Quality of airsoft in comparison to real steel

[frogfish]

I think the guy on the first page is getting confused a little bit about the whole "firing real ammunition" issue. The problem has nothing to do with most airsoft weaons. The Japanese found that if you gave the hammer spring in an Asahi M40 a little more kick, and modified the bore diameter it would chuck out .22 rimfire rounds. Of course this landed Asahi in a whole heap of trouble as this was tested and proven that it was actually possible, although rather stupid.

 

The reason most manufacturers use pot metal instead of high quality material is as stated before, price point, if I can make a gun for $25 and sell it for $200 why would I make a gun for $230 and sell it for $400 (the cost of a high end replica), it costs me more to make and I won't be able to sell as many even though my profit on each individual would be the same.

 

It will take a maker like Real Sword to prove that we will pay for those high end materials to make it worth selling them.

[Gigueand]

Skip to the bottom to avoid my ramblings and to read my main point

 

As far as paintball inovations go I dont beleive they can be translated directly to airsoft

 

a - cos theres a fair deal of neccesity in paintball for a lot of those features - the electronics strike me as much as being borne of the need to throttle back the ROF of what would otherwise be an incredibly short stroked pneumatic system thats being fed from a high pressure external source. Not as easy to implement on an electromechanical system and not really anywhere near as required.

 

b - because of that need they're now firmly in the mass market end of paintball and benefit from economies of scale

 

c - and finally, because markers arent usually constrained by the fixed dimensional accuracy (or near dimensional accuracy) that airsoft has set itself for externals. Need a few more mm breathing room to shoehorn Project X into your newest paintball marker? Then provided it doesnt make it ergonomically unuseable, a dimensional alteration or two to your external design to provide the extra room isnt a major headache. Try the same in airsoft and you best have a tin lid on your head when you issue the press release and product photos...

 

 

I'll quickly address A and C. I definitely agree with you on B, paintball is a much bigger industry (at least in the U.S.) than airsoft.

 

 

A. The electronic components of paintball guns were not developed to decrease ROF, but rather to dramatically increase it. Electronics meant shorter trigger pulls, easy non-mechanical full auto, burst, ramping modes of fire, and the ability to achieve high ROF without chopping paint through the introduction of electronic eyes.

 

C. I would argue that while paintball guns remain unconstrained by the physical dimensions that airsoft guns try to copy, airsoft guns themselves have lots of room to introduce new features. Think about how much space is wasted on a typical airsoft M4A1? The buffer tube s typically empty, the handguards are typically empty aside from a battery which doesn't utilize the total space. Now think about an M14. That huge stock and front handguard could hold all sorts of electronic goodies to increase the gun's performance. Hundreds of people have shoehorned MOSFETs into their guns already, JG is doing it with stock guns. There is plenty of space for a chip that could add modes of fire. The fact that airsoft guns have plenty of room for internal improvements is testified to by plethora of new AEGs with mechanisms to add "blow-back." IE the TM AK-74, AKSU and most recently the TM M4A1 and the G&G "blow-back" MP5s and M4s.

 

Airsoft GBBs are even more guilty of wasting space. Stocks, handguards and pistol grips remain empty. Stocks, as in the past, could hold gas reservoirs, regulators (ala Palmer pursuit shop). I'd imagine that one could shoehorn an electronic sear tripper like the Tippmann E-Grip right into an M4A1's pistol grip, thus providing semi, burst, auto.

 

Now, of course, I'm speculating, but the fact remains that there is room, both physically and intellectually, for airsoft innovation on both the GBB and AEG level.

 

 

Then buy a PTW for the 3rd time. It's supper high external and... well the internals arn't impressive without work (I've owned one), no more so then a slightly beefed up Marui. but easier to work with. And if price is something that you REQUIRE to be an "indication" of quality, at $1500-$2000 that's about as high as you get on a "mainstream" airsoft gun.

 

As has already been mentioned, the PTW externals are not the best. I'd argue that the newest AK clones coming out of China probably have the best externals. Some of the G&P M4s and the newest KA offerings also come close to replicating the look of a true M4A1. If these lower end guns can replicate the real steel then why should I drop $1500+ to get a Systema PTW? The gearbox is truly innovative (and should be applauded), but there is certainly room for improvement.

 

 

What do you want an airsoft gun to do that it doesnt do already?

 

I want it to be reliable for a start. Why can my 1993 VM-68 paintball gun cycle through a 100,000 rounds with no problems, but my current airsoft arsenal needs careful babying? Yes, I understand that the AEG has more moving parts, etc, but gearboxes are not magic. They are well understood so why can't they be made more reliable?

 

Even Microsoft (a company notorious for releasing products to be beta tested by the unknowing consumer) tests its products to a degree before unleashing them on the market. Airsoft companies are in such a hurry to push out their new "cool" looking gun that they fail to product test. Don't believe me? Go talk to some of the poor WA M4 ginny-pigs whose bolt catches and other parts were breaking after less than a 1,000 rounds. It isn't that hard to run a few thousand rounds through a gun to make sure it will stand the test of time.

 

I'd like to see the return of burst fire. Sure, semi and full auto are available... but it'd be nice to have MOSFET regulated modes of fire. Hey, I don't care about realism that much... give me some ramping modes as well. I'd love to see a chip with an LED under my M4A1's handguards that will let me set the length of my trigger pull, switch modes of fire and count my shots. Basically the kind of thing that paintball gun manufacturers have been doing for years. Not only doing for years, but doing so successfully that they can offer a $200 gun with all those features.

 

In GBBs, I'd like to see internal regulators to provide stable FPS and eliminate "shoot-down" (again, a major problem in paintball that has been solved). I know I keep harping on about multiple modes of fire governed by electronics, but if paintball has been doing it since 1996 why can't airsoft start doing it in 2008?

