SpudFiles

n-strike wrote:Pneumatics because they just rule. No, seriously. All others suck. Sorry.

No, all others don't suck. They all have unique and fun features. I've built both combustions and pneumatics and find both can be both simple and challenging depending on the design and performance you're going for.

I'm a combustion/hybrid man myself...just the way nature intended things to be...

I'm also not the BB or paintball sort...helps drive my preference.

Pneumatics here, though I would like to build an advanced combustion sometime.

Pneumatics are just easier to get power from and there are more possibilities.

Granted I ever get off my butt and start making piston guns, I'm sure I'd have a blast. Currently, I have only worked in the field of pneumatics. When I have the time I would like to build a combustion and as far as the other two, I'm haven't had the time to sit down and figure out what I needed to know. I would however like to build that electromagnetic pistol that (someone help me with the name) built.

tl;dr Pneumatics are awesome but I haven't tried anything else.

I like pnuematics. They work well on any scale, which is ideal for me. Just look at the firing range thread...

Pneumatics just coz it was my funnest build to date.

I say pneumatics, they are so versatile and easy to control... Not to mention combustions are more illegal here (NSW, Australia).

Since the question points a personal preference, i voted hybrids. They are powerful at least more than pneumatics and combustion spudguns. Once they have the fine tuning it requires, they fire 100% of the time.

In terms of power, an electromagnetic gun will outpower any gun, since the projectile velocity is only limited by the amount of current and the speed of light.

Combustion.

For being uncomplicated.
For ease of construction.
For reliability.
For least expensiveness (not sure if thats a real word)

For a regular Joe who stumbles across this site and decides to give spudding a whirl, combustion is the easiest way to get a spud in the air....

Rob

ps I tried to vote, but don't have enough posts... I've built more than a few cannons though!

Rob Thornton wrote:Combustion.

For being uncomplicated.
For ease of construction.
For reliability.
For least expensiveness (not sure if thats a real word)

I personally think pneumatics are more reliable than combustions, based on personal experience.

Myself, i am a pneumatic man. You can do so much more with them and i think they are harder to build (which is a good thing).

M.J.P. wrote:
I personally think pneumatics are more reliable than combustions, based on personal experience.

Myself, i am a pneumatic man. You can do so much more with them and i think they are harder to build (which is a good thing).

I agree with you to a degree MJP.

The point i was getting at, is that for somebody with few 'cannon building skills' and limited resources such as money and tools - combustion is what he should build..

My favorite is pneumatic
They are powerful.
Simple to operate.
Reliable.
Portable when used with regulated co2.
Versatile because you can launch things that combustion would singe like t-shirts and confetti.

However combustion get's my vote because they are what most people use/see when they get started in this hobby. Without them how many of us would not have been introduced to spud guns.

I prefer pneumatic. Because they're the most reliable and consistent.
And convenient for public reasons, "how does it work?" "Well I pump air into this 2-liter" for example. Also I owned airguns since age 8.

I had a combustion and it was annoying when it wouldn't fire and it was inconsistent. But maybe some consider that a challenge, and improvements are constantly being made.

I am interested in hybrids because of ideas and thoughts I am sure could be improved on.

I am not voting because "which is better" is a stupid question IMO. 8)

Meh, Lucky. My EM-CC (Electromagnetic Compressed Combustion) Bolt action cannon cost me the latter side of $500, including case construction, plans, cutting, internals, microcontrollers, etc.

I haven't posted any pics of it yet, as it was a old design. I lost the plans to it, have it locked up in the closet, and I only have one more box of ammo left for it, but it was HELLA AWESOME.

I wonder if it still works. Lets see...


...


Argh, the battery's dead. Figures. I've had that dangerous thing locked up for 2 years now since it knocked down a small tree.

BTW if you want to know how it worked, it was a parallel circuit, controlled by a PIC-1 microcontroller (I think it was named that), with half the electricity going through a compressed cartrige with air and propane in it. The other half, or rather, 70%, went to the coil wrapped around the barrel, made out of ABS. Due to the fact it shoots iron, it is not a spud gun.

I'm severely bad at pneumatics. That's why I made a noobish topic about pneumatics, but electromagnetics are a different story.

Pneumatics, I'm experimenting with cheap substances. Electromagnetics, I am trying to make a more ergonomic, semi-automatic design.

A SCR is basically an electronic switch, you put in voltage on the gate, and the Anode and Cathode connect. SCR's get fairly expensive in the higher range (one i got was ~110 dollars).

What about electrothermal? There alot simpler than EM guns and provide fairly high power+awesome muzzel flash.

You didn't check ebay eh?

1200V 230A SCR for £19 including delivery