Is it known yet if they will have oversized bores like the rifles, as in .223 and .254? And what about the 177? If that isn’t oversized and has a sensible TR, I might prefer that on the basis of more pellet/slug options.
Upvote 0
I am confident that the .25 can exceed 40FPE by a large margin and any time I have seen its power represented that low or lower it has been with munitions of 36 grains or less.
I will provide personal results of .25 with 50 grain at max 300 bar fill for 1 full magazine when I have the resources to provide said data.
I have used those 17gr air boss in my Artemis PP700 and my Artemis PP750 with very good results. I’m a pistol enthusiast, had three AP-16’s which all eventually leaked air so I returned them. I have two Artemis PP700’s in .22 cal and a .22 cal Artemis PP750 that shoot superbly accurate out to 50-60 yards. I’ve also pre-ordered the GK1 in .25 cal because I want a .25 cal pistol.Thanks, Manny.
Yeah, for us close-range pesters there is really a market for wadcutters...:
(1) Heavy wadcutters that don't require detuning today's PCPs with their much higher ME.
(2) Larger caliber wadcutters to put even more smack on the pack.
For no. (1) for .22cal I found these 17 grain wadcutters from Air Boss, a sub-brand of Apolo. I still need to do some testing with them, but they seem better than the featherweights that all the other manufacturers are selling.
Matthias
View attachment 370561
View attachment 370562
Two days ago Shooting Gear Reviews posted a shorts video of the GK1 .25 cal delivering 81 foot pounds of energy and there’s YouTube videos out there of the .22 GK1 doing 61 fpe.
What !?!? ...that is bonkers.Two days ago Shooting Gear Reviews posted a shorts video of the GK1 .25 cal delivering 81 foot pounds of energy and there’s YouTube videos out there of the .22 GK1 doing 61 fpe.
There’s another video from Amadeus 360 where he shoots the .25 GK1 using JSB 33.95 gr. at 1078 fps which is 87.63 FPEWhat !?!? ...that is bonkers.
No way !!!...that is crazy.There’s another video from Amadeus 360 where he shoots the .25 GK1 using JSB 33.95 gr. at 1078 fps which is 87.63 FPE
There is a diminishing return in terms of barrel that is true even in the pb world. extending barrel length by 25% often yields a gain in speed by less than 10% and the longer the barrel you are starting with the more true this becomes. In the pb world the goal is to burn off all the powder behind the bullet. Therefore you can get a .308 to shoot very close to its top speed out of a shorter than a 5.56 because while the diameter is only slightly larger, the surface area is significantly larger, and when you take the surface area and multiply it by the entire length, the volume you end up with out of let's say an eight inch barrel is enormous by comparison. Which provides plenty of space for all the powder to be burnt to provide plenty of propellant force behind the projectile. While with the 5.56 you need greater length for higher pressures to have enough time to be built up.(Which begs the question:
If that kind of power can be produced with such a short barrel —
and no modifications besides turning an external adjuster —
WHY are most rifles with three times that barrel length so limited in power?!? )
For one most rifles aren’t using 350 bar to produce full power. For example: the k1 bullpup has a 24” barrel, almost 3 times the length. But most k1 bull pups are setup with the reg at 150 bar on average. I’m running my k1 bullpup at 175 bar and still able to achieve 90 ft lbs.WOW...!
I. Am. In. Awe.
(Which begs the question:
If that kind of power can be produced with such a short barrel —
and no modifications besides turning an external adjuster —
WHY are most rifles with three times that barrel length so limited in power?!? )
Thanks for the info. I'll check it out.
Matthias
As someone who recently acquired an FX mark II, I went to .35 to lob the heaviest projectile I could. The .35 is quite obviously shoe horned into the platform. It's not rigid enough to handle the recoil. If FX was making a barrel worth while, they wouldn't keep changing and make seven different kinds. I would prefer a lothar walther barrel rifled from end to end all day. Maybe in .30 everything works fine but if you are thinking about jumping to FX in .35 just to get a little bit more out of what you are doing I would personally advise against it.Joel and Colin,
thanks for explanations that I can understand. This is all pretty unknown territory to me, internal ballistics, that is.
I understand that the GK1 is unregulated, and has a 350bar airtube. So, two factors contributing to higher power than "typical rifles."
➔ However, it the begs the follow-up question:
Why don't manufacturers give us higher regulator settings to choose from in order to achieve higher power? RTI offers 200bar max., Huma 180 or 150bar, others I don't know.
The barrel length has been a constant nagging in my brain:
I was deciding between a 500mm or 600mm barrel for a .30 with balanced valve (Prophet 2).
When comparing the published specs it seemed like the longer barrel didn't offer that much additional power.
(However the longer gun had a longer [=bigger] bottle, so that's where the much higher shotcount came from.)
And as I am dreaming about an extreme long range gun, I've been wondering if I need to defect over to FX in order to get access to an 800mm barrel — or if I can stay with 600mm and do fine at 300y?
Matthias
PS: I hope the mods won't chastise me for derrailing my own thread.
As someone who recently acquired an FX mark II, I went to .35 to lob the heaviest projectile I could. The .35 is quite obviously shoe horned into the platform. It's not rigid enough to handle the recoil. If FX was making a barrel worth while, they wouldn't keep changing and make seven different kinds. I would prefer a lothar walther barrel rifled from end to end all day. Maybe in .30 everything works fine but if you are thinking about jumping to FX in .35 just to get a little bit more out of what you are doing I would personally advise against it.