PDA

View Full Version : stopblock idea



QUINCYMASSGUY
07-16-2003, 09:47 AM
The secret is out about what exactly the ULE trigger is! Now that these questions are answered I'm sure we all have more new questions and would looooove for the mods and people priveleged enough to get the ULE triggers and learn all about them to give their honest opinions about how they will work for normal Mag owners, any weaknesses in them, the best features of them, how difficult it is to set it up, and such! Please by all means post issues you want addressed in this thread, not congratulations or anything, AGD knows we like it, and hopefully they will respond. And if an offical thread comes out that would make this redundant, I fully understand if the moderators want to pull this one.

My first question: The Warpig article seemed to allude to the fact that the retro effect might still exist or is able to exist... for those using them, is this true? Does this prevent chuffing? Wouldn't that make for easy sweetspotting, ie not tourney legal? Do the shims change this?

My next one: Is the trigger pull length affected at all, in other words how short can the pull be while still effectively cycling at, lets say, 15bps? I presume same as before but I'm sure if we could in any way get the length as close to electric as the weight is, we'd be in heaven.

Three's a charm: Do you see any room for upgrades to this or the Lvl 10 setup that could increase ROF, shorten pull, or anything? No I'm not expecting it and definitely won't be bummed, just wondering as AGD has redesigned so much lately that creating a part to replace the sear to enable a shorter pull would definitely be something I could see these innovators move to next!

And finally, Tom touched on before that this on/off had an issue related to dwell times on EMags/XMags but also hinted that this lighter pull could make an affordable e-trigger with smaller solenoid possible. Any feedback on this? Would this open up aftermarket companies to release E-frames, possible in a 90 degree style?

Come on folks, give us the dirt!

GT
07-16-2003, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by QUINCYMASSGUY
And finally, Tom touched on before that this on/off had an issue related to dwell times on EMags/XMags but also hinted that this lighter pull could make an affordable e-trigger with smaller solenoid possible.

this is my speculation, none of this info is based in fact!

I think it would be mighty nice if AGD desgined a smaller selnoid, use that combined with the ULE trig, and would therefore use a smaller batt. This would make a very very light ULE E/Xmag.

Your signature is WAY over the limit. You now have over 80K in it. Thats more than double allowed. Please revise it according to the rules you will find posted near the top in Friendly Corner. thanks! cphilip

acecl22
07-16-2003, 11:31 AM
in some other thread, tom said that the ULE trigger is part of a much bigger picture, i cant wait to see what he has in store for his loyal mag owners

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-16-2003, 11:37 AM
That other thread and the "bigger picture" was what raised my attention to the possibility of upgrades or possibly something to replace the sear and/or rail so the Mag may not even shoot using a sear pin anymore. I don't know, all speculation, but now that the ULE on/off is out we might have a better idea.

SIGSays
07-16-2003, 11:51 AM
i know what he has in mind... a new scheme to take away even more money....

lvl 10 took money from us
ule bodies took money
iframes took money
ult will take money
xvalves even more money taken..

when will the madness stop??

Arg!!!! Too big and too many things in signature!!! Change the signature dude... cphilip

acecl22
07-16-2003, 11:52 AM
i wonder if tom's engineers could play with the sear assy so that the assembly itself moves the same amount, but you only have to move the trigger a fraction of what it is now, im sure its possible, just dont know how

acecl22
07-16-2003, 11:54 AM
lol, since nobody else makes quality upgrades for mags yet, i dont mind paying agd for their great inovations... i wonder how long until they run out of ideas for things to revolutionize paintball, nahhhh thatll never happen

Automaggin2
07-16-2003, 12:14 PM
I think AGD needs to do SULE, super ultra light engineering. Titanium, carbon fiber, you know you know :D


JP.

And a smaller solenoid....hmmm....i dunno.....

SG Avenger
07-16-2003, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by SIGSays
i know what he has in mind... a new scheme to take away even more money....

lvl 10 took money from us
ule bodies took money
iframes took money
ult will take money
xvalves even more money taken..

when will the madness stop??

When AGD introduces the first Cyber Paintaball Gun [grin]

jdev
07-16-2003, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Automaggin2
I think AGD needs to do SULE, super ultra light engineering. Titanium, carbon fiber, you know you know :D


JP.

And a smaller solenoid....hmmm....i dunno.....

is your gun really that heavy that you cant carry it with ULE parts? :P

if so, you should consider workin out more :D


QUINCYMASSGUY

i can answer your first question, best to my ability.

it does not seem to actual shorter the trigger pull itself. I fired a few rounds on this bad larry at the megameet, pull didnt seem any different than my x-valved mag. was WAY ligher though :D

Kellen_p8nt
07-16-2003, 01:02 PM
Avenger do you think those next generation cyber paintball guns will include the hot chick?

SG Avenger
07-16-2003, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by Kellen_p8nt
Avenger do you think those next generation cyber paintball guns will include the hot chick?

if they wan't it to sell it damn well better! [grin]

cheetah256
07-16-2003, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by QUINCYMASSGUY
That other thread and the "bigger picture" was what raised my attention to the possibility of upgrades or possibly something to replace the sear and/or rail so the Mag may not even shoot using a sear pin anymore. I don't know, all speculation, but now that the ULE on/off is out we might have a better idea.

i seem to remember him talking about efficiancy modifications next...

cphilip
07-16-2003, 08:07 PM
It doesn't shorten the pull. That he has said many times...

When will the madness end? Well...you figure he gotta retire some day? :D

acecl22
07-16-2003, 09:59 PM
lol... i wasnt sayin that it would shorten the pull, i was just sayin that maybe the engineers could think of a way to shorten the pull, anythin is possible, quincymassguy and gtrsi are speculating on a new solenoid i think, maybe because not as much pressure is needed for the solenoid to do its job, so it wouldnt need as much power... hence a smaller bat pack, and a lighter gun

magnj
07-16-2003, 10:09 PM
AGD should offer a cheap Electro Frame for the Automag/RT. If he could put out a frame under 175 that allowed something like 18BPS, he would make mad stupid crazy money

Nomad
07-16-2003, 10:40 PM
If he did that would there be any point for the E-mag or the X-mag?

Catch22
07-16-2003, 10:43 PM
When will the madness end? Well...you figure he gotta retire some day?

No, That will just give him more time to think!!! Nooo!

askman
07-16-2003, 11:29 PM
why would anybody want an electronic frame, when ULE trigger is already as light as electronic frame, without the hassle. I will be getting ULE for sure for my Xvalve, because I wanted to stay all mechanical.

Also, the article basically state that Level X bolt is mandatory for ULE trigger.

durtysoufcraka
07-16-2003, 11:58 PM
will this ule trigger be made w/intellifeed capabilities or will i be stuck buying an intelli frame that is not quite as sexy or light as the ULE trigger. ...intelli frame + ule :) .... :( please?

Aliens-8-MyDad
07-17-2003, 12:13 AM
will this ule trigger be made w/intellifeed capabilities or will i be stuck buying an intelli frame that is not quite as sexy or light as the ULE trigger. ...intelli frame + ule .... please?

what? i may be tired but this doesnt make any sense.... unless u thinking the ULE trigger is a frame.. it isnt a frame its a on/off valve upgrade, you can use any frame u want with it, but u must have level 10

TransMan
07-17-2003, 04:32 AM
Originally posted by acecl22
i wonder if tom's engineers could play with the sear assy so that the assembly itself moves the same amount, but you only have to move the trigger a fraction of what it is now, im sure its possible, just dont know how

You could have some sort of gears in it that would shorten the trigger pull but it would make the pull heavier again....

TheJester
07-17-2003, 06:29 AM
well is it hard to set up? look at the diagram, how can it be hard, there's only a few differences from the stock on/off valve. the only thing you have to adjust is the amount of shims you place between the on/off top and bottom...how hard can it be? sounds like you can train a monkey to do it.

in terms of the reactivness of it, well i think that might go back to some of my original speculation, it all depends on how big the head is compared to the stock pin, and how heavy it is compared to the stock pin. the only thing i'm not sure about is because the larger piston size down by the sear. it's been a while since i've last done anything with pistion dynamics, or anything remotly realivant. but if you have the same amount of force applied to the same size piston (all compared to the stock pin) but that pushing on a larger surface area....does that not result in lower pressure? if you have 800 psi on a square inch size pin (i know, the on/off pin is a LOT smaller than that) but the bottom of that pin (the part that's hitting the sear for the reactiveness) is 2 square inches...isn't it hitting the sear with 1/2 the force it would be if it were the same size? please correct me if i'm wrong here, but i think the reactiveness of it is determined by the vairied pin sizes. i realize that doesn't answer the question on if it's still there or not, cuase i guess we just have to wait and see.

pull length....thing about what affects the pull length in a mag, why it's so short to begin with. it's the distance the sear has to travel down to release the bolt. so because this is an on/off mod, not a sear or bolt mod, the trigger pull length will be unaffected, for the sear will release the bolt at the same place.

sbpyro
07-17-2003, 08:02 AM
is your gun really that heavy that you cant carry it with ULE parts? :P

if so, you should consider workin out more :D


QUINCYMASSGUY


Hey leave the fat ppl alone ( we smell our own)

kosmo
07-17-2003, 09:26 AM
I remember back in "the day" people would grind and bevel their sears to let it slip off the bolt smoother and sooner. If done just right, you could have one hell of a trigger. But polishing a little too much would cause your gun to go full auto all the time. And since the sear is made from a pansy metal, it would wear and go full auto after a while any way and you would have to replace the sear. Anywho, perhaps an aluminum or SS sear would be more viable? Best part is that its simple enough to do yourself, though it prolly voids the warranty.

BTW, if anyone is confused as to what Im talking about, heres a link: Ravi's Paintball Place (http://www.paintballravi.com/Articles/MagTrigger/mag_trigger_job.html)

Python14
07-17-2003, 10:27 AM
So let me get this straight. I have a standard valve with 2 orings so it says it will work....but how well?

Is it worth my money to try it when the beta comes out?

acecl22
07-17-2003, 10:51 AM
i think im gonna wait till a few batches after the beta testing, so that i can see reviews, and so that all the kinks are worked out

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-17-2003, 01:06 PM
Massive idea below, something of a ramble, knowledgable people in physics, paintball guns, please critique. AGD definitely welcome to contribute or ask followup questions.

I think the sear is the bottleneck now when changing to a mechanical mag with the same pull as an electric. If a new gear system with a sear holding just the edge of the bolt but not wearing could be designed (big could, just throwing concepts) this would allow shorter pull and hopefully only require minimal weight to pull. Work=Distance X Force. AGD has reduced the force needed without increasing the distance which is awesome. Less needed to pull the trigger. The same benefit can be gotten again if the pull can be reduced OR the pull can be reduced at a cost of more force being required (the gear system). So a sear setup with adjustable gears could be used to either lengthen the pull and make it even lighter OR to shorten the pull and make much shorter. Imagine a 1.5lb trigger that only needs to go a millimeter to cycle. a gear system connecting the trigger and sear (not the sear pin) could do that. I wish I could sketch it out, but I suck at graphics programs and don't have the time. Imagine a small gear around the trigger axis and a larger gear under the sear. Now, instead of a trigger rod imagine a rod with teeth that sits atop this larger gear and connect at the base of the sear, just below the sear pin, so when the gear turns, it pushes and activates the sear. So by adjusting the size of the larger gear you could have the following pull combinations (going on the Mag pull being 3mm although I'm probably wrong):

4mm X 11.25oz = 45 points work (33% increase in pull, 33% decrease in weight making it sickingly light but risks more chuffs)
3mm X 15oz = 45 points work
2mm X 22.5oz = 45 points work (33% reduction in pull, 33% increase in weight, so heavier but less chuffs and easier to walk for those with strong fingers)

Now... the question is how to take advantage of the gear system and using the new settings (2mm x 22.5oz) and find a way to trim that weight off the pull. Or with the other settings (4mm X 11.25 oz) find a way to shorten the distance the sear and on/off pin need so the trigger pull itself can be moved back to 3mm or better. Either way, setting up the new sear mechanism where you can choose gears (and I have a perfect idea on how to have this customizable) could be the next big thing.

There's my idea (patent pending, jk), critique away! But I know the physics support it, it's just a case of if it is worth doing to a Mag. But it would be a drop-in replacement for the sear setup and fit fine in current gripframes, I have in all mapped out in my head.

TheJester
07-17-2003, 01:43 PM
the thing with the gears...i've thought about actually trying something similar...but with more of a pulley system (little easier to make than micro gears)...but here are problems i see. the reason i never attempted to was i couldn't think of a way for it to work in reverse...for the return of the trigger. may have a similar problem with gears. also, what about durablility? they would have to stay in place for 1, so where you plan on putting these? in the rail? in the frame? how do you plan to hold them precisely in place? also, they would have to be small...small usually means fragil, how would you prevent the teeth from being damaged on the kick return of the trigger?

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-17-2003, 02:15 PM
You're right in that a belt system would have an issue with the return, and I admit I hadn't put as much thought on the return. BUT the smaller gear would be set with the pin holding the trigger as its axis. So it would move exactly as the trigger does. If a sear tip can handle the bolt pressure I'm sure the gear could handle the push from the trigger return. Unless cheap metal is used. The second gear is a tough one. What if a new rail was designed with a place to hold the second gear and the new sear assembly? Or a much thinner rail-like part that sits under the current rail? Doesn't have to be too thick at all, even as thin as a penny. Just enough to be strong and hold the gear steady. So the gear would be right above the safety, held in place by an attachment to the rail. So it would almost be like a spur hanging down. Plus the sear would sit in the rail and having a new rail lets AGD set the distance and height optimally so the sear bottom and the gear can line up. Not totally sure, if this idea was fine how it is I'd be making $$$ off it. But I know it can be done. I might sketch it out later on.

SIGSays
07-17-2003, 02:24 PM
ule pic... i saw this in another thread

afrankart
07-17-2003, 02:51 PM
That pic appears as if it were off of the AGD store site. Too bad it isn't there now.;)

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-17-2003, 03:11 PM
Yeah, I'm 95% sure that picture Sigsays added is not what it really looks like. If you take a peek at the Warpig Diagram you'll notice the orings sealing the top of the on/off is indented into the brass part, so it would be different from the pic where the oring sits on top.

So sidenote I was just thinking of (I do not know the physics principles Tom is using for the trigger exactly, but if the ULE trigger on/off pin top was larger than it is now would that result in a lighter pull (12oz?) but the reason it is not being done is because it would be so light chuffs would be nonstop? If so could the gear idea that shortens the pull/increases the pull weight (2mm X 22.5 oz) be combined with a larger on/off top to bring it down to either 3mm X 12oz or 2mm X 18oz? Basically same weight pull as the ULE now but 33% pull distance reduction without chuff risks. If I am wrong, someone pleae explain what would actually change the force required to push the on/off so that it seals the airflow inside the Mag.

Come on guys, TheJester is once again coming up with some good points (always does, unfortunately he proves me wrong sometimes, lol) but would my idea of a rail with the 2nd gear attached, that gear pushing the sear, and a small gear around the trigger pin to pull the bigger gear work? A pretty thick pair of gears could be used to offset the stress of the trigger return that could result in wear.

IT... COULD... WORK! (Young Frankenstein quote)

classicmagplayer
07-17-2003, 03:25 PM
Ummmm this is to everyone that is thinking of using belts/gears to change the force or distance of the trigger pull....look at your sear, it is a lever. If you change the point where the clevis is attached to the sear you change the lever arm. Which changes the amount of force and distance required to pull the trigger. If you want a smaller pull, drill another hole right above(toward the sear pin) the one that the clevis is attached in. This will shorten the pull, but make it stiffer. If you want a long soft pull drill a hole right below(away from the sear pin) There isn't really enough room below the clevis to drill another hole, but who wants a longer pull anyhow? The trigger pull can also be change by changing where the trigger rod hits the trigger, that is why the benchmark frame has a longer pull, I think, never seen one in person. Both of these methods also require messing with the trigger rod length, which isn’t difficult, but it's not recommended by AGD. I'm not telling you to try this, but it’s a lot easier than a bunch of gears and belts. Oh yeah, one other downfall of gears and belts is friction, each thing you add would increase friction and stiffen the trigger pull more. Changing the mounting point of the clevis on the sear won’t add any friction.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-17-2003, 03:40 PM
OK, I am officially kicking myself for missing that. Couldn't AGD produce a new sear then with a shorter lever then? They could keep it to trigger rod standards so Mags don't start messing up and that should result in a much reduced pull length. I might try that regardless But AGD coming up with some short sears would be nice and pretty easy to do. Any risks involved in this? Bolt not fully resetting, etc?

And if the pull is made heavier by a short lever, could the larger on/off head theory I previously posted offset that extra torque (?) required? If so, raising the sear rod's and producing a different on/off pin for the ULE that is wider (maybe use thinner oring if possible but I read the ones he got are as small as they come or something?) could make the trigger real close to an electric!

Good call classicmagplayer, my idea involved shortening the lever because it would have hooked up right below the hinge, but that alone should make the pull short and I totally overlooked it. DOH!

classicmagplayer
07-17-2003, 04:05 PM
When you pull the trigger the pressure on both sides(above and below) of the on/off pin top are equal, so changing the size of the on off top doesn't affect the stiffness of the pull...well it might have a miniscule effect because of the surface area pressing on the o-ring, but almost none is what i'm guessing. What the on/off pin top size would change is the amount of kick back the trigger has, larger surface area of the on/off pin top, more kickback felt through the trigger.

What makes the trigger pull stiff is the actual rod part of the trigger rod. Where the bottom o-ring seals with the rod. Think of it this way, pressure is measure in force/area....soo if you decrease the cross sectional area of the trigger rod (the actual rod part, not the top) you decrease the force required to hold the ppin in place. The shape of the on off top has no affect on the pressure pushing the pin out....the pressure is pushing evenly on the whole pin, except the part sticking out the bottom oring. Smaller o-ring hole=smaller on/off pin(not top)= less force pushing the rod out. This is the whole idea behind the ule trigger(I think, didnt go to the tech class, so I didnt see it yet). Plus the smaller sealing o-ring would have less area touching the pin, so there is less friction.

hope this helps some

edit spelling

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-17-2003, 04:23 PM
Hmm... ok, definitely not sure how that exactly decreases the force needed to pull the trigger but I'm sure it'll be explained when IAO is over and the mods are free again. If something can be done to drop the force required to pull the trigger a little more to offset the added force needed by raising the point where the sear rod makes contact with the trigger so it all balances out and results in a super-short, ultralight, effective, and reliable trigger. I know if with the current setup they could have dropped the weight even more, but I wonder if the chuffing issue was the concern for doing that? If so, the shorter pull of raising the sear rod could prevent chuffing big-time.

So the lingering question is: if the lever part of the sear is shortened to the point where the pin could be as high as even just below the safety, could this result in cycle problems with the new ULE? If not, does anyone know the physics equation needed to calculate exactly how much heavier the ULE pull would be and how much less distance the trigger pull would be?

classicmagplayer
07-17-2003, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by QUINCYMASSGUY


So the lingering question is: if the lever part of the sear is shortened to the point where the pin could be as high as even just below the safety, could this result in cycle problems with the new ULE? If not, does anyone know the physics equation needed to calculate exactly how much heavier the ULE pull would be and how much less distance the trigger pull would be?

I think you have it mistaken, raising the point where the trigger hits the trigger rod will make the pull lighter, but increase the length needed to pull. More than likely this would result in more short stroking of the trigger. On the other hand raising the point where the trigger rod is attached to the sear(with a clevis) would result in a shorter, stiffer trigger pull. I dont know if clevis is the right name for it in paintball, but that is what we call it for model airplanes.

It would be cool if AGD produced a sear/trigger rod that would be used with the ULE trigger to produce a trigger that was a little lighter than stock, but also shorter. Shortening the trigger pull might also help reduce chuffing caused by short stroking with the lvl X.

I just looked over what you posted again, and shortening the trigger rod wont shorten the trigger pull. What would shorten the pull is mounting the clevis closer to the sear pin, not closer to the trigger.

banzaimf
07-17-2003, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by kosmo
I remember back in "the day" people would grind and bevel their sears to let it slip off the bolt smoother and sooner. If done just right, you could have one hell of a trigger. But polishing a little too much would cause your gun to go full auto all the time. And since the sear is made from a pansy metal, it would wear and go full auto after a while any way and you would have to replace the sear. Anywho, perhaps an aluminum or SS sear would be more viable? Best part is that its simple enough to do yourself, though it prolly voids the warranty.

BTW, if anyone is confused as to what Im talking about, heres a link: Ravi's Paintball Place (http://www.paintballravi.com/Articles/MagTrigger/mag_trigger_job.html)

Just wanted to say, Done it, it works if done a little bit at a time, and I have been running the sear for about 7 years now with no problems. The carbide steel is pretty tough.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-17-2003, 08:54 PM
classicmagplayer, I actually think we are in agreement but got our terminology mixed up. When I said shorten the lever I mean the part of the main piece of the sear that hangs down and connects the sear pin and that metal thingee the sear rod screws into to the rest of the sear (ok, my parts name knowledge sucks). So the trigger rod would be higher, closer to the point where the trigger rotates. I actually just looked at my Mag and realized it would possibly require some of the space below the safety to be hollowed out to allow the rod to go right below the trigger hinge. But some progress could be made. I have attached a pic, there are 4 lines included. The bottom is where the sear pin is roughly located now. The other three are potential places it could be located it the lever part I am referring to is shortened. Higher it is, the shorter the pull will be but it will inversely add pull weight. Cutting half the distance between where the sear rod connects and where the sear pivots should cut the pull needed in half but also double the pull weight. Maybe not half but somewhere near that. With the ULE trigger it could be a miniscule pull (1/2 the current pull) with a less than 2lb pull which is still 1/3 less than the current Mag pull. I know my fingers are strong enough to walk that. Take a look at the pic and give me your ideas. The orange is the stock pin location, the others are places the pin could be moved to. Yes, some trigger frame hollowing might be needed.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-17-2003, 08:56 PM
Here's the pic

classicmagplayer
07-17-2003, 10:28 PM
I like your idea, but i would keep the trigger rod in the same place it always hits at the trigger, and just change where it attaches to the sear. Look at the pic to get an idea of what i mean. If you do it how you posted you would be negating the shorter pull by moving the rod up the trigger also, which would increase the pull. Hope that made sence. I realize that this will create some problems with pushing the sear up, but it wouldnt take much of a change to the sear to make a large difference with the distance of the pull.

I like the idea of a shorter trigger pull. You wouldnt have to ride the trigger to fire fast like you would with a long soft pull.

I think I'll try this when i get the x valve and ule trigger. maybe post some pics too.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-17-2003, 11:18 PM
I am not sure you're right, but I may not be either. I have attached another pic demonstrating the movement. The bottom line is two colors: red being the pin set at rest, the orange being the distance it needs to travel to make the sear fire. The top is the same but higher to represent the higher pin location we are discussing. So the higher one will move a shorter distance but as the same amount of work or force will be needed to fire the paintball gun a higher level of force must be applied in that shorter distance to make it work. So the pin being higher up towards the body of the mag would mean shorter pull indicated by the reduced orange line but would require more force.

So to get back to the issue before this becomes a tech issue: is this feasible (possible) and if so would the AO community prefer a shorter, slightly heavier pull which could be almost anywhere between the current settings of normal pull and 15 oz weight to the top image I did, right near the trigger hinge, which would be insanely short but probably only slightly lighter than the current Mag pull weight? I think a happy medium would be my pick, roughly half the pull and 2lbs weight of pull, or 22oz pull and however short that makes it, but it is possible I believe.
I think most people love the lightness of electros but one other thing I always think is great about them is how short the pulls are.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-17-2003, 11:19 PM
I always forget the pic.... grrr!

classicmagplayer
07-17-2003, 11:46 PM
your missing the fact that if you move the rod up on the actual trigger you end up with a longer pull. Look at the very top line in you last pic...even if the trigger rod only has to move 1 mm, the rod is so close to the trigger pin...or rotation point, that the bottom of the trigger would have to move like half an inch just to move the rod 1 mm. if you had that same setup, except the trigger rod hitting the trigger in the stock location, you would end up with about a 2-3 mm pull at the bottom of the trigger.

Another thing to think about, this would actually increase the force that the trigger would kick back compared to the stock ule trigger.

I would like a trigger that is a little lighter than stock, but a shorter pull.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-18-2003, 12:09 AM
Oh ok, I think I see what you're saying, so that maybe an angled pin would be how to get a short pull. You're right my idea could possibly result in a longer, lighter pull. Oops, but I think we do have the right idea. Your #2 and #3 could definitely do what we're looking to do, unless the direction the trigger is being pulled and the angle the pin is sloped at plays a role. I don't know, it's late and the brain is shutting down for the night. But if the trigger motion is directly back but the pin is being pushed at a slant wouldn't that also require a longer pull for the same motion? Maybe not, I'm thinking that could work. Would make installation easier too, no cutting into the trigger frame body. I need a new screw anyways, maybe I need to order a new sear and do some playing.

classicmagplayer
07-18-2003, 12:26 AM
actually i'm majoring in aerospace engineering, and have 2 years of physics in :D

As long as you aren’t trying for an extreme change in the length of pull, i doubt the angle of the sear and trigger rod will matter much. The pull might make have a stiff start then get softer, which would be ok. Could probably cut the pull length in half without problems.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-18-2003, 12:42 AM
You reading this employees of AGD? classicmagplayer is legit (I hope, who knows online but so far I believe it). Yeah, I was thinking that if a little extension came off the back of the trigger and was slightly angled too, the extension would push against the pin in the same fashion the trigger does now allowing the same motion to push the same distance, but since the sear connection is much closer to the sear's pivot, it would result in the sickly short pull and only minimal weight increase.

classicmagplayer, any chance you would be able to do the math determining exactly how much change this could have, for example to drop the pull distance down to half presumably by making the sear connection spot half the distance to the sear axis, and in doing so what additional force would be required to activate the sear properly without other issues resulting? The exact AGD specs would be tough but if you could do something close to what I did earlier, that would be great. We definitely want to find the spot where we get the most beneficial reduce in pull while still keeping most of the lightness. By how the sear moves, wouldn't we want it to be 1/2 to 3/4 of the way down the sear, so in other words 1/4 to 1/2 the distance closer to the sear axis? I think if we only crept it up a little (1/10) the amount shortened wouldn't be worth the added weight but on the other hand if the pin was connected right by the axis the pull weight would make the almost nonexistent pull length pointless. Or would it?

We're nearing 1000 views, people are interested :rolleyes:

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-18-2003, 08:21 AM
Also, two additional questions:

If a sloped angle was used for the sear on the trigger could Emags and Xmags be adjusted to be able to fire at such an angle? I haven't spent much time looking at the E-frames for mags so I don't know if this could work for them, but I could see where the solenoid might be set for a straight horizontal sear position. Not sure, EMag techs, please explain! Thanks!

Also, if it COULD, wouldn't this help address the issue of the dwell not charging enough or whatever the ULE trigger mod was doing to electrics that AGD is going to need to adjust a little? I remember reading about that and I think the lightness was the issue.

classicmagplayer
07-18-2003, 02:00 PM
just fired the ule trigger today :D guess whos going to buy an x valve tomorrow and the wait for the ULE will begin.

After firing it I think a shorter pull would help a ton with the "chuffing" even if the trigger was a little stiffer. The trigger is freakin light and you can still feel it kick. I only got to play for like l min, but it does chuff unless your paying attention to releasing the trigger. I'm sure after playing with it for a couple games it would be easy to shoot. The only problem is that the trigger is light enough you dont realize your "riding" the trigger and short stroking it.

I'm going to ask tomorrow if a shorter spring would have any effect on the short stroking. The with the shorter spring it would take less pressure to get the valve to move the whole way forward and release a larger amount of air. This might stiffen up the pull more though cause the spring would be pushing less on the bolt. I really doubt that made sence.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-18-2003, 02:31 PM
Sounds sweet classicmagplayer, while you're asking them questions don't forget to ask about that whole idea we were bouncing around about raising the point where the sear pin connects with the sear so that it goes at a more upward angle, thereby shortening the pull distance but adding some weight to the pull. If this works it could really reduce chuffing and if the trigger is so light it shouldn't have too much effect on the pull weight needed. If the counter argument is regarding how the trigger will actually push the rod if the trigger is moving horizontally and the rod will need to be pushed at a 45 degree angle, I know what it needs. Imagine the part of metal that sits just above the sear now extended down so there is a flat surface at a 45 degreee angle to the trigger so that it would sit flat with the new on-off pin angle like the trigger does now with the current sear pin that is horizontal. So this new surface would be perpendicular to the new sear pin and move at a 1:1 ratio with the trigger as it does now, allowing the reduction in pull distance with no loss of effectiveness due to the angle of the sear and trigger being changed. This surface would need to be low, about where the pin makes contact in mags right now, to take advantage of a shorter distance. Following me??

classicmagplayer
07-18-2003, 02:46 PM
yeah, you talking about angling the stright part of the sear back so its still perpendicular to the trigger rod. That would be great, but you would also need a longer trigger rod that probably out of the adjustment range. AGD could sell a new sear/trigger rod that would make the pull shorter but still lighter than the old pull. The only real problem i can see is with the emag/xmag where the solinoid arm/plunger thing goes up through the clevis to attach to the sear... at least thats what i can see from pics. If the normal trigger rod is moved up and back(moved back to fix the angle problem) the hole in the clevis might not be long enough for the solnoid to fit through.

I think there might need to be a "step" in the trigger to hold the rod in place...because if its angled down toward the trigger it might bind up behind the trigger. When i get my x valve i might try it.

sorry for the bad grammer and spelling, i dont have a spell checker and i'm too lazy to look stuff up.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-18-2003, 02:57 PM
great minds think alike... unfortunately they don't communicate well...

What I initially meant was exactly what you countered with :D

The sear itself can stay the exact same shape and location it is now. The rod can even stay the same style but the pin would be hanging at a 30-45 degree slope so it's connecting higher on the sear and utilizing the shorter but heavier pull. Whether or not the solenoid and all that can still be hooked up now that the pin angles differently is another issue entirely, but for us with manual mags, I am not worrying about that just yet. Do you think anything in the grip for Emags would interfere with theis new angle or that the plunger won't be able to connect?

The ledge/step/point that the sear contacts would be on the trigger. Thats what I meant. My whole intent of mentioning that was the binding issue, you would need the ledge on the trigger, angled so it's pushing the pin straight at the sear and the pin won't get pushed in the wrong direction. Yes the sear rod length would need to be altered but hey, thats progress. Would pushing the sear at a more upward angle that a flat angle cause issues? I would think it would be easier to release the bolt doing that.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-18-2003, 08:44 PM
Up, and since this thing's gotten over a thousand views I know more than just classicmagplayer and myself are viewing it, if you like the idea, give your opinion about whether this idea sounds good, if you'd want a shorter pull with just a little loss in lightness, and if you think it could work. Especially AGD techs and people who really know the marker, give your two cents to this, the whole intent is for this to help everyone!

afrankart
07-18-2003, 09:32 PM
Yeah, I can't help but check this thread out every time someone posts, but I can't help but wait for feedback and info from someone who has shot this trigger and possibly has a beta version to tell us about.

classicmagplayer
07-18-2003, 10:54 PM
I shot it :D

Picked up the mag on the table thinking "hey its an rt with an x-valve" and was like woah...it felt like the diadem i was just shooting. Its real light, easily walkable. The only problem I can see is the chuffing. I have to admit switching from the diadem to the mag was weird. With the e-guns it doesnt matter if you get out of rythm, but with the ule trigger it will sputter. There were a couple people there that couldnt shoot the thing at all and every shot was a sputter or chuff.

The reason it so easy to short stroke it is that the on/off closes as soo as you touch the trigger. So if your walking it and dont fully release with one finger before the other hits your short stroking. I tried fanning and didnt have a single chuff, but when walking every once in awhile you could here a little sputter.

And you can still feel the RT effect...

hopefully i'll be going again tomorrow to play with it some more...i think i spent more time playing with the guns than i did watching the games. THere have got to be more people on here that went to the IAO and have shot the trigger.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-19-2003, 12:53 AM
Almost 1200 views and climbing, you people definitely see potential in this. classicmagplayer has given some great ideas and amendments to mine to the point where we have the basic concept mapped out pretty solidly. One issue that may arise is the trigger rod: By changing where the rod is located and which direction it is being pushed, the length may need to be adjusted. How is the best way for the right length to be selected? Is it just so that at rest the rod has that miniscule distance between it and the trigger? What are the risks of the distance being slightly off in either direction?

Here's another question for the general population: what is the current distance the trigger on an Intelliframe has to be pulled to shoot effectively in rapid fire, and if this idea works how short would you want it to get to benefit you in preventing chuffs and allowing walking, knowing it will add extra weight to the pull? It seems one issue is almost how light the trigger really is and that it's so light you don't know if you released it enough. Would you prefer a little more weight is added so you can tell that it has reset but at the same time reducing the distance it needs to reset?

We will all see how the ULE is when it comes out, and I definitely can't wait for the feedback from the current users regarding how it is and how this idea could work then. But speculate people, make educated guesses, or just express your opinion about if you would even want this functionality if it can work effectively in this thread.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-19-2003, 01:19 AM
Another idea to add to this... I was just playing with the sear, using my thumb and index finger and the axis and playing with the angels that the pin can be pushed at. One thing I noticed with a 45 degree angle is that it's tougher to push due to where the axis is. Could the part that hangs down be moved a little further back? What effect would this have on how it fired? The Emag plunger might need to be adjusted (or the end can have an L shape, with two seperate holes in the sear for the plunger and the sear rod). Ideas?

afrankart
07-19-2003, 05:37 AM
Well since you shot it classicmagplayer, if you can, could you tell me the approx. pull weight/reactivity push? I am curious just how reactive it is, and if the reactivity is adjustable in any way. By the way, did you notice if it had a preset or an adjustable tank?

classicmagplayer
07-19-2003, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by QUINCYMASSGUY
If this were a mod we did with our own sears because AGD chooses not to adopt this idea we're working on here, how is the best way for the right length to be selected? Is it just so that at rest the rod has that miniscule distance between it and the trigger? What are the risks of the distance being slightly off in either direction?



Its easy to adjust...just have enough space between the trigger and the rod for light to pass through. And the trigger to be able to move foward and back a little. The risks are:
if the trigger rod is hitting the trigger all the time, the on/off assembly will not fully open, thereby short stroking the trigger by itself
If there is too big of a gap you might not be able to pull the trigger far enough to release the bolt, so you couldnt shoot.
Its really easy to adjust to the proper length, it just takes a couple minute of disassembling the maker and putting it back together a couple times.


Another idea to add to this... I was just playing with the sear, using my thumb and index finger and the axis and playing with the angels that the pin can be pushed at. One thing I noticed with a 45 degree angle is that it's tougher to push due to where the axis is. Could the part that hangs down be moved a little further back? What effect would this have on how it fired? The Emag plunger might need to be adjusted (or the end can have an L shape, with two seperate holes in the sear for the plunger and the sear rod). Ideas?

Thats exactly what i was trying to say be4. If you move the stright part(part that hangs down) back to correct for the angle change created by moving the trigger rod up on the sear. The only problem with this is you would need a whole new trigger rod, because, with the hanging part of the sear moved back, the rod would be too short to reach, even if it was adjusted out the whole way.


Well since you shot it classicmagplayer, if you can, could you tell me the approx. pull weight/reactivity push? I am curious just how reactive it is, and if the reactivity is adjustable in any way. By the way, did you notice if it had a preset or an adjustable tank?

It had an flatline tank on it, but i didn't check the output pressure, all I looked at was if there was air in the tank. As for the approx pull and length...its the same length as stock, just a ton lighter. It was probably under a pound seeing that stock pull is 3 pounds right? and the reactiveness was still there, but its not enough to push your finger back to sweat spot, at least I dont think there was enough.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-19-2003, 10:58 AM
OK, so if the part that hangs down got moved back it might require a longer pin to be made. I am definitely playing with this when I get my ULE trigger! It's minor parts to be made, basically a new shape to the current sear. But the benefits could be phenomenal

GhillieGuy
07-19-2003, 03:44 PM
pic i got from warpig..;)

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-19-2003, 04:08 PM
Yeah, I can't wait to see this thing in full production. However I am still confused about what precisely makes this thing drop 2/3 of the trigger pull weight. A step by step explanation of how it works and where it is different from the traditional on/off would be nice.
I can see the differences in that diagram but it'll probably make way more sense when a mod can explain.

Well too nice a day to keep typing, but let's here some more thoughts on our super-short, super-light trigger idea. I'm trying this trigger-shortening idea no matter what when I get this thing but having some more feedback, especially from the folks at AGD, would be nice to help plan this out. This thread should be a classic :D

classicmagplayer
07-19-2003, 05:39 PM
alright heres a simple explanation:

Pretend your standing under a small waterfall that is wide...the water is hitting you. You can feel the weight of the water pushing down on you but its not bad. Now hold up a piece of plywood and try and stand under the waterfall. There is now a ton of pressure pushing down on the surface of the board which in turn is pushing on you.

in this analogy the new ule on off pin is you, and the old on off pin is you with the piece of plywood. :D the water fall is the pressure inside the valve. This just shows that a larger surface area with the same pressure produces more force.

since air pressure pushes in all directions, it doesnt matter what shape the on/off pin is...the top of the pin could be huge and the trigger pull would be the same. This is because the pressure is surrounding the top and pushing on all sides. The only place that matters for the trigger pull is the area inside the micro o-ring. Making this piece smaller with lighten the trigger pull.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-20-2003, 12:29 AM
OK, I got it....so what would the shims be needed for then if it's all reliant on the pin being thin? :D I know, I'm a pain.

Still not many other responses on this one guys, if you like the idea of a shorter pull at little sacrifice in how light the pull is, speak up. AGD doesn't care if just classicmagplayer and myself want to talk about this and hypothesize about it (unless we do it and it works, then I think we'll have their attention) but if enough people voice interest AGD themselves might begin to investigate a new sear shape that would allow the angled pin and a new trigger with the 45 degree ledge for the pin to sit on or be clipped to so that the sear doesn't slip and fall into the trigger frame and also pushes at the needed 30 or 45 degree slope that will shorten the pull. Hey, if pivot point on the sear is moved forward or the part that extends down is moved back, it may not even make the trigger pull heavier. I don't know, and we won't till it's tried. So AGD... any hopes of looking into if a modified sear and trigger could do this and not have negative effects on the mags performance or the life of its parts?

SIGSays
07-20-2003, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by QUINCYMASSGUY
Yeah, I'm 95% sure that picture Sigsays added is not what it really looks like. If you take a peek at the Warpig Diagram you'll notice the orings sealing the top of the on/off is indented into the brass part, so it would be different from the pic where the oring sits on top.

So sidenote I was just thinking of (I do not know the physics principles Tom is using for the trigger exactly, but if the ULE trigger on/off pin top was larger than it is now would that result in a lighter pull (12oz?) but the reason it is not being done is because it would be so light chuffs would be nonstop? If so could the gear idea that shortens the pull/increases the pull weight (2mm X 22.5 oz) be combined with a larger on/off top to bring it down to either 3mm X 12oz or 2mm X 18oz? Basically same weight pull as the ULE now but 33% pull distance reduction without chuff risks. If I am wrong, someone pleae explain what would actually change the force required to push the on/off so that it seals the airflow inside the Mag.

Come on guys, TheJester is once again coming up with some good points (always does, unfortunately he proves me wrong sometimes, lol) but would my idea of a rail with the 2nd gear attached, that gear pushing the sear, and a small gear around the trigger pin to pull the bigger gear work? A pretty thick pair of gears could be used to offset the stress of the trigger return that could result in wear.

IT... COULD... WORK! (Young Frankenstein quote)

sorry about that... jterraw or something said that was.. and he put a pic of it in a threa... so i just assumed it was a ult :(

845
07-20-2003, 07:42 AM
I have one but I have not gotten to shoot it with paint yet so I wont post my opinion until I do.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-20-2003, 11:43 AM
Thats cool you got one though, I'm wondering when batch #2 is coming out but if the current release is acting like a beta test and someone picks up on a design flaw at least it can be fixed before I get mine. Fast is nice, but I can wait for the right reasons.

No prob Sigsays, so much about this thing is speculation right now. Whoever gave the pic to you is a jerk or an idiot, depending on if he knew it was the ULE or not. But that pic definitely came from the AGD store and was most likely labeled RT on/off or something similar where they got it. Please by all means contribute your opinion on if you want the shorter pull/slightly heavier trigger idea. I've been dying to hear others' thoughts. They can't ignore us forever! :D

So I was thinking about it and I think the reason the part of the sear that extends down is in front of the pivot point is because thats required for the pin to effectively move at a horizontal angle. So if this idea were to work this part that extends down would need to be almost or even completely under the pivot point for the sear. The question is with the change in pivot location would this alter the pull distance required?

So here's the changes so far to sum up:

Goal: Reduced trigger pull, 40-60% reduction, testing pending. Expected but acceptable side effect of increase weight of trigger pull of 30-50%, testing pending. With testing the optimal result is to shorten the pull by a larger percentage than the trigger pull weight is increased. Wouldn't 16oz 70% reduced trigger pull rip? Aiming for it :D

Idea: with the new ULE on/off, a new ULE sear and trigger should be next. The old sear was designed with a heavy pushback on the on/off in mind. AGD has done a great job and managed to solve that issue but with one side effect: risk of shortstrokes that would "chuff". But with the push against the on/off that causes the pull weight reduced, the leverage the sear is designed to give to push in the on/off pin is no longer needed. This allows us to change the functionality of the sear with great benefits in doing so.

The new sear: OK, imagine the current sear or look at one while reading this. The part that locks the bolt stays the same. So does the actual sear pivot point (the hole). And how the back part pushes the on/off pin. BUT lets look at that part of the sear that hangs down. It's a fulcrum, so by it being an inch right now (guessing an inch) the on/off pin connects to the end and has to push X mm's to fire the gun. But what if this part was half an inch? By moving the point of pressure 1/2 the distance to the center of the sear it will theoretically take 1/2 the distance to fire. so the trigger pull would be .5X instead of X but at the cost of the pull being heavier. So the idea is to find the right balance between pull and weight to minimize chuffing, allow easy walking, and not add too much weight back into the pull. Now, to really benefit from this, the angle the sear pin is pushed needs to be changed. So instead of a horizontal motion the pin needs to be pushed from its current location at a 30 degree angle upwards. This may add or remove some of the benefits of the shorter fulcrum, testing needs to be done for this. But this angle is needed to allow the shorter pull because if the location the pin is pushed at by the trigger, that would counteract the benefits or shortening the fulcrum. So also needed is for the fulcrum, the part of the sear that hangs down, to be moved back so that it is directly or only slightly in front of where the hole is in the sear. As long as no issues result in this, this should allow a smooth, short pull. Here is a pic of roughly what the new sear would look like, any designs thoughts, problems you think could result, reasons why are logic is off, please by all means respond with them.

SlartyBartFast
07-20-2003, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by classicmagplayer
alright heres a simple explanation:

The only place that matters for the trigger pull is the area inside the micro o-ring. Making this piece smaller with lighten the trigger pull.

I don`t quite get it either. Think I`ve forgotten most of my university fluid dynamics courses.

What I can say with certainty is it`s not quite as simple as the analogy given.

After all, If you tried to support your piece of plywood with a broom stick, you`d stil ahve to hold up a ton of weight.

SI|ENT|3O|3
07-20-2003, 04:40 PM
Quincy, would your ule sear work without the ule trigger upgrade? lmk.
-sebastian

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-20-2003, 04:42 PM
OK, go with the broomstick example. pretend the broomstick is the on-off... pushing it up into the water longwise wouldn't be that hard. Now try doing that with a baseball bat... pushing that up into the water would be harder because there is more surface area being pushed against. So you have to do more work. So thin pin, less surface area to be pushed against.

What I think I'm curious about is the shims.. I have no clue what they will do. Or if the smaller passage of air between the reg and the chamber that holds the air you use to shoot the paintball will affect max ROF.

Well hope the example helped and if anyone knows the functionality let us know, but people with ULE triggers, throw us some info guys, if you really don't have interest in seeing if this works, fine, but help a brother out!

Silent, great question. This sear idea would be exclusive to the ULE on/off because I think it would make a normal mag or Lvl 10 mag with no ULE have too heavy of a trigger pull, although I could see it working well on an RT Pro or XValved Mag if you got a strong trigger finger because it would still shorten it, reset quickly, and allow some sick ROF if you can handle a 3.5-4lb pull. But the idea is for it to work with the ULE on-off and take advantage of the new light pull. I just don't have a ULE on/off yet OR the machinery to modify a sear to test it out. I'm looking into both of those.

afrankart
07-20-2003, 04:46 PM
My guess* is that the shims are used to lengthen the length of the on/off assembly, therefore making the pin "shorter" in comparison to the longer assembly. This might have the same effect of having a shorter on/off pin in a normal on/off assembly ginving you more reactivity to fight bolt stick. *I emphasize guess.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-20-2003, 05:17 PM
That could be the reason behind the shims, at this point it is all speculation. We shall see!

There are a tons of authorities here on AO who really know their stuff, especially about Mags and what has worked, can work, and about what effect changes such as the one I have spent so much time devising would have on Mags. I would be honored if they could contribute your knowledge to this and help me and the others posting on evaluating the current idea and address issues or offer your two cents on how it can be improved further. I'm shocked that such an idea as this has not received more responses from any other members on AO and especially shocked it has received none from the people who I view as some of the better techs and resources in the paintball community and definitely the elite of AO. Would changing the sear have a negative effect on the Mags performance or possibly cause damage I am not forseeing? Has such an idea been tried before by any of you or anyone you know? The whole reason I started this thread is to contribute to AO and help us advance the marker we all love and use (or at least own, lol). I truly would value your assistance and look forward to seeing posts from some of you. Thanks!

Other people on AO.... would you want this trigger mod or would you rather just stick with superlight and regular pull? Speak up! :D

Meph
07-20-2003, 07:08 PM
There's only 1 thing bad about the ULE trigger.


I COULDN'T GET ONE! Lucky bastards signing up for your fancy schmancy tech class. Wish I read up on that class and known it was going to go through the ULE trigger as well. Just figured it'd been the same stuff I went through in Tennessee at PTI training. Guess not.

SI|ENT|3O|3
07-20-2003, 08:24 PM
See i wouldn't really mind a hard pull if it's really short, i would prefer it. That way i can keep more pressure on it and it would be suuuuuuuuuuper snappy. I could test out your modified sear for you on a retro, i could pay for it...VERY INTERESTED i am.
-sebastian

classicmagplayer
07-20-2003, 08:41 PM
Originally posted by SlartyBartFast


I don`t quite get it either. Think I`ve forgotten most of my university fluid dynamics courses.

What I can say with certainty is it`s not quite as simple as the analogy given.

After all, If you tried to support your piece of plywood with a broom stick, you`d stil ahve to hold up a ton of weight.

Thats not what i was trying to say...i was saying a larger area(piece of plywood) under the same pressure(waterfall) would have a greater force than a small area(just the person) under the same pressure(waterfall) I guess a better example would have been someone holding a book and a piece of plywood under a waterfall. Book would have a smaller area so it would have less force then the larger area of the plywood. That make sence? :confused:


Oh and i asked one of the guys at IAO today if they had any ULE triggers left, he said no, but they should be up in a week or two.

Hmmm i got an extra sear and my new X valve...might have to try this tomorrow when I get some air. Wish I had an adjustable tank so I could crank up the input pressure though.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-20-2003, 11:40 PM
Ok, starting to generate some new interest. To answer a few things:

Meph, I don't have one yet either man, but I got to wait till the next paycheck and pay a little over a grand on Amex and over six-hundred in rent before I know what I have to spend so I'm not hitting the fields anytime soon. But I can't wait to get one of these.

Silent, "huge chunk edited because my plans for the future have been slightly modified ;)...) If you want to see this be evaluated and taken seriously, encourage your friends here on AO to post here saying what a good idea this is and that they would want this understanding the possibly heavier pull. Enough voices and this'll be noticed. But I'm a non-AGD sponsored, non-techie, non-paintball store owner, non- everything except just a guy who loves this game and is leading this innovation out of pure curiousity. I am most likely going to try it myself and if it works keep it in my Mag (and maybe help classicmagplayer and other people who helped to produce their own) and then evaluate possible options of further production "another edit ;)".

Futuremagowner, when I did my last post I was looking right at my sear I replaced with the Xvalve one thinking how I can prototype this idea with my Intelliframe and XValve. One thing I am concerned about is that the platform on the trigger is really needed to stop the pin from dropping down into the trigger frame and I think moving the part that hangs down back is also needed for this idea to work properly. If you have the equipment to do this, go for it and I can't wait to see the results. And definitely post them! I am going to see what I can do and might just jury-rig something to see if I can replicate what the pull would be like if this new sear was built.

Thats all for tonight folks, tell your friends to post in this thread to give their support for this, if you are reading this and haven't posted yet but like to see this happen enter a post with as little as one line just saying "I like this idea, can AGD look into it?"

This is exactly what AO was designed for, lets make this a reality. Keep the posts coming and the views racking up.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-20-2003, 11:54 PM
Side question:

I am looking at the icon next to this thread and it's still that blue envelope and it has a black dot on it, why has it not moved to an overfilled envelope considering the views and posts exceed the numbers listed below and what does that black dot mean? Have we been blackballed by the mods, is that what the black dot means? lol, that would make my day, I'd be laughing my head off. G'night gentlemen, keep the posts a-coming!

Dayspring
07-21-2003, 02:11 AM
Shims- this is to alter the "length" of the on/off pin. Since they are only doing one pin length, the shims change the point at which the on/off seals with the oring inside.

Install- yes. It's fairly easy to install. Using locktite is the EASIEST way to do part of it b/c what you think is one long piece is actually 2. (on/off pin and the on/off support). It IS possible to not locktite it but you have to be careful taking it apart or you lose the poarts.

MISC- Basically, the tech class covered Emag/Xmag trigger pulls, adjusting the pull, some physics behind the pull- (pre-travel, hysteresis & post travel), how Hybrid and Emode relate to each other, recharge & fire points, ACE adjustments, 3.0 software & ULE trigger.

The small diameter on/off actually reduces the weight of the pull. (NOT getting into the physics of it. Tom took all morning to explain the physics behind the pull before he got to the ULT. ) Will answer more specific tomorrow. Tired now. Just got home from IAO.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-21-2003, 10:29 PM
Welcome back from IAO everybody, looks like we made a solid impact there. I hope everybody had fun.

I have no new information to contribute right now but still somewhat shocked this has not received even the slightest attention from some of AO's brighter minds. I am just a 9-5 working guy addicted to this game like most of you. As I said before I do not own a store, I do not do customs, heck I only own one Mag (although it IS an all-AGD ULE badboy) because frankly rent stinks and so does paying college loans, but I interact closely with this site and I am loyal to AGD and I think I may have actually devised something with classicmagplayer that could make the Mag line be improved further or at least give customers an option. Maybe I haven't and people at AGD or the brighter minds here at AO know exactly why not (won't cycle right, sear damage, etc) but I've done all I can to promote and devise this idea. You're all posting on other threads so don't tell me you're busy. It's your turn folks. Help us follow through on this one. And people reading this and interested, post SOMEthing regarding your thoughts on this idea.

That's all I got for now, what have you all got?

Dayspring
07-21-2003, 11:01 PM
I'll say this. Leave modifiying the sear to the professionals. There's a reason why the sear is shaped the way it is. The sear is actually coated, but that coating is VERY thin. You start cutting, you get to the soft/chewy center. BAD. The actual physics behind the placement of the sear pin is amazing. (tech class) Tom can actually make the trigger pull lighter, but the travel of the trigger would double. We already know people will accept a longer pull- double trigger.

But DO NOT start messing with the sear. drilling holes and moving stuff around WILL affect how the gun pulls. Badly.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-22-2003, 12:05 AM
Dayspring, you have illustrated exactly why I am so shocked that the skilled professionals have remained silent until the point you contributed. I consider you one of these authorities whose opinion I value and trust, you truly are an authority on Automags and I am happy you brought up that modifying the sear could result in the sear breaking... but without AGDs help in producing a new prototype sear or contributing thoughts about why it would or wouldn't work, myself and classicmagplayer have no other option but to try it ourself. With the jerks at smartparts trying to raise costs of electronic markers this could give our markers an edge in the mechanical genre. It would be foolish to just ignore.

I am sure the balance is very scientific and it is a step above my knowledge. For the previous Mag setup the balance may have worked, but with the ULE on-off push against the sear being changed an X factor has been mixed in, and this is all about evolution of the sear. And we are not talking about lengthening the pull, it's about shortening it. Before the ULE on/off the pull was heavy enough, now we have room to work with since its reduced so much. I am talking about redefining the science used in the sear. Evolution. If there is no way this idea could work because AGD looks into it and tries it, ok cool, no problem. But Automags.org is about presenting ideas and giving them a shot to see what it can do. The Lvl 7 bolt was AGD's outdated component, AGD looked to improve it. Superbolt 1 came, failed, but was evaluated more, EVOLVED, and the Lvl 10 came from that. Redefined how the bolt and power tube functioned, evolved it. Classic body, powerfeed body, ULE body, evolution. The ULE on/off went through evolutions, it had times when it sucked and even now it has a weakness but the weakness is how it's activated (the pull). So here is the next step of evolution. The sear. The same sear used for ages in Mags. The bottleneck in my opinion. I have presented an idea and it sounds feasible. It could eliminate shortstrokes and make the Mag rip. So now it needs the experts to evaluate it and if it sounds good to them it needs to be tested. If AGD doesn't want to evolve, that's sad and I dont believe that's the case anyways. But if this won't work, they haven't said that yet. They haven't even acknowledged this idea exists by posting in this thread.

Close to 2000 views, tons of posts, all we want to know from Tom, his techs, and/or the senior AO members is....
In your opinion, could this work? What is your opinion on this? I've been spending all this time posting here yet it's almost entirely falling on deaf ears..

Dayspring
07-22-2003, 12:32 AM
I know you want to shorten the pull. The problem is that there is a bunch of things moving that require the post travel of the trigger. The tech class illustrated this. There are parts of the firing cycle- pre travel, hysteresis & post travel. There are points within that travel that are required to make it work- recharge (where the gun is fully recharged and ready to fire) & fire. (there's also front and rear stop- the limit of the trigger travel.)

In order to get everything to work right, you need a certain amount of travel. There's going to come a point where you can't shorten it any more. That's why people try and adjust their trigger rods. They want to decrease the distance between the firing point and the recharge point. As it stands now, we're about as close as it's going to get with having the marker fire reliably.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-22-2003, 01:12 AM
Some rules can be bent, some can be broken... that is why AGD would be very helpful in evaluating this and also contributing to it being revised and perfected, they are the authority.

All the laws you brought up will still exist. Shortening the part that hangs down will not eliminate them, a screw still turns the same way no matter how far out you are holding the handle of the wrench but the closer to the center of the wrench you hold it, the less your hand has to move. So all parts above it stay the same. If changing the point of rotation will throw this then a new way to use the sloped angle to push the sear in the same movement it does now needs to be evaluated to keep it in the same place. The SEAR will travel the same distance and direction, and that is all that matters. It's the sloped pin that allows a shorter trigger pull to move the sear the same distance and direction. I bet the reason the part of the sear that hangs down has not been shortened is because the Mag would end up with a 5lb pull. Way too much to be wanted. Now thats changed. A slanted sear would do this.

The points of motion required will be there, but I KNOW we can make it a shorter pull by this reverse leverage idea. Please keep the counterpoints coming, you are doing exactly what I hoped someone would. It's stress-testing my idea and if you have any questions on what I just posted don't hesitate to ask.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-22-2003, 01:18 PM
Editing this post because it was me venting a little and it was inappropriate to act that way. I wouldn't be doing this if I didn't like AGD the most and enjoy posting and contributing to AO but it bummed me a little that no one in the senior membership or from AGD care at all to post to this, it's discouraging and makes me think I shouldn't waste my time responding to threads asking input about new products either because my opinion is totally overlooked. But anyways, I previously said I might drop the project, and it has gone back-burner, but I'm going to keep looking into it. But please, those with technical knowledge on the Mag, please do contribute your thoughts, I'm putting serious thought into this and hope it can work, but without you even acknowledging it won't work I have no idea where to go from here. I definitely appreciate your response Dayspring, and you will notice I did value your opinion and revised my idea.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-27-2003, 02:25 PM
I took Dayspring's point of not modifying the sear into consideration and revised my idea. As indicated in the pic, instead of modifying the current sear, an extension could be designed that changes the location of the pin relative to the pivot point of the sear. This provides three benefits over my prior design:

1.) Since classicmagplayer and I are the only ones looking to maybe try this (and who besides Dayspring and a few others seem to care at all about investigating into improving the Mag pull distance), it'll make testing it easier and not involve damaging the sear itself and let the sear work with it's normal functionality. I still expect a possible issue of the first part of the pull being stiff but unless the fulcrum part CAN be moved back without causing issues then I guess this'll have to do. But if this gets the pull reduced, with the new ULE on/off allowing the point of fire and recharge to be minimal and the forward and back stops that edwierd is working on, this could make a pull as short as an electronic trigger.

2.) It can be a drop-in kit that can be removed, although once the appropriate and most beneficial location on the sear is found, a little ledge should be polished into the sear fulcrum so the mod sits better and doesn't slide down.

3.) It allows the Emag parts to still connect to the location where the sear currently is. The fulcrum isn't being shortened, only adding a part for the sear pin to connect to instead.

So the idea is that part one is the previously mentioned extension to the trigger that is needed to allow the push to be the same as it is currently. By rotating on a 90 degree axis like the current trigger does, no extra trigger distance is needed to push the pin the same distance as it currently does. Having the push be horizontal but the pin moving diagonally would cause further movement in the trigger to be needed. Part 2 near the bottom of the extension is the ledge for the sear pin to sit, perhaps a way for it to clamp on the pin so the pin doesn't fall into the trigger frame. Part 3 is the actual extension. The sear pin would connect to it much like it does to the current sear but at a higher point on the fulcrum as previously devised. The orange part is the part that clamps to the current sear and stops it from moving. A rubber lining to prevent slipping could work.

So there's the revision..... any thoughts?

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-27-2003, 02:25 PM
grrr.. I always forget the pic.

edweird
07-27-2003, 11:33 PM
OK... ive scanned this thread and have to say I think you guys should attend the techclass and get on the same page as Dayspring and myself.

Now that that is said let me begin with saying that the sear is designed in such a way as to allow equal pressure from the fulcrum be transfered in such a way to balance out the rest of the system. Monkeying with the sear only going to throw the rest of the system out of wack. The lengths of each arm are designed to be equi-distant from the fulcrum and thus apply the same balancing force throughout.

Also lets clear up the concept of what the ULT mod does to the trigger pull.

Basicly imagine 4 points to the trigger swing. From the front to the back you have:
1. Front stop
2. Recharge Point
3. Fire Point
4. Back stop

The part of the mech trigger pull you really worry about is the distance between the 2nd and 3rd point. The other 2 points are not in play for the fireing cycle.

Now this is where the shims of the ULT come in. By adding shims you move the Recharge point closer to the fire point. Eventually you will get to a point where the fire point is to close to the recharge point and a condition of runaway is automatic. As we know this is NO GOOD! So all you have to do is remove the shims to the point where its out of danger of running away.

Im still thinking of the best way to shorting the distance between the recharge point and the forward stop. Doing this will reduce the obscene appearance of the over all length of the RT pull regardless of the actual operating length.

If this means rolling out the rod length to push the whole middle of the swing closer to the forward stop, Or even installing a setscrew in the front of the trigger to push the middle of the swing to the back stop. Eventually we will figure out what is better via good old school trial and error.

AGD
07-27-2003, 11:49 PM
Quincy,

If you shorten the tang on the sear like you said it would DOUBLE the trigger force and HALF the stroke. Yes you can do it but everyone wants a softer trigger over a shorter one.

AGD

shinobidice
07-28-2003, 12:28 AM
<head is spinning.. this should get moved to deep blue, all that high tech smart talk, i expected the news, just i got confused like halfway down the first page. maybe its cause its 1:30 in the morning.. im goin ta bed i'll re-read later

edweird
07-28-2003, 12:55 AM
From AGD

it would DOUBLE the trigger force

Ding Ding we have a Winnah!

from the mouth of the man himself, Dont monkey with the sear :P

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-28-2003, 06:51 AM
Thank you for responding Ed, I unfortunately find it difficult timewise and financially to attend tech classes, and you and Dayspring definitely know your stuff. I appreciate the help and I do agree this is not the optimal solution.

Tom, thank you also for responding, and for also actually acknowledging that what I was saying from the start was true. My whole idea has been based around the principle that the amount of work (forceXdistance) would always have to be the same regardless of the sear rod location on the tang so if the trigger pull got reduced by a third based on how far up on the sear the pin was moved, it would increase the pull weight by that much as well. But if you and most others feel that would make it too heavy to have a shorter distance be worth it, I definitely see that point and can understand it. I figured I could at the very least get the idea out and let it be evaluated in case it was possible and make it available to the experts in case they wanted to go through with it.

So this idea is probably worth avoiding and better alternatives for shorter pull might come up later. Oh well. Unless something comes to light I think this project will remain untested as I do not think the damage risk is worth it. But I offer it up as open source for anyone else to take up or follow through on. Thanks for the help, all of you who contributed. I do honestly appreciate it.

edweird
07-28-2003, 12:20 PM
Not a prob man. But dont give up hope as I can see its not a dead issue as a whole. Once the ULTrigger gets tested fully by us beta people I think we can start looking at shorting the rest of the trigger pull. Thus negating the illusion the full swing of the RTP trigger gives to the uninformed.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-28-2003, 01:06 PM
Edweird, I think one thing that raises hope is that my idea seems at least feasible in that I was right it could work but there would be an equal sacrifice in having the pull be heavy again while still having the benefit of a shorter pull which was what I was stating from the start. It is not modifying the part of the sear that needs to stay the same for the proper cycle of the gun, only the part that activates that. It seems Tom acknowledged it would do what I originally said it would. Would maybe a 20% pull decrease, 20% weight increase exchange prove useful? I guess it's opinion and people have different preferences about what works for them. It would keep the pull light (15oz X 1.2 = 18oz, which isn't bad) while shortening the pull perhaps enough to reduce the chuffing issue a little. I guess it's not really much of a benefit increase. I definitely agree though it could prove beneficial later on perhaps and that the ULE beta testing will be a big factor. I'd love to hear anything you wish to contribute about your beta testing regarding if this pull idea could end up being used. I still believe the sear is the next spot where performance increases could be found as it has not evolved with the other parts. But I also see how so much is involved and how redesigning it could be tough. But no one thought the Lvl 10 could have ever been created too, but AGD did it. If the not-to-be-mentioned court case with the not-to-be-mentioned company results in the age of semi-automatic mechanical markers to be reborn, AGD stands to be an industry leader hands down. And steady innovation like what we have seen the last two years is exactly what will keep them there.

I also am in the middle of thinking up a trigger stop idea that could save alot of damage to Mag trigger frames, sears, etc. I am finishing devising that idea first and definitely keeping an eye on what people are doing with stops on the ULE trigger before I release the idea to AO though. Any notes on how your stops do would be great (front, back, both, problems that could happen although I know the key ones), and especially info on how you tell where they should go and how you know exactly where to drill. Folks, don't start flaming me, my idea is simply a way to do them without having to drill, nothing more. Keep your eyes out for that.

edweird
07-28-2003, 03:03 PM
I think your missing the point that adding shims to the ULT actually reduce the distance between the Fire and recharge point.

You can only let them get so close before you have a runaway condition... but I assure you its still very close.

The only thing left to adjust is the stops to take the slack out of the whole thing. Idealy you want a small bit of travel from the fwd stop to the recharge point and a small bit of travel from the fire point to the rear stop. Once we figure out the best way for this we will have the optimized trigger for the RTP.

Adjusting the sear always has made me learly. I will personally take a softer pull over a strong mouseclick type anyday.

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-28-2003, 04:49 PM
Nope, I totally get what you mean by the shims cutting the shot and recharge distance, in other words, pulling the trigger until it shoots then holding it there, letting it slowly release until you basically feel the air refill the chamber, the distance you released to get this point is what you mean. If the distance is so little that the front of the sear can't lock the bolt, it will shoot again and again (runaway) until either the trigger is released more and the sear locks or it's pulled again so it seals the air flow again. But by using my idea we can cut the trigger pull it takes to move the sear the small distance required to seperate shoot and recharge properly like you have by even more without risking runaway. That is one reason I brought up 20%, that would really cut it to a short pull without any more increased risk of runaway. But it would add 20% weight to the pull. And what you say is exactly right, it's all a matter of preference, I think I would prefer a little more feel to the pull and it should increase the reactivity by 20% more too, which would aid the shorter distance even more in preventing chuffs.

And my idea totally involves the stops, you have been real cool to me and I'll definitely bounce the idea off you first if you want as I know you will be a good judge and not go ahead and try it before we've thought it out enough. Some others might do it and if it damages anything, blame me. The whole reason I haven't done this yet is because I want to do the appropriate thinking first. But I think you'll like this idea. Give me a day or two to create a schematic.

I am REAL leary about modifying sears, which is why I was so adamant about having input from skilled techs first. But I was also confident this would work as I thought (and it sounds like it does). With my idea, and the reduction being reduced to only 15-20% change instead of 50%, it could even be a drop-in sear to let the user decide which to use (stock or this) and not involve major mods. A 20% change may not even require the trigger extension as originally planned. I am looking into this cautiously and also will look into my stop idea with the same caution. But to me shorter pull almost is as important as lighter. Light enough to easily walk it, short enough to easily walk it and minimize chuffs, that is the balance I want. And I got strong fingers so sacrificing lightness might not be so bad for me. We'll see.

AGD
07-28-2003, 10:05 PM
Quincy,

This is not the appropriate thread for this discussion. Please delete it and repost in the workshop forum.

Thanks

AGD

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-28-2003, 10:13 PM
OK, I got told to move this here even though it's presenting a possible future mod for Mags and something that could help out AGD in the evolution of their Mag. Enjoy!!

(from other thread)
OK, here is idea #2 that goes with the shorter pull, I advise that I am posting this so Edweird, Dayspring, AGD, and people who know Mag's technical functionality extremely well can evaluate it and I would not recommend others to try to replicate it until some brainstorming is done in this thread.

If the ULE Trigger is going to benefit from a short pull, and trigger stops are needed in the front or back of the pull, it's going to be tough for the average user to get it modified, and once a hole is drilled it is there forever.

Alternative? Sure, here it is...

Imagine a block, shaped to fit right in the gap under the trigger and slides under the trigger with slotted rails on both sides and sits snugly with a type of hook design that sits over the safety, and the other side is secured when the grip frame screw is put through the frame. It won't move or adjust itself this way and sits the same way on all mags. Now this alone will not have any benefit, however it will use plates that are thin metal sheets that slide into any of the multiple spaces for it in the block. With the rail over top, these plates will sit flush with the top of the blocks and be held secure by the rail pushing down on it. The idea is for these plates to be adjustable, for two plates to be put in any front and back combination that will be the trigger stops. So this mod will work for anyone as each Mag could have different stop points so it's customizable to each Mag and does not require drilling and can easily be changed or even removed. You just slide the block on over the trigger, set some stops out further, set the gun up, check the pull, and keep moving the stops closer until they are at just the right spot (tight with just minimal forward and back play after the full trigger motion needed.

Notes to make: the diagram is general, there would be many more slots much closer together so fine tuning can be done. Also, it is not to scale but identifies the key points: slides in, held down tight, allows adjustable stops, no drilling and is removable. Don't even have to remove the trigger to put it in.

So what do you think? Would this work for the stops possibly needed for the ULE on/off?

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-28-2003, 10:47 PM
Stopblock idea (what I mentioned to Edweird in regards to a new idea I was going to contribute to help out the evolution of the Mag) moved to Workshop forum as requested (didn't even know there was one), anyone interested take a look over there. You may like the idea and it relates to the ULE on/off and the sloped sear idea. Don't post regarding it in this thread please.

I presume the rest of the thread is ok as its focus is brainstorming and market researching (forum consensus) to find out what can be done to help with the remarkable new ULE on/off which I'm dying to get my hands on and to see what people are interested in doing. The sear adjustment was a sidenote to it. I am going to wait for the ULE on/off and then decide if I want to try the sear idea out. I might not depending on the consensus I receive.

How about it folks, though? You have, lets say 10 units X 15oz with the new ULE. Totally hypothetical and I don't know the distance so lets say the current pull distance is 10 units. This could be before or after stops, ULE shims, and anything else that factors in to it. You have to always equal 150, but what would you prefer? Keeping the distance (10 units) and weight (15oz)? Go with 9 units distance (10% further reduction in distance) but a heavier pull? (16.67 ounces)? 8 units (20% shorter than stock) and an 18.75oz pull? I am preferential to the 8 X 18.75, sounds like Edweird likes the 10 X 15. It's all a matter of taste.

I am really interested in hearing what the AO community would prefer, so please post away with your preferred balance. Don't go below 8 X 18.75 though, probably too heavy a pull to be useful and it will put the sear at too much of an angle.

Those who have the new ULE on/off please also post with your descriptive opinions on how the trigger feels now that you've had a chance to adjust and play with it, especially about what took getting used to (pulling again too soon probably?) and how walkable it is or if it is still a little too heavy or perhaps if it is a little too long to walk still. I am dying to try it, haven't yet, and would love to hear your stories.

edweird
07-28-2003, 10:57 PM
Here this will make it easier for everyone...........

If your intrested in this thread and want to chat further please refer to this Thread (http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=94876)


MODS if your reading this please merge this thread with the one I linked to above. I would ask you to do so in chat but im slacking off at work now and cant use chat under threat of getting my manhood cut off

QUINCYMASSGUY
07-28-2003, 11:53 PM
Edweird makes a good point, a merge would be great but I would encourage people to keep an eye on this and keep contributing. I have a feeling it might become buried and ignored in the workshop and I am confident this is a great pair of ideas for AGD. The whole idea of customizing your marker is a big selling point. How much more custom is getting to select your pull weight, distance, and front and back stops? Almost total trigger customization and it keeps it mechanical as well. But if this is not wanted by anyone then that's that.

With that said.... see you all in the Workshop!

QUINCYMASSGUY
08-01-2003, 08:28 AM
OK, took the sear to a machine shop and they evaluated the possibility of drilling a second hole slightly above the first one... nope. Sears are made of really hard steel and the drill wouldn't be able to get through it. They might be able to with a carbide drill bit but they didn't have one. So the best way to do this idea is to request AGD to produce sears (or ask the person they send the order for sears to be made by) to put a second hole just a little higher up on the sear so that if any of us want the flexibility to change the stroke (customization) we can.

...and no, it has not even been put in my Mag yet, it is a backup sear, and most likely won't be put in there unless it's verified my idea is safe. So no, my warranty is not void as of yet.