Umarex Gauntlet: Super Tune Kit Installation (VIDEO)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
"maxony"
"Hajimoto"The issue is that the overall surface area of the factory poppet is too large and heavy which require way to much hammer energy to overcome it.
Click to expand...
The weight and the shape of the original poppet could be easily altered on the lathe or drill. The air pressure on the valve poppet is a function of the surface of the valve port only and that did not change. My concern that a new poppet in the kit is a downgrade due to lack of the seal and a potential for leaks. 
These are the assumptions that the poppet in the kit is made out of steel.
Click to expand...
Incorrect Assumptions, the after market poppets are made from either nylon or delrin. Most use delrin but some use nylon also as a choice. (ROy at MOuntain Air will do either for you)
You can improve the stock brass poppet by putting it in a drill press and holding a file to the edge to improve flow, but where the delrin poppet shines is it's ability to open easier. The delrin is harder then the stock "seal" and as such requires less force to "unseat".
If you have a drill press and a file you can purchase a 3ft long piece of delrin 3/8" diameter from Graingers (under $3.00) and make your own poppets. I just made my own poppet head and used the original stem. I just removed the brass head by filing it all the way done to the stem. I pickled up 30fps in my .177 QB without any other changes. I had already slimmed the original as small as possible and still sealing. The delrin improved 30fps over the modified stock one.
 
Upvote 0
"BigTinBoat"
"spysir"+1
"The issue is that the overall surface area of the factory poppet is too large and heavy which require way to much hammer energy to overcome it."
You want that "poppet" valve stem whatever you'll call it. The factory one is THE biggest hold back to power and or consistency and does improve efficiency. I'm using a white nylon (?) poppet in both a QB and the Gauntlet.
If Umarex really is bringing out this model in .25 , and, the power is what they are hoping for claiming regarless of ( reasonable) psi they would need to dump the standard metal poppet, IMO.
That spring adjuster pic - for a QB- is just a grab from the internet, I had a neighbor drill & tap a 2.5mm hole and a long headless Hex screw which hides flush when backed out w/ a touch of vibra-tite. Very clean that way.
John
Click to expand...
John,
Are the QB and gauntlet poppet the same? I would think so. If they are Roy at Mountain Air has them for $12 in 'delrin. Someone who can drill and tap the end cap could do this upgrade for $20.
Click to expand...
interesting. 
 
Upvote 0
"BigTinBoat"
"spysir"+1
"The issue is that the overall surface area of the factory poppet is too large and heavy which require way to much hammer energy to overcome it."
You want that "poppet" valve stem whatever you'll call it. The factory one is THE biggest hold back to power and or consistency and does improve efficiency. I'm using a white nylon (?) poppet in both a QB and the Gauntlet.
If Umarex really is bringing out this model in .25 , and, the power is what they are hoping for claiming regarless of ( reasonable) psi they would need to dump the standard metal poppet, IMO.
That spring adjuster pic - for a QB- is just a grab from the internet, I had a neighbor drill & tap a 2.5mm hole and a long headless Hex screw which hides flush when backed out w/ a touch of vibra-tite. Very clean that way.
John
Click to expand...
John,
Are the QB and gauntlet poppet the same? I would think so. If they are Roy at Mountain Air has them for $12 in 'delrin. Someone who can drill and tap the end cap could do this upgrade for $20.
Click to expand...
If anyone is going to try (or has tried) the Mountain Air option, would you please share the results as I think it would very useful information? If the poppet size is usable the only upgrade killer would be if the stem were too short, longer ok, shorter not good. 
 
