What are your thoughts on 3d printed accessories?

[JimD]

I love my Carm magazines. Much better than the ones SPA provides in my opinion. I also really like the printed moderators I have inside the shroud of my 3 P35s. They work great and are not subject to damage inside the metal shroud. I broke an exposed printed moderator on my Prod, however. It fell off my couch and the moderator broke. I have one now on my Avenger that protrudes a little. I think it will be OK but we'll see. The longer the moderator is the more stress is on the threads if it gets bumped and plastic is just not terribly strong. Functionally printed moderators are good on airguns, I'm just not sure about reliability when they are subject to getting bumped.

 

[3Crows]

I think printing is a great way to prototype and test a concept but I would prefer a machined (metal or engineering materials like Delrin) or molded plastic (like ABS etc.) part.

 

[AirNGasman]

Og no like plastic. Wood best building material.

 

[Stubbers]

Og no like plastic. Wood best building material.

View attachment 490357

 

[OC_]

I think printing is a great way to prototype and test a concept but I would prefer a machined (metal or engineering materials like Delrin) or molded plastic (like ABS etc.) part.

well, i can print you ABS!!! Delrin (acetal) can be printed too. But this is very difficult and requires a special printer.

 

[MRaccurate]

If my pockets were deeper, I would prefer better materials and processes. I work with what I've got. Some surprises with PLA filament are that it absorbs moisture and when that happens, the battery box connections are not good insulators and will discharge the batteries. As it ages, PLA can lose its elasticity as well. So much for plastic being a good insulator and stay flexible. Thread holding capability is very challenging as well. I'm running 2-56 x 1/4" and longer screws that are too easy to strip out. Fingertip tight only for most of my screws. I lose the setscrews under my fingernail; they are that small. I am always mindful to design with the vision to mass produce these sights. Injection and extrusion molds would be needed to make the components cost effectively. That is a discussion for another day. I have not learned to print using WOOD!

 

[Gerry52]

If they work well & cause no adverse effects it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks imho.

 

[OC_]

If my pockets were deeper, I would prefer better materials and processes. I work with what I've got. Some surprises with PLA filament are that it absorbs moisture and when that happens, the battery box connections are not good insulators and will discharge the batteries. As it ages, PLA can lose its elasticity as well. So much for plastic being a good insulator and stay flexible. Thread holding capability is very challenging as well. I'm running 2-56 x 1/4" and longer screws that are too easy to strip out. Fingertip tight only for most of my screws. I lose the setscrews under my fingernail; they are that small. I am always mindful to design with the vision to mass produce these sights. Injection and extrusion molds would be needed to make the components cost effectively. That is a discussion for another day. I have not learned to print using WOOD!

For the reasons stated above and also issues like solvent resistance, being brittle, layer adhesion, melting in sunlight, and being UV sensitive, I do not like PLA at all. I think this material is the least suited for airguns outside of a prototype. This is a problem since it is the most popular material to print with due to how well it prints. Many of the 3d printed stuff I see out there is defiantly printed from PLA.

 

[rhobbs]

I was wondering what the general opinion was on 3d printed parts. The first 3d printed part I got was a chassis for the original AV Avenger, it is the Bonicci Goods design and is a hybrid unit. It has a 3d printed frame and carbon fiber panels on the side. Its been a pretty solid piece and my only complaints with it are with its overall functionality and nothing with its construction.

I have two different single shot loaders that are perfect.

 

[3Crows]

well, i can print you ABS!!! Delrin (acetal) can be printed too. But this is very difficult and requires a special printer.

Again, I would prefer those materials machined or molded. The thread asked for our thoughts and those are mine. I have used and will use printed parts if they are suitable. My preference would be other processes when available even if it costs more.

 

[RAMJET66]

I have the adapter for the carbine stock from moistone on my Gk1 & i pick the carbine by the stock most of the time ,i even hang it from the back end of the stock with a zip tie on a S hook on one of my metal shelf racks, also have the speedloader from moist one, & a couple of moderators from Oldspook , also one designed by Subscriber on the Gk1 , no problems at all..

 

[rcarlisle]

I do some 3D printing as a side hobby. I have a small, inexpensive delta printer that I was able to tune well enough to get dimensionally accurate parts with. I don't print too much with it anymore unless I'm working on a project. There's a fair amount of waste, even for successful prints. I rarely print anything that does not benefit from a 100% infill, though I have for some larger pieces I've produced for work in an effort to reduce material costs.
I, by far, prefer traditional materials (metal and wood) on guns. But I really do appreciate the ability to dream something up, produce it for next to nothing, and try it out. I'll compromise on material limitations if I can prove a concept is worth investing more in.
Right now, I am using a single-shot tray I printed and a front blade sight I designed and printed on my Marauder. Ideally, I'd love to get the front blade CNC milled from billet aluminum, but it'll need more refinement before I am ready to commit to that. For now, I am satisfied to have personally produced a useful item in one hobby to be used in another.

