• In order to send private messages to other members, you must have a minimum of 10 posts on the site.

FX harmonics

What’s the first thing most of us do to make a gun shoot “better”? But a new barrel on it? What kind of barrel? I don’t know of a single individual that went thinner and more flexible. Some have gone with carbon fiber to stiffen and keep the weight down but if we assume heavy stiff barrels work with powder burners is there a debate here for air rifles? I understand the reasons for what FX is doing but it seems contrary to me if the goal is ultimate accuracy.

i have an FX impact II. It’s a nice gun. Shoots reasonably well for me. And yes it can be both challenging and frustrating. I’m convinced the gun could be made to shoot a lot better if the barrel was heavier and SCREWED into place. You could still have interchangeable barrels and yes it would be MUCH more expensive . However if accuracy is the goal this harmonic tuning is NUTS. Or so it seems to me 
I shoot a lot too. It’s not unusual to shoot 50 to 100 pellets at a time. The frustrating part of this is that it’s not unusual to have little or no concrete conclusions after doing so. Can you imagine doing that with another fire arm? We should not have to do this to “tune” an air rifle. Or should we ? 
 
I don’t mind working to get a gun to shoot great groups . I find it frustrating to have to work to get it to shoot “good” groups. That’s been my experience with my impact. That and doing it repeatably I’m assuming that a heavy stiff well machined barrel would do better. I know air guns are a different cat but I believe my logic is logical. I’ve put thousands of rounds thru my gun and I’m frustrated and apparently others are as well. Glad some aren’t 
 
I haven't had to fiddle with any harmonics on my Impact. I have four different barrels that will all drill small ragged holes at 52 yards when feed the right ammo in the correct speed ranges, which is relatively easy to find. Don't give up, Try changing up ammo and speeds for different results.

I have other high quality made thick barrels as well that I shoot with. They foul up much quicker and weigh more. The liners can be indexed and swapped or cleaned very easily. The liner and shroud is very stiff and secure. It's one gun I can pick up and trust the first shot with. I have tested this many mornings and am happy to finally have a regulated gun to hunt with.
 

ChRiSiS

Member
May 6, 2020
1,047
122
CT, United States
    I for one don't really understand the frustration.

    My Impact and my Crown AND my Dreamline all give excellent accuracy as far as I have shot them (100 yards). I have not really taken them apart as many people seem to do, just changed barrels/calibers on the Impact and played around with different settings on all three (Transfer Port size, Power Wheel setting, Hammer Spring tension - on the Impact & Dreamline Tac.). So far they have been outstanding and definitely exceeded my expectations.



    I have no doubt that other guns could be just as accurate but it's hard to see how they could be more accurate, at least in my hands. Sub 1 inch groups at 100 yards is simply hard to beat. I also hear lots of complaints about the price, but frankly they don't seem so out of line when compared to the RAWs, Daystates, Brococks, AGTs, etc.

    Now, my Marauders (.22, .25 and SAM) and my AirForce Condor SS cost a lot less, and are pretty darn accurate too, at least to 50 yards. But frankly, since I have purchased my FXs (first the Crown in April, The Impact in July and the Dreamline Tactical used last month) the only one I have touched is the Semi-Auto Marauder and that was brand new two weeks ago. Some will say that I drank the FX Kool Aid, but if so then I drank it and love it, and I'm still alive and liking it.



    Chris
     

    tor47

    Member
    May 18, 2018
    964
    10
    Other, Norway
      There is one simple reason the FX guns with X-barrels has to use liners. That is that the walls have to be thin to make it possible to press the rifling from outside, the way they are made. Sure you can make thick steel barrels, but it will not be a smooth twist-X barrel anymore. Having a thick solid steel barrel with smooth twist-X rifling is probably not possible to make, within reasonable limits.
       
      There is one simple reason the FX guns with X-barrels has to use liners. That is that the walls have to be thin to make it possible to press the rifling from outside, the way they are made. Sure you can make thick steel barrels, but it will not be a smooth twist-X barrel anymore. Having a thick solid steel barrel with smooth twist-X rifling is probably not possible to make, within reasonable limits.

      Good point
       
      I have had both the good and the bad with my impacts. The platform is what I like personally, the barrels have been a lottery.

      I have a 700 slug a/transitional superior liner that is absolutely amazing and I will never sell, but it took 5 years of perseverance to get to the point that I could select that liner from a sample of 20! And then the local Airgun market went pear shaped as far as distribution and retail channels.

      If I was at the mercy of a dealer selecting my liner who knows if I would have persisted? I probably would have, but would still be very frustrated...

      The heart of any gun is the barrel, all manufacturer’s have good and bad runs, some more than others.
       
      When I got my impact, accuracy wasn’t good, I blamed the liner assembly so went about modifying it, accuracy improved but still not as good as any of my other guns. So I swapped the liner for a lw barrel, accuracy improved again but still not as good. No matter what I did, I could not get the impact to shoot as accurately as I would expect.
      So out of frustration, and to rule out the liner, I made an adaptor to fit my Rapid, hey presto the liner was as accurate as any of my other barrel.👍

      I now have a FX liner fitted to my RAW and will buy more Fx liners in the future, I haven’t got the Impact any more and won’t be getting another either.

      so while my opinion about fx liners has changed my opinion about the way the liner is fitted to an impact hasn’t.



      F674D59A-E708-4DAA-977F-F8E450DE545B.1599117374.jpeg
      28D93CA6-DEAB-48AB-8CB5-08383B793B83.1599117374.jpeg



      Bb
       
      I for one don't really understand the frustration.

      My Impact and my Crown AND my Dreamline all give excellent accuracy as far as I have shot them (100 yards). I have not really taken them apart as many people seem to do, just changed barrels/calibers on the Impact and played around with different settings on all three (Transfer Port size, Power Wheel setting, Hammer Spring tension - on the Impact & Dreamline Tac.). So far they have been outstanding and definitely exceeded my expectations.



      I have no doubt that other guns could be just as accurate but it's hard to see how they could be more accurate, at least in my hands. Sub 1 inch groups at 100 yards is simply hard to beat. I also hear lots of complaints about the price, but frankly they don't seem so out of line when compared to the RAWs, Daystates, Brococks, AGTs, etc.

      Now, my Marauders (.22, .25 and SAM) and my AirForce Condor SS cost a lot less, and are pretty darn accurate too, at least to 50 yards. But frankly, since I have purchased my FXs (first the Crown in April, The Impact in July and the Dreamline Tactical used last month) the only one I have touched is the Semi-Auto Marauder and that was brand new two weeks ago. Some will say that I drank the FX Kool Aid, but if so then I drank it and love it, and I'm still alive and liking it.



      Chris

      Did you drink any comparable Kool Aide elsewhere to compare? Like some Daystates, Edguns, Crickets, Taipans, etc.?

      Not that this is happening here or that your feelings and observations aren't completely legit. I'm just hinting at a general trend -- people tend to purchase something and justify their purchase, sometimes against all odds. Half the reviews I see are probably people either justifying their purchases or denying that they can't figure out how to use a good product because they didn't think it through or use it right or buy it for its intended purpose, etc.

      Just being a devil's advocate here. I believe people often believe what they say, but less so that they say what they believe. Not saying I'm any different, either.
       

      fe7565

      Member
      Oct 13, 2015
      1,667
      46
      VA, United States
        .....so while my opinion about fx liners has changed my opinion about the way the liner is fitted to an impact hasn’t.

        Bb

        You got something there... It's not that barrel harmonics can be completely eliminated, but how it is mitigated by design. Both methods...designing shorter and thicker barrels to reduce harmonics vs. "free-floating" the barrels (if implemented correctly) should accomplish the same. 

        One may argue that "free-floating" is more difficult because it allows for full (naturally occuring) harmonics to take place during one shooting cycle. The aim is that the level of full harmonics is repeatable from shooting cycle to shooting cycle (shot to shot). Meaning: the barrel flexes exactly the same amount, at same locations, at same time frame of every shot as the pellet makes its way down the barrel. The success of this method depends on the manufacturer's proper design (or modifications by users) of the barrel mounting points and using the same conditions for each series of shots (pressure/velocity, pellet weight). 

        While the shorter and thicker barrel designs/modifications aim to eliminate that "flex" from the get go. So any remaining barrel "flex" will be negligible and will not result in any significant changes of impact at long distances. The success of this method again depends on the design by the manufacturer or the aftermarket modifications by the user.

        Both methods, if designed and executed properly should be able to accomplish the same... But are they done right straight out of the factory, or require users to keep on "testing and trying"?

        More on both "reducing harmonics" and "free-floating" here: https://www.guntweaks.com/barrel-harmonics.html

        Options on harmonics mitigation: https://www.breachbangclear.com/language-lessons-barrel-harmonics/




         
        Why on earth the barrel is kept in place by one grub screw? Why the liner is as thin as a straw? Why the barrel is free floating and not tensioned properly?

