Advice needed for improving RAW HM1000X

[mubhaur]

Dear Motorhead,

Apart from my experiment on lengthening the barrel, I want some more refinements to my RAW guns.

I have already installed SSG designed by Bucketboy. Also installed valve designed by Bucketboy. 

I have also installed an external plenum. 

I still need more refinements for better consistency, better regulator work at 250 bars, less cocking effort and efficiency and power.

Please advise. I also have regulator testing equipment. 

After installing the SSG, the cocking has become even a bit more hard.

Regards, 

Umair Bhaur 

 

[Motorhead]

I had added a reply on GTA on the same inquire ...



Scott

 

[mubhaur]

Thank you Scott 

Regards, 

Umair 

 

[tommyb]

Dear Motorhead,

Apart from my experiment on lengthening the barrel, I want some more refinements to my RAW guns.

I have already installed SSG designed by Bucketboy. Also installed valve designed by Bucketboy. 

I have also installed an external plenum. 

I still need more refinements for better consistency, better regulator work at 250 bars, less cocking effort and efficiency and power.

Please advise. I also have regulator testing equipment. 

After installing the SSG, the cocking has become even a bit more hard.

Regards, 

Umair Bhaur

Umair, Bucketboy, Scott — I like to follow all of the RAW threads. This post interested me, given the title.

I purchased mine ( HM1000x .22 HP ) from SPAW about 2 years ago. Martin Rutterford built the gun using all factory/standard settings. I use it exclusively for 50, 75 and 100 yard casual Benchrest shooting EBR, NUAH scoring targets. Also for group shooting. Trigger is set to about 5.5 to 6 oz release - perfect for me. Love this gun. Other than adjusting HST up/down to optimize the JSB MRD 25g pellet velocity ( 930-940 avg FPS), I don’t have any other customization done to the gun. The RAW regulator is excellent and I believe Martin has it set to 140-150 BAR. ES values consistently under 10, sometimes as high as 15. 

I’m not really a tinkerer and fully realize the three of you like to tinker and stretch the envelope. I know my limitations and can live with those. 

My question - Given the above, is/are there any suggestions you collectively might provide for me to enhance my gun? Accuracy is important because of all the BR distance shooting I do. The Moderator, although loud, is a non-issue since I shoot exclusively at my local outdoor range. Trigger is perfect. I don’t like the standard RAW SST and I think the magazines are not as accurate as SST for me anyway. 

I didn’t replace any HST springs or valve or buy any plenum. Not sure I need to either. I can consistently shoot one half inch average groups at 50 yards, in light wind.

I’m mostly curious as to your thoughts, so I tried to provide some context and background as to how I use the gun. Again, any suggestions or ideas for consideration are welcome.

Thanks 

Tom 

 

[Motorhead]

IMO ... nearly all the owners of 1000 "X" guns have them being used in high Power applications. This is why the "X" variant was made, too stretch the receiver gaining a larger plenum. 

Some efficiency gains can be found in a few areas.

Transfer path between valve body and barrel is oversize and making a donut that bridges that space reduces wasted transfer volume a tad.

SSG devise on the hammer can further reduce bounce and save air ( tho typically action will cock a tad stiffer when set for equal power to OEM parts ) having the noise level get quieter in most cases.

Stepping the poppet stem diameter within the throat area has valve breath a tad better.



As stated on my OP, most of these "X" actions are leaned on pretty hard for power in stock form ... You can find more power too !! Efficiency however at these higher power levels kinda is what it is.



JMO ...

Scott S

 

[mubhaur]

https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/a-tale-of-two-raws-hm1000x/

I hope you will get a good insight if you read it.

But at the same time I understand that RAW guns are already very well tuned but one can improve them even more.

I have done it for myself and wanted that if Scott could have some more to share it could be great.

Looks like that I have already near the limitations. 

I will not suggest you to try anything if something is not broken.

Just shoot it and enjoy.

These guns are dream to shoot and only that person can understand it who shoots these guns.

Regards, 

Umair Bhaur

 

[tommyb]

IMO ... nearly all the owners of 1000 "X" guns have them being used in high Power applications. This is why the "X" variant was made, too stretch the receiver gaining a larger plenum. 

Some efficiency gains can be found in a few areas.

Transfer path between valve body and barrel is oversize and making a donut that bridges that space reduces wasted transfer volume a tad.

SSG devise on the hammer can further reduce bounce and save air ( tho typically action will cock a tad stiffer when set for equal power to OEM parts ) having the noise level get quieter in most cases.

Stepping the poppet stem diameter within the throat area has valve breath a tad better.



As stated on my OP, most of these "X" actions are leaned on pretty hard for power in stock form ... You can find more power too !! Efficiency however at these higher power levels kinda is what it is.

Scott, 

If I am interpreting correctly, only ‘modest’ efficiency gains in your three suggestions? That’s my takeaway. 

