Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: something for the think tank, paintball revolver

  1. #1

    something for the think tank, paintball revolver

    Hey everyone

    This seems to be the new thought tank so I figured I would give everyone something to mull over.

    A buddy of mine who is taking mechanical engineering with me brought up a concept to me that he would like to do for his final project.... Paintball revolver we discussed it for quite awhile (btw please nobody swipe it I was just posting for thoughts) and we where thinking something 50 cal for size because the largest pistol I know it a 45 so its close, maybe something like what goblin has for shells? But after discussion we thought if we ditched the shell idea and came up with some form of blowback idea it could spin the revolver (forgive my bad terminology ) and recock the hammer? He wants a hammer for authenticity so I was thinking some kind of poppit valve for activation.
    Any who duty calls so I have to get back to work let me know what you guys think!

  2. #2
    I don't know that a blow back would be ideal. I would think a mechanical motion would be best. Although having the hammer hit the valve would be most realisic I think this might not be the best type of system either. It doesn't need a large bolt or bolt movement because each chamber already contains the next round. I would think a type of spool valve would take up the least amount of space in an already cramped revolver body

  3. #3
    Insider
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,182
    A typical revolver uses only finger force to cycle the cylinder and cock the hammer (which then releases, and the hammer hits a striker that concentrates the work of the trigger pull).

    The key thing is, the energy contained in a trigger pull is doing a lot of stuff. Because you don't have the luxury of igniting a substance, you're talking about low force actuation mechanisms. I'm assuming that the form factor would necessitate a 12g in low volume, so I'd balance a poppet valve, if I could, to avoid having to have a heavy hammer (big!) or rally ridiculous spring (really horrible trigger pull). I don't trust spools under really high pressures.

  4. #4
    When I get some free time I'm going to research how the airpathes in existing revolver are. I know the hammer and bullet holder ( again bad terminology ) and spun/cocked using gas pressure from the bullet going off. I also know the hammer gets its striking force from a spring. Now I know you probably get more pressure from the bullet but we wouldn't need the same kind of spring force as a real revolver so we would take less air pressure for that. I'm interested in your spool idea though? And mech would be cool but I think that would be a lot of linkage? Plus it just wouldn't have the same feel

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Lurker27 View Post
    A typical revolver uses only finger force to cycle the cylinder and cock the hammer (which then releases, and the hammer hits a striker that concentrates the work of the trigger pull).

    The key thing is, the energy contained in a trigger pull is doing a lot of stuff. Because you don't have the luxury of igniting a substance, you're talking about low force actuation mechanisms. I'm assuming that the form factor would necessitate a 12g in low volume, so I'd balance a poppet valve, if I could, to avoid having to have a heavy hammer (big!) or rally ridiculous spring (really horrible trigger pull). I don't trust spools under really high pressures.
    Just saw your post, I thought in a revolver it was just for the first shot you had to pull back the hammer manually? (Forgive my ignorance) and yah we both agreed that a 12 g would be best

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by steadian View Post
    Just saw your post, I thought in a revolver it was just for the first shot you had to pull back the hammer manually? (Forgive my ignorance) and yah we both agreed that a 12 g would be best
    No more linkage than trying to stop a cylinder from spinning in an exact spot.

    Who said it needed to be high pressure? But the dump chamber would be slightly hard to hide. Unless its in the center of the revolving part. It would be much easier to house the entire valve system in there to begin with as there is more length to use

  7. #7

  8. #8
    That's awesome. The lower feed tube is great.

  9. #9
    That is pretty cool but to me it just dosnt look right, I'm kind of weird though so I did some research and I was wrong all of the linkage is machanical. Also I started thinking about the whole goblin cartridge thing again and if you where too make those for a 50 cal I think you could use a lot of the same linkage over again (might have to swap out some springs but basically) in fact if you had a 45 revolver with enough meat on it and custom built the cartridges you could almost mod one to work couldn't you? You would bore the bullet holder holes out the extra 50 thou, bore the barrel smooth again the extra 50 thou, the build your cartridges to fit. That would be pretty badass actually..... But I can't think of anyone that wants to hack up their 45

  10. #10
    Goblin cartridges do not work well in my experience. I would avoid that system.

    Also 50 cal paintballs work for packaging and making a product more realistic in size, but I personally find they suck for playing the game if you are going up against 68 cal paint.

    It's tough to package everything you need for a good paintball gun into a pistol/revolver.

Posting Permissions

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