Upvote 0
"BigTinBoat"
"maxony"
"Hajimoto"The issue is that the overall surface area of the factory poppet is too large and heavy which require way to much hammer energy to overcome it.
Click to expand...
The weight and the shape of the original poppet could be easily altered on the lathe or drill. The air pressure on the valve poppet is a function of the surface of the valve port only and that did not change. My concern that a new poppet in the kit is a downgrade due to lack of the seal and a potential for leaks. 
These are the assumptions that the poppet in the kit is made out of steel.
Click to expand...
Incorrect Assumptions, the after market poppets are made from either nylon or delrin. Most use delrin but some use nylon also as a choice. (ROy at MOuntain Air will do either for you)
You can improve the stock brass poppet by putting it in a drill press and holding a file to the edge to improve flow, but where the delrin poppet shines is it's ability to open easier. The delrin is harder then the stock "seal" and as such requires less force to "unseat".
If you have a drill press and a file you can purchase a 3ft long piece of delrin 3/8" diameter from Graingers (under $3.00) and make your own poppets. I just made my own poppet head and used the original stem. I just removed the brass head by filing it all the way done to the stem. I pickled up 30fps in my .177 QB without any other changes. I had already slimmed the original as small as possible and still sealing. The delrin improved 30fps over the modified stock one.
Click to expand...
I agree with this in theory. But in case of Gauntlet, if you enter numbers, the light poppet does not sound convincing. Kinetic energy of the hammer has to overcome: inertia of 8 gram original Gauntlet poppet, inertia of the poppet spring, force of the poppet spring 5 lb and air pressure 30 lb (at 1100 psi regulator) pushing on the poppet when closed. Assuming nylon poppet is only 4 grams(steel stem) or saving of 4 grams = 0.01 lb vs original. I cannot see that improvement with 35 lb total is measurable. On the other hand, porting for a better flow and reducing force of the poppet spring made an improvement to mine. 
 
Upvote 0
"maxony"
I agree with this in theory. But in case of Gauntlet, if you enter numbers, the light poppet does not sound convincing. Kinetic energy of the hammer has to overcome: inertia of 8 gram original Gauntlet poppet, inertia of the poppet spring, force of the poppet spring 5 lb and air pressure 30 lb (at 1100 psi regulator) pushing on the poppet when closed. Assuming nylon poppet is only 4 grams(steel stem) or saving of 4 grams = 0.01 lb vs original. I cannot see that improvement with 35 lb total is measurable. On the other hand, porting for a better flow and reducing force of the poppet spring made an improvement to mine. 
Click to expand...
Personally I don't think the weight has much to do with it at all. It's the smaller diameter (more air path) and the harder delrin (easier to unseat) that makes the difference. I think you need a few more numbers in your calculation like the seat diameter, right? Isn't that how force is calculated?

Haji - the QB poppet stem has a diameter of 3mm. It is 51.25mm over to end of poppet and 37.5mm from end to seal. How does this compare to the Gauntlet?
 
Upvote 0
"BigTinBoat"
"maxony"
I agree with this in theory. But in case of Gauntlet, if you enter numbers, the light poppet does not sound convincing. Kinetic energy of the hammer has to overcome: inertia of 8 gram original Gauntlet poppet, inertia of the poppet spring, force of the poppet spring 5 lb and air pressure 30 lb (at 1100 psi regulator) pushing on the poppet when closed. Assuming nylon poppet is only 4 grams(steel stem) or saving of 4 grams = 0.01 lb vs original. I cannot see that improvement with 35 lb total is measurable. On the other hand, porting for a better flow and reducing force of the poppet spring made an improvement to mine. 
Click to expand...
Personally I don't think the weight has much to do with it at all. It's the smaller diameter (more air path) and the harder delrin (easier to unseat) that makes the difference. I think you need a few more numbers in your calculation like the seat diameter, right? Isn't that how force is calculated?
Haji - the QB poppet stem has a diameter of 3mm. It is 51.25mm over to end of poppet and 37.5mm from end to seal. How does this compare to the Gauntlet?
Click to expand...
I wish I took all of the measurements while it was apart. The seat diameter is a little over 5 mm. That is where I got 30 lb air pressure when closed. The air path around the poppet body is much larger than other much more restrictive air passages
I don't understand the term "easier to unseat". Original poppet looks to have a nylon seal. It should not be sticky.
 
Upvote 0
"maxony"
I wish I took all of the measurements while it was apart. The seat diameter is a little over 5 mm. That is where I got 30 lb air pressure when closed. The air path around the poppet body is much larger than other much more restrictive air passages
I don't understand the term "easier to unseat". Original poppet looks to have a nylon seal. It should not be sticky.




