PCP conversion kit 😁

Jump to latest Follow Reply
S

Sublimemoon0000

Member
Jul 30, 2022
109
27
Paonia, Colorado United States
Recently picked up a Sig Sauer MCX CO2 rifle. Super fun and accurate, I do like it. So, I'm thinking about getting the Air Venturi hpa conversion kit they have for these, turn it into a PCP so I don't have to drop $25 everyday on 90 gram CO2 cartridges (I shoot a lot).
It seems definitely more cost effective to do that , I'll get the pump and everything for it.my question has to do with the regulated output of the tank.Its a 13 cubic inch 3,000 psi tank, pretty standard I believe.
The regulated output is 1100 psi, I found in research that the co2 output is about 8-850psi.
I was looking at other brands of hpa tanks,there is one specifically that comes with an awesome floating stock, that fits nicely over the bottle, I'm trying to keep the AR look, and not just have a bottle and the little butt stock piece that the kit comes with.
So, the regulated output of this other tank is 850 psi, and apparently you can add/remove shims to change this, but 850 is the max.
So is there that big of a difference between 1100 psi and 850psi? I'm wondering as far as accuracy and power are concerned, would I even notice a difference? Has anybody done this conversion to their CO2 guns?
It seems to me that going with 850psi regulated output using HPA, would be the same as running CO2 , since it's output is about the same.

Basically just want to know if it matters that much, I really want this other stock , and it comes with the tank already,I would just have to get the little adapter and the pump and I'd be ready to go 😁 any help or advice is appreciated guys thank you
 
Last edited:
Changing from CO2 to air (of equal pressure) should net about a 50% increase in energy. Energy, not velocity...meaning if it was producing 600fps with a 8gr pellet (6.4fpe), it would then produce about 735fps (9.6fpe).

Going from 850psi to 1100psi will net another proportional increase in energy (approx 30%), assuming the hammer spring tension is sufficient to knock open the valve fully. Most CO2 rigs come from the factory with a pretty heavy hammer strike, presumably to avoid valve lock at high temperatures. For example, CO2 climbs to 1100psi by about 95°F.

Shot count will be way less than CO2 on account of the way CO2 is stored as a liquid and transitions to a gas to maintain a somewhat stable pressure until the liquid is consumed.

Accuracy isn't necessarily affected by choice of propellant but often times will improve with air, particularly regulated air because of a few reasons:
1. more stable operating pressure from day to day...not so temperature sensitive like CO2
2. moving from 500-600fps up to 700+fps places domed pellets into a velocity range where their ballistic coefficient is more favorable
3. flatter trajectory means slight errors in range estimation don't influence the point of impact as much
 
  • Like
Reactions: shambozzie and Sublimemoon0000
Upvote 0
nervoustrig said:
Changing from CO2 to air (of equal pressure) should net about a 50% increase in energy. Energy, not velocity...meaning if it was producing 600fps with a 8gr pellet (6.4fpe), it would then produce about 735fps (9.6fpe).

Going from 850psi to 1100psi will net another proportional increase in energy (approx 30%), assuming the hammer spring tension is sufficient to knock open the valve fully. Most CO2 rigs come from the factory with a pretty heavy hammer strike, presumably to avoid valve lock at high temperatures. For example, CO2 climbs to 1100psi by about 95°F.

Shot count will be way less than CO2 on account of the way CO2 is stored as a liquid and transitions to a gas to maintain a somewhat stable pressure until the liquid is consumed.

Accuracy isn't necessarily affected by choice of propellant but often times will improve with air, particularly regulated air because of a few reasons:
1. more stable operating pressure from day to day...not so temperature sensitive like CO2
2. moving from 500-600fps up to 700+fps places domed pellets into a velocity range where their ballistic coefficient is more favorable
3. flatter trajectory means slight errors in range estimation don't influence the point of impact as much
Click to expand...
Very well explained thank you 👍👍 I shoot from a table 99 percent of the time. Usually plinking or shooting at reactive targets to see how good a grouping I can get. So the 1100 psi tank would make a noticeable difference yes?
If I'm going to drop the money, I want the better one👍
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu