Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 137

Thread: Unusual RT Pro Issue. . .Now confirmed as micromag 2k9 problem!

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by nak81783 View Post
    Now we still need from center of rear field strip screw hole to start of breech slot on the main body piece for both markers, please. That should complete the puzzle.
    Actually, I guess I didn't need this. Since both the feed tubes start at the same point from the aft edge of the breech piece, I think we're back to the 3 machining options I mentioned before.

    Did anyone see if velocity increases by plugging the feed tube threading?
    XT00380
    Last of the Salzburg Clan

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sunny Florida- Woot!
    Posts
    4,854
    Quote Originally Posted by nak81783 View Post
    Actually, I guess I didn't need this. Since both the feed tubes start at the same point from the aft edge of the breech piece, I think we're back to the 3 machining options I mentioned before.

    Did anyone see if velocity increases by plugging the feed tube threading?
    I guess I'm missing where we figured out what the differences are making Snipers not work? So far, everything seems to be the same as my working body. What measurement are we thinking is different? I just took a measurement from the middle of the FS screw to the back side of the feedport on my MM2K9, ULE Mag and Emag and coming up with the same measuremnt of 3.43".

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    image.jpg

    We've known the primary issue since working bodies are around 3.5" from rear field strip screw center to aft edge of feed tube and sniper42's is 3.65".

    What the issue is now, is how to fix it. Dukie went in depth about something I had only touched on before - the breech bein machined wrong. With the latest measurements you and sniper42 provided, I do not think its the breech. I believe one of the three options I posted before (when you thought I was heavily caffeinated) will work, but it depends where stock exists to do machining. This is why I still want the measurements, in their entirety, from the other thread from working and non-working bodies alike.

    I still think a custom bolt might be the best option (does not affect external cosmetics), but I'm hoping someone else can figure out an easier way.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sunny Florida- Woot!
    Posts
    4,854
    I would still like to see a side pic of Snipers marker. What if as someone else mentioned, bottom milling is just off? He says the "body hole" is longer, exactly what does this mean? I still say we need a pic/diagram fo the body and bullets or whatever showing exactly what needs to be measured to make sure we are all comparing apples to apples.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    This is the best I can do with the time I have available.

    1. Measure the following:
    A to B. From center of rear field strip screw hole to bolt spring seat (without washer).
    A to C. From center of rear field strip screw hole to aft edge of breech piece.
    A to D. From center of rear field strip screw hole to aft edge of feed tube.

    Attachment 88123
    Locations in schematic are approximate.

    2. Place two balls in the feed tube (positioned vertically) without a hopper. Shoot the bottom one, and report what the top ball does (flies out of feed tube, feeds properly, jostles a bit, etc.). Try to quantify if possible. For example, it flew 2 feet out of the feed tube.
    Last edited by nak81783; 08-07-2013 at 08:15 PM.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by OPBN View Post
    I would still like to see a side pic of Snipers marker. What if as someone else mentioned, bottom milling is just off? He says the "body hole" is longer, exactly what does this mean? I still say we need a pic/diagram fo the body and bullets or whatever showing exactly what needs to be measured to make sure we are all comparing apples to apples.
    Bottom milling being "just off" is a bad thing. This would mean trigger frame screws, sear slot, and sear axle holes all need to move. Not the easiest fix in my opinion.

    "Body hole" is the "A to B" measurement in the schematic I uploaded. At least, that's what I took it to mean.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    Is my schematic going to suffice to get measurements from everyone?


    -Mr. Snippy (I hope this isn't an omen for things to come after the bun in the oven is born)

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sunny Florida- Woot!
    Posts
    4,854
    Quote Originally Posted by nak81783 View Post
    Is my schematic going to suffice to get measurements from everyone?


    -Mr. Snippy (I hope this isn't an omen for things to come after the bun in the oven is born)
    Should be for me. Do we need to specify what to measure in a standard body to confirm we are comparing apples to apples in the case the both my working body and Snipers non-working body come up with the same measurements?

    When I got a twofer the second pregnancy its what I went in and got.....
    Last edited by OPBN; 08-07-2013 at 04:45 PM.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    Measure away!

    On a ULE or other stock body, we're looking for the following:
    A to B. From center of rear field strip screw hole to bolt spring seat (If we've all been measuring the same thing, this will have a wide range. It isn't critical.).
    A to D. From center of rear field strip screw hole to aft edge of feed tube.

    ULE Schematic.JPG
    Locations in schematic are approximate.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    Any update on this? I hope we're not giving up.

  11. #101
    Most certainly not. I've been working on making a new longer bolt for mine. I'm about halfway done and I will post pics once its done. I will also get those measurements.

  12. #102

    mm2k9

    If someone has a good cad model I can FARO arm my body that is having the same issue. If not I will just model up a body off of the AGD autocad file. I just ran across this issue, and I was going to post about it, but you beat me to it.

    My body only gets to the 240-250 range. Its sad, since I love the body.

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by Blahslug View Post
    If someone has a good cad model I can FARO arm my body that is having the same issue. If not I will just model up a body off of the AGD autocad file. I just ran across this issue, and I was going to post about it, but you beat me to it.

    My body only gets to the 240-250 range. Its sad, since I love the body.
    Any additional data you can provide would be great. However, could you please also fill in the data points requested earlier in this thread? Distances, does your marker shoot balls out the feed tube stack when there's no hopper on it, etc. I'm 95% confident we have it figured out, and I'm eagerly awaiting results from sniper42's longer bolt.

  14. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by nak81783 View Post
    Any additional data you can provide would be great. However, could you please also fill in the data points requested earlier in this thread? Distances, does your marker shoot balls out the feed tube stack when there's no hopper on it, etc. I'm 95% confident we have it figured out, and I'm eagerly awaiting results from sniper42's longer bolt.
    I will have to put the body back on a gun, and get some air. I will post up when I get some results.

  15. #105
    Well I seem to have gotten some dimension wrong because all my new bolt does is chuff. I will have to make another go at it and next time I will just make a level 7 bolt for simplicity's sake.

  16. #106
    And we have a winner. A longer bolt solved the problem. My first bolt I made from scratch was supposed to be a level 10 replacement but some dimension must be off because all it does is chuff. For the next one I decided to pick up a level 7 bolt from baccipaintball.com for a couple bucks. I turned the outside down and made a sleeve to extend the bolt by .150" and glued it on. I also put a screw in the front so the ball has something to seat against. I will glue some foam to this later.

    So far the results are promising. I was able to get up to 300fps before my velocity screw bottomed out. Before the new bolt, at about 240fps, I was getting enough blowback up the stack to launch a ball approximately 1.5 feet up. With the new bolt at 270fps I still have a bit of blowback but it is much less. It will only launch the next ball maybe 6 inches. So a sleeve that is maybe a tad longer might be in order.

    With my new bolt the face of the bolt is even with the back edge of the feedhole. Here is a crappy cell phone picture of the new bolt:
    i-9wtNb2d-L.jpg

    So at some point I think I will have to get my hands on a spare level 10 bolt to make a sleeve for.

    Now before testing my new bolt, I had a small hiccup where I apparently shot the ball bearing out of one of my detents.

  17. #107
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    Nice work! Just make sure you don't repeat the AGD Superbolt issue where the sleeves wore out, cracked, and came flying out the barrel. I think this was because they used delrin, but just keep an eye on it.

  18. #108
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    PHX, AZ
    Posts
    1,434
    can you make a sleeve for tha bolt you made to replace a lvl 10 bolt? have you figured out wat dimension/dimensions were off on that bolt?

  19. #109
    I had that thought. This one will be more of a proof of concept until I can come up with a more permanent one. The last thing I want is to shoot part of my bolt at someone.

  20. #110
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sunny Florida- Woot!
    Posts
    4,854
    I still don't get why some work and some don't. I would really like you and I to send our bodies to someone to compare to see what the difference is.

  21. #111
    I'm guessing that either the breach operation or the entire bottom operation with the grip frame holes, sear hole etc was offset by .150 and an entire batch got machined that way. Hence why there are a few markers out there that have the same issue.

  22. #112
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    PHX, AZ
    Posts
    1,434
    its pretty safe to say that some of tha bodies...tha ones with tha velocity issues....might have had the breach machined backwards, which would have moved the feed hole just a lil further than it should have been. nobody ever complained about having any issues with mounting tha frames or any sear issues did they?

    have you guys asked Luke to take proper measurements of tha MM2K9 that he is selling to see what measurements he comes up with? maybe ask if he will test tha velocity on his MM2K9 as well...see if he will help yall out?

  23. #113
    All of the holes on the bottom would be machined in one operation. That means that everything would still mount up correctly but if the zero point for the program was off by .150" it would move all of those holes by .150".

  24. #114
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by sniper42 View Post
    All of the holes on the bottom would be machined in one operation. That means that everything would still mount up correctly but if the zero point for the program was off by .150" it would move all of those holes by .150".
    Yeah but then they wouldn't match with the valve. The body would also need to gain or loose that much more length on the back and move the frame mounting screw hole as well.

  25. #115
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    triple mag shop.
    Posts
    3,178
    Quote Originally Posted by need4reebs View Post
    its pretty safe to say that some of tha bodies...tha ones with tha velocity issues....might have had the breach machined backwards, which would have moved the feed hole just a lil further than it should have been. nobody ever complained about having any issues with mounting tha frames or any sear issues did they?

    have you guys asked Luke to take proper measurements of tha MM2K9 that he is selling to see what measurements he comes up with? maybe ask if he will test tha velocity on his MM2K9 as well...see if he will help yall out?
    yeah that makes more sense. because my dust black one is great and works proper. it sucks that people have these issues.

    is there a way to get a total tally of people who have these issues and present them to PTP?
    if you went to them with a full number of how many new breeches need to be made, maybe they will make some replacements?
    My sydarm weighs less than yours!!!

  26. #116
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by Laku View Post
    Yeah but then they wouldn't match with the valve. The body would also need to gain or loose that much more length on the back and move the frame mounting screw hole as well.
    Not necessarily. We've determined that the length from the rear screw to the bolt spring seat can vary greatly and still work.

    It really all depends on their processing. I'd have to see what they used for datums in each of their unknown number of setups.

  27. #117
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by nak81783 View Post
    Not necessarily. We've determined that the length from the rear screw to the bolt spring seat can vary greatly and still work.

    It really all depends on their processing. I'd have to see what they used for datums in each of their unknown number of setups.
    Ah yeah.. was actually thrown off by those stoopid imperial units. Mentally converted that to much larger offset. But if the change was more like 5 mm or more it would likely miss align the on/off hole.

  28. #118
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    PHX, AZ
    Posts
    1,434
    Quote Originally Posted by sniper42 View Post
    All of the holes on the bottom would be machined in one operation. That means that everything would still mount up correctly but if the zero point for the program was off by .150" it would move all of those holes by .150".
    it sounds like only the breech measurements are off and since the feed hole wasnt directly centered it sure does sound like if it was accidentally machined backwards all tha problems your having would be happening? tha main body was prolly machined with tha frame screw holes, sear slot, and the breach screw holes...but when tha breach was machined a possible mistake was made and it was machined backwards. tha breach will still line up with tha screw holes to hold the breach in place but tha feed hole wont be in tha proper place? after reading all this that seems to be the most logical explanation for something like that to have POSSIBLY happened.

  29. #119
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    406
    To my knowledge, this is the first MM2K9 body with this issue to be remedied, so nice job AO!

  30. #120
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    PHX, AZ
    Posts
    1,434
    Quote Originally Posted by nak81783 View Post
    To my knowledge, this is the first MM2K9 body with this issue to be remedied, so nice job AO!
    mainly you, sniper, dukie, and athomas....yall are sum BAD MoFoS!!!!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •