Warning about Gletcher guns.

[springer]

Three months ago I purchased a Gletcher Nagant CO2 revolver from Gletcher's website. The gun loses all its gas if not used for a week. I contacted Gletcher for replacement under their eighteen month warrantee and was informed that users are required to remove the CO2 cylinder after each use and they will not honor their warrantee for this reason.

Buyer Beware!!!

 

[AirShot]

Unfortunately that has been the case for many years, 50 years back I was into CO2 pistols and the recommendations were the same. Constant pressure causes issues and even to this day, something that can't be corrected. My guess this is a big reason co2 guns have never been very popular. This is the main reason I got away from these many years back.

 

[bandg]

Unfortunately that has been the case for many years, 50 years back I was into CO2 pistols and the recommendations were the same. Constant pressure causes issues and even to this day, something that can't be corrected. My guess this is a big reason co2 guns have never been very popular. This is the main reason I got away from these many years back.

Agree. I don't believe that singling out Gletcher for this is accurate.

 

[John "spysir" Blount]

These are relabeled Umarex right? If so are the relabeled "glether" or? Hard to tell from internet pics.

And yes the correct oil and no/little psi is the cart seals against a seal. I pierced inside a pressure holding vessel (as many old designs & QB's & such) they should hold Co2 untill the o-rings one day give. 

John

 

[Odoyle]

How's about the RETURN TO DEALER POLICY-?

IF NO THEN I WOULD PUT SOME Alphabet org AUTO TRANS STOP LEAK QUICK FIX IN A NEEDLE SYRINGE AND INJECT INTO THE CO2 INLET WAIT COUPLE HOURS INJECT A LITTLE MORE THEN PUT NEW CO2 FIRE IT TILL EMPTY. REPEAT IF NECESSARY. 

OTHERS MAY NOT AGREE TO THIS UNORTHODOX METHOD THO. 

 

[Odoyle]

Three months ago I purchased a Gletcher Nagant CO2 revolver from Gletcher's website. The gun loses all its gas if not used for a week. I contacted Gletcher for replacement under their eighteen month warrantee and was informed that users are required to remove the CO2 cylinder after each use and they will not honor their warrantee for this reason.

Buyer Beware!!!

FIRST OFF-

B4 doing the above, how would they know you left a co2 inside the gun-? What if you just mail it in to them with a note that it leaks with your COPY of purchase receipt-?

Of course you send it in without a co2 still inside

 

[springer]

CO2 guns are pressure vessels just like 4 oz paintball tanks and 20 lb bulk CO2 tanks. Paintball and bulk tanks must be pressure tested periodically, not because they deteriorate with time, but because every refill and exposure to high temperature stresses their components. A time period was chosen for retesting because in the pre computer, pre internet days there was no realistic way to keep track of refills and exposure, so a time was chosen by agreement.

Why are CO2 guns more reliable with repeated fillings when larger vessels are less reliable with repeated fillings. Has anyone ever tested this. A reasonable test would require a statistically significant number of guns. Let's say one hundred to describe the test. Fifty guns would be filled and refilled one hundred times each, and then the guns examined for wear. Fifty guns would be equipped with a pressure gauge, filled, and then allowed to sit in storage, occasionally exposed to 120 degree temperature, until they lost all pressure. These guns would be examined as the first batch. Then results would be compared. This portion of the test may take a long time. My bulk fill Crosman 111 resealed by Beeman in the early 1990's is still holding its original charge.

I propose four reasons manufacturers recommend discharging the gun after every use.
1. and most probable. Sell more C02 cartridges.
2. insurance and liability. Should a person, child or adult point a charged CO2 gun at themselves and pull the trigger they could receive a nasty burn from the cold gas.
3. Cut down on warrantee claims because users would nor realize their guns have a slow leak.
4. More long term business for the repair department.

I reviewed the Umarex manuals for the 12 gram charged Fusion and 88 gram charged Beretta Storm rifle. The Fusion manual recommended removing the CO2 cartridge after each use. The Storm manual did not. Does an 88 gram cartridge do less harm to a gun than a 12 gram cartridge. Unlikely. Umarex probably figures they would never sell another 88 gram gun if they recommended removal after each use. 

 

[bandg]

CO2 guns are pressure vessels just like 4 oz paintball tanks and 20 lb bulk CO2 tanks. Paintball and bulk tanks must be pressure tested periodically, not because they deteriorate with time, but because every refill and exposure to high temperature stresses their components. A time period was chosen for retesting because in the pre computer, pre internet days there was no realistic way to keep track of refills and exposure, so a time was chosen by agreement.

Why are CO2 guns more reliable with repeated fillings when larger vessels are less reliable with repeated fillings. Has anyone ever tested this. A reasonable test would require a statistically significant number of guns. Let's say one hundred to describe the test. Fifty guns would be filled and refilled one hundred times each, and then the guns examined for wear. Fifty guns would be equipped with a pressure gauge, filled, and then allowed to sit in storage, occasionally exposed to 120 degree temperature, until they lost all pressure. These guns would be examined as the first batch. Then results would be compared. This portion of the test may take a long time. My bulk fill Crosman 111 resealed by Beeman in the early 1990's is still holding its original charge.

I propose four reasons manufacturers recommend discharging the gun after every use.
1. and most probable. Sell more C02 cartridges.
2. insurance and liability. Should a person, child or adult point a charged CO2 gun at themselves and pull the trigger they could receive a nasty burn from the cold gas.
3. Cut down on warrantee claims because users would nor realize their guns have a slow leak.
4. More long term business for the repair department.

I reviewed the Umarex manuals for the 12 gram charged Fusion and 88 gram charged Beretta Storm rifle. The Fusion manual recommended removing the CO2 cartridge after each use. The Storm manual did not. Does an 88 gram cartridge do less harm to a gun than a 12 gram cartridge. Unlikely. Umarex probably figures they would never sell another 88 gram gun if they recommended removal after each use. 

I would say they are a bit more complicated that a pressure vessel due to the firing mechanism. And the piercing/sealing mechanism probably isn't as consistent either. Maybe manufacturers recommend discharging the gun after every use because they understand that.

 

[springer]

CO2 guns are pressure vessels just like 4 oz paintball tanks and 20 lb bulk CO2 tanks. Paintball and bulk tanks must be pressure tested periodically, not because they deteriorate with time, but because every refill and exposure to high temperature stresses their components. A time period was chosen for retesting because in the pre computer, pre internet days there was no realistic way to keep track of refills and exposure, so a time was chosen by agreement.

Why are CO2 guns more reliable with repeated fillings when larger vessels are less reliable with repeated fillings. Has anyone ever tested this. A reasonable test would require a statistically significant number of guns. Let's say one hundred to describe the test. Fifty guns would be filled and refilled one hundred times each, and then the guns examined for wear. Fifty guns would be equipped with a pressure gauge, filled, and then allowed to sit in storage, occasionally exposed to 120 degree temperature, until they lost all pressure. These guns would be examined as the first batch. Then results would be compared. This portion of the test may take a long time. My bulk fill Crosman 111 resealed by Beeman in the early 1990's is still holding its original charge.

I propose four reasons manufacturers recommend discharging the gun after every use.
1. and most probable. Sell more C02 cartridges.
2. insurance and liability. Should a person, child or adult point a charged CO2 gun at themselves and pull the trigger they could receive a nasty burn from the cold gas.
3. Cut down on warrantee claims because users would nor realize their guns have a slow leak.
4. More long term business for the repair department.

I reviewed the Umarex manuals for the 12 gram charged Fusion and 88 gram charged Beretta Storm rifle. The Fusion manual recommended removing the CO2 cartridge after each use. The Storm manual did not. Does an 88 gram cartridge do less harm to a gun than a 12 gram cartridge. Unlikely. Umarex probably figures they would never sell another 88 gram gun if they recommended removal after each use. 

I would say they are a bit more complicated that a pressure vessel due to the firing mechanism. And the piercing/sealing mechanism probably isn't as consistent either. Maybe manufacturers recommend discharging the gun after every use because they understand that.

After decades of hearing tobacco companies lie about cancer resulting from smoking, auto and hydrocarbon companies lying about the harmful effects of air pollution, herbicide suppliers lying about deaths and women's reproductive system harm from their products, lies from my phone company, and more and more I do not share your confidence that a manufacturer would recommend, or insist upon, my taking actions for my, rather that their benefit.

 

[bandg]

That's certainly an opinion.