Click to expand...
Well I'm not certain of the Rockwell numbers on the Delrin or whatever the substance is that the original seals are made of, and I'm not making predictions based on theories (got a guy on another airgun site who likes to do that and get in arguments with those who have the actual items for testing) I'm using my first hand results with my QB. I filed down my original QB poppet at both the head and a section on the stem to allow more flow thru the throat of the valve. I then was able to get some delrin and make my own poppet head. When I put my delrin poppet head on the original stem (which was modified) I gained 30fps with NO OTHER MODIFICATIONS TO THE GUN.
I can tell you, from actual experience, that the seal on the QB poppet is positively softer then the delrin one I made. This softness allows the poppet seal to compress more. When the stem is struck the force has to first "un-compress" the seal, and then unseat it to allow air to flow thru. It positively takes more force to do this. Since more of the available force is used to "un-seat" the valve, less force is available to contribute to the dwell of the valve, hence the valve will not open as far nor as long. This results in less FPS with the other parameters being the same.

Think about jacking up a car. Put the jack under the frame of the car and see how long it takes to get the tire off the ground. Now up the jack under the lower control arm and see how long it takes to get the tire off the ground. Without having to first overcome the coil springs (or torsion bars) the jack gets the tire off much quicker doesn't it? Is it still the same result? I don't think so, and here's why. The jack can get the tire the same height without traveling as far, right? If the jack does travel as far (using the same amount of effort) then the car is raised much higher, right? So you can lower the jacks "effort" and get the same result, or you can use the same "effort" and it will raise further. Same with the valve, but hopefully easier for everyone to understand. You can lower the hammer spring force and get the results or use the same hammer spring force (as I did) and get more "raise", 30fps in my case.

Sure that .01lbs of force(if that # is correct) might not seem like a big difference, but having the valve open just the tiniest bit further, or longer definitely has a difference.
Case in point being my Compatto. With the slingshot hammer adjusted perfectly I get 25-27 shots starting around 910, peaking at 938 and back to 910 over a 3400psi fill. If I turn the adjusting screw (which is an M5 I believe) just 1/4 turn in, the velocity will start at 910 and go down with each shot. This is with just 1/4 of a turn. If this is a M5 x.5 screw then that's a length of just 1/4 of .5mm or .125mm which is just 0.00492126 inches. How could that small a length make such a difference? I'm not sure, but it does.
 
Upvote 0
I am not disputing your experience with QB. Once the momentum of the hammer breaks over poppet inertia, poppet spring and air pressure , the surplus of that momentum controls the dwell timing of that valve. The small changes of the hammer spring tension could account for big changes of the output. 
But I am skeptical about this kit claiming over 100 shots while more power. If that is true, it's a huge screw up by Umarex engineers. 
I understand that it could be inflammatory, It just would be nice to see the proof.
 
Upvote 0
"maxony"I am not disputing your experience with QB. Once the momentum of the hammer breaks over poppet inertia, poppet spring and air pressure , the surplus of that momentum controls the dwell timing of that valve. The small changes of the hammer spring tension could account for big changes of the output. 
But I am skeptical about this kit claiming over 100 shots while more power. If that is true, it's a huge screw up by Umarex engineers. 
I understand that it could be inflammatory, It just would be nice to see the proof.
Click to expand...
I can't comment on the actual vs "advertised " gains of thus kit. I would imagine Haji has run a before string and will run a post in tall string to see what his actual gains are.

As far as Umarex missing the boat, remember that this kit adds almost 25% plus labor to the cost of gun. They built this to be an under 300 gun, not a max output max efficiency gun.
 
