5
6

PerformanceO-Ring Taping Debunked-with Data (self.Nerf)

foam_data が 投稿

I am indebted to Britnerf member and engineer SSGT for this test. Pure data,

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ai0yaQwoF0wwdEcxZVYtNGpRREVqYkJYNjY1OUs5T1E&output=html

Explanatory notes

http://britnerf.myfreeforum.org/about1610.html

Although he used "good fired" rather than box fresh Elite darts, it gives a really good idea of real world conditions and proves what myself and others have suspected, namely that in direct plunger systems, taping under the O-Ring actually harms performance.

I realise this is probably going to cause lots of people to furiously defend this as a practice, but if you are going to do this, please supply-

Data- minimum 30 dart shoot- ideally load it up to an open source doc platform for everyone to see.

Your hypothesis that supports your data.

全ての 15 コメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
ベスト
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順

[–]Duke_Wintermaul 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (5子コメント)

You had me so pissed off for a good five minutes. The Data you linked in your post is not the Teflon data, its all about the Retaliator and it's OMW kits. I had to reread this whole thing a few times to figure out what the fuck was going on, seeing as how the data you linked had nothing to do with Teflon taping in the slightest.

I reject your conclusion. Having one set of numbers for one particular blaster is far from conclusive, it would be scientifically immoral to allow this to set presidence.

Although I agree that Elite blasters do not require an improved seal, there are many blasters that benefit from a new O-ring or Teflon taping. Lying down a blanket statement of Teflon being useless is absolutely absurd, especially if this is all the proof you have.

I don't need to prove what I'm saying, you need to prove what your saying. A scientific hypothesis cannot be rejected or confirmed on what little data you have presented.

Edit: Your post and stance was very premature, SSGT himself says

Although the data is a bit too limited to conclude definitively, it does appear that Elite springers don't need a "perfect" seal to work to their full potential.

He acknowledges that his test is both inconclusive and limited to Elite blasters, not sure why you seem to have interpreted this as a war cry for banning Teflon tape on YouTube...

[–]torukmakto4 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I reject your conclusion. Having one set of numbers for one particular blaster is far from conclusive, it would be scientifically immoral to allow this to set presidence.

I think the wrong link was posted. This is the correct one.

And TBH, the data are secondary evidence.

The main issue is that floating O-ring seals should not be turned into non-floating, high-friction seals by putting crap in the ring groove. That is a terrible method. If you do that, you are taking a high-performance feature that you had out of the box and throwing it away for no reason. This is transparently obvious if you know how a floating O-ring seal is supposed to function.

That goes for whether it really just needs a new O-ring, or whether the seal was already perfectly functional before the tape and they just degraded its performance (Swarmfire is the most common offender) in a misguided attempt to tweak things.

The subject of piston seals in the NIC is one of those voodoo things. You have a lot of misguided ideas, including that seal friction equals seal quality (thus free travel equals bad seal), and that getting rid of minute leakage flows at all costs is beneficial to efficiency/performance even if friction goes up massively in the process.

[–]Duke_Wintermaul 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I did see the correct data before posting, had to get it from the BritNerf page itself.

In my experience, teflon taping o-rings is only done on incredibly piss poor seals. This is partly the reason it's so popular, Nerf used to only have piss poor seals.

It's also worth mentioning that taping O-rings doesn't just happen in the plunger, I've taped many air pump O-rings to fix a minute leak.

It's much easier to buy a roll of teflon tape instead of having to keep running back to the store to find the correct O-ring, although it's always worth getting the perfect ring if you can.

A modder I know actually wraps his O-rings in Teflon tape, this circumvents fixing the O-ring in place and simply makes it just a tad thicker.

I'm well aware how ported piston heads work, I'm pretty sure that's what 'floating o-rings' refers to.

[–]torukmakto4 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm well aware how ported piston heads work, I'm pretty sure that's what 'floating o-rings' refers to.

It's the inverse. Like many technologies, they have roots outside nerf, or airsoft, in the "real world". The former term is an airsoftism.

[–]Zombona 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well it seems as though I have a few blasters I need to re open and remove a few layers of teflon from.

[–]NonaSuomi282 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Can I just say, I'm glad to see that hard data and truly relevant benchmarks are finally asserting dominance over hearsay, gut instinct, and inaccurate "tests".

