[cockerpunk]

drg, on 16 January 2012 - 10:49 PM, said:

cockerpunk, on 16 January 2012 - 10:16 PM, said:

but it doesn't change how the gun works, so its dumb to categorize a gun based on that. your the only one muddying the waters by talking about one minor thing not how the entire system functions. its an increasing force pressure controlled poppet.

Well, the operation of this gun is spool valve, so that doesn't make any point in your favor. The structure in the middle of the gun is a spool. It works pretty much like a classic spool valve design. I don't see how you can look at the animations and not see that. It's as plain as day and acknowledged by the designers. The only thing that would make it a poppet is a poppet-type structure controlling the firing pulse.

Yoda already cleared up the issue with the Legion Shocker as it being misdrawn. The Etha originally had a poppet seal for the front of the spool, which is where that terminology originated from, and it was carried through the process for pragmatic reasons. It made it into marketing copy for marketing reasons.

the operation of the gun is not spool valve. its a pressure controlled poppet valve.

[drg]

cockerpunk, on 16 January 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

the operation of the gun is not spool valve. its a pressure controlled poppet valve.

Based on what? You literally have no reason for saying that, you're just repeating bullshit. Radial seals sliding back and forth in a bore = spool.

All spool firing mechanisms I can think of are pressure controlled. The operation is similar to a Threshold/G4 with the plunger moving instead of the bolt.

This post has been edited by drg: 16 January 2012 - 11:44 PM

[Molybdenum]

drg, on 16 January 2012 - 11:32 PM, said:

cockerpunk, on 16 January 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

the operation of the gun is not spool valve. its a pressure controlled poppet valve.

Based on what? You literally have no reason for saying that, you're just repeating bullshit. Radial seals sliding back and forth in a bore = spool.

All spool firing mechanisms I can think of are pressure controlled. The operation is similar to a Threshold/G4 with the plunger moving instead of the bolt.

He has already explained why he believes it to be a pressure controlled poppet valve. Your logic for calling is a spool is sound, but it fails on the subject of properly categorizing the guns functionality. Calling this gun a "spool" with no other modifiers implies it functions like traditional spools, and is so not completely accurate.

[Troy]

I think this is all a vast conspiracy by Jack Wood to have us arguing over the marker's operation, and thus promoting it on the message boards.

[cockerpunk]

Molybdenum, on 17 January 2012 - 09:26 AM, said:

drg, on 16 January 2012 - 11:32 PM, said:

cockerpunk, on 16 January 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

the operation of the gun is not spool valve. its a pressure controlled poppet valve.

Based on what? You literally have no reason for saying that, you're just repeating bullshit. Radial seals sliding back and forth in a bore = spool.

All spool firing mechanisms I can think of are pressure controlled. The operation is similar to a Threshold/G4 with the plunger moving instead of the bolt.

He has already explained why he believes it to be a pressure controlled poppet valve. Your logic for calling is a spool is sound, but it fails on the subject of properly categorizing the guns functionality. Calling this gun a "spool" with no other modifiers implies it functions like traditional spools, and is so not completely accurate.

correct

it may have a spool valve type seal, but it does not operate like a balanced (shocker) or unbalanced (G3/4) spool valve.

[Troy]

cockerpunk, on 17 January 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

it may have a spool valve type seal, but it does not operate like a balanced (shocker) or unbalanced (G3/4) spool valve.

Now, we are in agreement.

[Jack Wood]

I'll come back in a couple of months when you've all either:

a) Made your minds up about a new classification system or
2) killed each other with iBombs....

The problem is we are trying to use 1 term to describe valve and bolt operation. It must surely be time to seperate bolt and valve function at the very least in descriptions.

Etha would be a FASR Bolt With Pressure Controlled Spool Valve.
Ego Would be a Electropneumatic Bolt with Impact Valve
Geo would be a Blow Forward Spool Valved Bolt

[Troy]

Jack Wood, on 17 January 2012 - 11:01 AM, said:

I'll come back in a couple of months when you've all either:

a) Made your minds up about a new classification system or
2) killed each other with iBombs....

The problem is we are trying to use 1 term to describe valve and bolt operation. It must surely be time to seperate bolt and valve function at the very least in descriptions.

Etha would be a FASR Bolt With Pressure Controlled Spool Valve.
Ego Would be a Electropneumatic Bolt with Impact Valve
Geo would be a Blow Forward Spool Valved Bolt

No sir, I think YOU should continue reinventing the same valve/bolt combinations so they fit in nicely with OUR definitions.

But yes, I think you're right... and having a FASR bolt sounds awesome

[UV Halo]

Jack Wood, on 17 January 2012 - 11:01 AM, said:

...The problem is we are trying to use 1 term to describe valve and bolt operation. It must surely be time to seperate bolt and valve function at the very least in descriptions...

My thoughts exactly!

Stick to the hard definitions "Spool = radial seals", "Poppet = Face Seals", and go from there.

[cockerpunk]

Jack Wood, on 17 January 2012 - 11:01 AM, said:

I'll come back in a couple of months when you've all either:

a) Made your minds up about a new classification system or
2) killed each other with iBombs....

The problem is we are trying to use 1 term to describe valve and bolt operation. It must surely be time to seperate bolt and valve function at the very least in descriptions.

Etha would be a FASR Bolt With Pressure Controlled Spool Valve.
Ego Would be a Electropneumatic Bolt with Impact Valve
Geo would be a Blow Forward Spool Valved Bolt

i have no problem adding FASOR bolt or even blowforward to increasing force pressure controlled poppet. that would actually be the perfect way to tell this gun apart front the legion shocker design, which is closed bolt increasing force pressure controlled poppet. and further from the shocker sport, which is an increasing force pressure controlled poppet with a ram controlled bolt.

This post has been edited by cockerpunk: 17 January 2012 - 01:19 PM

[UV Halo]

cockerpunk, on 17 January 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

i have no problem adding FASOR bolt or even blowforward to increasing force pressure controlled poppet. that would actually be the perfect way to tell this gun apart front the legion shocker design, which is closed bolt increasing force pressure controlled poppet. and further from the shocker sport, which is an increasing force pressure controlled poppet with a ram controlled bolt.

Gordon, what influences you away from the ZDSPB and other (Wiki: "Poppet", Tooling U: "spool") definitions of "Spool" and "Poppet" valves if we were to break down the marker to sub-components?

[cockerpunk]

UV Halo, on 17 January 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

cockerpunk, on 17 January 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

i have no problem adding FASOR bolt or even blowforward to increasing force pressure controlled poppet. that would actually be the perfect way to tell this gun apart front the legion shocker design, which is closed bolt increasing force pressure controlled poppet. and further from the shocker sport, which is an increasing force pressure controlled poppet with a ram controlled bolt.

Gordon, what influences you away from the ZDSPB and other (Wiki: "Poppet", Tooling U: "spool") definitions of "Spool" and "Poppet" valves if we were to break down the marker to sub-components?

well the term Poppet valve comes from automotive valves, which are mostly tapered valves (basically both face and radial seal). this is because it is hard to pre load a face seal without a plastic liner (and in a car plastic would melt) and a radial seal again requires a conformable seal, a tapered seal makes the most sense. so i find that face vs radial thing a bit simplistic. although for most paintball guns it is accurate. pressure controlled poppets are really the only thing hard to classify, basically it means its not a spool valve cause the valve and bolt arnt the same thing, but it doesn't have a true poppet valve either. in this light, odd guns become very easy to classify. and in looking at "classic" spool and poppet guns you start to see PCPs pop (pun intended) up all over the place. it really is a much better way to classify guns.

[drg]

While it is a seemingly simple difference, it is not simplistic at all, as the design considerations between the two are quite different.
But whether the difference is simple OR simplistic has no bearing on whether something falls into one category of design or another. There is simply no reason to use the term based on nothing more than flawed drawing. CP seems simply mentally stuck on the term and cannot get off it; maybe others can suggest why that is.

But the claims made by CP and others are in fact quite wrong, the operation is in fact essentially traditional spool. Any spool operation is going to be either balanced or unbalanced; the Etha main spool is a balanced design, the bolt is unbalanced. Looking at the spool diagrams a little closer, a Quest is very very similar in operation:



The only difference is that the spool moves rather than the cylinder. "Spool with blow-forward bolt" would be a pretty accurate description of the operation of the Etha, using existing terms. However marker operatiion description usually prioritizes the firing valve over the bolt operation, e.g. a Sovereign is a poppet gun despite its spool bolt. So in a single term, the Etha is a spool valve gun.

This post has been edited by drg: 17 January 2012 - 04:18 PM

[Snipez4664]

I don't think the geometry of the Etha being somewhat similar to the Quest is really relevant - Jack Wood himself came in and made the sensible distinction to separate bolt and valve motion in the nomenclature.

This post has been edited by Snipez4664: 17 January 2012 - 04:25 PM

[drg]

To whom are you referring?

[xincognitopbx]

drg, on 17 January 2012 - 04:10 PM, said:

While it is a seemingly simple difference, it is not simplistic at all, as the design considerations between the two are quite different.
But whether the difference is simple OR simplistic has no bearing on whether something falls into one category of design or another. There is simply no reason to use the term based on nothing more than flawed drawing. CP seems simply mentally stuck on the term and cannot get off it; maybe others can suggest why that is.

But the claims made by CP and others are in fact quite wrong, the operation is in fact essentially traditional spool. Any spool operation is going to be either balanced or unbalanced; the Etha main spool is a balanced design, the bolt is unbalanced. Looking at the spool diagrams a little closer, a Quest is very very similar in operation:



The only difference is that the spool moves rather than the cylinder. "Spool with blow-forward bolt" would be a pretty accurate description of the operation of the Etha, using existing terms. However marker operatiion description usually prioritizes the firing valve over the bolt operation, e.g. a Sovereign is a poppet gun despite its spool bolt. So in a single term, the Etha is a spool valve gun.

How is the etha diagram similar to that ^

This post has been edited by xincognitopbx: 17 January 2012 - 04:23 PM

[drg]

xincognitopbx, on 17 January 2012 - 04:22 PM, said:

drg, on 17 January 2012 - 04:10 PM, said:

While it is a seemingly simple difference, it is not simplistic at all, as the design considerations between the two are quite different.
But whether the difference is simple OR simplistic has no bearing on whether something falls into one category of design or another. There is simply no reason to use the term based on nothing more than flawed drawing. CP seems simply mentally stuck on the term and cannot get off it; maybe others can suggest why that is.

But the claims made by CP and others are in fact quite wrong, the operation is in fact essentially traditional spool. Any spool operation is going to be either balanced or unbalanced; the Etha main spool is a balanced design, the bolt is unbalanced. Looking at the spool diagrams a little closer, a Quest is very very similar in operation:



The only difference is that the spool moves rather than the cylinder. "Spool with blow-forward bolt" would be a pretty accurate description of the operation of the Etha, using existing terms. However marker operatiion description usually prioritizes the firing valve over the bolt operation, e.g. a Sovereign is a poppet gun despite its spool bolt. So in a single term, the Etha is a spool valve gun.

How is the etha diagram similar to that ^

I don't know how to answer this. Look at it. Now, hold the bolt still and move the spool back and forth. The gas paths are nearly identical, with the control feed placed behind the main feed because the moving structures are transposed in the gun layout.

[cockerpunk]

drg, on 17 January 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

xincognitopbx, on 17 January 2012 - 04:22 PM, said:

drg, on 17 January 2012 - 04:10 PM, said:

While it is a seemingly simple difference, it is not simplistic at all, as the design considerations between the two are quite different.
But whether the difference is simple OR simplistic has no bearing on whether something falls into one category of design or another. There is simply no reason to use the term based on nothing more than flawed drawing. CP seems simply mentally stuck on the term and cannot get off it; maybe others can suggest why that is.

But the claims made by CP and others are in fact quite wrong, the operation is in fact essentially traditional spool. Any spool operation is going to be either balanced or unbalanced; the Etha main spool is a balanced design, the bolt is unbalanced. Looking at the spool diagrams a little closer, a Quest is very very similar in operation:



The only difference is that the spool moves rather than the cylinder. "Spool with blow-forward bolt" would be a pretty accurate description of the operation of the Etha, using existing terms. However marker operatiion description usually prioritizes the firing valve over the bolt operation, e.g. a Sovereign is a poppet gun despite its spool bolt. So in a single term, the Etha is a spool valve gun.

How is the etha diagram similar to that ^

I don't know how to answer this. Look at it. Now, hold the bolt still and move the spool back and forth. The gas paths are nearly identical, with the control feed placed behind the main feed because the moving structures are transposed in the gun layout.

so if the gun operated completely differently, then it would be like this other gun that operates completely differently?

[drg]

cockerpunk, on 17 January 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

so if the gun operated completely differently, then it would be like this other gun that operates completely differently?

Eh?

Snipez4664, on 17 January 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

I don't think the geometry of the Etha being somewhat similar to the Quest is really relevant - Jack Wood himself came in and made the sensible distinction to separate bolt and valve motion in the nomenclature.

1) Why wouldn't it be relevant?
2) We have been separating it in the case of poppet guns for years now, but never mention the bolt operation in the nomenclature. Why not?
3) Even if we separate the two, there is still no poppet in this gun. This gun is simply not a poppet at all. If anything it's two spools, or a spool and a ram/bolt.

This post has been edited by drg: 17 January 2012 - 04:38 PM

[xincognitopbx]

but the spool/poppet 'stick' if you will doesn't move. The legion shocker resembles the etha much better in my view