Topic: Five Easy Probes

[droid]

That one surprised me, shouldn't that one have hindered the airflow ? Sorta defeats the point of a hollow probe now doesn't it ? Or does it ?

[quickster47 †]

Here are results from the fourth test.  These are the average of 240 pellets fired in batches of 30 pellets at a time using the Charles Mellon flow-through probe that I cleaned up ever so slightly to remove some tiny burrs.  Not that I am prejudice but this has always been my go-to probe for all my target guns.  Again the only thing done was a tiny drop of Pellgun oil to the o-ring and also a change of the powerlet after 30 shots.

The length of this probe is slightly shorter than the other two extended probes but I believe it has a more consistent seating of different pellet types if you are prone to changing pellets quite often. Although for this test I have used the same pellet type throughout my testing.  You can also see from the first picture that the opening is directly over the transfer port and lined up very well with the transfer port.

Carl

[ped]

great data carl good job you weren't using a pumper or you'd have arms like arnie
i normally use hollow probes not because they give better fps gains than the extended probes but i found that they load pellets better with less chance of the pellet cockling
i have just made an extended one with a wider tip that seems to work well for loading once past the breech screw hole(once i'm happy with the gun i think a little filler will be going in)
ped

[droid]

I just thought, I hope no one is hiding in the woods 

[WyoMan]

Well performed test Carl.....the results seem logical to me and I'm with you on the points you make 
Glad you did this because the probe thing was almost an urban legend......now we need someone to do an accuracy test 

[arkmaker †]

So that leaves the solid probe 

[ped]

i wonder if thats going to give a suprise result
ped

[BigErn]

Very cool stuff Carl! Thank you for sharing this great info 

[quickster47 †]

Here are results from the fifth and final test.  These are the average of 240 pellets fired in batches of 30 pellets at a time using my very own designed probeless bolt.  This was quite a challenge to test because it was very, very easy to load up a pellet and shoot the gun before realizing I had not removed the filler probe.  I ended up having to make at least eight of these probeless blanks because of mishaps.     Again the only thing done was a tiny drop of Pellgun oil to the o-ring and also a change of the powerlet after 30 shots.

This one was the biggest surprise of all the tests.  I certainly did not expect even the slightest gain and because of some previous testing I actually expected a loss of FPS.  The filler pieces were made about 0.190" in length and the one end was concave to mate better with the bolt end, not that doing that made any difference in the testing but it did make me feel better.

Carl

[quickster47 †]

And the data from the probless bolt tests.

Carl

[quickster47 †]

So what does all this mean?

I think the one thing that crosses my mind about the last two tests, the extended flow-through bolt and the probeless bolt, is that was my barrel getting well seasoned after a thousand shots and did that make any difference or are these type of bolt probes actually better.  From a realistic standpoint you can really throw out using a probeless bolt because of its impractability.  It just ain't gonna happen in the real world.  Although I suppose one could make use of it in some type of shooting competition.  But you would definitely need to be well disciplined.

And does such a small increase in FPS really make any difference in the big scheme of things.  Sometimes I believe it does then at other times I think not.  Others have done some similar tests but I don't believe anyone has done anything quite like what I did.

This testing was a lot like the barrel testing I did in October 2011.  It was a lot of fun and a whole lot of work but after shooting 1200 pellets and going through 40 powerlets I am really, really glad it is finished for the time being.

Carl

[breakfastchef]

No way! I wonder if reducing the headspace in the cavity behind the pellet with that 'oil drum' you concocted may actually be beneficial. Just guessing.

Your tests prove that most any bolt that pushes the pellet past the transfer port increases pellet velocity.

[quickster47 †]

No way! I wonder if reducing the headspace in the cavity behind the pellet with that 'oil drum' you concocted may actually be beneficial. Just guessing.

Your tests prove that most any bolt that pushes the pellet past the transfer port increases pellet velocity.

What I would do is insert a pellet, close the bolt, pull the bolt back, insert the 'oil can', close the bolt and fully seat the pellet, pull the bolt back, remove the oil can, close the bolt and fire.  Whew...  and the problem was that sometimes I would forget to pull the bolt back and remove that 'oil can'. 

And I think that is pretty much true, any bolt pushing the pellet past the transfer port is a winner.

Carl

[breakfastchef]

So let me clarify this...the oil can was removed after setting the pellet? Or it is an integral part of the bolt that remains in place during the firing sequence?

What I would do is insert a pellet, close the bolt, pull the bolt back, insert the 'oil can', close the bolt and fully seat the pellet, pull the bolt back, remove the oil can, close the bolt and fire.  Whew...  and the problem was that sometimes I would forget to pull the bolt back and remove that 'oil can'. 

And I think that is pretty much true, any bolt pushing the pellet past the transfer port is a winner.

Carl

[arkmaker †]

OK, wait!! Let me make sure I have this correct. You use the probeless bolt, add the drum, add the pellet and lock it in, then open and remove the drum and re-lock and fire??


Is that right??
Rich