"Dreaming" of a Dreamline ;)

I didn't mess with the reg much, I just made sure it was "reading" between the recommended 140 and 145 bar on the gun's unverified gauge. Once I did that, I spent some time working the internal hammer spring adjuster up until I got to FX USA's targeted numbers of 920 fps with a 16gr and 870 fps with an 18gr (30 fpe). Reaching these goals got me 35 regged shots at 30 fpe between 230-145 bar. The gun will continue to stay in a somewhat desirable velocity range on down to 110 bar or so (so one can get more shots) but falls off the reg at the previoualy set 145 bar, so that's when I ended my shot charts. Once at this point, I dialed the external power adjuster back to position 2, and got 51 regged shots at 29 fpe between 230 and 145 bar... again there may be more in there if ya want to wind it down to 110 bar or so, or play with the reg more. For me, this exercise was more about getting the received gun which arrived shooting an 18g at 700 fps, up to FX's desired specs of 870/920 with an 18 and 16gr. It was never my intent to declare ultimate efficiency although I still think I'm pretty close to what the average person can get out of it.

I should also add that the gun performed better with the 18g moving at 870 than it did with the 16gr moving at 920. With an 18gr moving at 870 (30 fpe) the gun will shoot 1" groups at 100 yards. At 50 it didn't much matter. Both rounds were half inch-ish for me.

Hope this helps clarify.

Steve

WAIT A MINUTE! Did I miss something!? A 250ci cylinder and you are getting less than 40 shots at under 900 fps?......... I hope with all the “adjustability” Steve figures out how to make that better. And without much effort.

Click to expand...

The FX press release literature reads 250 cubic centimeters for all Dreamline calibers. If ya saw "cubic inch" somewhere, that's incorrect. Steve

AEAC says 35 shots at 880 ft/s. Utah Airguns says 60 shots at 30 ft/lb? The FX press release says 80 shots in .22? Something isn't adding up here.

I understand the valving and transfer port on the Dreamline is the same as the Streamline . My Streamline .22 cal shoots 860 fps with the JSB 18's and gets 60 shots on the regulator and comes off it at about 125 bar. That is with a 190 cc air tube. It would make sense with a 250 cc air tube it would get about 80 shots. Bill

Awesome...looking forward to the review and full specs for this new line. 

I'll take the classic by far.

While not a fan of the hockey stick, the Classic and Pup versions both look great! Best part is that if someone wins the hockey stick and wants a Pup, it might take a while, but eventually the stock kit will be available to make the conversion.

If Steve is right, and this is basically a 1 MOA gun at 100 yards, at $1000 price point for the Classic, it could be a real game changer. Putting 1 MOA guns at that price point could bring precision shooters from multiple disciplines into Airguns. A 1 MOA gun at this price point could also force the overall price of PCP's down industry wide. After all, why should I spend $900 bucks for an Armada when I can get a Dreamline for the same price? The sub-$1000 price point is going to get really crowded as guns reposition against a new mid-price leader.

Even the high priced guns will need to rethink pricing. If the Dreamline is a 1 MOA gun, and a Red Wolf is a 1 MOA gun, and I have a choice of $1000 or $2700, which do I pick? This could do a real number on the high end guns as well.

Time will tell what a .25 and .30 can do in this platform, but it's very promising right now. I'll give it 6 to 12 months before considering another purchase, but this will probably be high on the list.

The next question for FX, and this is strictly business related, how many guns will you cease production over the next 24 months? The Streamline is obvious, but what about the Bobcat, Wildcat, Verminator, Gladiator, Cyclone, Boss, and other guns whose functionality could be absorbed into this new, mix and match line over the next couple years? This could get really interesting.

Looking really interesting . . . . . . .

Just want to step in and clear up the shot count for the Dreamline. The press release is based on the Swedish factory settings. They are coming out of the factory geared around the 16gr JSBs which are much more common in Europe (it's hard to even find the 18gr in some countries in Europe). The settings are around 110 Bar and FX USA can confirm that at that setting you can get 80 shots per fill.

We realize that the American market most likely wants to shoot the 18gr with a little more heat behind it to get in the 30+ ft/lb range. So we are having Ernest tune each .22 caliber gun, increasing both the Regulator setting and hammer strength.

Much like our other adjustable guns, you can tune for optimum shot count, or optimum ft/lbs depending on your application.

Hope this clears things up.

The next question for FX, and this is strictly business related, how many guns will you cease production over the next 24 months? The Streamline is obvious, but what about the Bobcat, Wildcat, Verminator, Gladiator, Cyclone, Boss, and other guns whose functionality could be absorbed into this new, mix and match line over the next couple years? This could get really interesting.

