it would significantly alter the power - something like turning on a hop-up.
I'm not trying to stir anything up, by the way - I am genuinely curious about it all. I make my living selling these things, so I'm naturally concerned with how these rules are interpreted, and the thinking behind them.

Having said all that though, I agree with the honourable member from Cork - This is totally off-topic and should be addressed in another thread, so I'm done with it for now. I'm surprised we haven't all been infracted by now !

MacAonghusa

Hivemind187 wrote: »

There is a slight difference.
What Dex is talking about is the device "in its current configuration" rather than being altered, which in effect changes it to a different device.
If there is no modification to the power (i.e. hop is set ot off) then the device is producing its maximum potneital energy measured in that specific atmosphere.
Thereby being compliant with the law.
... you#re right. this is waaaay to complex for a review thread.

What you say makes sense but surely changing the hop up is altering the capability of the gun. I'd almost see altering hop-up in the same light as changing to a higher power spring; ok ones easier than the other but both effect the muzzle energy of the gun. The key phrase is muzzle energy:

"an air gun (including an air rifle and air pistol) with a muzzle energy greater than one joule or any other weapon incorporating a barrel from which any projectile can be discharged with such a muzzle energy,"

Captain Chaos

But as already said above, the hop units primary function is to provide back spin to increase accuracy and range with different bbs, the fact that it changes the power out put is a bi product of that.

A spring's primary function is to fire a bb of a set weight at a set velocity.

A tighter barrel on the other hand is in a grey area as it can improve accuracy and increase the velocity slightly and it is intended for that purpose.

Thats the way I'd view it anyway, but it's how all this is defined in a big book somewhere that matters.

Hivemind187

MacAonghusa wrote: »

What you say makes sense but surely changing the hop up is altering the capability of the gun. I'd almost see altering hop-up in the same light as changing to a higher power spring; ok ones easier than the other but both effect the muzzle energy of the gun. The key phrase is muzzle energy:

"an air gun (including an air rifle and air pistol) with a muzzle energy greater than one joule or any other weapon incorporating a barrel from which any projectile can be discharged with such a muzzle energy,"

Again, I see what you're saying but the point I'm making is that the "given components" should not be capable of exceeding the 1 joule.

Thats the key to capability, what is there right now. Not what can be added, subtracted etc.

ED E

Yeah, I agree with tony here, the law is just so unspecific, but what can you expect when we got through on what could well be considered a loophole.

The gas thing really gets me, as many gas guns in average conditions do circa 300fps. BUT, on very sunny days(global warming:rolleyes:) I've seen same chrono significantly over. Technically if you got a heatwave most gas guns could go over, its just a matter of a certain temperature required. Are we to measure at average outdoor temperatures? Hottest recorded temperature from Met Eireann, I think I'l look and see if I can find what that is.

Also, might I suggest that this be split to a new thread, we're really gone OT here.

MacAonghusa

kevteljeur wrote: »

*cough* JG *cough* AUG A3 *cough*
Seriously, between the rails, shorter body length and JG upgraded mechbox, it's a good piece of kit for less than the price of an upgrade.

TBH I prefer the built in sight but yeah the A3 is very cool too.

MacAonghusa

Captain Chaos wrote: »

But as already said above, the hop units primary function is to provide back spin to increase accuracy and range with different bbs, the fact that it changes the power out put is a bi product of that.

Yeah I know what you mean but I still see the final muzzle energy as being the key issue here.

MacAonghusa

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Again, I see what you're saying but the point I'm making is that the "given components" should not be capable of exceeding the 1 joule.

Thats the key to capability, what is there right now. Not what can be added, subtracted etc.

I see what you're saying but is a firearm without a firing pin still firearm? It's no longer capable of firing anything with its "given components" but try to convince the Gardaí it's no longer a firearm.
Not a perfect analogy but do you see what I mean?

Hivemind187

MacAonghusa wrote: »

Yeah I know what you mean but I still see the final muzzle energy as being the key issue here.

Thats not what the law says though.

Law is written so that the entire wording is taken into account not the begining, middle or end.

As such, no device should be capable of producing a muzzle energy in excess of one joule. Being that to change a component is to change the device I dont see where the problem is.

MacAonghusa

Hivemind187 wrote: »

As such, no device should be capable of producing a muzzle energy in excess of one joule. Being that to change a component is to change the device I dont see where the problem is.

Ok, there is where I'm missing something then. We prove it's compliant with the law by testing aegs with 0.2bbs. But if we use a higher weight bb couldn't that push it over the limit therefore the device is capable of producing a higher muzzle energy without any change to the component?

Captain Chaos

MacAonghusa wrote: »

Ok, there is where I'm missing something then. We prove it's compliant with the law by testing aegs with 0.2bbs. But if we use a higher weight bb couldn't that push it over the limit therefore the device is capable of producing a higher muzzle energy without any change to the component?

No, 1j of energy is still 1j of energy. I don't know the fps/weight graph off hand but a 1j rated AEG will fire a .2 at 328fps. A .23 or .25 will be fired at less around 300fps. The AEG still has the same power and will use the same force to fire a heavier bb.

MacAonghusa

Captain Chaos wrote: »

No, 1j of energy is still 1j of energy. I don't know the fps/weight graph off hand but a 1j rated AEG will fire a .2 at 328fps. A .23 or .25 will be fired at less around 300fps. The AEG still has the same power and will use the same force to fire a heavier bb.

I just did a quick test with 0.2 & 0.25 and there wasn't even near that difference between them; over 6 shots the difference was only 6fps (edit: though admittedly I could have done a better test)

Captain Chaos

Here is the link to the 1 joule graph
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055353665

A .25bb should have a velocity of less than 300fps, about 290fps.

MacAonghusa

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Here is the link to the 1 joule graph
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055353665

A .25bb should have a velocity of less than 300fps, about 29f0ps.

You got in ahead of me I was just about to post it too. Damn slow net connection.

fayer

Hivemind187 wrote: »

I'll run this by Fayer and see what he thinks.

Sorry took so long to get on this one. Il give a post on it tomorrow, I want to do the proper book work first so I have all the aspects of this correct and covered.

If anyone has ideas you want me to consider drop me a pm.

Yours, under an ever growing pile of leather bound books
Fayer

Vintz

With those readings where its was 320 in one location and 360 in another down with the same BBs and more importantly, the same chronograph. If not then the statements you guys are making aren't worth a ****e. Pure and simple. I've personally used a mad bull chronograph at sea level, 30 feet above, 60 feet above and 90 feet above sea level in humid and dry conditions. This would also cover both high and low preasure also. At NO time did the reading average differ by more the 5-8 FPS.

I did this as I was ****e sick of people having this argument. Bottom line. Oz is more or less correct. **** chrono as was used as the gathering would be enough to create the havoc that insued. Test is yourselves like I did. Head on off to the Wicklow mountains and try it out or bury yourself and the POS chrono/AEG you're using...

Please don't have a go at me over this blurb, quite honestly I couldn't care less... I tested this for my own curiosity and to aide customs prove a point. If its good enough for them, it's good enough for me...

Oh, and this whole thread is like a few others of the past. Which is better, Green Gas or Propane... Answer: Green Gas is Propnane with a built in lubricant, again tested and verified. Or the other that CO2 wil make a GBB run over the limit or break it, Answer: It won't in either case, tested by the good folks at SAS-C, if anything it reduces the power...

Happy days, night kidos!