Upvote 0
"BigTinBoat"
"maxony"I am not disputing your experience with QB. Once the momentum of the hammer breaks over poppet inertia, poppet spring and air pressure , the surplus of that momentum controls the dwell timing of that valve. The small changes of the hammer spring tension could account for big changes of the output. 
But I am skeptical about this kit claiming over 100 shots while more power. If that is true, it's a huge screw up by Umarex engineers. 
I understand that it could be inflammatory, It just would be nice to see the proof.
Click to expand...
I can't comment on the actual vs "advertised " gains of thus kit. I would imagine Haji has run a before string and will run a post in tall string to see what his actual gains are.
As far as Umarex missing the boat, remember that this kit adds almost 25% plus labor to the cost of gun. They built this to be an under 300 gun, not a max output max efficiency gun.
Click to expand...
I am processing the tune adjustment video as we speak. There are 3 shot strings included. Umarex rated the .22 at 900fps using RWS 11.9gr pellets, I shoot a 10 shot group so we all know that the tuning kit exceeds Umarex numbers I then proceed to shoot 14.3gr pellets at the same power setting. The third shot string will be the power adjuster turned clockwise two full rotations shooting the same 14.3gr pellets.
As for making the rifle cheap, I can not for the life of me see how the door stop poppet that came with the Gauntlet is cheaper to fabricate and install than the Tuning Kit variant. They could easily include this style poppet with increasing the price of the rifle.
 
Upvote 0
Yep, another Gauntlet Tutorial! This time I walk through how to adjust your Tuning Kit and I show you what you can expect from your Gauntlet when all is said and done. All the shot strings I made were using the stock 13ci bottle that comes on the Gauntlet.

The first 10 shot string was made to help illustrate how the Gauntlet performs on LOW setting using the Umarex test pellet which is the RWS Hobby 11.9gr wadcutter pellet. I think you will agree that it smokes em down range like a boss.

The next shot string was made shooting the heavier and more common Crosman 14.3gr domes. The power setting was the same but I don't stop at 10 shots... I think you will be amazed at what happens next.

The power adjuster was turned 2 full turns from Low to Medium, Max power would not be too far away. I think 1 additional clockwise turn more and shots would be 40 or so at high power at over 920FPS.
https://player.vimeo.com/video/258545514

Please remember, I do not get paid to make these videos, your comments and feedback are my compensation, please be generous!
 
Upvote 0
Haji,
If you analyze the string it's not too bad, but not really "good", nor really even close to what the parts manufacture claims to have gotten.

In your "Medium" power shot string you got 160 shots on the regulator. So:
Shots - 160
AVG FPS - 680? (estimated)
ES - 50 (8%)
FPE - 14.7
Efficiency - 1.54 FPE/CUIN

High power
Shots - 78
AVG FPS - 890? (estimated)
ES - 20 (2.2%) - not counting 1st shot of 601fps
FPE - 25.2
Efficiency - 1.29FPE/CUIN

Manufacturer claims to have gotten 1.49FPE/CUIN at 22FPE ES-25 (3%)

First off the lower power tune shows too little hammer force. This is why you are getting 8% ES and such a large jump when it comes off the reg at shot 160.

The ideal tune for this rifle would likely be in the 870fps range with the 14.3's for best efficiency. The 1.29 is not bad at 25fpe, but if you open up the ports and so some more work to the internals you can make it better.
 
Upvote 0
"Jonah"Well, in my opinion this is another of your top notch videos. I've enjoyed every one of them. Keep thinking up more videos on the Gauntlet and the Marauder.
Click to expand...
BTB you are absolutely correct in your assessment and I tried to qualify in the video that my regulator is 1300-1400PSI (which is too much really) compared to the 1100PSI factory setting and everyone that has made regulator adjustments or heavier pellets will see different numbers. I am pretty sure if I turned down the reg and adjusted the preload I could hit the manufacturers claims but I could tell after 250 shots that It was a matter of how much time into adjusting did I want to invest to achieve numbers I really am not going to use after all.

I will reduce my regulator to 1200 as I think that will be the sweet spot to push 18.13's. My goal in making the video was to show folks that with the kit installed they could adjust where before they were stuck with only a reg pressure adjustment which certainly was not user friendly or quick.

I am very pleased with the performance of knowing with some adjustment I can get it this to shoot where ever I want with an external adjustment to accommodate different pellet weights. Obviously a simply hammer preload is not going to be the answer to complete tunability but for the average guy, I think it fits the bill. Now I need to come up with a transfer port selector and .........LOL it never ends :)
Thank you for all the detailed assememnt of the shot curves.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu