ScopesAndAmmo.com Store Logo

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: 500 FPS pellet testing

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Tue Apr 10 2012
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    87

    500 FPS pellet testing

    I have a question about when they test airguns for compliance with our laws.

    Do they shoot multiple times and average the FPS (a 500+ jump will be fine), or do they shoot until they get a 500+ and declare it illegal?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Sun Jan 1 2012
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Posts
    87
    I'm no authority on this, but it seems reasonable "They" would likely shoot 5-10 shots on a prototype and look for varience, top speed, and average speed for a given pellet weight. They'd definitely err on the side of caution, and de-tune the gun as necessary. May explain why the box says 495fps, but the results are usually lower.
    Manufacturers would have guidelines they follow to meet the standards of wherever they're shipping to. It'd be interesting to actually see the testing standards, especially what pellet weights are being used...
    Maybe Canada will finally just revise the laws governing airguns, and use fpe like our brethern in England.

  3. #3
    Administrator AirGunEric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sat Dec 3 2011
    Location
    Somewhere Out There
    Posts
    1,295
    Based on my knowledge of how the labs around the country test things, they work in a very "discretionary" manner- i.e. one "peak shot" could nail you if someone wants to nail you. This is where having a good lawyer and a ballistics/testing expert on your side would be useful if you ever had an issue.

    That being said- the question is "why would you have a single, high output shot?"

    Something's not right here. Either you had a defect pellet (i.e. too light) or something is inconsistent in the gun. If it's a spriner, perhaps some dieseling.
    I'd say I care- but I'd probably be lying...


  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Tue Apr 10 2012
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    87
    Ah thank you Eric. The Brocok Concept I got seems to be quite jumpy with the crosman pellets (for obvious reasons) and had 10 out of the 150 shots go over the 150 mark. 489.7, 501.3, 493.

    Shots 91-100 had the highest number of over shots.
    498
    500.1
    498.1
    498.7
    501.1
    498.7
    501
    502.7
    490.5
    500.3

    I will post the complete strings later.

  5. #5
    Moderator rsterne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Wed Dec 7 2011
    Location
    Coalmont, BC
    Posts
    1,266
    At the risk of bringing up something that might be better left alone.... there isn't a weight specified for testing in the law.... Yes, I know that an airgun is non-PAL if it's under 4.2 FPE even if it's over 500 fps.... but if you want to take that literally, the intent of adding that rule (so that the police can't use lightweight pellets) really only applies to .177 cal, where pellets are available that are lighter than 7.6 gr. (the weight at which 499 fps equals 4.2 FPE).... I'm not counting things like felt cleaning pellets.... The lightest lead pellet in .22 cal is the RWS Hobby, at 11.9 gr.... Non-lead is another matter, Gamo Raptors are only 9.8 gr., H&N FTT Greens are 9.56 gr., and Crosman SSPs are only 9.5 gr.... They are all commercially available, and you can bet if "they" tried them in almost any "decent" non-PAL gun they would exceed 500 fps AND be over 4.2 FPE....

    If you're dealing with a dead stock XXX brand airgun then "they" are supposed to believe the manufacturer's claim, which can even be made with a specific pellet.... IIRC, some Dianas were measured with 10.3 gr pellets in .177 and rated non-PAL, and it was specified on the box the pellets used.... I'm guessing that if you have done ANY performance mods to a non-PAL airgun, and you run into someone whose purpose is to spoil your whole day, with any pellet over 7.6 gr., you better be under 500 fps....

    Bob
    Dominion Marksman Silver Shield - 5890 x 6000 in 1976, and downhill ever since!
    Airsonal: Too many to count!

  6. #6
    Administrator AirGunEric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sat Dec 3 2011
    Location
    Somewhere Out There
    Posts
    1,295
    It's true- anyone wanting to spoil your day can certainly put up a good fight for you.

    However, there is still that 4.2fpe angle- i.e. the guns needs to have a muzzle energy over 4.2fpe AND 501fps.

    That being said, you could still end up in a court if the specific jurisdiction in which you are being charged is a bit thick-headed.

    Based on my experiences with this sort of thing, it, at times, appears that the appropriate authorities are more concerned with how a product is labeled than anything else. If you did not modify it, and the box states "under 500fps" I think it would be especially difficult for anything to "stick".
    I'd say I care- but I'd probably be lying...