[–]justusUMBC -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (8子コメント)

This only applies to blasters with perfect seals from the box, like the Elite series. I have 7 years of modding experience to support the fact that putting thread seal tape, or even electrical tape temporarily, under a plunger with a bad seal can improve both the seal and the ranges haha

[–]torukmakto4 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you have a bad O-ring (wrong size, shrank, dried out, cut, worn) then you should replace it for literally a couple cents.

[–]jabies 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Data?

[–]foam_data[S] -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

What a surprise, no actual data. Didn't read the post?

If your o ring is so bad that there is no seal, then simply putting a new one in there will fix it.

Note that elite series don't have a "perfect seal" as defined by this sort of test (putting your thumb over the bolt and pushing etc) it is in fact, like most DP tubes, slightly tapered, thus only fully seals at the point the air becomes sufficiently compressed to want to escape. The above statement may be true for useless reverse plungers of yore, but totally misses most of the real mechanics of an efficient system, namely piston velocity and the way the o-ring is deliberately designed to "flutter" in the groove, like the compression rings on a petrol engine.

[–]apparissus 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

What a surprise, no actual data. Didn't read the post?

You don't have any actual data on the effect of taping older blasters, either. You've only presented data for the EAT. So how do you justify your condescending tone and sweeping assertions about all direct plunger blasters?

[–]foam_data[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Firstly, I specifically said that if you had data that contradicted this test, then post it, so far no takers, point proven on sweeping assertions.

Secondly, all elite direct plunger primaries have the same plunger tube design, with only slight variations of capacity, the operating mechanism is also identical except in the pistols with the spring in the butt, whereby the spring is wrapped around the plunger, so clearly the same mechanical process is at work, thus it's not a sweeping assertion, it's a single design used in multiple shells, as is the old reverse plunger tube it replaced. I wouldn't bother testing a reverse plunger design, as the best mod for that is to replace it with a direct one.

As to the older direct plungers, scant regard has been paid to proper measuring and testing of assumptions made about those. I have been trying to sort that out, but I can only test so many mods a month!

I will continue to be condescending to anyone who claims a range test is a valid method of testing mods. It's a fun way to illustrate something to people new to the hobby, as well as a way of surprising people at wars, but it's irrelevant for true performance testing.

It's time any mod without some repeatable testing was treated as suspect, especially ones being sold. Let's not kid ourselves, modding is now a business for some, you will be parting with sometimes substantial sums of money, therefore you should expect real testing.

Look at the more serious bloggers. They may post ranges as that was the way things were measured in the past, but the best ones all take chrono readings.

justusumbc- I get where you are coming from, in some gen 1 systems there were issues, which could be improved on. The reason I haven't tested this is simply as you stated there are no competitive DP's that need seal improvement. I would happily test any blaster you send me for free and post it back to you at my expense.

[–]justusUMBC -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Why do I need data for something which can be proven easily? If you increase the diameter of the o-ring by placing material under it in a blaster with a bad seal and then place your finger over the end of the tube, you will find that the seal is improved. Some older blasters are complete garbage if you don't do this. I don't need data to support this, it is easily observable. Nor am I suggesting that replacing the o-ring isn't a better solution, I'm just saying that you can't say using some kind of tape doesn't work when you aren't already working with a good seal like most of the newer blasters have.

[–]foam_data[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

It clearly doesn't work ON DIRECT PLUNGERS. There is a difference between opinion, which is what you are offering, and data which actually proves a mod by physical measurement. There is a degree of the placebo effect in operation with modding, where because you feel it should be better, you believe it is. This is why I only say a mod works if I have tested it. The rest is just an opinion.

It is your opinion that tape is a valid mod. You are entitled to it, but without testing it's not proven.

[–]justusUMBC -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I wish I had a working chrono and some stock blasters to prove it to you. I've had countless early generation Nite Finders before they switched to the tapered plunger tube that had barely serviceable seals, as in pushing the plunger at high speed with the barrel plugged and feeling no resistance. When I was younger I had no access to replacement o-rings. Tape works if you need it to, period. That all being said, my whole argument is basically irrelevant, since there are no competitively viable DP blasters that could really benefit from a seal improvement nowadays (unless you got an out-of-spec lemon) haha