SpudFiles

I think he's referencing the initial post where the guy says he has designed paintball markers.
It does seem a little strange that the initial test product blew up and looks rather crudely made. I guess most engineers don't stray too far from the drawing board. This may be why they return to it so frequently when they try getting their feet wet in the actual assembly of an idea.

i would be intrested in buying a valve like that.
i dont know how much of a market there would be for it but if its a good valve and dosent cost too much then people will probably buy it.

Thats a cool valve, but isnt this all it is? (you have all probly seen this, but here it is)

http://www.koolpages.com/potatohell/pnuematics.html

athleteforever wrote:Are the top guns on the market you say scenario markers. I am wondering, because I find it hard to believe that your work has created Ego's, Dm's, Timmys, and Shockers. Which are all speedball guns, and on the top of the market.

No, I design & manufacture parts for tourney/speedball markers.

Hawkeye wrote:I think he's referencing the initial post where the guy says he has designed paintball markers.
It does seem a little strange that the initial test product blew up and looks rather crudely made. I guess most engineers don't stray too far from the drawing board. This may be why they return to it so frequently when they try getting their feet wet in the actual assembly of an idea.

Blew up: my fault, I overpressurized the backside and I only had 1/2 the screws in. was trying different combinations of springs, balance prot sizes, and fill locations. I was changeing thing quickly, so was only using 1/2 the screws..figured i'd be ok, I was wrong. Did figure out the best combination though: no spring, filling from behind the piston(so piston seals better during filling). dumps more air, and provides a more powerful shot. the tradeoff: takes a while for the resivior tho fill through the small balance port (the hole through the piston), and its way more dangerous if your filling with unregulated high pressure air.

Crudely made:
1. Its A prototype. To make every step of the development process look nice and pretty would be a mojor waste of time and money. the piont here is to make it work, figure out what it takes to build each one, and if there's any profitability. You worry about making it look good for the production version.

2. Its a PVC valve... its supposed to be inexpensive, quick to make, and have universal fittings so anyone can easily attach it to any of thier own "spud gun designs". not useing off the shelf parts would make it way too expensive, and take too long. that would defeat the purpose of what I'm trying to do. if you want to develop a "beautiful" valve that will handle these pressures, go ahead. see how many people will pay the $300 you'll have to charge for a machined valve. or you could go with a molded valve and spent $150,000 on tooling + shipping +packaging+..etc., sell your valve for $100.00. (which means you'd probably have to sell about 6,000 valves JUST TO BREAK EVEN). good luck with that one.

3. look at the piston seal...I wont say what it is, but its a hell of a lot less crude than a flat piece piece of rubber held in place by 3 screws. (how pretty much ever other valve out there does it)

finished the new valve and did some chrono testing:

Tank= 4" tubing x 3.5' long
Barrel= 3" tubing x 5' long
"shot"= tennis ball (wrapped with cloth to fit the 3 inch barrel)
pressure= approx. 100 psi

results (10 shot average) =

with spring- 415 feet per second = 283MPH

without spring- 460 feet per second = 313MPH

So whats the priceing looking like so far?

hi wrote:Thats a cool valve, but isnt this all it is? (you have all probly seen this, but here it is)

http://www.koolpages.com/potatohell/pnuematics.html

Piston travel was a bit excessive. That, and it only had SCH 40 for the bulkhead, I had that very valve blow up on mr last weekend.

I just finished the cad files for the piston and back-cap, and I'll be sending them out for quotes this week. As soon as I get that info, I'll know. I'm 99.9% sure it will be under $100.

anyone know how those numbers stack up?

Check here -- www.bcarms.com
C19o is selling 1.5"ported valves for $45.00. I think i got all that rite.

I sell a valve identical to C19o that I advertised for sale over 4 months ago but cleaner and with a lighter piston for better travel for $40. It is a barrel sealing 2" tee with 2" threads and slightly over 1.5" porting. The piston is hollow, therefore light (quicker actuation), while still strong enough for hundreds of psi. I pressure test every valve to 140psi before shipping. As of right now the piston only has 1 o-ring, which is enough but if you are extremely anal I can make it with 2 so that it sits in the track better while sliding, but the o-ring does do it's job and makes the actuation such a dream.

Not trying to compete or steal business away, but it seems like no one remembers my valve, which is a solid performer at a steal of a price, so just reminding everyone of it so they may choose the suitable valve for them.

http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=5140344
http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=5140347

I meant the chrono numbers. how do those stack up?


as for the valves...a 1.5" ported valve is a completely differnt monster....everything is smaller which = lower costs. (although the smaller diameter stuff can handle more pressure)

Sgort87 has the numbers posted for his "Maular Valve", if i remember correctly it was like 640 fps at 100 psi.

From another thread:

sgort87 wrote:Oh, right, I forgot to tell you guys the results. The Mauler was getting 20 FPS faster velocities from a 4' x 4" chamber and a 5' golf ball barrel. The velocities were around 640 FPS at 120 PSI. The Supah showed 620. I have a feeling, though I didn't have a chance to test it, that a smaller test chamber would give results much farther apart in performance, with the Mauler leading at greater velocities than the Supah.

If you truly believe in the power of your valve, I would build a cannon exactly the same as this one, with equal chamber size and barrel size; just substitute in your valve for his. The Mauler valve is a revolution in the spud gun world as of now, for people are buying it because of its greater availability, lower price, and better performance (when compared to the supah valve).

If your valve can beat the Mauler valve in terms of power, you will have definitely garner some attention. Don't change variables however; this will just lead to speculation; make it as clearcut as possible, with few sources of error or such.

Good luck if you try to do this test.

rmich732 wrote:From another thread:

sgort87 wrote:Oh, right, I forgot to tell you guys the results. The Mauler was getting 20 FPS faster velocities from a 4' x 4" chamber and a 5' golf ball barrel. The velocities were around 640 FPS at 120 PSI. The Supah showed 620. I have a feeling, though I didn't have a chance to test it, that a smaller test chamber would give results much farther apart in performance, with the Mauler leading at greater velocities than the Supah.

If you truly believe in the power of your valve, I would build a cannon exactly the same as this one, with equal chamber size and barrel size; just substitute in your valve for his. The Mauler valve is a revolution in the spud gun world as of now, for people are buying it because of its greater availability, lower price, and better performance (when compared to the supah valve).

If your valve can beat the Mauler valve in terms of power, you will have definitely garner some attention. Don't change variables however; this will just lead to speculation; make it as clearcut as possible, with few sources of error or such.

Good luck if you try to do this test.

And it only took 8 pages !!!