 

 

But I digress,

 

 

My main point in joining this thread was to champion the idea that airsoft lacks innovation due its nature and the nature of its constituency.

 

In paintball, the sport is driven by competition. Teams actually compete both on the speedball and "milsim" level for prize money, tournament victories, sponsorships, etc. This has driven paintball companies to innovate and develop ways to make the guns smaller, lighter, and more accurate while also providing high rates of fires, eliminating "shoot-down," keeping high shot-to-shot FPS consistency and allowing players multiple modes of fire. They have been doing this for years and the result is that simple mechanical triggers are headed the way of the dinosaur as electronic trigger systems become cheaper and increasingly prevalent.

 

In airsoft, manufacturers, driven by the wants of their constituency, pump out new gun after new gun, variation after variation. AK, M4, G36, L85, Uzi, MP5, FAL, G3, etc ad nauseam. The result is wonderful diversity, but mediocre performance. Internal innovation is stifled every time someone cries out for a better looking rifle. Luckily, as we've seen with the new spurt of GBB and AEG "blow-back" rifles, airsoft gun companies are slowly starting to spin the wheels of internal innovation. Not really a surprise given the level of quality some of the newest (again the China AKs) have reached.

 

I am simply advocating for taking the excellent (externally) rifles we have now and pairing them with new, innovative internals. GBB can be improved upon, AEG "blow-backs" are gimmicky and JGs MOSFETs don't do quite enough, but at least it is a start.

[JAYALA]

Well another one of the problems with airsoft is, that for every one airsofter who seeks for a higher grade replica, there are ten others that wish the chinese come up with a clone of such thing. There really isn't much of an incentive for innovation when one knows that the clone makers will somehow be able to produce something for a lower price, I am not bashing clones, but the airsoft community as a whole. I know some guys relish the innovation on some replicas, but others don't and just want to get cheap products. I would love a high grade replica but Airsoft Guns serve their purpose, spit bbs downrange. I however agree that screws, pins, and other parts should seriously be made with higher grade materials, there is no excuse for not doing so. (Kalash AK, great price and quality)

[skyclark]

My main point in joining this thread was to champion the idea that airsoft lacks innovation due its nature and the nature of its constituency.

 

In paintball, the sport is driven by competition. Teams actually compete both on the speedball and "milsim" level for prize money, tournament victories, sponsorships, etc. This has driven paintball companies to innovate and develop ways to make the guns smaller, lighter, and more accurate while also providing high rates of fires, eliminating "shoot-down," keeping high shot-to-shot FPS consistency and allowing players multiple modes of fire. They have been doing this for years and the result is that simple mechanical triggers are headed the way of the dinosaur as electronic trigger systems become cheaper and increasingly prevalent.

 

In airsoft, manufacturers, driven by the wants of their constituency, pump out new gun after new gun, variation after variation. AK, M4, G36, L85, Uzi, MP5, FAL, G3, etc ad nauseam. The result is wonderful diversity, but mediocre performance. Internal innovation is stifled every time someone cries out for a better looking rifle. Luckily, as we've seen with the new spurt of GBB and AEG "blow-back" rifles, airsoft gun companies are slowly starting to spin the wheels of internal innovation. Not really a surprise given the level of quality some of the newest (again the China AKs) have reached.

 

I am simply advocating for taking the excellent (externally) rifles we have now and pairing them with new, innovative internals. GBB can be improved upon, AEG "blow-backs" are gimmicky and JGs MOSFETs don't do quite enough, but at least it is a start.

 

This is a point that this thread has demonstrated quite well. Most of the responders dont care about innovation and some are quite strongly against it. Its good to hear from those who do.

 

I'm with the Big G on this one. Someone needs to get an engineer buddy to look at the mechanical system that feeds and propels the BB downrange...hell, even look at the BB itself...and see if there are not other alternatives that could be put inside existing guns.

 

It is out there...lets just ASK someone to make it for us!

 

Thumpy...OVER

 

 

Hopefully I can be one of those engineer buddies. Im working with a friend who is also an industrial designer to develop a better gear box(s). We are doing it as a hobby but hope that if we can create something really good we can get some interest from the community. So far this thread has some great answers and thoughts on the topic and I look forward to more.

 

We both work with mechanism, I do hardware for race vehicles, furniture, firearms, etc and he does super high end RC car stuff. We have both played with airsoft for several years now and between the two of us we think we can pull off something pretty good.

 

To start, we are working on a modular, billet/ molded carbon, V3 box with a quick change spring/piston set up and machined gears. The electricals specifics are still up in the air but it will be digital. We think that a quality gearbox that will fit into standard bodies will be more popular initially and cheaper to produce than an entirely new system and body. We have limited funds to throw at the project and cant afford to jump into reinventing the guns entirely, as much as we would like to.

 

We understand that not everyone will like what we are doing and fewer will want to pay for it but we want a another option so we building one for ourselves.

 

 

[Azulsky]

I dont see the point of your v3 project. If there is anything that needs to be fixed it is the v2. We need a motor that attaches the to gearbox. If you can fix that you will be a god among men.

 

Machined Gears already exists. RiotSC sells them on airsoft-mechanics.com, they are the best thing you can make and get for this platform.

Electricals are almost nominal for AEG's once paired with a FET and a motor willing to turn the gears fast enough. You can just refine the switches on most so that are more robust.

 

How much of the aftermarket airsoft stuff have you been exposed to honestly. I mean a Systema FTK 99 is a true hunk of machinery in every way, so are a good deal of high end aftermarket parts.

 

Billet gearboxes are fine and cool but the design of the v3 stands up to use fine, having one that had a few teflon coated areas and was made out a slightly better material would be all i could ask. Quick change spring feature i find sorta useless as most people are bound to one FPS limit anyway. I dont like the idea of having to pull out my battery, somehow take off the top of my gearbox(because the *albatross* end isnt really exposed satisfactorily enough in a ak47s), then spend 5 minutes cradling the battery back in there. If i need to switch out to a different setup on a gun like that i can just pop in another mechbox, or just get another gun, as the entire gearbox is tuned for the spring(gear ratio, motor choice) and swapping it out is not satisfactory for me.

 

 

I mean yeah there are a few methods of propulsion that seem cooler than AEG's, but really with the stuff we have we are pushing the physics of a in flight sphere with the small amount of alloted energy to the limits anyway. I mean my point is Uber Quality exists except in a few areas where design flaws(v2) kill that. Its just no one has written it down in one place.

[skyclark]

I dont see the point of your v3 project. If there is anything that needs to be fixed it is the v2. We need a motor that attaches the to gearbox. If you can fix that you will be a god among men.

 

Machined Gears already exists. RiotSC sells them on airsoft-mechanics.com, they are the best thing you can make and get for this platform.

Electricals are almost nominal for AEG's once paired with a FET and a motor willing to turn the gears fast enough. You can just refine the switches on most so that are more robust.

 

How much of the aftermarket airsoft stuff have you been exposed to honestly. I mean a Systema FTK 99 is a true hunk of machinery in every way, so are a good deal of high end aftermarket parts.

 

Billet gearboxes are fine and cool but the design of the v3 stands up to use fine, having one that had a few teflon coated areas and was made out a slightly better material would be all i could ask. Quick change spring feature i find sorta useless as most people are bound to one FPS limit anyway. I dont like the idea of having to pull out my battery, somehow take off the top of my gearbox(because the *albatross* end isnt really exposed satisfactorily enough in a ak47s), then spend 5 minutes cradling the battery back in there. If i need to switch out to a different setup on a gun like that i can just pop in another mechbox, or just get another gun, as the entire gearbox is tuned for the spring(gear ratio, motor choice) and swapping it out is not satisfactory for me.

 

 

I mean yeah there are a few methods of propulsion that seem cooler than AEG's, but really with the stuff we have we are pushing the physics of a in flight sphere with the small amount of alloted energy to the limits anyway. I mean my point is Uber Quality exists except in a few areas where design flaws(v2) kill that. Its just no one has written it down in one place.

 

 

I like the G36 so Im doing what fits in that first. If that goes well I may do the V2. My current V3 box has worked fine for 3 years and many will argue that since its not broken I shouldnt fix it but since Im doing it for myself, I am making what I want.

 

You are right, I dont have a tremendous amount of exposure to different airsoft designs. I am interested in learning and hearing about other people opinions so I posted this thread. I have been researching this as much as I can and tinkering in the workshop. I figured this would be a way to hear the thoughts of a wide range of people who may (and did) offer some insight that I missed previously.

 

Your point about not needing the ability to change spring rates is interesting and I will definitely keep it in mind. I had made the assumption that while I will probably only run one spring, the ability to change it without taking the whole box apart would be appealing. You are probably right - people who care enough about their set up to put in an aftermarket box will have it dialed in exactly to their playing style and dont need to fiddle with it regularly.

 

The disconnect between the quality of aftermarket parts and the quality of factory guns is a large part of why I thought to start this thread. There are some really great parts to put into our guns and I have them in mine but no manufacturer seems to be selling a gun that completely matches their quality. People end up putting very nice parts into troublesome pot metal gearboxes and trying to balance between making the gun run the way they want to and breaking the front of the box. I am surprised (though after this thread Im less surprised) that so few companies are selling guns that come with parts like those.

 

This brings up another point. Would people rather buy a ready to go high quality gun from a shop or assemble one from parts to suit their needs? I think you will find some of both.

I like tinkering so I like the ability to upgrade and source my own parts but I would like to start on a platform that will be will match what I put into it. The more options we have to choose from the better it is for the sport.

 

[P.S.I.]

I fail to see the reason some people want things like CNC machined receivers on an airsoft M16 series gun. FFS, the REAL M16 series guns don't have CNC machined receivers.

If a cast receiver is good enough for my RS M16 A2 Carbine it's good enough for my airsoft M4.

 

That said, I'd like to see someone start using higher quality metal for their castings, especially for gearbox shells. Beyond that, I see no need to make a smooth-bore BB dispenser any more expensive than they already are. It's not as if you'd get significantly better performance out of it by having a machined receiver or gearbox. Certainly not enough to justify the HUGE price tag it would have.

 

I've been at this for 10 years now and I've never broken a metal receiver and I've only broken 1 mechbox (on an M4 shooting >400 fps @ 17 rps).

 

I, for one, am not willing to spend more on an airsoft gun than I can buy the real gun for.

[snorkelman]

Real deal might not be CNC machined but its not diecast metal either

 

forged aluminium -> cnc machined-> diecast

 

in a small scale machine shop machined billet alloy is a lot more of a practical proposition than alloy forging which is why the next step up from diecast in airsoft terms has been to cnc from billet rather than forge

 

 

[Frakk2k]

I kinda don't like the top of the V3 gearbox, its a pain to split it. But other than that. I really like the motorcage, that makes it so easier to check if everything is ok before you stick it back in.

 

The problem with airsoft, is that you really don't want to increase ROF, not from a simulation point of view, and if you are not simulating, then the need for accurate exterior is kinda useless. What you want, is a rifle that is a similar to the real one as possible. You want lower caps, with bolt stop. You want recoil and sound.

 

I think GBB is the way to go, some modifications to that platform would be best. AEG is all nice and dandy for cold weather, but GBB has the realism. Also, it seems to me that GBB has seen a lot of advances the last year or so.. (WA, WE, Inokatsu, GHK whatnot).

