Why did they put the detent on top?

[trains are bad]

Word.



what he said and all that.

[FutureMagOwner]

doesnt make a difference in a mag it would in a cocker however because of the way the detent. you could drill on the side i suppose but you would most likely void agds warantee however i would only do that so i could put in 2 ball detents but not to get it off the top and with the rail if its all milled out you could probably also put one in on the bottem.

[LudavicoSoldier]

Personally, I like the detent on top. I am thinking of modding a High-Viz fiber sight bead to sit on top of the detent.

[Gambit1106]

think about what you just said...

double ball feeding is a direct result of balls pushing past the detent, if the first ball (note: we're talking force feed here) presses the detent down, the following ball will push it out of position, and then repeat the cycle...

Thus the reason that a lot of people had to go to stiffer detents because of force feed loaders pushing past detents.

[deathstalker]

But I still don't understand why a detent mounted on the top works differently from a detent mounted on the side! I don't understand why a force-fed loader might push balls past the detent if it's mounted on the side but won't if it's mounted on the top. The detent is forward of the feed tube.

What forces are at work that requires detents to be installed at a 90-degree angle from how they're fed? Isn't the same amount of force applied to the ball (from the loader) no matter where the detent is mounted?

[TheLaxPlayer]

Myself and train believe it doesn't matter at all. You could put the detent on the same side the balls feed in, and it would do the same thing.

I would say good call to CoolHand and call it a done deal.

[AGD]

Please gentelmen, do I have to explain every little detail ? Can't you just trust us on some things? Don't you think we would have put the detent on the side if we could? If you want play pro gun designer please go ahead and drill a detent hole where you THINK it should be on the side.... have fun.

Air-Gun-DESIGNS

[Target Practice]

...

Ouch, Presidential burn. TK is right though. Let the pros and the engineers deal with it. Trust them to know what they are doing. They haven't given us any reason not to, have they?

[trains are bad]

Let the pros and the engineers deal with it. Trust them to know what they are doing.

NEVER!

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.

[Kevmag]

Please gentelmen, do I have to explain every little detail ? Can't you just trust us on some things?

Please do... This is AO. Question is what we do.

[Fred]

it has been explained... if you still don't get it, destroy your warp ULE bodies with a new detent on the side and then come complain about them being out of warrenty.

[dansim]

it has been explained but they are asking something people are over looking

the top mounted detent is located like a half inch infront of the feed tube the balls coming in have to move forward in order to touch the detent. they are asking why couldnt it be located on the side, a half inch infront of the stack, i personally know it would negate the detent, but to each his own, personally i want to get a bullet detent for the top and turn it into a quasisight

[deathstalker]

it has been explained... if you still don't get it, destroy your warp ULE bodies with a new detent on the side and then come complain about them being out of warrenty.

I think your explanantion is lacking and did not answer the other questions it raised. Your explanation assumed a side-mounted detent would be directly across from the ball as its fed. This is not the case. You can't even see the detent if you look straight down the feed tube. No one is implying the design is wrong or that it should be done a different way. No one is even disagreeing that they won't work when side-mounted. There are simply a few people who would like to know WHY it does not work if mounted on the side.

The answers people have provided to the original question of, "Why did they put the detent on top?" have raised more questions for clarification. Those questions have not been answered. If I had the resources (read: tools) to properly drill and tap for the detent, I would have no problem doing so. However, I only have hand tools and I do not trust myself to do it correctly. I've already dropped a couple grand on AGD gear, what's another $150 to drop on a new body? Far be it for me to think Tom might actually provide an answer if he's already done the research. We're not complaining, nor are we saying it's wrong, just simply asking why it works that way.

And yes, Tom, we do question little things. If you don't question things, you're nothing but a sheep. Hey, how'd that first run of ULE bodies go? I heard everyone LOVED how well the detents worked. If anyone had problems, it was obviously their own fault because you're the pro gun designer.I heard 3.2 was perfect and NO ONE had to make any modifications because NO ONE was having any problems. Oh wait, you're a pro gun designer and not a programmer, right?

I'm sorry if I have neither the time, resources, nor education to play pro gun designer with you. Maybe Jim Drew has some spare time on his hands and you can play with him.

[Kevmag]

I personally don't care about the detent location - I'm not buying one either way as I personally found my emag w/ warp set up too heavy for my tastes.

The reason for my post was AGD's response surprised me. "Just trust us" is something I expect from other companies. The great thing about AO is it give the average player access to insight on how/why products are designed directly from the man himself. I can't think of another company that does this...

[deathstalker]

I wholeheartedly agree, which is why I showed attitude I usually don't. The I-make-paintball-guns-for-a-living-and-you-don't-so-I'm-right attitude doesn't sit well with me at all. I guess Jim should have simply said, "I make boards so I'm right" when questioned about his products.