Jump to content
holly

GC2 Action .

Recommended Posts

On 31/12/2017 at 3:10 PM, holly said:

Right 4.53s . tried to day , no real difference . targets brought in to service and re-position . tea drunk . sandwhich eaten . did some standing practice . gradually changing position as i went and think , hope i have found something . surprising how much difference a small movement of things can make . ??? HOLLY

I think that proves what people have been saying regarding head sizes. It don’t make any difference it’s all about batches. A tin of 4.51’s were measured and some bigger than 4.53 were in the tin and not many 4.51’s 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a bitch of a day . loaded three rifles up and off we went . got stuck in the -covered in gore- field . grrrr . walked across with one rifle .the GC2 , filled it up and Hissing sid enter the room . -covered in gore- hell .. tried all the usual , noway hosay .oh well . one of the lads had just bought a secondhand FTP 900 . i have had a couple of shots through one . not bad but not exceptional . shot at 47 yards . only board out . booger me they all went through the same hole . and that was with a really awful hawk scope on top . with what looks like a lot of little hairs of my staffie floating about in it . it was easily as good as the tsar and the 9015 . although the trigger was not a patch on the shutz . when i got home i dropped out the filler valve and put in another . no good still leaking . so i had to put the old video type connector back in i replaced 20 years ago . so much for -covered in gore- progress ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK got my bottle filled today . do i whipped out the GC2 Filler valve . and put some plumbers tape on the thread to see if that helps , fingers crossed . as said renewed the O ring between the trigger mech and the reg . . so filled that up tonight as well to see if that is gonna cure that . . ??? HOLLY 

 

PS GC2 tomorrow . whether leaking or not . may have to throw the pellets down range . will still probably win .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like one of those old classic cars that always has the bonnet up tinkering lol 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup . it should go into retirement but it depends on how mr canes outfit works ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well tried the GC2 again this morning and there is still a very slow leak . ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Looks Like Mr spare shutz is on it's way shortly ? if so the old GC2 can go off for service to SCR . only snag is i don't have a really good scope to go on it . so it looks like my old Custom shop is gonna get pressed into action . back to the future type thing . i can use em . but if more that two solid hours looking through em . they do give me a head ache . so set it up and just do 40 targets . stop . looking forward to it . ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Came rather late to this Topic but I have wondered for a long time whether a modern alternative to the GC2 would be a commercially viable proposition. No need to buy any rights from anyone as the Cardew Patent has long since expired and I wouldn’t want to repeat all the over complicated design faults of the original. I have been experimenting for a long time trying to build a rifle that would perform as well as the GC2 but would use air more efficiently and would fit in with modern fashions such as the Bullpup, semi auto mechanism etc. The Huben K1 is a possible role model.  

I came very close recently but test results on a prototype showed disappointing consistency and I gave up until a recent Eureka moment has prompted me to try again.

My motivation in this is not to make money but to prove that Gerald Cardew was right to avoid using a hammer action and that the future for high quality airguns lies in a pure pneumatic hammerless action. The Huben K1 has received much attention in USA as it has shown that a hammerless action can produce power well beyond that of a conventional airgun. There is doubt about its accuracy however, as reported on tha AIRGUN NATION Forum.

If I am able to produce a prototype that proves my point would anyone be interested or would the vested interests in hammer action PCPs be too much to allow the idea to flourish ? I am too old to consider forming an airgun manufacturing company and am not a RFD anyway. But watch this space as I may soon have “son of GC2”.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2017 at 1:12 PM, holly said:

Need to win the lottery Col . then off to Jons gaff to nag him into sorting it . if so . then drop by sportsmatch and buy the rights off young fordy for a tenner . .get a small unit . cnc machinery . good small work force . and away we go . ??? HOLLY

 

PS choice of stocks from warren . choice of anodised colours . try to keep the price down to £ 1200 . pups or full sized rifles . get four sponsored shooters . drop mr doe a few squid to push em in the mags . wham bam thank you mam .

This is the post that prompted me to reply in my previous post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with getting away from the dreaded 'hammer' is consistency. The beauty of the hammer design is it's simplicity and reliability, as soon as you try and get clever all that goes out the window as you've found yourself.

Saying that, without innovation we'd still be shooting springers with x4 power scopes so I'd also say go for it. There must be another way to reliably power a pellet down a barrel that doesn't involve a system that isn't that far away from cross-bow technology.

If it wasn't for Edward Howard trying and failing, we wouldn't have mercury fulminate and here we are 200 years later without a viable alternative to the percussion cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest snag with the GC2 is the trigger and the bleed valve . sort those and the fact that you only get around a hundred shots from a fill , would not be a problem ( MK 111 bleed valve ) you would need to convince a good shot to use it in competition . to prove it's worth . plus you would need to keep the price down . at least to start with . build the right product and the world will beat a path too your door .  yes i would be interested if it was a pup ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, holly said:

The biggest snag with the GC2 is the trigger and the bleed valve . sort those and the fact that you only get around a hundred shots from a fill , would not be a problem ( MK 111 bleed valve ) you would need to convince a good shot to use it in competition . to prove it's worth . plus you would need to keep the price down . at least to start with . build the right product and the world will beat a path too your door .  yes i would be interested if it was a pup ??? HOLLY

Hallo Holly and thanks for your interest.

My design is nothing like the GC2 in format. The only common features are that it uses a dump valve and a regulator. The real secret of the GC2 lies in the regulator but Gerald Cardew’s mistake was to combine the regulator and the trigger mechanism. An engineering nightmare. 

A simple form of his regulator could have been fitted to the air input of a simple dump valve based on the Sharp Innova and Job Done.

But my object was also to eliminate the basic inefficiency of the dump valve and that I have achieved. I would expect to obtain about 200 shots from a 250cc cylinder with a sub 12ft/lb rifle.

Now to modify my prototype to eliminate the inconsistency and I shall be getting somewhere.

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think one of the best things about the GC2 is the fact that for a rifle that likes a lot of air . it does not change zero as it uses it . i tried to get whiscombe to design/alter my trigger to bring it up to match grade . nope . i have bought  4 or five other bull pups . the problem is always the same . the trigger . you need in FT , maybe not so much in HFT a really good trigger . so you need to factor that into your research .also i would be using a S 200 barrel as long as you can get a real one and not one of the dodgy jobs going around . ??? HOLLY

 

PS i think something else to consider is that in the GC2s case . it was a beautiful rifle .elegant . 

Edited by holly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Treat it as a hobby Tony and prove them wrong.

 

Now on to you Holls wouldnt this be from your youth.

05-31-12-01-Gallery-airgun-with-crank.jp

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, holly said:

I think one of the best things about the GC2 is the fact that for a rifle that likes a lot of air . it does not change zero as it uses it . i tried to get whiscombe to design/alter my trigger to bring it up to match grade . nope . i have bought  4 or five other bull pups . the problem is always the same . the trigger . you need in FT , maybe not so much in HFT a really good trigger . so you need to factor that into your research .also i would be using a S 200 barrel as long as you can get a real one and not one of the dodgy jobs going around . ??? HOLLY

 

PS i think something else to consider is that in the GC2s case . it was a beautiful rifle .elegant . 

That consistency is due to the regulator, because the design is such that the pressure in the dump valve is always constant regardless of the varying pressure in the main reservoir. That is because the dump valve chamber is charged slowly so that the pressure at the input of the regulator has no effect on the set pressure at the output. No hammer valve regulator can do that, so far as I know, because there is always a flow through the regulator during a shot and the hammer valve has to compensate for the varying pressure at the input to the regulator.

I know what you mean about the perfect trigger, I still miss my Walther KKM that I had to give up when I stopped competing in small bore rifle.

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jon said:

Treat it as a hobby Tony and prove them wrong.

 

Now on to you Holls wouldnt this be from your youth.

05-31-12-01-Gallery-airgun-with-crank.jp

 

That is what it has been, just something to keep me sane in my retirement, although not completely successful in that,  Ho Ho, HaHa, HeeHee - - -

Tony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with zero shift as the rifle emptied was on some of the older rifles due to the muzzle brake fitting on a lot of em . even the modern EV2 suffered from it . if the adjustment on the retaining bolt was tightened too much on the brake . . one i bought had been tighten so much that the barrel was bowed . ??? HOLLY 

 

PS Jon  . my first rifle was a flint lock i bought new off you . you old git . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No no no your first was this Chinese black powder circa 1200's

1024px-Yuan_chinese_gun.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the real ale has gone to his bonce ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 11:33 AM, holly said:

I think one of the best things about the GC2 is the fact that for a rifle that likes a lot of air . it does not change zero as it uses it . i tried to get whiscombe to design/alter my trigger to bring it up to match grade . nope . i have bought  4 or five other bull pups . the problem is always the same . the trigger . you need in FT , maybe not so much in HFT a really good trigger . so you need to factor that into your research .also i would be using a S 200 barrel as long as you can get a real one and not one of the dodgy jobs going around . ??? HOLLY

 

PS i think something else to consider is that in the GC2s case . it was a beautiful rifle .elegant . 

 

Finally the penny is starting to drop about his Anschutz....:grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or a steyr with a LW barrel ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, holly said:

Or a steyr with a LW barrel ??? HOLLY

 

Mere toys....:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/6/2018 at 9:03 PM, Jon said:

No no no your first was this Chinese black powder circa 1200's

1024px-Yuan_chinese_gun.jpg

 

Almost as old as this thread... it's coming up to it's 9 year old anniversary!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some rifles deserve to be consigned to to the dustbin of history Rob . Walther , Daystate . ? others like the GC2  deserve to be resurrected . with some mods it could rule the roost again . accuracy + elegance + consistency , will win comps . old Fordy said , nobody tunes my rifles and nobody did ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, holly said:

Some rifles deserve to be consigned to to the dustbin of history Rob . Walther , Daystate . ? others like the GC2  deserve to be resurrected . with some mods it could rule the roost again . accuracy + elegance + consistency , will win comps . old Fordy said , nobody tunes my rifles and nobody did ??? HOLLY

 

They didn't tune it because it wasn't possible not because it didn't need it.

I've tried a few over the years and by far the best one I tried was Matt Knock's old one for the trigger.

The worst of the bunch was yours, again for the trigger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite true Col, powers derived by the air volume non adjustable. Want more velocity a longer inserts made up.
At least with the Sharp Innova (same rifle) you could alter the velocity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2018 at 8:26 PM, Jon said:

Quite true Col, powers derived by the air volume non adjustable. Want more velocity a longer inserts made up.
At least with the Sharp Innova (same rifle) you could alter the velocity.

 

I think Cardhew fell foul of the rule that theory doesn’t always pan out in practice...👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You forget Col . i owned Matts GC2 when he sold it . it was not as accurate as my one ( 113 ) the GC2 has to my mind the perfect reg . EG  what it has is a chamber . which when it fills you shut and what ever is in that chamber goes out the barrel . that is why is is so consistent . yes it uses a fair bit of air . but you only need say 60 shots . which it does with 40 to spare . Just needs upgrading ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, holly said:

You forget Col . i owned Matts GC2 when he sold it . it was not as accurate as my one ( 113 ) the GC2 has to my mind the perfect reg . EG  what it has is a chamber . which when it fills you shut and what ever is in that chamber goes out the barrel . that is why is is so consistent . yes it uses a fair bit of air . but you only need say 60 shots . which it does with 40 to spare . Just needs upgrading ??? HOLLY

 

It's just a glorified manual reg.; you push a button and wait, at least with a normal reg it fills itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot get the consistency out of a normal reg in cold weather ??? HOLLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×