[RC-1138]

Real deal might not be CNC machined but its not diecast metal either

 

forged aluminium -> cnc machined-> diecast

 

in a small scale machine shop machined billet alloy is a lot more of a practical proposition than alloy forging which is why the next step up from diecast in airsoft terms has been to cnc from billet rather than forge

 

Give me a few hours to draw my Rifle and I'll supply some pics of this so called "superior" build...

[Azulsky]

I kinda don't like the top of the V3 gearbox, its a pain to split it. But other than that. I really like the motorcage, that makes it so easier to check if everything is ok before you stick it back in.

 

The problem with airsoft, is that you really don't want to increase ROF, not from a simulation point of view, and if you are not simulating, then the need for accurate exterior is kinda useless. What you want, is a rifle that is a similar to the real one as possible. You want lower caps, with bolt stop. You want recoil and sound.

 

I think GBB is the way to go, some modifications to that platform would be best. AEG is all nice and dandy for cold weather, but GBB has the realism. Also, it seems to me that GBB has seen a lot of advances the last year or so.. (WA, WE, Inokatsu, GHK whatnot).

 

 

I would have to disagree and agree at the same time. I have a gun that has quite the high rate of fire(30-35) that i find useful for certain instances being that the rof makes up for accuracy deficiencies inherent to the bb by increasing my statistical probability of hitting the target(this is at the maximum range, 200+ feet). On the other hand i have a gun that has a much lower rate of fire (20ish) that i also find useful because of its ability to keep up a steady rate of fire for longer periods of time, which remaining accurate enough out to the maximum range(200+ feet). If you are going for simulation yes then all that you have listed is important, but I for one am not ready to give up ease of use and reliability for a bit of extra function that many(myself included) consider a novelty.

 

v3,6,7 are ideal mechboxes for the reason you have said. Mechanical engineering is not even my field and i can say without a doubt that the v2 is a flawed design(as well as the cageless v3 guns like mp5k's, sigs, etc) considering the variable(sinusoid) load placed upon the motor. Like i said the godsend would be some new type of motor that still takes the standard pinion gear and interfaces properly with the mechbox like it is done on the PTW.

 

All clones aside, in the beginning it was just Marui. Marui AEG's, while not a unbreakable, indomitable design, on the whole are entirely sufficient for their use, considering the joule limits in Japan(.98), they are engineered to the right combination of reliability and cost effectiveness. Except for v2's, i have seen marui stock gearboxes last for ridiculous periods of time. You are correct, besides Systema PTW's there is no creme de la creme go for broke gearbox + externals in a buy it now package. The closest we have seen to that is G&P and a few King Arms replicas, which are the best blend of external quality and internal reliability. These days the best you can do really with a v2 is custom peice together externals from a number of different companies and for internals either know the right combination of parts that work together and put that time and effort into fitting it, or you can buy a Systema Full Gear Box.Dont get me wrong, i get a hard on for an over engineered peice of machinery time and time again, but its just a matter of where i would draw the line between what is over engineered and what is "uber engineered" if you get my meaning.

 

If you do release a v3 shell that is a few rungs up the ladder then i will make an effort to get it. I would try engineering it around very high tolerance parts like Systema, the more you mess with airsoft parts the more you see discrepancy in tolerances and even design stability. Some companies like Dboys have even changed gear angles which makes installing some parts less than painless.

[RC-1138]

Okay first let me get some of the eye candy out of the way:

 

Here's my issue, M16A2 (regardless to popular belief the army DOES NOT only issue M4's and M16A4's, they still have considerable stockpiles of A2's that they actively issue for both training and active service, more of the former rather than the latter though):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(see following post for more pics)

 

Now either the pictures don't do justice or people are blind but the fact is that this rifles "build" is not what is commonly believed. And this is it, this is the same f'n rifle all our guns copy, so based on "quality standards" and "comparison to real steel" this is the bar that they are trying to reach: a standard issue, US Government Property, M16.

 

Personally I believe they reach and exceed it at times. For instance, as far as body strength goes, as I said in my review for the Star M4A1, the Star's Aluminum body feels the same as this. Just as strong, feels just as "cold" and solid, and quite frankly the Star's body looks like more effort was put into it, which makes 110% sense since my issue wasn't built to "look" right or be eye candy but the Star was. My issue has machining scars (no their not scratches, dents or signs of wear, it has those too, these are clearly from when it was being made) as well as imperfections that you see in the run of the mil airsoft gun metal body (I'm speaking only of M-Series guns, I don't plan to touch anything regarding AK's or any other type as I have limited exposure to the real steel, and I mean real steel (WASR-10's don't count) AK's and such). Moreover this gun rusts, alot, A WHOLE LOT. One day in the field in slightly moist conditions leaves the foresight, rear sight, dust cover. And this is a real rifle (I'll be repeating this periodically to highlight the fault in the statement "airsoft guns have poor quality). Conversely I've dunked my Star M4A1 in water, pulled it out, used it a full day, no rust ANYWHERE.

 

Moving on, the plastics used are okay, just okay. They have give, I've seen them crack, under about the same stress I've seen durable handguards from airsoft guns give similar results. Remember, quality is not synomous or interchangable with durable. TM handguards are high quality, they are not durable. Star's handguards are not high quality, but they are highly durable, as are Systema's and ICS's (at least the aftermarket ones). JG isn't either of these two possibilities. This distinction creates and issue where people don't understand what it is their looking for, something that "looks" good, or handles well. I'd say, visually, even a fairly battle scathed marui looks nicer than my issue, but it's no where as durable. But I digress.

 

As seen in the pictures, this gun has plenty of dents dings and scratches, and with a simple scratching with the fingernail you can make more. Again Star, by my experience, and even PTW's, which I dislike but must admit their external quality, do not have this trait. This is all looks, but lets move onto "internal" quality, if one can compare a toy to a real weapon.