Looking really interesting . . . . . . .

Click to expand...

Streamline is officially not being made anymore since the Dreamline is essentially the Streamline MKII in many ways. FX USA also stopped bringing in the Gladiator, Cyclone, & Revolution (so basically anything older than the Royale / Bobcat). Everything (out side of the Streamline) from the Royale & Boss on are still in production. Royale & Boss coincidentally just dropped in price by $100. This should be great news to those that love the straightforward consistency of those platforms.

Thanks Steve, I’m new to the table and appreciate all the information you are putting together on the dreamline. I really am looking forward to finding out more about the dreamline as I believe this is the rifle that will tip me into the PCP arena.

I don't think there is 250 CC's of HPA air available, I think that is the entire volume of the tube...then you have to subtract from it regulator space + whatever else is inside the tube. Just my take...because if I run efficiency on a 250 CC tube shooting 51 shots @ 29 fpe from 230 to 145 bar (assumed with 18.1) gr, I get 1.08 FPE / CI...which is POOR....(excess P drop / hammer bounce / over dwell detected...)

Excess Pressure drop (if present) cause = Regulator volume low

Hammer bounce (if present, likely) cause = no hammer gap...

Over dwell (if present, possible) = Too small of porting for the desired FPE..



If I change available HPA volume to 200 ccc I get efficiency of 1.35 FPE/CI....which is reasonable but still not great...



I am losing faith in FX, I am not going to hold my tongue, what ya see is what ya get...1.0 FPE/Ci translates to roughly 20% thermal efficiency, expected thermal efficiency of a pcp is 27-33% range (nominally)...where as the reduced volume would be at 27%..So they're either fibbing about volume or the gun is an air hog currently.



@ 30 fpe the efficiency was .85 FPE / CI... @ 250cc or 1.06 FPE / CI @ 200 cc...no saving that one..



Now for some harsh realities, the requirements for a pcp to operate nominally are simple. Is FX forcing customers to by power kits + upgrades by choking these rifles from the factory? Think about it...

Looking at Steve's data it does appear something seems a bit off, he should be getting more shots per fill so we're going to have his rifle sent in to us, and get another Dream-Classic out the door to him. We want to make sure he has a fully functioning rifle for him to evaluate.. Thanks for everyone's comments so we could pick up on this.

Sure are beautiful guns!!

I don't think there is 250 CC's of HPA air available, I think that is the entire volume of the tube...then you have to subtract from it regulator space + whatever else is inside the tube. Just my take...because if I run efficiency on a 250 CC tube shooting 51 shots @ 29 fpe from 230 to 145 bar (assumed with 18.1) gr, I get 1.08 FPE / CI...which is POOR....(excess P drop / hammer bounce / over dwell detected...)

Excess Pressure drop (if present) cause = Regulator volume low

Hammer bounce (if present, likely) cause = no hammer gap...

Over dwell (if present, possible) = Too small of porting for the desired FPE..



If I change available HPA volume to 200 ccc I get efficiency of 1.35 FPE/CI....which is reasonable but still not great...



I am losing faith in FX, I am not going to hold my tongue, what ya see is what ya get...1.0 FPE/Ci translates to roughly 20% thermal efficiency, expected thermal efficiency of a pcp is 27-33% range (nominally)...where as the reduced volume would be at 27%..So they're either fibbing about volume or the gun is an air hog currently.



@ 30 fpe the efficiency was .85 FPE / CI... @ 250cc or 1.06 FPE / CI @ 200 cc...no saving that one..



Now for some harsh realities, the requirements for a pcp to operate nominally are simple. Is FX forcing customers to by power kits + upgrades by choking these rifles from the factory? Think about it...

Click to expand...

Nah that's silly talk, but the Dreamline does have smaller air passages than the more expensive Impact, Crown, & Wildcat so by design it doesn't have the capacity to make as much power... and it appears my tester may have had a bum reg. Sorry guys, will get right back to it when the replacement comes. Steve

Wait, Ernest is going to tune these before sending out?

Where's that BUY button!!!!!

Keep up the good work Steve. It's not easy to do such extensive testing and keep track of everything, then organize it all and produce a nice video.

We appreciate your hard work.

I really like the platform I think its a winner for people that want to tinker and still save some money and get great accuracy at the same time win win to me cant wait to see the video Steve thanks for all you do for us

OK, so if Steve got one with a bum regulator, that means the test gun is right off the shelf, and Ernst never looked at it. Makes the reviews all that more realistic, doesn't it?

Ya. I meant. cc. Not ci.