That said, I think I will leave the “RAW as is.” I was curious if all of these mods being discussed were really more of personal tuning preferences by Umair and BB, or something that I really want to pursue. 

Thanks

 

[theotherpursuit]

I’m not sure if Ernie is still in the business, but his work seems to even impress Martin. He might be able to advise.

Also, maybe the HUMA reg may be worth a try. It may allow for more consistency.

top

 

[mubhaur]

IMO ... nearly all the owners of 1000 "X" guns have them being used in high Power applications. This is why the "X" variant was made, too stretch the receiver gaining a larger plenum. 

Some efficiency gains can be found in a few areas.

Transfer path between valve body and barrel is oversize and making a donut that bridges that space reduces wasted transfer volume a tad.

SSG devise on the hammer can further reduce bounce and save air ( tho typically action will cock a tad stiffer when set for equal power to OEM parts ) having the noise level get quieter in most cases.

Stepping the poppet stem diameter within the throat area has valve breath a tad better.



As stated on my OP, most of these "X" actions are leaned on pretty hard for power in stock form ... You can find more power too !! Efficiency however at these higher power levels kinda is what it is.

Scott, 

If I am interpreting correctly, only ‘modest’ efficiency gains in your three suggestions? That’s my takeaway. 

That said, I think I will leave the “RAW as is.” I was curious if all of these mods being discussed were really more of personal tuning preferences by Umair and BB, or something that I really want to pursue. 

Thanks

In fact I have achieved really huge gains by all my modifications. Specially the external plenum has surprised me.

Now I have reduced the regulator pressure from 152 bar (as was set by Martin) down to 140 bars and still achieve much more power. Its up to me whether I keep this additional power as is or convert it into efficiency by going back to OEM power.

I hope you understand. 

Regards, 

Umair Bhaur 

 

[tommyb]

IMO ... nearly all the owners of 1000 "X" guns have them being used in high Power applications. This is why the "X" variant was made, too stretch the receiver gaining a larger plenum. 

Some efficiency gains can be found in a few areas.

Transfer path between valve body and barrel is oversize and making a donut that bridges that space reduces wasted transfer volume a tad.

SSG devise on the hammer can further reduce bounce and save air ( tho typically action will cock a tad stiffer when set for equal power to OEM parts ) having the noise level get quieter in most cases.

Stepping the poppet stem diameter within the throat area has valve breath a tad better.



As stated on my OP, most of these "X" actions are leaned on pretty hard for power in stock form ... You can find more power too !! Efficiency however at these higher power levels kinda is what it is.

Scott, 

If I am interpreting correctly, only ‘modest’ efficiency gains in your three suggestions? That’s my takeaway. 

That said, I think I will leave the “RAW as is.” I was curious if all of these mods being discussed were really more of personal tuning preferences by Umair and BB, or something that I really want to pursue. 

Thanks

In fact I have achieved really huge gains by all my modifications. Specially the external plenum has surprised me.

Now I have reduced the regulator pressure from 152 bar (as was set by Martin) down to 140 bars and still achieve much more power. Its up to me whether I keep this additional power as is or convert it into efficiency by going back to OEM power.

I hope you understand. 

Regards, 

Umair Bhaur

Umair

I have read all of your prior posts transforming your RAW(s) with great interest. Good to know that all of the mods have yielded desired outcomes. 

 

[mubhaur]

IMO ... nearly all the owners of 1000 "X" guns have them being used in high Power applications. This is why the "X" variant was made, too stretch the receiver gaining a larger plenum. 

Some efficiency gains can be found in a few areas.

Transfer path between valve body and barrel is oversize and making a donut that bridges that space reduces wasted transfer volume a tad.

SSG devise on the hammer can further reduce bounce and save air ( tho typically action will cock a tad stiffer when set for equal power to OEM parts ) having the noise level get quieter in most cases.

Stepping the poppet stem diameter within the throat area has valve breath a tad better.



As stated on my OP, most of these "X" actions are leaned on pretty hard for power in stock form ... You can find more power too !! Efficiency however at these higher power levels kinda is what it is.

Scott, 

If I am interpreting correctly, only ‘modest’ efficiency gains in your three suggestions? That’s my takeaway. 

That said, I think I will leave the “RAW as is.” I was curious if all of these mods being discussed were really more of personal tuning preferences by Umair and BB, or something that I really want to pursue. 

Thanks

In fact I have achieved really huge gains by all my modifications. Specially the external plenum has surprised me.

Now I have reduced the regulator pressure from 152 bar (as was set by Martin) down to 140 bars and still achieve much more power. Its up to me whether I keep this additional power as is or convert it into efficiency by going back to OEM power.

I hope you understand. 

Regards, 

Umair Bhaur

Umair

I have read all of your prior posts transforming your RAW(s) with great interest. Good to know that all of the mods have yielded desired outcomes. 

Thank you Tommyb,

Regards , 

Umair Bhaur