 

Over my last leave period I got the chance to hold and play around with a heavily modified WA M4A1, dect out with upgrade parts including a CNC aluminum bolt. Between holding this bolt and the airsoft version, I can wholeheartedly say their isn't a hugely noticeable difference. Weight is about the only difference, and that's due to the fact the real bolt has more moving parts make of metal. And quite frankly I like the airsoft version better in the one respect that it seems to be a much more matched fit to the faux star chamber. My issue's bolt has a bit more play on it's tracks.

 

That's just a small part of a very long list of common traits of airsoft guns that imho are better than even the real steel it copies. And, to be fair, I'll list a few things better about the real gun.

Sights, obviously are better and more robust, with less play on the nobs. The barrel has no give whatsoever which is a semi-common problem among armalite replicas (not all however). Obviously easier to work with. I can strip down to the bolt/extractor and back up again in about a minute-minute and a half. I can't get the gearbox out of an airsoft gun that amount of time.

 

There are others but the fact is for the most part, there isn't that many things that makes the real one "better" per se, as much as their inherent differences separate them, which CANNOT BE OVERCOME. A dog and a wolf both have individual advantages, despite being very similar, but the fact is no matter how hard you try, you will NEVER make a single dog into a wolf. Your never going to get an airsoft gun to be exactly the same as a real steel. Analogous to making a dog more vicious than a wolf, you may make an airsoft gun more durable than a real gun, it will never be the same. Trying to compare quality simply isn't fair since, at times, the airsoft gun is, in respect to itself, of higher quality.

 

Also as a final note, cause I know this will come up. Just because you bought an AR made by Armalite or FN or really anyone else does not mean you have the valid comparable object. Your gun isn't what they are copying. Their copying the Colt AR15 series and there are VAST differences between an Armalite M15A4 and an M16 made for the government by colt.

 

And to address the chart. I don't care what it says, I've held and shot the issued Colt and I own an Armalite. The colt sucks. No and if's but's about it. I don't care what charts you show. Until you go and shoot one of these POC's don't mention that it's "top of the food chain." I've fired HK416's, I've fired my M15A4, FN's, and many of the others in between, and the colt is not the best one. It may be the one best suited for military application, but from a purist shooter's point of view, it is far from the best.

[RC-1138]

 

 

 

 

 

[skyclark]

Dont get me wrong, i get a hard on for an over engineered peice of machinery time and time again, but its just a matter of where i would draw the line between what is over engineered and what is "uber engineered" if you get my meaning.

 

If you do release a v3 shell that is a few rungs up the ladder then i will make an effort to get it. I would try engineering it around very high tolerance parts like Systema, the more you mess with airsoft parts the more you see discrepancy in tolerances and even design stability. Some companies like Dboys have even changed gear angles which makes installing some parts less than painless.

 

Since I have the luxury of not needing to meet mass production costs or anything like that I am willing to push the over/uber boundary a bit. But you are right, if I have good success with this and try to take it beyond the hobby level (do a production run of decent size) I will take many more things into consideration.

 

You are totally right about the Marui guns being at the peak of evolution for the Japanese mass market. They have done what Honda and Toyota have before them and created a product that is affordable, solid out of the box, easily upgradeable, and fits the limits put on the market. I am very impressed with what they have accomplished.

 

 

For those who are into replicating the RS guns exactly - I am not trying to do that or looking for that. I am interested in playing with and creating airsoft guns that are really nice airsoft guns. Because they have fundamental design differences, I don't mind that not everything is the same as the RS. I like many of the guns on the market and I think the sport can do a bit better.

 

 

 

 

[RC-1138]

For those who are into replicating the RS guns exactly - I am not trying to do that or looking for that. I am interested in playing with and creating airsoft guns that are really nice airsoft guns. Because they have fundamental design differences, I don't mind that not everything is the same as the RS. I like many of the guns on the market and I think the sport can do a bit better.

 

Your choice in topic title is interesting then...

 

Quality of airsoft in comparison to real steel

 

Cause part of comparing a rs with an airsoft gun is also the faults inherent in each of them...

[skyclark]

Your choice in topic title is interesting then...

 

 

 

Cause part of comparing a rs with an airsoft gun is also the faults inherent in each of them...

 

 

I titled it "quality" and a moderator changed it to this and told me to be more specific in the future. Sorry to mislead you.

[RC-1138]

Well not even just the title, but be that as it may, your seeking for "quality" internals I fear will end in disappointment. Even a 100% custom machined gearbox and gears can and WILL still fail, and probably not after much more time than high end upgrade parts. I base this assumption on just looking at cars. Super high end cars, with some of the most precision machined parts, gears, and such, actually tend to wear out faster, because additional stresses caused by the higher performance parts wears down on them faster. I believe this will carry over to your uber gun and your gona still end up with a "wrrrrrrrrr... bang" of a stripped gear or the like.

[Azulsky]

The problem is simply that besides enhancing material quality and tolerances, we have done nothing but add a few gimmicks that have made no real difference in the world of airsoft since the gearbox was invented(20 years). There are some platforms that i feel are complete externally and internally. We essentially have almost real quality AK kits out there and have internals that last a lifetime(given reasonable spring rate). Other platforms suffer from basic engineering flaws.

[RC-1138]

OK, so we know a few "ground truths" in this thread:

 

There is not much difference in build quality between real-steel rifles...at least the M4/M16's...and their higher-end airsoft brothers. The object seems to be higher cost=better quality for externals.

 

We know that everyone in this thread so far wants some improvements in quality outside, but more importantly, INSIDE their favorite models/types.

 

And, that the current crop of mechanicals, either gas or electrically-driven internals and their barrel/hop up systems, is not up to the state-of-the art that modern materials and engineering might provide for practical use on the majority of airsoft fields-of-play.

 

Forget about 300-meter/yard shots...we all understand that the energy to propel a bb that far, that accurately would be harmful or lethal at closer ranges. What I boil-down from the comments is:

 

That most folks want a reasonable change to the working mechanism that improves accuracy at most game ranges..50-feet to 150 feet is a normal engagement range even in the real steel world...so can I get a hit from a burst at that range. Does that mean something better than a 6mm or 8 mm spherical projectile...or a change in barrel and hop up systems that better propels them? Could a "pellet" shape be perfected that could be magazine-fed and non-penetrating/non-injurious to people, yet allow a rifling system to impart spin? And, do it at a rate-of-fire that won't jam?

 

That most owners want a more rugged, reliable system to propel the projectile, that is either more impervious to defects, of if it does break down, can be simply field-stripped and reassembled to get a player back into the fight.

 

And, That everyone wants something economical that might be placed inside prior versions of guns, yet lean toward modernization and push the sport into a new era, aka, paintball's arms-race that took it from a tree-marking pistol to the modern, reliable, effective guns that sport has to select from today.

 

OK engineers, tinkerers and all-around genius-guys...there's your million dollar quest...and whomever comes up with a magical answer, at a fair and reasonable price-point, is the next Mr Airsoft!

 

Thumps....OVER

 

Fun post to answer *cracks knuckles*

 

Your mentioning of rifling peaks my interest. As someone who is very forward upgrade oriented (everything forward of the cylinder head) rifled airsoft barrels have always been something I've been very interested in. There is no reason to believe that rifling will not have SOME effect on an airsoft bb. Early rifles, musket's with rifling, did fire the "normal" spherical projectiles before the miniball became common place. Obviously the mini ball trumped any performance done by the spheres but that isn't to say the "bb's" shot by rifle'd rifles didn't perform better than their smooth bore counterparts. The only problem I've found with developing an effective airsoft rifled barrel is that a hopup creates quite an issue (the reason I haven't bought one of the rifled barrels yet myself). By design the hopup puts a particular spin the bb, usually an "up and down" spin with the "front" (looking out the barrel) going "up" and around. Unfortunately, this would not be very conducive of using a rifle barrel, whose intent would be to place a horizontal spin on the bb. Thus your faced with a choice, hopup and smooth bore barrel, or rifled barrel with no hop. I haven't found it worth the economic risk to invest in a VERY expensive M4 rifled barrel to test this theroy out (and modifying a hopup to not do anything at all, even leak air which would pooch the whole deal, so far is something I won't spend time or money on attempting) so I don't have any real empirical evidence on exactly what an airsoft rifled barrel will do but, as I said, even with just a rudimentary high school level understanding of physics will tell you that having both a hopup and a rifled barrel won't work. It'll probably cause one to counteract the others effect in total and in the process lose much of it's own energy to push/spin the bb out farther. This is however, an internal upgraded that I would like to see played with by gun/upgrade companies into a viable option for users.

 

As far as a pellet shape goes, I can't see why not. Nerf guns shoot dart shaped projectiles and yet they don't hurt. It has all to do with velocity and build material. A plastic pellet would likely work, the primary issue being an effective feeding system which I doubt would ever be possible for AEG's, not without causing to much air pressure loss. However this new market of GBB rifles does provide the opportunity for a possible new form of ammo but looking from a marketing standpoint that will only work, and therefore be pursued by gun companies if a) everyone shifted to GBB guns and dumped AEG's or at least relegated them to "second tier" guns and thus every major gun company shifts to GBB production. Obviously, for a multitude of reasons, neither of these are likely to happen. AEG's are a tried and true machine, everyone likes them for the most part, and they sell well, and there's already a HUGE base of them in the consumer's hands. GBB's as of right now are more of a novelty item, not yet something to be taken seriously and in the climate were in, chances probably arn't something we'll likely see. So in turn pellets will likely not be a realistic "upgrade" we'll see in any real capacity in the near future, not on a real huge scale at least.

 

As far as reliable internals go, it'll never exist. Like any machine these will break, and given the high strain of forcing a projectile to move 350 or so feet per second, which when you think about it is pretty fast (that's roughly 240 MPH, really think about that for a second, that's only a little slower than the world's fasted production car, and these accelerate to that speed faster), is going to cause the gun to break. Just like real guns. Even the best autoloader firearms rarely get through about 500 rounds with a single stoppage, and even fewer can go 1000 rounds without some part failure. To be honest I think people need to stop and understand what it is their holding and actually be impressed for a little while on exactly how reliable most airsoft guns are. The fact they can pump out 10,000 rounds stock, usually without a single issue, is impressive to me at least. I started with real guns and moved to airsoft, so maybe I'm jaded in that respect but still, I don't understand what it is people seem to expect these little machines to do? Shoot 1,000,000 rounds with 0 failures/stoppages? I can say this 100% assurance that WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

 

They say everyone at the academy is an engineer to some degree or another. I don't know if that's true or not, I don't think I'm an engineer (nor do I plan to be) but I can say even a with a basic knowledge of how things work, mechanics, physics, and a little bit of basic math, and of course that purest thing of experiment, should really show that there's not much to all this. There isn't that much more we can do to these things to make them "better." I started playing airsoft about 9 years ago now, and in all that time there really hasn't been much of a change in how the guns function. Marui is still making reliable stock guns that shoot at or about the same level of efficiency/ability they did then, and about the only real change was the intro of LPEG's, which evolved to MPEG's and now true middle ground priced guns with "high" abilities. Unfortunately I think that very evolution has changed what people's expectations but NOT what they generally go for. The guys who have been doing this for a long time can back me up on this: even still now, as it was 9-10 years ago, people still mentally fight over upgrading their gun to that classic "400 FPS" level, getting that perfect metal body, perfect trades, and a ROF where your pissing bb's. The reason this want hasn't changed in 10 years isn't because the airsoft companies haven't made efforts to reach these ends, because they have. Look at Classic Army (like it or not they made the attempt first), G&P, Star, KWA, and now King Arms. The fact is there's this "perfect" airsoft gun ideal that many hold and want to see, which simply doesn't exist and can't. It's the same over romanticized view people have over pieces of gear, getting that perfect looking Ranger loadout, or tactical understanding of the best SF unit. You can't get it because it doesn't exist. There is no perfect SEAL impression, there is no perfect way to clear a room (TRUST me on that, I'm being trained by the best), and there is no perfect (airsoft) gun.