        Look at EdGun. The barrel is tensioned as a string.

        I thought you hated FX? Why don't you show us a picture of yours and then describe the problem you're actually having instead of just starting a bitchfest about their design. BTW EDgun doesn't tension their barrels. Tensioning occurs when the barrel is secured to the breech then is stretched out by something like a shroud and fitment at the muzzle. Similar to a guitar string.
         

        ChRiSiS

        Member
        May 6, 2020
        1,047
        122
        CT, United States
          I for one don't really understand the frustration.

          My Impact and my Crown AND my Dreamline all give excellent accuracy as far as I have shot them (100 yards). I have not really taken them apart as many people seem to do, just changed barrels/calibers on the Impact and played around with different settings on all three (Transfer Port size, Power Wheel setting, Hammer Spring tension - on the Impact & Dreamline Tac.). So far they have been outstanding and definitely exceeded my expectations.



          I have no doubt that other guns could be just as accurate but it's hard to see how they could be more accurate, at least in my hands. Sub 1 inch groups at 100 yards is simply hard to beat. I also hear lots of complaints about the price, but frankly they don't seem so out of line when compared to the RAWs, Daystates, Brococks, AGTs, etc.

          Now, my Marauders (.22, .25 and SAM) and my AirForce Condor SS cost a lot less, and are pretty darn accurate too, at least to 50 yards. But frankly, since I have purchased my FXs (first the Crown in April, The Impact in July and the Dreamline Tactical used last month) the only one I have touched is the Semi-Auto Marauder and that was brand new two weeks ago. Some will say that I drank the FX Kool Aid, but if so then I drank it and love it, and I'm still alive and liking it.



          Chris

          Did you drink any comparable Kool Aide elsewhere to compare? Like some Daystates, Edguns, Crickets, Taipans, etc.?

          Not that this is happening here or that your feelings and observations aren't completely legit. I'm just hinting at a general trend -- people tend to purchase something and justify their purchase, sometimes against all odds. Half the reviews I see are probably people either justifying their purchases or denying that they can't figure out how to use a good product because they didn't think it through or use it right or buy it for its intended purpose, etc.

          Just being a devil's advocate here. I believe people often believe what they say, but less so that they say what they believe. Not saying I'm any different, either.

          I understand your points, and they are quite possibly correct. However I don't think that it is that simple, at least not for me :) I bought my first FX in April, after doing lots of reading etc. I ended up with a Crown Continuum. I was simply very happy with the outcome. I loved it so much (based on experience, not on wishes) that when i decided to get another gun in a different caliber I went with the Impact. Again, I was both satisfied and amazed at the flexibility of the gun, despite all the haters and naysayers. I ended up buying a .30 cal kit off the Classifieds and this absolutely cemented my appreciation for the flexibility of the FX approach. When i saw a used Dreamline Tactical come up at a good price in late August I jumped on it, and again have been very happy. So I think that experience rather than self justification has been guiding me.

          Unfortunately there is almost nowhere, especially during Covid-19, that one can get to try out a number of airguns. For sure I have Daystate and Raw (and possibly the Uragan or a Leshiy 2) on my potential list. However the Daystates are even more expensive than the FXs, and have less flexibility with regard to changing calibers, from tube to bottle, etc., and with the RAWs I struggle to see what they offer over the FX Impact.

          The only thing that really has me intrigued at the moment are the semi-auto guns, like the LCS or Huebens. The Semi Automatic Marauder that I got last month is a great deal of fun (and would be more so with a bigger magazine or more mags than the one that came with the gun).

          Anyway, the beauty of this sport is that there are many roads to satisfaction, and we don't all have to take the same one. It just makes me really scratch my head when i see people beating on any one brand, or gun, especially when many of them don't even own one. I am happy with my FXs, just as i am with my Marauders. That doesn't mean that I have to beat on Edguns, or Daystates, or anything else, especially when I have no real experience with them. My liking FXs doesn't make those others bad, and the reverse is also true.

          Chris
           
          • Like
          Reactions: Macros
          bucketboy

          "I now have a FX liner fitted to my RAW and will buy more Fx liners in the future, I haven’t got the Impact any more and won’t be getting another either."

          I like the concept of the Impact platform and plan to get one. Some state they have had bad luck with them, and others swear by them. Odd how that works, isn't it? I guess it's a good thing that choices abound.