Air Efficiency - Your Experience

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Sottyman
    Certified Post Whore
    • Mar 2021
    • 504
    • Colorado Springs

    #1

    Air Efficiency - Your Experience

    Hey guys,

    I just snagged a cheap classic right feed this past week (first one ever, was always a phantom and cocker guy), and I'm absolutely stoked to get out and play! I know these things aren't efficiency queens by any means, but I was just curious to know what you guys typically get on a fill. I bought this as a limited paint semi setup, and only plan on having sub-200rds on me at any one point (50rd APP pocket hopper and 3-4 30rd APP tac pods MAX). I have a 48/3k now and will test what I can get from it, but it's really back heavy and I'm debating getting another 17/3k tank or possibly a 22/3k with small drop (I really like the smaller lighter feel, and no required hydro testing for life is nice too). Not really sure if the smaller tanks are worth it if I can't get at least 200ish shots out of them, though!

    -Mike
  • Jordan
    I. Am. Canadian. 🇨🇦
    • Jul 2020
    • 3511
    • Southern Ontario, Canada

    #2
    On a 3k tank, you'll get 10 shots per cu.in. or worse. Probably slightly worse, and I think lvl10 aggravates that even more.

    Comment


    • Sottyman
      Sottyman commented
      Editing a comment
      I did a little google-fu and saw similar ballpark figures. 10/ci for 3k, and 15/ci for 45. Just wasn't sure how "true" that was for the mags!
  • Toestr
    Certified Post Whore
    • Jul 2020
    • 2877
    • Poland, Onterrible

    #3
    Originally posted by Jordan
    On a 3k tank, you'll get 10 shots per cu.in. or worse. Probably slightly worse, and I think lvl10 aggravates that even more.
    Isn't that just the general efficiency 'formula'?

    You'll be about on par with a Tippmann for efficiency. Not the hugest deal for rec play, but it is a reason they aren't favoured for tournament use anymore.

    Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

    Comment

    • Jordan
      I. Am. Canadian. 🇨🇦
      • Jul 2020
      • 3511
      • Southern Ontario, Canada

      #4
      Originally posted by Toestr
      Isn't that just the general efficiency 'formula'?

      Pretty much. Mags aren't as horrible as say, a Shocker 4x4, so 8-9ish shots per isn't unreasonable on a 3k tank.

      Comment


      • Sottyman
        Sottyman commented
        Editing a comment
        So thinking 8/ci for 3k is a better ballpark?
    • lew
      Devious Dirtbag
      • Jul 2020
      • 1035
      • WY

      #5
      15 shots per cubic inch at 4500 psi with an Automag is extremely optimistic.

      All the Mags I've had- all Classic valves- got 1100 rounds at best off an 88-90/4500.
      “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” -Krishnamurti

      Comment


      • Sottyman
        Sottyman commented
        Editing a comment
        Probably easiest for me to just run to the field and start shooting a bag of paint on a full fill and go from there. The 48/3k isn't terrible by any means, I just wouldn't mind shedding the weight if it's doable
    • Tinybear
      Old timer
      • Feb 2021
      • 439
      • South West Ontario Canada.

      #6
      I never had issues getting around 900 out of my last x valved level ten mag on a 77/4500 tank with a SHP REG. So ruffly 12x/CI for a 4500psi in a ABSOLUTELY a worst case scenario. Likely be much much better with a standard output tank not RTing and with a Level 7 bolt.

      My level 7 classic valved mags are far better on air but I never really shoot enuff with them to worry about efficiency. Even still I run them on a 88ci tank now for comfort reasons so air is never going be an issue as I have more air then I EVER carry paint. Generally speaking my current classic mags will run the standard efficiency by the old calculation. So for you wanting small and light with a 200 round capacity. Your best bet would be something along the lines of a 27ci/3000psi tank.
      AGD 68 Automag, AGD ULE 68 Automag, Azodin Kaos Pump II, PE EMEK pal, Tippmann SL68II gen2, Umarex TR50.

      Comment

      • Sottyman
        Certified Post Whore
        • Mar 2021
        • 504
        • Colorado Springs

        #7
        I was torn between the Tippmann 26/3k I saw and the ninja 48/3k. If the 26 is the safest bet I'll just stick with the 48/3k. Better reg, and if I still need to hydro I don't really gain much besides a few oz's in weight savings!

        Comment


        • Tinybear
          Tinybear commented
          Editing a comment
          Fair enuff. I have a couple of the tippmann tanks. They work well enuff for my use. I have the 26/3000 I run for my pumps(in Canada this tank does not need dehydrogenase as it falls under the under 1L Capacity ruling). And recently picked up the 48/3000 as a cheap replacement for my
          50/4500 that dated out (also falls under that 1l ruling)
          Last edited by Tinybear; 05-08-2021, 05:29 PM.

        • Sottyman
          Sottyman commented
          Editing a comment
          Lucky you, we just have the dumb 2" x 2' rule. Under 2" diameter and less than 2' long no hydro needed. Have to meet both requirements for it to count. I did see those 15/45 tanks but they require hydro (must be a smidge over 2" diameter I guess) and are SUPER expensive lol
      • Toestr
        Certified Post Whore
        • Jul 2020
        • 2877
        • Poland, Onterrible

        #8
        There are 3k psi tanks that are between 30 and 40 ci. They are roughly the size of a peanut tank, but flat bottomed and the price of a normal steel/aluminum tank. Might be a good option is you want a standard bottomline option without a drop.

        Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

        Comment


        • Sottyman
          Sottyman commented
          Editing a comment
          I did see those 26/3k Tippmann tanks, but if I need to hydro I'll probably keep the 48/3k (already have it, made 3/21). Seems like I just need to head to the field and shoot some paint/determine my best path that way?
      • Jordan
        I. Am. Canadian. 🇨🇦
        • Jul 2020
        • 3511
        • Southern Ontario, Canada

        #9
        Tinybear - I'm not sure if it was a typo, but the ruling is 1 liter, not 2... 1 L is 61 cu.in.

        Comment


        • Tinybear
          Tinybear commented
          Editing a comment
          Thanks Whoops my bad. Fixed it.

        • Jordan
          Jordan commented
          Editing a comment
          I wish it was 2L... no more hydro then.

        • Sottyman
          Sottyman commented
          Editing a comment
          ...Of course they'd make 68 a testable size...
      Working...