Skout Skout .177...

Jump to latest Follow Reply
bfloyd1095

bfloyd1095

Member
Sep 11, 2018
925
838
Conroe Texas, United States
I am considering another Skout for the stable but need a .177 as I have sold off everything I had in that caliber.

This brings me to the question, do any of you guys have an Epoch. EVO. or Compact in .177 that can give me an idea how and what they are shooting?

My EVO in .22 woth the LW Poly Bull Barrel is a straight up stud ...

Thanks in advance for your input
 
Had read last year of a few fooling with .177 in "EPOCH" configuration. Magazine function / loading w/o damage I recall was a concern and SKOUT was very actively working threw it ... no idea where at today ?
Then we have the Bloke in the UK who is active currently with his .177 ( Evo if recalling correctly ) that is following sub 12 fpe UK output maximum having what looks like consistency issues running at such low power as is UK legal who appears too place a post on Weird operation trends near weekly .... Don't know :rolleyes:

Leaving that train of thought .... Having an EPOCH myself now 2 years and counting ... The platform and the valve tech is a MONSTER / BEAST for output potential and if doing a .177 I'm likely to sway in the thought of using them as designed for higher output uses no matter caliber. As is Hot rod cars ... Choking/Strangling the output of a High Horsepower motor generally does not work very well either .. jusy sayin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JoeWillie and JaceSpace1369
Upvote 0
Motorhead said:
The platform and the valve tech is a MONSTER / BEAST for output potential and if doing a .177 I'm likely to sway in the thought of using them as designed for higher output uses no matter caliber. As is Hot rod cars ... Choking/Strangling the output of a High Horsepower motor generally does not work very well either .. jusy sayin.
Click to expand...
Thanks amigo..
That makes perfect sense to me..
I'll get in touch with Bill and ask him if they have tried .177 in the compact platform yet..
 
Upvote 0
Skout part number EPO-116 is the transfer port. The guns have various sizes available, so it seems possible that with the smallest (black) one, power could be reduced to .177 pellet levels.

IMG_3097.jpeg

IMG_3096.jpeg

IMG_3095.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shortcut and Dairyboy
Upvote 0
Sadly the Manifold having the transfer path up to the barrel is a MASSIVE @ .340' I.D.
Soon as you go below or near the "Second from left" seat the transfer path becomes a major mis-match ... don't shoot the messenger 😞

Until such time as they engineer a miens to choke the transfer path selectively for caliber we will not have a truly adaptive caliber platform ... IMO
 
  • Like
Reactions: JoeWillie and Centercut
Upvote 0
Yes I have had problems with my sub 12 Epoch, first was the barrel (and still is) very tight in .177, and I could barely rod a pellet through, so I was sent another by Skout but still rather tight but better, the first would actually fail to fire a pellet in cold weather!

I was also sent another LP reg due to problems but so far nothing had resulted in better constancy, I can get a shot string of close FPS maybe 8-10, and then I will get a drop of up to 30fps (was 60 fps) which destroys any shot string averages, and It's not down to pellets, I am currently looking for a suitable barrel blank to machine up to fit, but the length is a problem, the gun is reasonably accurate but still nowhere near good / accurate as some of my self tuned rifles, I had expected better for such an expensive gun.

My opinion is that yes it's developed and more suitable to larger calibre and higher power, however that in theory shouldn't make for a bad rifle when restricted as there are plenty of other restricted rifle that shoot very well, my feelings are that maybe the spool valve design is more suited to shifting more air, and I am not sure about the reg design, but I still need to get my head around just how they work in relation to each other and since on the sub 12 version the LP reg is not adjustable and relies on the ratio of the HP reg I am not convinced this may be one of the stumbling blocks, however I don't usually give up on guns and will find the solution eventually.;)

Unfortunately, not many really understand this gun and even fewer can give sensible advice.
 