 

In short, I think people have to either a) stop being half empties, and really think about what they want their gun to do, and really see if that's something their gun doesn't do already. I want my M4 to have more range and be more accurate, but the fact is it's pretty damn accurate and has very good range, and without taking it in a direction that I feel is a negative trait, that's as good as it's going to get, and as such, I'm happy with my rifle.

 

EDIT

 

Pardon the double post but these are for pics: more comparison's between a real steel M4 and my Star M4A1 (for the record all these pictures, including the previous ones, we're taken with the same camera on the same setting):

 

Real:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(I'm proud of snapping that pic, with the brass still in the air)

 

Now the Star M4A1:

 

 

 

[RC-1138]

cont:

 

 

 

 

 

Now as far as I'm concerned they both look pretty similar. They feel similar too and quite frankly "handle" in the relative sense, in a similar way (I refer to ease of shouldering, weight distribution and the like). In some ways I prefer the looks the airsoft, and some ways I prefer the realsteel (pure aesthetics) As far as build goes however, looking at simple structer and stable feel, their very similar. Now obviously overall the real one is better, but only by a little, and it might be a "feel" thing. The airsoft gun feels like it has something delicate inside it, might just be me, but I can feel that it can break internally. The real gun feels more hollow and therefor if it bounces I wouldn't be as dismayed... well not for the same reason at least.

 

Which brings me to the most important point, out of all the FTX's I've done, I've never done anything so BRASH and DESTRUCTIVE to my gun that I felt that it's durability was truly "tested"

the same is true of airsoft guns. I don't personally feel, baring a few stupid exceptions that were mainly accidents, that I've ever tested the durability of the guns. It's not something that comes up. Now that doesn't excuse a gun that may have a lack of durability, but what it means to me, and I have a decent idea this is true, that people are harder on their airsoft guns than I am on a real battle rifle, or, and possible the far greater majority of complain origins, people FEAR the gun breaking, both internally and externally, but have no actually experience with a "durability" issue. Your RIS breaking off because the screw on the bottom can't handle jaring isn't a durability issue, that's a crappy built RIS. The stock on an M16 cracking because you banged into a tree is a durability issue of the design, which low and behold can and I've seen break real guns.

 

What I'm trying to say here is that there is this overall desire for something that a) doesn't exist in the real world and b ) can't exist in the real world.

 

[DesertFoxRomel]

If you want to do something innovative by way of gas guns, the only thing I dont think has been tackled yet is a gas-assisted-springer style design- mechanical 'spring and piston fired' for shot to shot consistency over a wide range of ambient temperatures, with the gas blowback used solely to recock it, so that ambient temperature and cooldown has more effect on ROF than FPS (though thats going to be viewed as a backwards move from current WA and GHK trend of trying to approximate internals of the real-deal)

 

Other than something like that, materials are pretty much the only real viable improvement for gas guns. I dont see a lot being done in terms of improving gas efficiency when we have the mass market desire for gas in mag (that brings with it relatively low pressure gases prone to cool down, minimal scope for pressure regulation and an inherently inneficient way of using the gas). At a pinch we could see someone build a system that relies on igniting the gases rather than just blasting them into the atmosphere as a pressurised propellant, but I suspect that sort of explosive gases desing could set big red alarm bells ringing in various countries firearms legislation.

 

Hey, I had that idea years ago. It would of had the stable FPS of an AEG with the recoil of a GBB. Unfortunately, I decided that propane would not have enough pressure to cock an AEG spring and since that Tokyo Marui made recoil AEGs, I decided to go down that route and improve on those designs.

 

[P.S.I.]

Just to comment on rifled barrels in airsoft guns...

 

The TK "twist" rifled barrels do not make the BBs spin. The rifling is there to effect the airflow through the barrel, it causes the air propelling the BB to be less turbulent. This in turn produces a more stable flight path of the BB, and still allows the hop-up to function normally.

The TK barrels are only effective for guns that shoot right around 1 joule, anything over that and the effect is lost. It might be possible to get the same effect at higher FPS by increasing the depth of the grooves, or other modifications but that requires more R&D to determine. (Perhaps TK has already done so.)

 

Imparting an actual spin on a BB via rifling would require the BBs to expand and grip the rifling of the barrel (like bullet do in firearms). Obviously this is not possible with the current airsoft technology. I doubt it's possible at all if it is to remain safe to fire at other people, w/o dramatically changing the design of both airsoft guns and the ammunition used.

[t_hum]

tend to agree with the argument that great technological leaps could be made to airsoft guns, particularly GBB rifles, using proven and widely developed paintball gun technologies. However, I can think of at least two primary reasons it hasnt been implemented as of yet.

 

1. This sport hasnt had much support from North American companies where paintball and related gas technologies are used frequently and have had many years to go through multiple design iterations and changes. This technology just isnt as available in Asia. Plain and simple. Just as you dont see american air gun companies using AEG tech youre not going to see asian companies using air gun tech from the west. Cross pollenation is the real trick

 

2. American companies could do it easily I think. Give an aeg to a well respected paintball gun manf. and I would venture to guess you could have a really amazing gas system shoehorned in current gun dimensions within 3-4 months. Perhaps the biggest deterent for these american companies is the fact that loads if not all trade dress patents for real weapons are extremely enforceable here. Forget about externals coming out of the US without some type of licensing which makes things cost prohibitive.

