Tell me about your m3

What do you have now? What is your intended purpose with the airgun? Bench shooting, hunting, pesting, plinking?

The big difference between the M2 and M3 is the M3 has tool-less tuning and 2 regs. Both have equivalent accuracy.

If you have a great shooting M2 no real reason to upgrade unless you want the latest and greatest. 2 regs are great if you run the second reg low , but if you run the second reg hi , 140-150 you don’t really need the first reg. Quick tune is nice but again once you have your impact shooting at its best speed you really won’t touch it much unless your changing calibers and shooting in high or low altitude compared to where you tuned the gun; it helps with those changes quickly. Also the larger Plenum of the M3 isn’t necessary unless your shooting slugs at high speed .

I had an m2, then added an m3, sold the M3 as the value equation wasn't there at the time. If / when I get a place to shoot slugs regularly, and prices settle down, I will be back in the market. M2 in .177 shoots very well, sends a lot of lead down the tube on a 480cc tank. Covers my needs very well. Agree with Sell682 on 2nd reg and quick tune.

I have the M3 and a very upgraded Gen1 with a Gen2 on the way. Both of the guns I now have shoot sub MOA at 100 yards in .25 and .30. If I could only keep one of them it would be the m3. I would keep it because of it's superior ease of tuning ability, two reg consistency and more shots because of the 300bar fill. 

Otherwise they are all great guns and I have no complaints about any of them.

With the choice available for any of the three why not get the most up to date?

The only real advantage I see is the quick adjustability and possibly the 2 regs. 


Butch

Hope they dont announce a M4 before my M3 gets here

Have the MK2 in .30 and M3 in .35 but also have the .22 and .25 barrel kits. The M3, as stated above, does allow for a 300bar fill thus a few more shots when out in the field. 
They both have the power for what I’m using them for but the M3 is staying a .35 because of its slight edge in power. I haven’t tried to run the .35 on my MK2 because it’s really shooting well in .30. I have a Maverick that fills in for the .22 and .25 so think the others are staying in .30 and .35.

Even the Maverick has a 300bar bottle on it due to the dual regulators and again I can get extra shots when out in the field or at the range. Don’t think you can go wrong with either of the rifles as they will both get the job done…

I love the M3 impact. you really can't beat the quick tune system. My wife uses our .30 and she changes the tune to her style (she likes to use lower speeds to see if she can watch the pellets fly haha) but man is it easy to use and even go right back to. The impact MkII is not a bad system but there is a lot more intricacy that was upgraded when the M3 came out. I highly suggest it. Plus you have the dual-regulated shots like Ram2jeep stated above. It's amazing. Hits hard hits accurately and consistently. 

What dual reg....

Now that I've essentially turned my M3 into a MK2 (yes, I even have modified the valve adjust knob), I love it! Lol

Edit: btw 160bar reg set slug shooter. And bio, I have something coming Thursday that hopefully works out for the 2nd front gauge

Nice. Don't forget to post. I'm with you.

I'd like to replace it now, it has better battery life, but I'd like to hear what everyone thinks.

I recently read a post where someone verified straight from FX if the M3’s were a 300 bar fill or a 250 max fill like it stated on the gun itself. The new bottles that come with the M3 are 300 bar rated, but pretty much the internals of the rifle itself (im talking o rings, valve, power plenum guts, etc) are pretty much exact like the MK2’s. How can one be rated 50 bar more than the other when those components are the same? It’s not like the 1.5 and 2.0 mm (thickness) buna 70/90 o rings in the MK2’s got switched out to 2 and 2.5mm(respectively) thickness, and to Viton or Fluro o rings in the M3’s- they’re still the same Buna 70 and 90.

The valve rod hasn’t gotten beefier, either, nor the valve seat. Springs are all identical. 


Ami missing something? Are the wall thicknesses of the front and rear blocks any different, or the type of metals used?

In that post, the OP that checked with FX did say that FX said, the M3’s are fill rated at still a 250 bar max pressure, regardless of bottle pressure capabilities.

I don’t own an M3, just two MK2’s. If I’m wrong or that person that verified needs to be corrected, please by all means let us know