Upvote 0
Tricky-Dicky said:
Unfortunately, not many really understand this gun and even fewer can give sensible advice.
Click to expand...
That said ... You may wish to do a re-read on my R&D done a few years ago that was going after better efficiency, reduced output pulse volume & accuracy.
I placed a tapered transfer tube within the OEM housing choking the area smaller, Recalibrated the vent size on poppet head for a faster closing cycle and some other tweaks ... Love it !!!
https://www.airgunnation.com/threads/inside-the-skout-epoch.1285150/post-1450902
Link above is @ mid thread, so go back to the start and visit the content as there may be some useful data in there you can use ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tricky-Dicky
Upvote 0
Shortcut said:
I have the Evo in .177 and like Lewis it is a laser at right at 12 fpe. Here is a picture of my transfer port in .177 and the transfer port out of my other Evo.View attachment 540349

View attachment 540348
Click to expand...
Shown IS NOT the transfer "Port" .. as THAT IS the near .900" long passage within the manifold connecting the shown "Poppet Seat" to where the barrel plugs in and is locked in place.
Said passage is the equivalent of a typical removable "Transfer Port" tho it is fixed within the manifold.
This passage is @ .340-.350" in diameter, so having a majorly small/restricted poppet seat as shown indeed chokes air flow & the relatively HUGE transfer passage down stream of seat absorbs far too much volume to even be remotely efficient feeding a smaller caliber barrel fitted.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Motorhead said:
Shown IS NOT the transfer "Port" .. as THAT IS the near .900" long passage within the manifold connecting the shown "Poppet Seat" to where the barrel plugs in and is locked in place.
Said passage is the equivalent of a typical removable "Transfer Port" tho it is fixed within the manifold.
This passage is @ .340-.350" in diameter, so having a majorly small/restricted poppet seat as shown indeed chokes air flow & the relatively HUGE transfer passage down stream of seat absorbs far too much volume to even be remotely efficient feeding a smaller caliber barrel fitted.
Click to expand...
So I am presuming that reducing the TP and barrel TP diameter would certainly help with air usage along with changing the size of the poppet air return, did this then need a large reduction in regulator pressure? Not sure that it would make much of a difference in consistency, which is still something I have to track down the cause of, but worth a bit of time to find out.
 
Upvote 0
This is / has been enlightening to this point and I am learning a lot about the inner workings of this platform.

I hope the Skout guys are reading this thread as well...

From what i can gather thus far there is a saying that seems to apply from a Very experienced Race Motor builder told me many years ago when we used to run the Limited Dirt Late Models..(motors were restricted to the Holly 4412. 2 bbl carb)...
As we were dynoing one of my motors he said " damn son running this motor with a 2 bbl carb is like you or me running around the block 2 times and trying to breathe through a straw"....
 
Upvote 0
Tricky-Dicky said:
So I am presuming that reducing the TP and barrel TP diameter would certainly help with air usage along with changing the size of the poppet air return, did this then need a large reduction in regulator pressure? Not sure that it would make much of a difference in consistency, which is still something I have to track down the cause of, but worth a bit of time to find out.
Click to expand...

Need to understand terms your using ?

From the air pressure in plenum sealed by the POPPET head of the spool valve ... we have AIR taking this path ;)
THREW the Poppet Seat ( Where scout make differing sizes / colors )
THREW the Manifold ( Which is a @ .350" passage ) Aka: the Transfer port
THREW the barrel thimble ( Which is non restrictive leading air into barrel bore )

Ideally in such a valve system where there in not a poppet stem passing threw the poppets seats "throat" taking up area, The ideal size of the air path can be at or can be slightly smaller & for power a tad larger than what is the Caliber/bore size being utilized. My compromise in tuning was to use the tapered straw insert into the manifold reducing area and an amble size Seat .. as High Output was still my use, but wanted better efficiency with reduced valve dwell.
* Yes it takes a tad higher pressure to make equal power with mods I've done in link shared above, but IMO the AG is running much crisper / snappier & I like it better.

Now This is just my opinion based on years of working with and doing much R&D on PCP's .. Your mileage may differ :rolleyes:
 
Upvote 0
Motorhead said:
Need to understand terms your using ?

From the air pressure in plenum sealed by the POPPET head of the spool valve ... we have AIR taking this path ;)
THREW the Poppet Seat ( Where scout make differing sizes / colors )
THREW the Manifold ( Which is a @ .350" passage ) Aka: the Transfer port
THREW the barrel thimble ( Which is non restrictive leading air into barrel bore )

Ideally in such a valve system where there in not a poppet stem passing threw the poppets seats "throat" taking up area, The ideal size of the air path can be at or can be slightly smaller & for power a tad larger than what is the Caliber/bore size being utilized. My compromise in tuning was to use the tapered straw insert into the manifold reducing area and an amble size Seat .. as High Output was still my use, but wanted better efficiency with reduced valve dwell.
* Yes it takes a tad higher pressure to make equal power with mods I've done in link shared above, but IMO the AG is running much crisper / snappier & I like it better.

