OpnBlstr Posted March 30, 2009 Share Posted March 30, 2009 They are using a completely new design concept for the spring. It's a spring wound around a spool in the follower and the other end attached near the feed lips. As the bullets load in, it unwinds. This is definitely still in its infancy, This is the patented RamLine design from the late 80's, early 90's. It used a clockspring under the follower and riveted to the top of the mag. I have a lot of these mags still and they work fine. It generally adds three rounds in a factory length magazine. As far as open guns go they really haven't changed much in the past 12-15 years. Nowadays they all are basically the same with weights and spring setups to suit the individual shooter, stylized milling, and melt jobs on the grips. What has changed is the number of shops making top notch ready to go parts such as fire control components, comps, mounts, magwells, etc. That and the attention paid to the 170 mags with guys able to stuff 31+1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharonAnne9x23 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 ciscoip is in error. Para still sells frame kits. Check the Para USA web page. With the right scope mount, the Para dust cover is not a factor. There will not be 40 rd Open mags. Fill a magazine without the spring. You get about 33rds and are level with the bottom of a 170mm magazine. Revolution in Open division is over. Evolution will continue. We have reached the point of diminishing returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Revolution in Open division is over. Evolution will continue. We have reached the point of diminishing returns. Hmmmm....I think that's pretty short sighted. Two words: Caseless ammo. It's being used now and when it eventually filters down to us the game will change....far less recoil and capacity increases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seth Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Caseless Ammo is NEAT!!!! A quick google on that one was a wealth of information I wasn't aware of. Boy that would change the playing field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SA Friday Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Revolution in Open division is over. Evolution will continue. We have reached the point of diminishing returns. Hmmmm....I think that's pretty short sighted. Two words: Caseless ammo. It's being used now and when it eventually filters down to us the game will change....far less recoil and capacity increases. HUGE technology hurdles in caseless ammo. I doubt we will see this as a viable option in our life time, portable rail guns either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nYdGeo Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 What else is there? Caspian builds are very nice shooters. Run great (Steve Anderson's runs as good as a stock Glock). Give max capacity. (George Jones has a legal mag that goes 30+1) The two top USA shooters at the last World Shoot both run Caspians. (KC and Travis) KC has won a zillion Steel Challenge matches with one. Travis wins with one whether it's Limited or Open. World Champ uses a Tanfoglio. Henning runs circles around people with an EAA/Tanfoglio. Todd Jarrett has won every match around with a Para. Robbie, with a Springfield. I've seen a guy kick some butt with a 9mm Beretta with a red dot riding the slide. Most of those people are... "Happier than a itchy pig rubbing against a rail fence". Simply put, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nYdGeo Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 In the U.S., I think Open is probably at the end of the line, as far as innovation goes, and the STI with a C-More, 4-5 chamber comp, big stick, in 9x19 major is pretty much it. Yeah, a couple people might shoot Caspians, but I expect they'll eventually go the way of the Para Ordnance pretty soon . . . especially if we have another AWB and they don't have any mags or even replacement components for sale. Para Ordnances tend to be too fragile around the dust cover, don't have the tolerances that the S_Is do, and IIRC, aren't available as frame kits anymore.Tanfoglios might be players in the rest of the world, but as long as we're stuck with EAA as the exclusive importer, they're never going to amount to much here. I definitly agree with you on one point...the worst thing to ever happen to Tnafoglio in the USA is EAA. In Europe, but large and small-framed TF's are affordable, servicable alternatives. But thanks to EAA, TF's are all but a joke to the shooting masses. Pity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nYdGeo Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Revolution in Open division is over. Evolution will continue. We have reached the point of diminishing returns. Hmmmm....I think that's pretty short sighted. Two words: Caseless ammo. It's being used now and when it eventually filters down to us the game will change....far less recoil and capacity increases. And for the'lifestyles of the rich and famous crowd'. When if it finally makes it down to civilian availability if will be quite some time before the ability to handload it becomes avilable if at all. It will likely remain factory manufactured only for some time to come, and you'll pay their price for it or not shoot it. Just food for thought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted April 3, 2009 Author Share Posted April 3, 2009 I definitly agree with you on one point...the worst thing to ever happen to Tnafoglio in the USA is EAA. In Europe, but large and small-framed TF's are affordable, servicable alternatives. But thanks to EAA, TF's are all but a joke to the shooting masses. Pity... There does seem to be a supply issue when it comes to Tanfoglio guns in USA. That may change as more models are coming over soon, like the Stock II. Once you have your Tanfoglio then day-to-day support is coveded by Henning. He has all the spare parts and add-ons that you could need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Two words: Punctuated evolution. When Open and hi-cap dot guns were new, it was easy to come up with something better. As shooters and gunsmiths figured it out, the various designs settled in the upper righthand corner of the performance envelope. Now, it is refinement and style. When someone comes up with an improvement that adds performance, it will be tested and adopted. But it will be nothing like the early and mid 1990s, where you could build a gun before the season and find it obsolete before you wore it out, or even before the Nationals. As for the comps, there won't be any radical shift in shape or size until someone comes up with a design that improves on performance more than the mere +/-10% we screw around with now. Even then, it will be resisted, since no two shooters can agree on: a) what a comp is supposed to do, and how well it does it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Myself...or anyone for that matter, who has any knowledge of hydrodynamics could (and will) make a vastly superior comp. As of now I have only seen one that exploits the available energy in an effective manner. JMHO...Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al503 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 As of now I have only seen one that exploits the available energy in an effective manner.JMHO...Jim Care to share your opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Build it, put it on a gun, and let shooters try yours next to theirs. Half will say theirs is better regardless, and the other half will be undecided about claims yours shoots "flatter" or "softer" or whatever. Show them the reams of charts, high-speed photography, etc. and they won't change their opinion. Let one GM shoot an observably better score than he/she previously had, and they'll line up to buy it. Of course, as soon as it is installed half of the new owners will immediately begin changing it for the "better." The incremental differences between mechanical parts of Open guns is smaller than the variance in skill levels between shooters, or from day to day performances by individuals. I'm as open-minded as they come, but anyone who says they have a better widget has to prove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 (edited) soon I will have a device that has multiple accelerometers imbedded in it It can take data from every aspect of a shot.from the hammer fall to unlock and return to battery..including all motion in the cycle It can measure and graph all this data . This will be the only way to prove any design...by pure empirical data Jim Edited April 3, 2009 by GentlemanJim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisMcCracken Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 [peanut gallery] We need an emoticon eating popcorn. Sometimes it's just fun to watch the posts go back and forth. [/peanut gallery] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 No back and forth here...I think we all pretty much agree Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 I've got one of those VA Comps around. IIRC, it was designed with computers and fluid dynamics. It was built different...not milled. Kinda heavy. Probably expensive to make. I wonder if you couldn't get the flow models to jive with manufacturing by going with steel inserts within at tube/body. Like a silencer, but with holes to vent/jet the gases... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 I've got one of those VA Comps around. IIRC, it was designed with computers and fluid dynamics. It was built different...not milled. Kinda heavy. Probably expensive to make. I wonder if you couldn't get the flow models to jive with manufacturing by going with steel inserts within at tube/body. Like a silencer, but with holes to vent/jet the gases... You my friend,are right on the money. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisky Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 I've got one of those VA Comps around. IIRC, it was designed with computers and fluid dynamics. It was built different...not milled. Kinda heavy. Probably expensive to make. I wonder if you couldn't get the flow models to jive with manufacturing by going with steel inserts within at tube/body. Like a silencer, but with holes to vent/jet the gases... You my friend,are right on the money. Jim very interesting...more info pls... thanks!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StraightUp_OG Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 [peanut gallery]We need an emoticon eating popcorn. Sometimes it's just fun to watch the posts go back and forth. [/peanut gallery] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Gaines Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Were there is a problem there is opportunity. I think almost everything can be improved on. comp could be scientifically designed better The recoil master could be improved on, better materials etc. The c-more could be improved as far as durability. The aftec extractor was invented and has been a huge success. Thats one of the things I like about SV they are always trying to push the envelope as far as innovation. I have a couple of ideas, but I won't share them just because I would like to do some experimenting first. But thats my point were always comming up with something that will make something just a little better. jmo sean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Revolution in Open division is over. Evolution will continue. We have reached the point of diminishing returns. Hmmmm....I think that's pretty short sighted. Two words: Caseless ammo. It's being used now and when it eventually filters down to us the game will change....far less recoil and capacity increases. HUGE technology hurdles in caseless ammo. I doubt we will see this as a viable option in our life time, portable rail guns either. Nah, it's being used now....if it's workable now, if clumsy, it's not going to take 60yrs to become practical. Airplanes went from barely capable of sustained flight in 1903 to supersonic in 1947 and we're not talking that level of change. The evolution will be exponential just like with computers since we're now talking electronics more than anything else. It'll take a while to make it to an Open gun (assuming personal handguns are still legal) but it's doable. R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Any Open gun today can shoot .10 splits (heck, they return to battery in 0.06 or so) and hit any target we use in IPSC. How many shooters can do that? Will a better comp change that significantly? Caseless ammo would do what? Give us three or four more rounds in the mag? and forget about reloading it to 'work the comp' or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 Any Open gun today can shoot .10 splits (heck, they return to battery in 0.06 or so) and hit any target we use in IPSC. How many shooters can do that? Will a better comp change that significantly? Caseless ammo would do what? Give us three or four more rounds in the mag? and forget about reloading it to 'work the comp' or whatever. Probably only a couple of rounds more with caseless as you suggest, but with the experimental systems they're getting almost no muzzle flip at all....much smaller reciprocating mass. A zero flip, light recoil gun with 33-34 in the mag would be a reasonable jump in performance. In fact, now that I think about it, that might make more of a difference in Modified guns because the caseless would barely need a comp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted April 4, 2009 Share Posted April 4, 2009 (edited) For every action...there is an oposite and equal reaction However a bullet of a certain mass is propelled to a known velocity... The force will be the same...I see no way caseless can defy this law of physics. cost to manufacture ...is the only thing holding comp design back. Jim Edited April 4, 2009 by GentlemanJim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now