TargetTalk

scerir · Post by **scerir** » Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:54 am

the new Pardini K12

scerir · Post by **scerir** » Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:56 am

another pic

scerir · Post by **scerir** » Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:57 am

last pic

scerir · Post by **scerir** » Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:12 am

They say: 'La K12 è stata presentata alla fiera IWA la scorsa settimana e sarà disponibile dal mese prossimo. Molte cose sono state cambiate e migliorate incluso il compensatore. Le maggiori innovazioni sono a livello del meccanismo di scatto, dove so...no stati modificati i leveraggi e le molle rendendolo ancora migliore, e dell’absorber regolabile che azzera la reazione dell'arma (brevettato).'
So, there is a new compensator (or air-stripper), there is an absorber, a new trigger (springs, levers, geometry).

LukeP · Post by **LukeP** » Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:46 am

All this new pistol looks like Steyr after 20years....
it's strange Pardini phased out the K10 so quickly.

scerir · Post by **scerir** » Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:54 am

LukeP wrote: All this new pistol looks like Steyr after 20years....

well ... exactly!

LukeP wrote: it's strange Pardini phased out the K10 so quickly.

K10 has problems, as far as I know. Many had severe problems with valves. The trigger is 'dry' (and different from K2) but it is not easy to set the sear/hammer engagement screw properly.

Tycho · Post by **Tycho** » Sat Mar 17, 2012 1:53 pm

Not surprised, I've seen about three or four K10 in the last years, all in all. Pardini has had good success with a very conservative development policy (like they stuck to CO2 longer than anybody else), but this time I think it's bitten them in the ass, and they had to come up with something fast to go up against the Steyr. Not that I like it, from the looks of it, the trigger is still mounted too low and grip geometry still looks really strange.

kevinweiho · Post by **kevinweiho** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:42 am

Besides resembling an updated version of the Steyr, it also has some Morini traits... (cocking lever and trigger guard)

Sc0 · Post by **Sc0** » Tue May 29, 2012 6:12 pm

Looks similar to the K10 except modified for the absorber bolt and cocking mechanism? (Steyr influenced?)

If it's truly a new design I would like to know what defects the K10 exhibited as I have one... For starters, the severe valve problem catches my attention...

scerir · Post by **scerir** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:17 am

Sc0 wrote: If it's truly a new design I would like to know what defects the K10 exhibited as I have one ...

The trigger mechanism of K12 is entirely re-designed. Springs, levers, angles, etc., are different. The result is a clean, clean, clean, and easy, easy, easy break of the shot. On the contrary the trigger mechanism of K10 was something designed to give the "feeling" of the LP10 trigger. Unfortunately (just like the LP10) it was difficult to properly set the sear/hammer engagement screw. Turn that K10 screw a tiny tiny bit clockwise and the trigger becomes too dry and unsafe, turn a tiny tiny bit anticlockwise and the trigger becomes too long and hard to be pulled.

The K12 has the absorber (unfortunately, imo). But a different one. The absorber moves backwards not because a screw does the job (like for the LP10) but because part of the compressed air goes back and moves backwards the absorber's mass (which is around 50 grams).

Rover · Post by **Rover** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:42 am

You mean on the same basic principle as the FWB 65?

scerir · Post by **scerir** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 11:37 am

Rover wrote:You mean on the same basic principle as the FWB 65?

In the K12 the compressed air coming from the valve is split. The major part goes through the barrel, to push the pellet. A minor part goes backwards, through the bolt, to push (backwards) a movable, sliding mass (circa 50 grams). The mass moving backwards should compensate the effect of air pushing the pellet and the effect of the pellet leaving the barrel. There is a possibility (that is to say a valve) to adjust the effect of this absorber, from no effect at all to maximum possible effect.

Frankly I do not remember the FWB 65. Wasn't there a big big spring to compensate the backwards movement of the barrel?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:01 pm

scerir wrote: Frankly I do not remember the FWB 65. Wasn't there a big big spring to compensate the backwards movement of the barrel?

The upper part of the FWB 65 was used in two modes, locked and recoilless depending on need. Locked, it had considerable 'kick' which was said to be suitable for firearm training. In recoilless mode the barrel and entire upper block behind it, including piston and spring I believe, would slide backwards as a reaction to the movement of the spring and piston. Many have said that this action was very effective in maintaining a very steady hold on shot release. The big spring firing in the opposite direction in sync with the power plant spring/piston was in the previous competition models, the Diana M10 and earlier versions. The 65 made these obsolete by delivering a detectable reduction in gun movement.

I'm a bit puzzled by all these muzzle compensators and barrel drillings and recoil dampers in modern air pistols. Just this past Wednesday I was mildly teased at the club, by a couple of very experienced 10m AP shooters, when I said something about dropping the muzzle velocity to around 470fps to reduce muzzle flip. I've found that this reduces most of the 'recoil' or muzzle flip in my Pardini K10, even keeping it to a minimum when my hold is less than ideal. But they scoffed, as others have in forums here and there, saying that 'the pellet has left the barrel by then, there is no meaning to muzzle flip!' Well... that's all well and good to say, but when I have a succession of bad releases and have seen/felt the barrel pushing upwards, I go to the target and see a group a full ring high of centre. If the pellet has left the barrel by the time it's flipping up slightly, how is this happening? It's not heeling. When I heel a shot I feel it quite clearly, and the result is a hit in the upper 8 or even 7 ring. What I refer to is rather more subtle, when my grip has been slightly too relaxed (due to excessive hold time, usually) and the whole gun just jumps up slightly because my grip hasn't damped this. When I dial the speed up to 500 or even around 530, this muzzle flip becomes much more pronounced (along with the volume becoming a bit painful for home practice) and the results tend to be up in the 8 ring, not the 9. So it seems to me that the pellet is still in the barrel for at least a small part of this 'recoil.'

ronpistolero · Post by **ronpistolero** » Mon Jul 02, 2012 6:33 am

Re the FWB Model 65, I may be wrong but the gun had a recoil to some degree which was absorbed by the top part riding on its rails. In other words, the travel length of about 10mm rearwards upon firing and its weight were enough to make it feel as though it was recoiless.

My opinion, and I don't mean to discredit the K12 (and K10), is that the Steyr is more "italian" in design with it's sleekiness. If it were a car, it would be one with the best aerodynamics :-). The K10/K12 has its barrel too high against the web of the shooting hand for my liking. But the several K10's we have locally have very good and I mean very crisp triggers. Pretty much trouble free the past 3 years.

Gerard, there are some you tube videos showing muzzle flipping of various makes of target cal 22's showing that the bullet has indeed exited prior to recoil movement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlGRQFzMXe8

Oftentimes its just very difficult to notice. In any case, the gun is the constant, and the human is the variable. I assume that the reason why the top shooters are in their positions is primarily because their being variables is kept to a minimum. In other words, shot after shot they have the same grip pressure, same trigger squeeze, etc.

Just some of my thoughts.