I will say this brilliant one liner, that I want Ed, or anyone avoiding China or similar countries manufacturing for personal reasons to consider...
"You cost both YOUR Country and Countries you support DOLLARS, while only reducing the profits of an opposed Country by pennies, when avoiding the most efficient/economical means of obtaining the same end product for equal profit margins"
So you pay an employee a few dollars to make the part in your native country, and then turn around and charge both what you paid him + some (because employees must be profitable) to your countries customers...you think you're doing your country a favor but you're not..
If one wants to market their brand as '100% US/Russia made', that is fine, but at the end of the day, its a large part of the reason a rifle cost 2-3x as much as the same version built in China to equal standards, and yes it can be done...
I think Ed's digital pressure gauge was a great move for the industry, very innovative, possibly needing revising or simplification but still awesome...make it solar / motion powered ie: recoil of rifle re-energizes along with solar...and then you have some truly ground breaking tech that belongs on every single air gun...I deeply want one some day, but I think any first revision of a product, is not going to be its final, or rather, it shouldn't be...
I can, and have drafted designs, most pneumatic timings such as balanced valves or pneumatically actuated valves simply require mass flow calculations to obtain fill rates, or a gorilla that just tosses parts together until they work...either will suffice.
Electronic Valve design with nearly 0 wasted space, vastly benefiting larger calibers with over 2 CC's of space between valve seat and pellet base, or any caliber with small plenums..
External plenums that are sized to the calibers power needs, any caliber can run regulated provided adequate plenum volume, rarely manufacturers allow this...
Sensor at muzzle that severely reduces the exit diameter after pellet exit to vastly reduce the rate of which the remaining air is allowed to exit, greatly reducing exposure of HPA to ATM over time...hair trigger actuates a dilation of the orifice by means of a impervious material that isn't destroyed upon contact due to its design angles, material, and tolerances...seemingly impossible, but nothing is...certainly less than practical in the current day and age...but in 1000 years? Who knows...maybe it'll be done within 100
Actual pistol pcp's in an actual pistol form factor that produce high energy (inefficiently)..large caliber. One can engineer enough on board air to make it worthwhile, .30" cal 7.5" barrel can still make ~70 FPE. or 150~ FPE in .45 cal. For an all out PCP hunter, I think having something like this in your arsenal is a must, for finishing shots at close range if found necessary, plus the cool factor...its not the most practical PCP but, hell neither is semi automatics but manufacturers and people insist on introducing those into the sport..
Adjustable dovetail/pic rails in the sense that you can simply adjust their front most angle up/down...not a hard thing to implement IMO...its simply designed into breech and allows movement of one section of rail a few MM vertically
The list just goes on and on...I just gave away a few solid ideas for free...some very feasible and easy to implement, others not...and as I said the list can be long in this regard to pcp's and their tech..don't even get me started on NANO tech..
Almost all current PCP designs are simply borrowed from one to another...rarely do you see innovation or originality. I've seen very few companies do things others have not, Edgun being one of the few and I certainly respect that.
I agree 100% that most air gun technology is unchanged and very simple. I also understand Ed's reasons and business logic. I've been very adamant that most my opinion on this matter applies to large scale production air guns, not the small guy...most businesses begin outside of garage space or peoples personal homes...its near impossible to develop all the necessary relationships right off the bat, but the MOST successful business will evolve and do so quickly, by finding the most economical means of producing their product...its not just economical, its efficiency...money out vs money in...if you can maintain the same efficiency across the board but scale back the money out vs money in, everyone wins.
I still disagree with associating a cost for R&D time in terms of building blueprints to a PCP design...its very simple, most are copied and pasted designs from 200 years ago with simple additions, it should be fun and exciting, and only needs done once...you shouldn't impose a cost for time YOU invest in a way to make future time profitable for yourself...JMO...the world revolves enough around money, no need to induce more of it...
-Matt
"You cost both YOUR Country and Countries you support DOLLARS, while only reducing the profits of an opposed Country by pennies, when avoiding the most efficient/economical means of obtaining the same end product for equal profit margins"
So you pay an employee a few dollars to make the part in your native country, and then turn around and charge both what you paid him + some (because employees must be profitable) to your countries customers...you think you're doing your country a favor but you're not..
If one wants to market their brand as '100% US/Russia made', that is fine, but at the end of the day, its a large part of the reason a rifle cost 2-3x as much as the same version built in China to equal standards, and yes it can be done...
I think Ed's digital pressure gauge was a great move for the industry, very innovative, possibly needing revising or simplification but still awesome...make it solar / motion powered ie: recoil of rifle re-energizes along with solar...and then you have some truly ground breaking tech that belongs on every single air gun...I deeply want one some day, but I think any first revision of a product, is not going to be its final, or rather, it shouldn't be...
I can, and have drafted designs, most pneumatic timings such as balanced valves or pneumatically actuated valves simply require mass flow calculations to obtain fill rates, or a gorilla that just tosses parts together until they work...either will suffice.
Electronic Valve design with nearly 0 wasted space, vastly benefiting larger calibers with over 2 CC's of space between valve seat and pellet base, or any caliber with small plenums..
External plenums that are sized to the calibers power needs, any caliber can run regulated provided adequate plenum volume, rarely manufacturers allow this...
Sensor at muzzle that severely reduces the exit diameter after pellet exit to vastly reduce the rate of which the remaining air is allowed to exit, greatly reducing exposure of HPA to ATM over time...hair trigger actuates a dilation of the orifice by means of a impervious material that isn't destroyed upon contact due to its design angles, material, and tolerances...seemingly impossible, but nothing is...certainly less than practical in the current day and age...but in 1000 years? Who knows...maybe it'll be done within 100
Actual pistol pcp's in an actual pistol form factor that produce high energy (inefficiently)..large caliber. One can engineer enough on board air to make it worthwhile, .30" cal 7.5" barrel can still make ~70 FPE. or 150~ FPE in .45 cal. For an all out PCP hunter, I think having something like this in your arsenal is a must, for finishing shots at close range if found necessary, plus the cool factor...its not the most practical PCP but, hell neither is semi automatics but manufacturers and people insist on introducing those into the sport..
Adjustable dovetail/pic rails in the sense that you can simply adjust their front most angle up/down...not a hard thing to implement IMO...its simply designed into breech and allows movement of one section of rail a few MM vertically
The list just goes on and on...I just gave away a few solid ideas for free...some very feasible and easy to implement, others not...and as I said the list can be long in this regard to pcp's and their tech..don't even get me started on NANO tech..
Almost all current PCP designs are simply borrowed from one to another...rarely do you see innovation or originality. I've seen very few companies do things others have not, Edgun being one of the few and I certainly respect that.
I agree 100% that most air gun technology is unchanged and very simple. I also understand Ed's reasons and business logic. I've been very adamant that most my opinion on this matter applies to large scale production air guns, not the small guy...most businesses begin outside of garage space or peoples personal homes...its near impossible to develop all the necessary relationships right off the bat, but the MOST successful business will evolve and do so quickly, by finding the most economical means of producing their product...its not just economical, its efficiency...money out vs money in...if you can maintain the same efficiency across the board but scale back the money out vs money in, everyone wins.
I still disagree with associating a cost for R&D time in terms of building blueprints to a PCP design...its very simple, most are copied and pasted designs from 200 years ago with simple additions, it should be fun and exciting, and only needs done once...you shouldn't impose a cost for time YOU invest in a way to make future time profitable for yourself...JMO...the world revolves enough around money, no need to induce more of it...
-Matt
Upvote 0
!!