Now This is just my opinion based on years of working with and doing much R&D on PCP's .. Your mileage may differ :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yes should have said TP/valve seat, but generally It's what you're calling the manifold that would normally be referred to as the TP on the average PCP be it a drilling or separate piece, I like the idea of reducing the manifold size to closer match the actual size of the valve seat as on the sub 12 .177 its tiny so I can see the re expansion of the airflow as not being very efficient, but I also wondered at the fact that the barrel thimble is also has a quite large area, as a normal PCP would have this matched to the size of the transfer port.

The whole spool valve system seems to be geared to shifting a lot more volume of air than the std PCP does to me and although efficiency is great my goal is to reduce the fps variation to the levels of my other rifles and obviously accuracy which is dependent on also finding the correct barrel.

You mention reducing valve dwell yet if I reduce the electronic dwell on the sub12 I get a no fire or pellet sticking in the barrel.
 
Upvote 0
Tricky-Dicky said:
Yes should have said TP/valve seat, but generally It's what you're calling the manifold that would normally be referred to as the TP on the average PCP be it a drilling or separate piece, I like the idea of reducing the manifold size to closer match the actual size of the valve seat as on the sub 12 .177 its tiny so I can see the re expansion of the airflow as not being very efficient, but I also wondered at the fact that the barrel thimble is also has a quite large area, as a normal PCP would have this matched to the size of the transfer port.

The whole spool valve system seems to be geared to shifting a lot more volume of air than the std PCP does to me and although efficiency is great my goal is to reduce the fps variation to the levels of my other rifles and obviously accuracy which is dependent on also finding the correct barrel.

You mention reducing valve dwell yet if I reduce the electronic dwell on the sub12 I get a no fire or pellet sticking in the barrel.
Click to expand...
Valve dwell as I speaking in above statements is the dwell the valve has once opened effectively ... that being done via LP reg pressure and electronic time value which we're not altering.

* These valves CLOSE via pressure coming from the actual shot where the throat of valve once pressurized has it pass threw the metering orifice on poppet head and creating a counter push on the opposing side of the spool valves actuation piston.
This in turn pushes the poppet towards closure.
Electric Solenoid dwell & Low pressure creates the opening cycle of the valve and some of the parameters of how long valve hangs open until such time as opposing pressure coming threw the orifice pneumatically forces closure.

Once you wrap your head around the complete cycle will it make sense, as they are very different from a conventional knock open poppet type system.
 
Upvote 0
"Electric Solenoid dwell & Low pressure creates the opening cycle of the valve and some of the parameters of how long valve hangs open until such time as opposing pressure coming threw the orifice pneumatically forces closure."

Yes I understand how the system works, it's just the electronic dwell that I fail to get, sure the LP reg pressure is what's used for opening the solenoid and the electronics scale how long the solenoid is open for but cant see how this can actually affect dwell at least in the way I understand dwell, which is how long the actual valve is open for before the closing cycle kicks in, and yes I understand that it uses the pressure feedback to close the spool valve and this is accomplished by the aperture size in the valve end, so the electronic dwell is not really dwell as such.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Motorhead
Upvote 0
Electronic Dwell control just buys you ( In incremental terms ) a tad more valve open time when set to a higher value over a lower setting and near minimal to get a correct opening cyclic.
Unlike a mechanical knock open poppet utilizing an electro magnet solenoid staying energized holding the poppet open longer, the SKOUT valve can also hold open longer, tho only as long as the pressure coming threw bleed jet creates an opposing force no greater than the LP bearing on the opposing side of piston says otherwise :rolleyes: *Likely reason for the small bleed jet size they choose to use ?
This is the Hat trick .... Enough electric dwell to hold valve open long enough to extract required air flow ( energy ) for caliber/weight being shot, and a SMALL enough bleed jet size to allow it to happen.
* IMO in stock configuration system is calibrated correctly to do that in the larger calibers, it's just not really that efficient in lets say ... towing the line in low air use.
This is where my R&D in calibrating the system a bit differently ( Using larger bleed jet, tho higher HP setting, along with transfer passage size adjustments ) the smaller sips of higher pressure which is well known to be more efficient than larger sips of lower pressure ... is made to work utilizing the SKOUTS spool valve design.

Not saying I got all the answers, but what I do know & applied to my personal EPOCH has worked brilliantly thus far.

Good luck ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tricky-Dicky
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu