Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Standard feed vs powerfeed vs vertical feed bodies

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    282

    Standard feed vs powerfeed vs vertical feed bodies

    I'm sure this has already been discussed but I can't find a thread that covers it.

    Between the three different body designs (standard feed, powerfeed and vertical feed), does it really matter in terms of the rate of feeding balls when using a force feed electro hopper? Is there an advantage to a vertical feed body over the other two designs?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Halifax, N.S., Canada
    Posts
    8,037
    There is no advantage for any of the bodies for rate of feed when using a force fed hopper. When using a non-force feed hopper, the powerfeed body or a center feed body with a tall ball stack is preferred.

    The center fed body allows the hopper to be balanced over the center of the gun and makes it easy to shoot both right and left equally. The disadvantage is that it blocks you from sighting down the barrel or using open or red dot sights. You can use occluded sights on a center fed body though. You don't need to worry about an elbow twisting or breaking causing your hopper to move around sideways.

    The standard feed body places the hopper out to the side of the gun which makes it unbalanced and you have to deal with elbows that could break or become loose. The center of the body is clear of obstructions for easy sighting and shooting but the hopper sticks out to the side which makes it hard to shoot from your off hand and still stay behind cover in tight situations.

    The powerfeed body clears the center of the body to allow you to sight down the body, but not enough to allow you to mount a sight unless it is high enough to clear the powerfeed. A high sight does work quite well actually. I used to use a red dot sight on mine back in 1993. Its great for aquiring a quick sight and eventually your muscle memory will kick in and you won't need it. You do need to deal with elbows that could break or become loose. The hopper is more centered than with a standard feed but may require some tweaking to get the hopper directly in the center of the body for perfect balance depending on the elbows you use and may require you to cut the feed tube.
    Except for the Automag in front, its usually the man behind the equipment that counts.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    952
    I know that there have been issues with force-fed hoppers pushing balls past the wire nubbins and causing double-feeds although I couldn't say if one body style is worse than any of the others in that regard...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    3,559
    Quote Originally Posted by correia3
    I know that there have been issues with force-fed hoppers pushing balls past the wire nubbins and causing double-feeds although I couldn't say if one body style is worse than any of the others in that regard...
    I think the extra bend on the power feed helps that. I never had much of a problem with nubbins and B2s on a power feed. With ULEs and Lukes vert mods I have to pay more attention to the detent and the paint of the day, even after turning the tension down. But I still prefer to do that over messing with elbows.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    St Paul
    Posts
    1,387
    Quote Originally Posted by athomas
    There is no advantage for any of the bodies for rate of feed when using a force fed hopper. When using a non-force feed hopper, the powerfeed body or a center feed body with a tall ball stack is preferred.

    The center fed body allows the hopper to be balanced over the center of the gun and makes it easy to shoot both right and left equally. The disadvantage is that it blocks you from sighting down the barrel or using open or red dot sights. You can use occluded sights on a center fed body though. You don't need to worry about an elbow twisting or breaking causing your hopper to move around sideways.

    The standard feed body places the hopper out to the side of the gun which makes it unbalanced and you have to deal with elbows that could break or become loose. The center of the body is clear of obstructions for easy sighting and shooting but the hopper sticks out to the side which makes it hard to shoot from your off hand and still stay behind cover in tight situations.

    The powerfeed body clears the center of the body to allow you to sight down the body, but not enough to allow you to mount a sight unless it is high enough to clear the powerfeed. A high sight does work quite well actually. I used to use a red dot sight on mine back in 1993. Its great for aquiring a quick sight and eventually your muscle memory will kick in and you won't need it. You do need to deal with elbows that could break or become loose. The hopper is more centered than with a standard feed but may require some tweaking to get the hopper directly in the center of the body for perfect balance depending on the elbows you use and may require you to cut the feed tube.
    actually no, with force feed, a shorter ball stack will always improve feed speed. thus the move from high rise for agitation loaders, to ultra short for force feed.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    282
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk
    actually no, with force feed, a shorter ball stack will always improve feed speed. thus the move from high rise for agitation loaders, to ultra short for force feed.
    Yeah that makes sense. The shorter distance for the balls to travel will result in a faster feed rate.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    St Paul
    Posts
    1,387
    Quote Originally Posted by bpsimpson22
    Yeah that makes sense. The shorter distance for the balls to travel will result in a faster feed rate.
    no, its a lighter stack = faster feeding. the good old F=MA.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    282
    Okay, where F is the force acting on the balls from the hopper and so m is the mass of the stack, not the mass of one ball? Solve for a.

    I was thinking v = d/t ..

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    952
    I think that TK himself has said that the "no rise" E-Mag bodies were designed and built specifically because the Halos work better with a shorter ball stack...not sure how that relates to F=MA, but there it is...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Halifax, N.S., Canada
    Posts
    8,037
    I forgot about the mass of the ball stack affecting the acceleration. For gravity fed hoppers, this isn't a factor because all the balls fall at the same rate, but those being pushed are definately affected.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Halifax, N.S., Canada
    Posts
    8,037
    Quote Originally Posted by correia3
    I know that there have been issues with force-fed hoppers pushing balls past the wire nubbins and causing double-feeds although I couldn't say if one body style is worse than any of the others in that regard...
    This also has a lot to do with the internal diameter of the barrel and the size of the balls being used as well as the machined slot that the nubbin fits into.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    282
    I have all three frame designs. I'm curious if there is a way to actually test this ... I still feel a shorter distance will result in a faster feed rate. At the same time a shorter distance will also give a lighter ball stack. I'm not sure which variable (distance or mass) is more important. It's been awhile since I took physics.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    St Paul
    Posts
    1,387
    Quote Originally Posted by bpsimpson22
    Okay, where F is the force acting on the balls from the hopper and so m is the mass of the stack, not the mass of one ball? Solve for a.

    I was thinking v = d/t ..
    yup, fewer balls to push means you can push them faster given the same force. for force feed like halos.

    gravity feed is the opposite, larger ball stack allows the loader more time to load balls before you are shooting dry. gravity feed, even like the revvy, tends to feed in quick bursts, so a longer stack really helps keep your gun fed.

    note in this video 1. how good i look without a shirt on, and 2. that the loader tends to feed 3 round bursts quickly. this is an apache which is not force feed.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2tsXsx6IQA

Posting Permissions

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