 

If only a paintball gun manf. could be enticed to make a real drop in gas system that doesnt turn out like the Madbull CO2 gearbox... Already though with a system that isnt complete from the start eliminates a lot of sales from people who wont do any work on their guns personally. Again, incentive for manf. decreases.

 

I have the tools and equipment necessary for this type of prototype but lack both time and funds to source/build an ECU and certain valve components.

 

my .02

[skyclark]

OK, so we know a few "ground truths" in this thread:

 

There is not much difference in build quality between real-steel rifles...at least the M4/M16's...and their higher-end airsoft brothers. The object seems to be higher cost=better quality for externals.

 

We know that everyone in this thread so far wants some improvements in quality outside, but more importantly, INSIDE their favorite models/types.

 

And, that the current crop of mechanicals, either gas or electrically-driven internals and their barrel/hop up systems, is not up to the state-of-the art that modern materials and engineering might provide for practical use on the majority of airsoft fields-of-play.

 

Forget about 300-meter/yard shots...we all understand that the energy to propel a bb that far, that accurately would be harmful or lethal at closer ranges. What I boil-down from the comments is:

 

That most folks want a reasonable change to the working mechanism that improves accuracy at most game ranges..50-feet to 150 feet is a normal engagement range even in the real steel world...so can I get a hit from a burst at that range. Does that mean something better than a 6mm or 8 mm spherical projectile...or a change in barrel and hop up systems that better propels them? Could a "pellet" shape be perfected that could be magazine-fed and non-penetrating/non-injurious to people, yet allow a rifling system to impart spin? And, do it at a rate-of-fire that won't jam?

 

That most owners want a more rugged, reliable system to propel the projectile, that is either more impervious to defects, of if it does break down, can be simply field-stripped and reassembled to get a player back into the fight.

 

And, That everyone wants something economical that might be placed inside prior versions of guns, yet lean toward modernization and push the sport into a new era, aka, paintball's arms-race that took it from a tree-marking pistol to the modern, reliable, effective guns that sport has to select from today.

 

OK engineers, tinkerers and all-around genius-guys...there's your million dollar quest...and whomever comes up with a magical answer, at a fair and reasonable price-point, is the next Mr Airsoft!

 

Thumps....OVER

 

Well put, thanks.

 

Hey, I had that idea years ago. It would of had the stable FPS of an AEG with the recoil of a GBB. Unfortunately, I decided that propane would not have enough pressure to cock an AEG spring and since that Tokyo Marui made recoil AEGs, I decided to go down that route and improve on those designs.

 

This sounds like an interesting concept. Does C02 have the required pressure?

 

 

tend to agree with the argument that great technological leaps could be made to airsoft guns, particularly GBB rifles, using proven and widely developed paintball gun technologies. However, I can think of at least two primary reasons it hasnt been implemented as of yet.

 

1. This sport hasnt had much support from North American companies where paintball and related gas technologies are used frequently and have had many years to go through multiple design iterations and changes. This technology just isnt as available in Asia. Plain and simple. Just as you dont see american air gun companies using AEG tech youre not going to see asian companies using air gun tech from the west. Cross pollenation is the real trick

 

2. American companies could do it easily I think. Give an aeg to a well respected paintball gun manf. and I would venture to guess you could have a really amazing gas system shoehorned in current gun dimensions within 3-4 months. Perhaps the biggest deterent for these american companies is the fact that loads if not all trade dress patents for real weapons are extremely enforceable here. Forget about externals coming out of the US without some type of licensing which makes things cost prohibitive.

 

If only a paintball gun manf. could be enticed to make a real drop in gas system that doesnt turn out like the Madbull CO2 gearbox... Already though with a system that isnt complete from the start eliminates a lot of sales from people who wont do any work on their guns personally. Again, incentive for manf. decreases.

 

I have the tools and equipment necessary for this type of prototype but lack both time and funds to source/build an ECU and certain valve components.

 

my .02

 

The lack of cross pollenation surprises me. Even if its not a paintball company, I would think someone in the US would be using that type of technology.

Im surprised that there are so few american companies doing airsoft R and D at all. The patents have expired on many popular guns (AK, Uzi, Mp5, M16) so the only licence required would be for the name engraved on the gun if you even wanted that.

 

I think that another reason that american paintball companies are staying away is they would like airsoft to stay non-threatening to them. As airsoft guns get more appealing fewer people will take up paintball.

 

I would love to see a drop in gas system. If you ever want to put together a prototype I would be happy to help.

 

 

 

 

[Thorbard]

Theres a huge huge problem with fitting paintball systems into something that looks like a real gun: where does the gas go. Gas reservoirs for compressed air/CO2 et al (not the phase change gasses we use such as propane and 134a) are cylindrical with domed ends for strength under pressure.

 

Go look at a paintball gun again and think about the size of cylinder you have there. Where would that go? If you want an external rig go play with classics.

 

They died out for a reason, remember.

 

Theres no real innovation in the sport because noone much cares. Certainly not enough to buy. Everyone round my way complains that the new TM AEGs are too expensive and offer nothing new. The PTW is a nice idea but the externals are pants from the ones I've seen (on a par with my CA M16, nothing like a decent G&P or after market body), performance is the same as any other AEG at best and they are way overpriced for what you get.

 

Good luck to anyone wanting to make developments, but none of it is ever going to end up being profitable unless you get really lucky (even less likely when you think that some bloke in china is going to rip your idea off five minutes later).