That is the ONLY way i could get my M3 to shoot consistently!!Zero doubt on that but I like to keep my options open by not epoxying the entire thing solid. It certainly crossed my mind a few times but chickened out last minute!
Upvote 0
FX Solid barrel in DRS Pro Matt Dubber's video
- Thread starter mubhaur
- Start date
Something doesn’t seem right. All my FX guns only have carbon liner sleeve and they all shoot awesome.
Upvote 0
I didn't say it wouldn't shoot...... I said to shoot "Consistently"
I have seen many M3,s produce excellent groups ........ but they just wont shoot them in the same place ( POI ) time after time.!
I have seen many M3,s produce excellent groups ........ but they just wont shoot them in the same place ( POI ) time after time.!
Upvote 0
I do not understand your reluctance to accept that others have this POI issue just because you do not. You are simply very lucky. The POI shift issue can only be caused by one thing . . . . something is loose. In my case, with my Crown, it is the barrel to receiver fit. It does not take much. Even .001" is too much. It is a design fault. There is no defined register and there must be for a repeatable alignment fit. This is not a quality issue either. In a mass production environment, there will always be manufacturing tolerances. These are unavoidable. The design fault is that the design does not compensate for these unavoidable tolerances. Normally, this is accomplished with a tapered register surface and a clamp of some sort, but there are several proven design solutions for this issue yet none have been employed by FX. In my case, a shroud clamp to the bottle has helped me deal with the fault. It is not a perfect solution, but if I am careful to not knock or jar the shroud, it works. Yes, the clamp is a band-aid, just as the CF tube is also, but the real issue is that FX has not either acknowledged the issue or done anything to resolve it. For you to call these band-aids bs is disingenuous. They were created because a problem exists.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Of course something is not right. Just because you ,big Hun and others do not seem to have this issue, does not mean others do not. You both have been around air guns a long time. Yes, you are experienced and knowledgeable, but you cannot know everything. Nobody can. If only one person complains about an issue, it would not be unreasonable to think it may not be true, but when so many of us complain about exactly the same thing, doubting the issue exists is truly stupid.
Upvote 0
I'm guessing that the evolution of airgun tech will eventually gravitate to more solidly and over built options in target rifles for both steel and paper.
I'll point the finger at Thomas guns as one example in that regard in benchrest rifles. These guns are already there as far as being over built but are also continually evolving into state of the art almost month to month. Another thing I like is Mike N started using stronger receivers and .9" bull barrels for his slug guns. Most of us shake our heads at how precise these guns are.
Then there is AAA and these have also evolved improving on a pretty solid rifle to begin with.
And the Mac1 USFT. The older non reg model was far ahead of its time in "solidness" and a gun to count on.
These designers all understood something foundational. I see this and many do also, so foremost to me in all of the above rifles is the robust way of barrel attachment to the receiver.
FX found a way to build liners in house to save money, offer varried twist options, and these are also lightweight systems which most hunters and plinkers prefer. Oft times this system works out decently for precision as far as what I've read, but personally I wouldn't feel confident using them. I don't know how well the barrel attachment system works in the DRS but the heavier barrel or liner seems like a step in the right direction. I do applaud FX for the interesting way the plenum and the air resevoir are placed. Hopefully it will work out for the better in actuality???
I try not to buy 1st gen products so I'll wait and watch the DRS for however long it takes to give it a yay or nay. I will say that the worst 1st Gen guns in my case have been FX guns, that is except my old Royale.
Right now however there's no getting around the fact that the Pro MDT chassis was a fantastic step in the right direction for PRS and NRL!!!!!
My future prediction is heavier match grade target barrels, solidly afixed to overbuilt repeating receivers easily capable of 100 plus FPE, and bedded into solid chassis systems, as well as slug designs evolving.
I'll point the finger at Thomas guns as one example in that regard in benchrest rifles. These guns are already there as far as being over built but are also continually evolving into state of the art almost month to month. Another thing I like is Mike N started using stronger receivers and .9" bull barrels for his slug guns. Most of us shake our heads at how precise these guns are.
Then there is AAA and these have also evolved improving on a pretty solid rifle to begin with.
And the Mac1 USFT. The older non reg model was far ahead of its time in "solidness" and a gun to count on.
These designers all understood something foundational. I see this and many do also, so foremost to me in all of the above rifles is the robust way of barrel attachment to the receiver.
FX found a way to build liners in house to save money, offer varried twist options, and these are also lightweight systems which most hunters and plinkers prefer. Oft times this system works out decently for precision as far as what I've read, but personally I wouldn't feel confident using them. I don't know how well the barrel attachment system works in the DRS but the heavier barrel or liner seems like a step in the right direction. I do applaud FX for the interesting way the plenum and the air resevoir are placed. Hopefully it will work out for the better in actuality???
I try not to buy 1st gen products so I'll wait and watch the DRS for however long it takes to give it a yay or nay. I will say that the worst 1st Gen guns in my case have been FX guns, that is except my old Royale.
Right now however there's no getting around the fact that the Pro MDT chassis was a fantastic step in the right direction for PRS and NRL!!!!!
My future prediction is heavier match grade target barrels, solidly afixed to overbuilt repeating receivers easily capable of 100 plus FPE, and bedded into solid chassis systems, as well as slug designs evolving.
Upvote 0
Ah no luck when you wanna play at the elevated level game.
You already answered yourself how this could be done. You expecting the manufacturer do these things for you be ready with your wallet?
You need to tinker, do some homework.
One example, and I don't have any machines I asked a friend machinist, everything done by hand... I made my own tools :
or
Or you can just wrap a teflon tape before installing the liner nut.
Upvote 0
Lots of different topics, problems and potential solutions being mixed together on this thread…
Carbon fiber is much stiffer than steel. If you are trying to minimize harmonic flex in a long thin liner, the carbon fiber sleeve may help reduce this type of flex - while not adding much weight.
A thick steel sleeve over a long thin liner will also increase stiffness and reduce harmonic flex. It will also increase weight. The added weight in barrel may be advantageous to benchrest precision shooting, as it reduces recoil type movement - like muzzle flip.
I’m not certain that either of these two solutions would help with PoI shift, as this would logically seem related to a shift in alignment of the barrel rather than an issue related to harmonic flex of the barrel.
Just my random thoughts on the various topics popping in this thread.
-Ed
Carbon fiber is much stiffer than steel. If you are trying to minimize harmonic flex in a long thin liner, the carbon fiber sleeve may help reduce this type of flex - while not adding much weight.
A thick steel sleeve over a long thin liner will also increase stiffness and reduce harmonic flex. It will also increase weight. The added weight in barrel may be advantageous to benchrest precision shooting, as it reduces recoil type movement - like muzzle flip.
I’m not certain that either of these two solutions would help with PoI shift, as this would logically seem related to a shift in alignment of the barrel rather than an issue related to harmonic flex of the barrel.
Just my random thoughts on the various topics popping in this thread.
-Ed
Upvote 0
I see that Lothar Walther make 14mm .177 barrels. I'm surprised that they don't make a range of calibers. I would certainly try a poly in each of my calibers.....pre- threaded by LW would be even better.
Upvote 0
I don't think layering sleeves around a flimsy liner fixes the problem completely if they were where all three one piece maby.
Upvote 0
And obviously something isn’t right about your gun for this issue to surface, simple fact. I’m not doubting the issue exists, but the gun has many parts so it could have multiple reasons for this issue to show up. You solved your issue with epoxing the whole thing solid so something clearly was loose and epoxying solid addressed it. But that doesn’t clearly identify the source of the issue.
No one is doubting the existence of the issue, we are simply trying to understand the true cause of the issue so we can prevent it or fox it if we get it. It’s rather stupid to call point out the fact vast majority of people don’t have your problem stupid.
Upvote 0
There is the human factor to take into account. There are those who have spent their hard earned money on a high end gun, expect it to be perfect and complain if it’s not. There are others who after spending their hard earned money on a high end gun and refuse to accept the faults when it’s not perfect. What one person thinks is and good group another may think it’s not.
I know what I expect from a gun in terms of, accuracy, consistency, reliability and durability which is why I own the guns I do.
Bb
I know what I expect from a gun in terms of, accuracy, consistency, reliability and durability which is why I own the guns I do.
Bb
Upvote 0