45 replies to this topic

[A side of nerf]

The high price mostly comes from item numbers:

1. 8574K28 - Polycarbonate Sheet 1/4" Thick, 12" X 12", Clear = $12.79 Each

2. 8574K26 - Polycarbonate Sheet 1/8" Thick, 12" X 12", Clear = $6.96 Each

7. 96825K77 - Oak Dowel Rod 1/2" Diameter, 36" Length = $1.73 each (1) = $1.73

However, these items can be knocked off of the list because there is enough room to fit templates for 1 +bow and 1 L+L on 1/8 and 1/4 in. Thickness polycarbonate. As for the Oak Dowel, This can also be taken off and replaced with Polycarbonate or Nylon Rod.

I have added revisions to the Parts list now indicating what was stated above.

[eddieoctane]

Sorry, I read that wrong. I wasn't paying attention and when I read "PC" I added a V in there. It's kind of like this. I've never refered to polycarb as PC or have seen anyone else do that either. Again, my mistake.

Either way, nylon has a higher tensile strength than polycarbonate, so it can still take more force from a compressed spring. My gut still tells me that the nylon is a better choice.

[hereticorp]

eddieoctane, on Nov 19 2008, 06:17 PM, said:

Sorry, I read that wrong. I wasn't paying attention and when I read "PC" I added a V in there. It's kind of like this. I've never refered to polycarb as PC or have seen anyone else do that either. Again, my mistake.

Either way, nylon has a higher tensile strength than polycarbonate, so it can still take more force from a compressed spring. My gut still tells me that the nylon is a better choice.

We were talking about relative density affecting the plunger's movement and the gun already cocking hard so a stronger spring would make the cocking just stupid.

The strength of either material really wasn't under discussion at all, both of them are plenty strong enough for the job.

[Blasphemy]

There is a reason why CS switched the designs from 1/4" polycarbonate/UHMW polyethylene to 1/2" nylon rod. The durability of the 1/4" polycarbonate and ease of machining was a concern and the nylon rod was a good substitute. If you wanted to get really picky you could spend a few extra dollars on something just as durable/more durable which is even lighter. But I'd imagine that the difference in weight here would not make so much of a difference in range to matter. Remember, it is supposed to be a pistol, we don't need to squeeze that much power out of it. It is already hitting 80' ranges, isn't that good enough? I can't imagine how you could need more at a war.

Edited by Blasphemy, 21 November 2008 - 05:28 PM.

[hereticorp]

Blasphemy, on Nov 21 2008, 05:28 PM, said:

There is a reason why CS switched the designs from 1/4" polycarbonate/UHMW polyethylene to 1/2" nylon rod. The durability of the 1/4" polycarbonate and ease of machining was a concern and the nylon rod was a good substitute. If you wanted to get really picky you could spend a few extra dollars on something just as durable/more durable which is even lighter. But I'd imagine that the difference in weight here would not make so much of a difference in range to matter. Remember, it is supposed to be a pistol, we don't need to squeeze that much power out of it. It is already hitting 80' ranges, isn't that good enough? I can't imagine how you could need more at a war.

Huh, I always thought it was because the Polycarb got hung up on the catch mechanism because of the shape of the plunger rod, learn something new every day.

The weight isn't going to make a difference, which was the point I was arguing in the first place.

A pistol with 80' is excessive, a sidearm isn't meant for that kind of range requirement, but I really don't think changing the plunger material will hurt anything.

[TheNerfLoki]

I like it! When I make my +bow I am definitely making some of these.How long did it take you to make this?I think you will be the newest contributor soon. Also 200 posts!

Edited by TheNerfLoki, 23 November 2008 - 11:52 AM.

[analogkid]

They sell square Nylon. 8732K13 would be perfect for the L+L, or as a replacement NF plunger rod, it is the same size. 8732K15 is what I am going to use next time I build a plusbow, the modifications to the design would be small and the rod would no longer be able to spin, so it would catch more reliably.

Edited by analogkid, 23 November 2008 - 12:12 PM.

[A side of nerf]

Quote

How long did it take you to make this?I think you will be the newest contributor soon.

I'm assuming that was directed to heriticorp but having designed and built the gun, I can answer your question.

Machining the parts: 30min - 1 hour
Assembling the gun (granted everything goes accordingly): 45min - 1hour

Edited by A side of nerf, 23 November 2008 - 12:18 PM.

[CaptainSlug]

hereticorp, on Nov 21 2008, 06:45 PM, said:

Huh, I always thought it was because the Polycarb got hung up on the catch mechanism because of the shape of the plunger rod, learn something new every day.

That was never an issue. The issue was primarily one of machining difficulty. Cutting such a long narrow piece of polycarbonate is difficult to do without a table saw. If I switched to an extruded rod the machining difficulty of the project was reduced.
Many people were also having difficulty with getting the holes precisely drilled into the end of the polycarbonate plunger rod.

[Draconis]

analogkid, on Nov 23 2008, 09:11 AM, said:

They sell square Nylon. 8732K13 would be perfect for the L+L, or as a replacement NF plunger rod, it is the same size. 8732K15 is what I am going to use next time I build a plusbow, the modifications to the design would be small and the rod would no longer be able to spin, so it would catch more reliably.

Now that's what I'm talking about! I'm buying a length of that when I make my next order. Ooh.... Unless my plastics shop has some. I'll go ask on Monday.

[hereticorp]

TheNerfLoki, on Nov 23 2008, 11:51 AM, said:

I like it! When I make my +bow I am definitely making some of these.How long did it take you to make this?I think you will be the newest contributor soon. Also 200 posts!

Who knows, I nerf for a couple hours at a time, I don't really pay attention to how long it took, and I've been tweaking it for weeks now, so a lot of time to get it to where it is now.

Heh, people have been saying that since I started posting, I don't really care either way, but thanks for the vote of confidence.

analogkid, on Nov 23 2008, 12:11 PM, said:

They sell square Nylon. 8732K13 would be perfect for the L+L, or as a replacement NF plunger rod, it is the same size. 8732K15 is what I am going to use next time I build a plusbow, the modifications to the design would be small and the rod would no longer be able to spin, so it would catch more reliably.

Putting one of these in a +Bow is retarded. The design of the +Bow already accounts for the rotation potential of the rod and compensates with the cocking handle design.

Besides, if it's really the same size as a NF rod the screw will rip right out of that thing and it will snap in half if you try and cock it all the way.

You need it to be about 1/2" across, not the 1/4" in that the NF's plunger is.

However, that said, I'll be ordering some of the square 1/2" to try out with the L+L being as the round stuff is... Annoying.

A side of nerf, on Nov 23 2008, 12:17 PM, said:

I'm assuming that was directed to heriticorp but having designed and built the gun, I can answer your question.

Machining the parts: 30min - 1 hour
Assembling the gun (granted everything goes accordingly): 45min - 1hour

Seriously guys, this is all A side of nerf, I just built it and am playing with the design, the L+L is his baby.

Huh, that sounds about right, never really timed it.

CaptainSlug, on Nov 23 2008, 03:13 PM, said:

That was never an issue. The issue was primarily one of machining difficulty. Cutting such a long narrow piece of polycarbonate is difficult to do without a table saw. If I switched to an extruded rod the machining difficulty of the project was reduced.
Many people were also having difficulty with getting the holes precisely drilled into the end of the polycarbonate plunger rod.

Ahha, good to know, and I can see how that would be a problem, I have enough trouble drilling the hole in the L+L plunger, it would be much more of a pain to machine a rod that long.

Edited by hereticorp, 23 November 2008 - 05:36 PM.

[sam]

hereticorp, on Nov 23 2008, 02:20 PM, said:

analogkid, on Nov 23 2008, 12:11 PM, said:

They sell square Nylon. 8732K13 would be perfect for the L+L, or as a replacement NF plunger rod, it is the same size. 8732K15 is what I am going to use next time I build a plusbow, the modifications to the design would be small and the rod would no longer be able to spin, so it would catch more reliably.

Putting one of these in a +Bow is retarded. The design of the +Bow already accounts for the rotation potential of the rod and compensates with the cocking handle design.
Besides, if it's really the same size as a NF rod the screw will rip right out of that thing and it will snap in half if you try and cock it all the way.
You need it to be about 1/2" across, not the 1/4" in that the NF's plunger is.
However, that said, I'll be ordering some of the square 1/2" to try out with the L+L being as the round stuff is... Annoying.

Actually, Ryan#### switched over to that for the plunger rods on the +bows he made. They have way more flex and seem just as sturdy as the polycarbonate rods. So square nylon would be awesome for a L+L, but no advantage would be gained by using this square nylon in a rev.2 +bow.

[Draconis]

The nylon is 3/8" thick, though. Smaller than the round nylon, but bigger than the 1/4" polycarbonate. Should be pretty easy to work with.

[nerfer34]

Great job. I liked how you made an initila design and then went out and improved on it. I'm looking forward to seeing that thing painted!

[analogkid]

analogkid, on Nov 23 2008, 12:11 PM, said:

They sell square Nylon. 8732K13... 8732K15

Two different sizes are being discussed here. 8732K13 is 3/8" square, the same size as a NF plunger rod.

8732K15 is 1/2" square. The same size as the round rod used in the plusbow.

I am aware that the cocking handle design already accounts for rotational movement. However, a bit of redundant engineering never hurt anything.

Just to clarify.