 

[MRaccurate]

I do some 3D printing as a side hobby. I have a small, inexpensive delta printer that I was able to tune well enough to get dimensionally accurate parts with. I don't print too much with it anymore unless I'm working on a project. There's a fair amount of waste, even for successful prints. I rarely print anything that does not benefit from a 100% infill, though I have for some larger pieces I've produced for work in an effort to reduce material costs.
I, by far, prefer traditional materials (metal and wood) on guns. But I really do appreciate the ability to dream something up, produce it for next to nothing, and try it out. I'll compromise on material limitations if I can prove a concept is worth investing more in.
Right now, I am using a single-shot tray I printed and a front blade sight I designed and printed on my Marauder. Ideally, I'd love to get the front blade CNC milled from billet aluminum, but it'll need more refinement before I am ready to commit to that. For now, I am satisfied to have personally produced a useful item in one hobby to be used in another.
View attachment 490444

Do you do your own drawings for printing as well? Due to the amount of printing I have done, and the changes that I make to improve the next generation of sight, I try to stick with 20% infill until I get close to the final design. I may then print with a 40% infill. I may generate 3-5 versions before the design function is complete. I have been able to hold tolerances to .002-.003". I am pleased with that capability. All the earlier print versions are all stripped of parts and junked out. I have designed between 100-200 sights. All the designs are good, but I would not market any with the PLA filament. All the sights would need to be made with a variety of materials to insure wearability and reliability. One version fits picatinny rails that are mounted above or below the barrel. Other sights mount direct to the barrel. Some are designed to be siliconed directly to the pistol frame due to no other mounting option available. I have designed mounts that are in the grips of pistols. Next on the design agenda is a mount that installs between the barrel and the moderator. I have few other designs that most people would doubt that they will work, but I have already tested them out. It is enjoyable to create items and carry through to completion.

 

[OC_]

Again, I would prefer those materials machined or molded. The thread asked for our thoughts and those are mine. I have used and will use printed parts if they are suitable. My preference would be other processes when available even if it costs more.

Can I send you something that might change your mind about 3d printing?

 

[3Crows]

Can I send you something that might change your mind about 3d printing?

I would pay for a custom barrel band for my Marauder, it has a high rise breach, since getting one of aluminum is off the table since I retired.

 

[OC_]

I would pay for a custom barrel band for my Marauder, it has a high rise breach, since getting one of aluminum is off the table since I retired.

Its hard for me to make things for guns i don't have in my hands. How about one of my moderators? Also, i just looked up the current version of the gun, and it looks like it comes from the factory now with a band. Will that fit yours?

 

[3Crows]

Its hard for me to make things for guns i don't have in my hands. How about one of my moderators? Also, i just looked up the current version of the gun, and it looks like it comes from the factory now with a band. Will that fit yours?

Okay, I will bite, let me know what the moderator costs, I could use it on my Crosman 3622, little thing has a bark, it does have a 1/2X20 adapter . I will go for it!

The Marauder does have a barrel band but the JSAR side lever breach is a high rise design to increase rigidity and thus cannot use the standard barrel band. I did get one on eBay and it works but the quality is pretty rough and detracts from an otherwise pro looking build.

I am not against printing, I was in Germany a couple of years ago, for work, and went to the Gutenberg Museum. There was an original press and just a little away a 3D printer making a copy of the press in miniature, pretty neat juxtaposition of the two printing technologies!

PM me and we can work it out please.

 

[rcarlisle]

Do you do your own drawings for printing as well? Due to the amount of printing I have done, and the changes that I make to improve the next generation of sight, I try to stick with 20% infill until I get close to the final design. I may then print with a 40% infill. I may generate 3-5 versions before the design function is complete. I have been able to hold tolerances to .002-.003". I am pleased with that capability. All the earlier print versions are all stripped of parts and junked out. I have designed between 100-200 sights. All the designs are good, but I would not market any with the PLA filament. All the sights would need to be made with a variety of materials to insure wearability and reliability. One version fits picatinny rails that are mounted above or below the barrel. Other sights mount direct to the barrel. Some are designed to be siliconed directly to the pistol frame due to no other mounting option available. I have designed mounts that are in the grips of pistols. Next on the design agenda is a mount that installs between the barrel and the moderator. I have few other designs that most people would doubt that they will work, but I have already tested them out. It is enjoyable to create items and carry through to completion.

I use OpenSCAD for creating most of what I print. The parts I print most frequently are quite small and print in an hour or two. I am not in a hurry. If I am testing something out and it's large, I'll cut back on infill to save time, material and money. But if I am printing a final part (particularly if it is for myself) I go with 100% infill unless there's a good reason not to. Time is seldom a consideration unless I need to get something done for a client. Usually a WiFi access point mount or something like that.
Edited to add: I do not need to hold tolerances anywhere near yours. I am happy with +/- 0.25mm (~0.01"), which is well within the wheelhouse of my printer. All my parts are slip fit, generally, so some interference is good (generally) and I am not above hitting a piece with sandpaper if there's too much fit and not enough slip.

 

[kanmotexacal]

If done with the "finish" in mind, that is, a finer print, to lessen the "thread look", then yes. Also, a proper material for the finished product. Again...that is, use a strong enough material to help make the finished product is as strong / tough as it needs to be, so it has a decent life span.

I bought a couple of printed magazines a while back. For one of the guns, the finished product had a fairly heavy "thread" effect as the finished surface. Unfortunately, this gun has the breech seal o-ring on the pin, pellet probe/pusher etc. With the rough interior surface, I didn't want to put that o-ring through a rough surface every time that I cocked the gun, so there it sits...on the shelf.

I know that it's an easy thing to make printed parts to have a nice smooth surface that has VERY little "thread" effect surface. I have two sight mounts, made by two different people, that have a very nice / smooth finished surface, so yeah, I know that it can be done. Just takes the knowhow.

I know the expense is much higher, but it would be nice to see some parts made of printed metals. Aluminum, Titanium, nickel based steels, etc.

Mike

Could you use a reamer to smooth out the "bore" of the magazine? Just my 2-cents.