  7. #7
    Moderator rsterne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Wed Dec 7 2011
    Location
    Coalmont, BC
    Posts
    1,266
    My point was that for anything larger than .177 cal, the 4.2 FPE limit WILL be broken, even with non-lead pellets at 499 fps.... so argue as you like that the "intent" of the 4.2 FPE rule was to prevent guns being ruled over 500 fps by testing with non-lead (ie light) pellets.... that's not what the law actually says.... Personally, I think it would be prudent to test .22 cal modded guns with 11.9 gr. Hobbies, and .25 cal with 19.9 gr. FTTs (the lightest lead pellets currently available).... There are currently no "pellets" in .30 cal (although JSB is bringing out a 46? gr.), and the lightest currently available pellet is the EunJin 78 gr....

    Wouldn't it be nice if we could get "them" to use roundball or pellets of the equivalent weight for ALL testing....

    .177 cal - 8.3 gr.
    .20 cal - 12.0 gr.
    .22 cal - 15.3 gr.
    .25 cal - 23.5 gr.
    .30 cal - 44 gr.
    9mm/.357 - 68 gr.
    .45 cal - 143 gr.
    .50 cal - 188 gr.
    .58 cal - 293 gr.

    Of course that would be too logical.... and suggesting it would bring to light the existence of non-PAL "Big-Bores".... shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....

    Bob
    Dominion Marksman Silver Shield - 5890 x 6000 in 1976, and downhill ever since!
    Airsonal: Too many to count!

  8. #8
    Administrator AirGunEric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sat Dec 3 2011
    Location
    Somewhere Out There
    Posts
    1,295
    The CFC classification guys are well aware of it, and I have had at least one of their "senior technologists" explain it to me that they will use "common" pellets for testing. Of course, what constitutes "common" and they wouldn't put this in writing- so it comes back to the interpretive issue. I have had some casual conversations with both people in the RCMP/CFC classification area, and the ballistics lab (Ottawa) and from what I understand of it, the technicians doing the work, some of which happen to be airgunners, would like a more liberal, but well-defined set of guidelines/policies put on the table, but their upper management (in the RCMP, this means someone with badge that likely hasn't made use of it for quite some time) has resisted it.

    "so argue as you like that the "intent" of the 4.2 FPE rule was to prevent guns being ruled over 500 fps by testing with non-lead (ie light) pellets" - Who is arguing what?

    Bottom line is, if the law really wants to stick it to someone, they'll find a way- the idea is to avoid violating the law and not p!ssing off local law enforcement. Even if they can't ultimately convict as their "interpretation" is wrong- they can utilize the "system" to mess you around, possibly for years, at great expense to yourself in time, money and effort.


    And, just to throw it in- this is why a new member here a couple weeks ago was banned- he could not drop talking about something outright illegal (no "interpretation" on that issue was required) and when asked, politely, to stop it, goes off into a "free speech" thing. No one needs this sort of stupidity or any new scrutiny (even if this was only a one-man ding-dong parade) being brought about.
    I'd say I care- but I'd probably be lying...


  9. #9
    Member Dukemeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sat Dec 31 2011
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by AirGunEric View Post
    No one needs this sort of stupidity or any new scrutiny (even if this was only a one-man ding-dong parade) being brought about.
    Hear, hear! It was a good call to end that thread and discussion.
    Member, Limestone Beekeepers Guild
    Duke ))))----//----------==

  10. #10
    Member DocGadget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mon Apr 16 2012
    Location
    PQ
    Posts
    118
    Does the law say if airgun that CAN shoot over the limit or the guns that are MADE/DESIGNED to shoot over the limit that are illegal?
    If it's "can" most can be made to shoot over the limit no? A few drops of oil = detonation = too fast pellet
    So like it was said earlier if they want to mess with you they can find a way to shoot too fast, like they do with silencers in the US, even if destroys the thing as long as it lowers the report for ONE shot you're in trouble (it's probably the same thins here I suppose?)

    Wouldn't it be great if laws were clearer and simple to understand? There seems to be LOTS of grey and very little black or white...

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Pellet doping
    By maurice in forum Spring-Powered Guns
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: Jun 26 2013, 08:17 AM
  2. JSB Pellet Label and Pellet changes?
    By Doc Sharptail in forum General Airgun Questions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: May 10 2012, 08:14 AM
  3. M48 .177 pellet test.
    By bitterman in forum Airgun Target Talk
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Apr 19 2012, 06:16 PM
  4. Testing Forum Issues...
    By TrevorHannant in forum Tavern Talk
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Feb 03 2012, 10:55 AM

Posting Permissions

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