Edited by analogkid, 23 November 2008 - 09:26 PM.

[hereticorp]

Some new pictures of a new catch and plunger setup.




The new plunger rods, I still like the Polycarb one better, but the nylon one is growing on me slowly.




The new catches, they really do look a lot better with the new spring holder, I cut really deep into them so that the spring wouldn't bow out and would stay looking nice.



You'd think from this that I have two L+Ls now, sadly I don't, I'm waiting for a couple sheets of 1/8" polycarb so that I can make another frame.




The Polycarb version cocked, the trigger is extremely solid on this one, which could cause a problem for accuracy, I may have to adjust things a little to make the trigger pull a little lighter.




The nylon version cocked, this one is nice except for the rotation issue that I was worried about in the past, and the clunky look of the cocking handle. The handle I can fix, but the rotation is difficult.

I will be trying out the square nylon rod once I put together another order with McMaster, for anyone who wants to try it out before that, here's the link to the McMaster part.
Nylon 6/6 Square Bar 1/2" Size - 8732K15 $4.72/ft

[hereticorp]

nerfer34, on Nov 23 2008, 08:27 PM, said:

Great job. I liked how you made an initila design and then went out and improved on it. I'm looking forward to seeing that thing painted!

It's not getting painted, at least not in it's current form, if I add some padding to the grip I might paint it to make the foam look less like crap.

analogkid, on Nov 23 2008, 09:25 PM, said:

Two different sizes are being discussed here. 8732K13 is 3/8" square, the same size as a NF plunger rod.

8732K15 is 1/2" square. The same size as the round rod used in the plusbow.

I am aware that the cocking handle design already accounts for rotational movement. However, a bit of redundant engineering never hurt anything.

Just to clarify.

Sorry about that, I missed the 1/2", obviously I found it on my own above.

Redundant engineering that makes the item harder to machine (Cutting out a square instead of drilling a hole) with no clear benefit to performance seems pointless to me.

It'll be great for the L+L, but there's really no point for the +Bow.

Edited by hereticorp, 24 November 2008 - 11:06 AM.

[Dayko]

Vary nice work, hereticorp. This would look awesome under a +Bow.

[Draconis]

hereticorp, on Nov 24 2008, 08:02 AM, said:

Sorry about that, I missed the 1/2", obviously I found it on my own above.

Redundant engineering that makes the item harder to machine (Cutting out a square instead of drilling a hole) with no clear benefit to performance seems pointless to me.

It'll be great for the L+L, but there's really no point for the +Bow.

Huh... I hadn't really thought about the ease of drilling the round hole rather than cutting a square one. You still need to cut the squared off section on the top, though, so it really doesn't add much. At least not to the catch plate. I guess you could probably drill a hole one the other plates though.

Edited by Draconis, 24 November 2008 - 04:28 PM.

[hereticorp]

Draconis, on Nov 24 2008, 04:27 PM, said:

hereticorp, on Nov 24 2008, 08:02 AM, said:

Sorry about that, I missed the 1/2", obviously I found it on my own above.

Redundant engineering that makes the item harder to machine (Cutting out a square instead of drilling a hole) with no clear benefit to performance seems pointless to me.

It'll be great for the L+L, but there's really no point for the +Bow.

Huh... I hadn't really thought about the ease of drilling the round hole rather than cutting a square one. You still need to cut the squared off section on the top, though, so it really doesn't add much. At least not to the catch plate. I guess you could probably drill a hole one the other plates though.

On the +Bow it's 2 round holes and one half-round, that's three total cuts, only one of which I have to mess around with at all beyond the drill bit.

On the L+L it's only 2 and the holes on the template aren't even in the right position, so it's not that big a deal.

[hereticorp]

I did some fiddling around with the new catch design and came up with a set of plunger/catch mechanisms using one notch on the plunger and two different plunger rod materials.

I am still way partial to the polycarbonate plunger, but that may change once I get a nylon plunger that doesn't spin like a top when I try to cock it.


The two new plunger rods, one from 1/4" Polycarbonate, the other from 1/2" Nylon Rod


View from the front, I took the second notch out and left only the max-pull notch, which is 2" from the front of the plunger.


Both plungers in place in their newly cut catch mechanisms. I used the new catch spring design and the springs are the +Bow Piano Wire catch springs.


Higher view, I made the slot on the catch a little too wide on the right hand one, but I think the left hand one turned out aces.


View from the top, I think the polycarbonate just looks better than the nylon, but that's me.










The rod itself is 7.5" long and the first notch is about 2 1/16" back from the front of the rod. You can do 2 1/8" if you want to be sure it will cock solid.

Some closeups of the new catch mechanism, I trimmed the inner side of the spring tabs so that the spring would slot in between the two pieces of polycarbonate.