Silver Bullet

[DX]

Ball valves on launchers are a different story, that depends on what the launcher is for. If you want maximum range, you'd want something better. However, if you are only interested in effective range [what are you going to hit at 1500ft anyway?] then opening .12345 of a second faster makes absolutely no difference whatsoever. That's like comparing two identical guns with a 2ft difference in ranges or water cannon riot blasts with a 5x difference in output.

Note to self: need article on Paper Stats.
Note to self: need article on Maximum Versatility.
Note to self: need article on Effective Range and Output.

[Silence]

I dunno, efficiency is extremely important in my opinion. If you're using a sprinkler valve instead of a ball valve, then you can get away with half the pumping beforehand. Efficiency makes all the difference in terms of practicality.

[DX]

A sprinkler valve still does not generate PSI for you. You might need less, but then again it doesn't take more than 60 to put a water balloon at 400ft. I tap shoot water balloon launchers in a sense. The shot is extremely brief, a motion refined by tap shooting homemades, saving some pressure so that the next pump-up is shorter. The only time that doesn't matter is with multi-shots, since you use the whole firing pc.

It really depends on if efficiency is more important than simplicity. I for one like simple, easy to find items. I've never found a sprinkler valve, but I don't even need to go to a store to obtain a ball valve at the moment. Also take into account local rules. We sitll can't level a launcher, so all they are good for is bombardment variants. Reloading does not have to be all that quick in such situations. In our usual fast-action engagements, launchers of any kind tend to be too impractical to use, except for a first shot.

[joannaardway]

Having a ball valve definately restricts some options.

In a "fire fight", dual-wielding coupled with dual target aim* is a favourite of mine (I've been watching Equilibrium too much), which is difficult, or impossible with a soaker that uses a ball valve.

*Aiming and hitting seperate targets with each soaker. Takes a crapload of practise to get right, but when it works, it doubles your effectiveness. You have to be at least semi-capable of multi-tasking, and have good eye focus.

IMHO, agility also benefits from a triggered soaker. Although Vertigo was a powerful homemade, it was hard to move fast and fire as well as I could with any of my modded soakers.

With regards to WBL practicality, take a look at this: Timberwolf

It's a highly refined spudgun design my brother's creating. Recreating the concept in a slightly higher bore (1" or so), would make an excellent sniping wbl. In terms of practicality, the power is completely adjustable, it'll be capable of ROFs in excess of 60 RPM, and importantly, it'll be accurate.

The only ball valves on that act as safety catches. The main valves would, between them, put even four 3/4" modified sprinkler valves (actuated by a fifth) to shame.

Maximum range - over half a mile. Effective accurate range - 200+ yards.

We should be aspiring to WBLs that act as more than just an annoyance.

[WaterWolf]

We should be aspiring to water balloon launchers that act as more than just an annoyance.

Agreed. In these past few days, I've been working out some bugs in my C.L.A.W rifle, which should be a highly practical WBL assault-rifle once its completed.

The Timber-Wolf would need to have at-least a 2" barrel to be an effective WBL sniper-rifle though, but I like the design he's got. It looks well-balanced and powerful.

I think that on the Silver-Bullet, I'd go for reliability over a bit more ease-of-use. But if your somebody who oftain duel wields guns, then perhaps when you build your own you could simply replace the ball-valve with the pull-valve. Though I'm not sure how you would get its trigger all the way back the the handle.

[C-A_99]

For A/CPH's, I'd still rather build a trigger for the ball valve than a pull valve and a trigger for it. A pull valve however, would definately be better for a WBL, though that's where the building comes in.

[joannaardway]

Originally Posted by C-A_99

A pull valve however, would definately be better for a WBL, though that's where the building comes in.

It's best to use a Sprinkler valve - or even a QEV (which are the gold standard of launcher valves).

Both can use a blowgun as a "trigger", they provide excellent opening times, and the QEV provides excellent flow (especially if you get a 1.5" monster of a valve)

[Silence]

Originally Posted by DX

Also take into account local rules. We sitll can't level a launcher, so all they are good for is bombardment variants. Reloading does not have to be all that quick in such situations. In our usual fast-action engagements, launchers of any kind tend to be too impractical to use, except for a first shot.

Well, now it sounds like you're just arguing for the sake of it. I can't think of anybody who wouldn't welcome cutting the amount of time and effort spent per shot.

Timberwolf looks like it'll be good, but the thread got boring after about page 5, and two posts have been made here after reading the humungous thread. The design was also much simpler when it was breech-loading. Ah well.

The decent opening times of pull valves aren't that helpful for water guns, but definitely for launchers. Flow would also have to be maximized for use in a water gun. A QEV, especially piloted by a pull valve or something, would probably be a bit too complicated for a water balloon launcher.

[DX]

I actually spent my free periods today looking into other kinds of valves on spud forums. It seems like a modified sprinkler would be best for the purpose of a mobile launcher, though I'm known for having trouble finding stuff like that. QEV's sounded intriguing, but I know next to nothing about them. I do want the G4 Douchenator to use something better than a ball valve, but only if it is not a pain to attach and/or mod. I've also been looking into another improvement, which is locating a local supply of conical nozzles.

[Silence]

Are you sure you checked properly? Nearly every spudgun forum has a question about QEVs in the first page...

The image in the page I linked to, supposedly from their wiki, was actually stolen from elsewhere. Note that the middle of the tee doesn't just lead into plain air--it leads into the PC.

I'd say a pull valve or sprinkler would allow a simpler configuration, although they would entail a bit of work too. QEVs are also far more common in the UK than in the US.

[joannaardway]

The thread did get a bit long, but although Timberwolf's design has been hugely complicated, it's better for it. Or at least, I think so.
Most of the best developments occured rather recently.

Using a more powerful valve has a list of advantages so long that it's hard to remember them all.

Firstly, lower pressures can be used for the same result. Lower pressures have several advantages - they are quicker and easier to generate. And less pressure is obviously safer. Or, the same pressures can be used for higher results.

Accuracy benefits too. A valve that requires less effort to open will disturb aim less.

I could never hit anything reliably at more than a few metres with my early ball valve cannons. When I sprung loaded the valves (less physical effort when firing), the power and accuracy got huge bonuses.
With the recent piston cannons with vented attachments, I can hit small targets squarely at over 100 yards, with power well over what is needed to pierce 1mm steel plate (with appropriate ammo)

[wetmonkey442]

IMO, the best container to use for a water reservoir is an empty (and obviously cleaned out), jug of laundry detergent. I am not sure of the exact size, but I do know they all come in generally the same dimensions. They are squarish-in look, and hold quite a good deal of water. The nice thing about them is that they usually have two openings for attaching hoses/couplings to. This is important because often with a water gun reservoir, it's nice to have a secondary way to fill your tank up rather than just unscrewing the entire tank.

EDIT: Haha, just noticed how much this thread has morphed over the last few pages, my post seems sorta out of context.

[WaterWolf]

Ok, I'm re-awakening this topic, now that we've had a few weeks to let things settle down.

I pulled up the blue-prints today and found yet another way to fold the gun back into its-self.
Presenting version 0.5:



The dimensions for it are now a mere ~21" long x ~7" wide x ~6" tall.
I measured the current reservoir sizes and determined that they can hold a total of ~3.20 liters. To give you something to compare that with, the CPS-1500 can carry 3 liters in its reservoirs.
The gun is no longer nose-heavy, as I have slid the CPS-PC back between the reservoirs and under the handle. I also added a conical nozzle, since in the past they have been proven to add a significant boost in range over something like a drilled PVC threaded Cap.

[Silence]

The gun seems even more unbalanced now. All the weight--which there is a lot of--is now in the back, and the pump handle is way up in the front. Especially when the pump is extended, this gun is going to be hard to hold.

Also, no actual tests have been done comparing conical nozzles to endcap ones. The best nozzles I have seen were on my CPS 4100--although the MD5K is good too. Neither of these guns use conical nozzles--in fact, they're almost like endcap nozzles, but exceptionally well drilled.

A lathe is probably the best way to do any nozzle, conical or endcap.

[joannaardway]

I'm now unsure whether we're designing a homemade or parts for a star cruiser.

Can I state the obvious problem with the reservior?
Water needs to be drawn from the bottom and your pump is apparently drawing from the top- so the reservior needs rearranging.

And SilentGuy is right about the weight and balance. It really needs adjusting as well.

Sorry to list problems, but it's best they're pointed out early.