Morini Cylinders

David Levene · Post by **David Levene** » Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:57 am

Some might be interested; I have just seen a photo of a very recent Morini cylinder.

They have fallen into line with the others by giving a 10 year maximum.

TPE · Post by **TPE** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:08 am

Speaking of Morini air pistols. What will be the verdict with the older model 162 E with the fixed cylinder? Do the cylinders/guns need to be inspected by someone or are they anymore good for training purposes only?

TPe

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:12 am

Was to be expected - selling tanks is easy revenue, wo why leave that to others.

You can change the 162E tank as well, no problem.

jipe · Post by **jipe** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:54 pm

You can also find other reasons for this move:
- First Morini sells a lot of pistols in Germany. The 10 years validity of cylinders comes from Germany, easy to understand that they want to comply with the rule of a big market.
- Second, Morini doesn't manufacture the cylinders themselves, they most probably use the same supplier as some other manufacturers and this supplier follow the 10 year validity rule.

Richard H · Post by **Richard H** » Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:31 pm

Haven't been to Morini but I've watched the others manufacture the cylinders in house, where do you get your info from?

The cylinders are machined from aluminium billets.

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:02 am

The whole thing is a joke. The only cylinders ever that exploded were faulty ones, not old ones. It's a revenue generator, nothing else. And there was no problem in Germany with the 20 years of the Morini tubes, so why change? To sell more stuff.

j-team · Post by **j-team** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:46 am

Tycho wrote:The whole thing is a joke. The only cylinders ever that exploded were faulty ones, not old ones. It's a revenue generator, nothing else. And there was no problem in Germany with the 20 years of the Morini tubes, so why change? To sell more stuff.

Tycho, you are absolutely 100% correct.

I have no intention of replacing my air cylinders when they are 10 years old.

TPE · Post by **TPE** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:24 am

Is there a rule that gives the competition organizers power no to accept your equipment if you have an old cylinder not under warranty of the manufacturer? So is ISSF forcing the shooters to support the manufacturers?

TPe

jipe · Post by **jipe** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:47 am

Richard H wrote:Haven't been to Morini but I've watched the others manufacture the cylinders in house, where do you get your info from?

The cylinders are machined from aluminium billets.

When there was a problem with the Anschutz rifle cylinders, the name of the manufacturer was mentioned. Same in the FWB document explaining the 10 year limit and the process to re-check the steel cylinders.

The use of other suppliers for parts is not limited to the cylinders, many parts are manufactured and sometimes designed by sub-contractors. The most known one is the barrel with Lothar Walther.

This 10 years limit is just a matter of legal protection, the risk of people injuries in case of explosion is high. The risk that some cylinder explode is probably very low but the manufacturers cover themselves by setting a limit. ISSF does the same referring to the manufacturers rules.

About making money with cylinder replacement, if I remember well, I read that Walther offer a free cylinder replacement after 10 years for the new LP400 ?

David Levene · Post by **David Levene** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 3:09 am

TPE wrote:Is there a rule that gives the competition organizers power no to accept your equipment if you have an old cylinder not under warranty of the manufacturer?

Not exactly.

The most applicable rule is 6.2.2.8
"It is the shooter‟s responsibility that any air or Co2 cylinder has been certified as safe and is still within the validity date."

There is however an overiding rule, part of 6.2.1, which states "The Organizing Committee bears the responsibility for safety."

If they consider the use of an out of date cylinder to be a safety issue then they are entitled to stop it from being used.

Richard H · Post by **Richard H** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:39 am

Jipe that was the supplier of the raw material (the billets), the faulty ones had sub surface defects in the billet that should have been caught when the billets were tested with ultra sound ( the defect was actually a lap) and would have been easily detected (all billets are suppose to be tested usually at both the supplier and the customers end). I use to run a metallurgical lab, and worked in a lab a steel mill, prior to being a quality/reliability engineer in the automotive industry. Someone dropped the ball and didn't do what they were suppose to do and for that they now passed the ball to the consumer who can now pay the cost for their screw up.

Richard H · Post by **Richard H** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:42 am

Here's a little funny tidbit, I ordered a new cylinder from a manufacture, who promptly offered me an older one. I brought expiry date issue up to them and was told that it doesn't really matter the cylinders are all ok. Go figure.

ghostrip · Post by **ghostrip** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:20 am

perhaps morini changed the billiet supplier. or they were advised by their current supplier to change to 10 years. in my country we really don't look the cylinder dates (don't know if they will in the future)

RandomShotz · Post by **RandomShotz** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:46 am

I seem to recall someone on this forum complaining that he had sent a cylinder in to a reputable shop for repair - replacement seal? - and the shop told him that the cylinder was out of date and destroyed it without consulting the owner first. Apparently, the shop did not want the liability for returning an out of date cylinder even if they did not work on it.

One point was not brought up, and the metallurgist in this discussion might comment on it. Every time a cylinder is filled it expands slightly; the filling cycle can cause a work hardening of the metal that may make it more susceptible to catastrophic failure. I have used some very hefty aluminum centrifuge rotors that appeared perfect but had to be derated or retired after so many hours of use. The stress of cycles of expansion under centrifugal force makes them unsafe. It may be that the 10 year limit is a proxy for the number of fill cycles; a top competitor may be approaching the limits of the cylinder in ten years while the casual shooters and wannabe's could safely go a lot longer.

How much does a new cylinder cost anyway? I am wondering if the cost is amortized over ten years, is it significant w/ respect to the cost of pellets, targets, and other expenses related to shooting and competing?

Roger

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 9:08 am

Perhaps not, but it's still a major PITA. The only upside is that I got two Steyr cylinders on epay for 3,50 Euros, because they were 10 years old... Overall, the whole thing is a clear rip-off, and Francesco should be clobbered for not having the cojones to stand up to the 10-year-mafia.

v76 · Post by **v76** » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:40 am

I saw this photo a while ago when AP shopping: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stenholsfo ... otostream/, taken on Nov 6 2010. Would love to know if Morini is officially part of the rip-off consortium now.

Luckily I have some late 2008 cylinders "made to higher specifications" that are good for 20 years... zzzzzz

jipe · Post by **jipe** » Thu Jul 21, 2011 5:34 am

Richard H wrote:Here's a little funny tidbit, I ordered a new cylinder from a manufacture, who promptly offered me an older one. I brought expiry date issue up to them and was told that it doesn't really matter the cylinders are all ok. Go figure.

Of course it doesn't matter: it is metal fatigue that can cause problem. If the cylinders were never used and stored in a right way (no corrosion), the manufacturing date doesn't matter.

The problem is that once the cylinder are sold, it is not possible to know if they were used often or not. Therefore the use of the manufacturing date to define an expiry date.

As said Tycho, liability is the problem. No company would take the risk of being liable in case of accident if it is not necessary to do so. It is not a question of cojones, it is just business.

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Fri Jul 22, 2011 6:10 am

What are you, a lawyer? At the end of the day, they are in the business of selling guns, which are things that go bang, throw projectiles across the landscape and contain explosions... Can't do that with any lawyers near you.

David Levene · Post by **David Levene** » Fri Jul 22, 2011 10:36 am

Rover wrote:Has anyone here been turned away at a match for out-of-fate cylinders?

I didn't think so.

Yes, in Munich a couple of years ago. The shooters had to borrow cylinders from team members.

Richard H · Post by **Richard H** » Fri Jul 22, 2011 2:50 pm

Which ones David, even which country? It seems like Urban legend everyone "knows" someone who heard that. Yet when asked for specifics no one knows any details. I'd really like to know.