Help on LP1

lousyshooter · Post by **lousyshooter** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:43 pm

I just purchased a used Steyr LP1 and need some help and info. This is my first PCP gun so bare with me. The gun seem to be in good condition.
The manual that came with the gun is for CO2 but this is a compressed air gun. The compressed air cylinder does NOT have a pressure guage in them.
Just a little screw and red washer or o-ring. Is this something that tells you how much pressure is left in it?

j-team · Post by **j-team** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:57 pm

Yes, when the nipple pokes out it's full. When it's flush it's empty!

Rover · Post by **Rover** » Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:26 pm

The system is crappy and tends to spring a leak at that point.

Use a pellet count to determine the fullness of the cylinder (buy a shaker box). The indicator seems to be sticky and inaccurate.

When your cylinder starts to leak (and it will), have it rebuilt with the indicator disabled for longer "life". Pilk will do it.

Don't piss away big bucks for new cylinders when the ones you have are perfectly adequate.

Fred Mannis · Post by **Fred Mannis** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:42 pm

Doubt that Pilk will rebuild a compressed air cylinder that is over ten years old

Rover · Post by **Rover** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 7:15 pm

Why would Pilk care about some silly ISSF rule?

Does the gun leak? If not, don't worry about it.

RandomShotz · Post by **RandomShotz** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 7:40 pm

Rover wrote:Why would Pilk care about some silly ISSF rule?

There may be liability issues. At least one AP shop destroyed a customer's out of date cylinder rather than repair it or even return it unrepaired. I don't remember who it was, but there is a thread recounting that on this forum somewhere.

Rover wrote:Does the gun leak? If not, don't worry about it.

Good advice.

Roger

Rover · Post by **Rover** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:11 pm

I probably should have been less abrupt.

Hammerli used to recommend that after twenty years (!) the cylinder should be returned to the factory for inspection (not replacement).

I'm cetain that if Pilk had a cylinder apart for repair and it showed signs of deterioration they would contact the customer. If no deterioration, my hope is that they would rebuild it. Maybe they should chime in on this one, since I don't want to speak for them.

I would love to hear from anyone who had PERSONAL knowledge of a cylinder bursting from a correct 200 BAR fill-up, or even a 300 BAR fill.

David Levene · Post by **David Levene** » Sun Jul 01, 2012 3:44 am

Rover wrote:Why would Pilk care about some silly ISSF rule?

Would you mind clarifying which "silly ISSF rule" you are talking about.

I know the ISSF rules fairly well but am not aware of one that would stop anyone from repairing a cylinder. If however the manufacturer has stated that the cylinder must not be used for more than 10 years then, as previously mentioned, there might be some liability issues in repairing one. That has nothing to do with the ISSF.

Rover · Post by **Rover** » Sun Jul 01, 2012 8:49 am

The rule requiring you have in date cylinder to pass inspection and compete.

I haven't heard of any matches in the U.S. doing this, but maybe others have.

David Levene · Post by **David Levene** » Sun Jul 01, 2012 9:10 am

Rover wrote:The rule requiring you have in date cylinder to pass inspection and compete.

I presume you're talking about 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."

If a manufacturer has said that you must not use a cylinder for more than 10 years then describing that rule as "silly" is, IMHO, unwarranted.

Rover · Post by **Rover** » Sun Jul 01, 2012 10:44 am

I'm glad you had that at hand, as I did not.

"certified as safe and is still within the validity date."

Are YOUR cylinders "certified as safe"? Show documentation. If they ARE safe, why would you care about a validity date?

I know of only one instance of a cylinder burst, and that from an obviously defective in date 300 Bar Walther cylinder, with only a minor injury.

Perhaps I should have said useless rather than silly.

ronpistolero · Post by **ronpistolero** » Sun Jul 01, 2012 9:09 pm

Sir David. What if the tank was stamped Dec 2010 and then by 2020 I had it Pressure (hydro) tested and the tester stamped on a validity date good for 5 years and was provided a "certificate" of sorts to attest to it. Will that be acceptable with the issf?

Ron

Richard H · Post by **Richard H** » Sun Jul 01, 2012 9:46 pm

David, I was offered a cylinder with a date that was outside the period from a major manufacture for about $50 less, if they are willing to sell them with invalid dates then I really do think calling the rule silly is valid.

I too think the rule is silly.

scausi · Post by **scausi** » Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:16 am

I had an lp1 that had both cylinders resealed by Potter firearms (AUS), if the seal goes they can be replaced and not expensive, he was the Aus distributer and had the Steyr calibrating machine for their pistols for rebuilds.So they can be fixed . As far as the ISSF ruling you will find that will only come into affect if you are traveling around the world in shooting comps , not at local club base level

David Levene · Post by **David Levene** » Mon Jul 02, 2012 1:13 am

Richard H wrote:David, I was offered a cylinder with a date that was outside the period from a major manufacture for about $50 less, if they are willing to sell them with invalid dates then I really do think calling the rule silly is valid.

If it was one of the manufacturers who specifically said that you must not use a cylinder for more than a set time then you should ask them why they are willing to sell you a cylinder that you must not use.

The joint statement made by most of the manufacturers in 2009 was not specific to cylinders used in ISSF events. If they have made a statement which they now believe to be invalid then they should change their advice.

It is not the job of the ISSF to go against safety advice from the manufacturers. It is the manufacturers who set the validity dates, not the ISSF.

taz · Post by **taz** » Mon Jul 02, 2012 2:23 am

Actually it is neither the ISSF's job nor the manufacturer's.
Periodic inspection (which includes but is not limited to pressure testing) for pressure vessels is mandated by each country's legislation.
The initial certification of the pressure cylinders (considering most if not all are made in and sold in Europe) falls under directive 1999/36/EC (Transportable Pressure Equipment Directive).
The periodic inspection is mandated by the above directive as well as ADR and RID (Directives 94/55/EC and 96/49/EC) respectively.
All of the above directives have been incorporated in the legislation of the EU countries.

I suppose that similar legislation exists for the USA, Canada, Australia etc.

So guys it is not a matter of opinion, it is the law, and nobody (the ISSF or the manufacturers) can suggest or accept anything outside of this.

I could go into more detail but I doubt this would be helpful to anyone.

j-team · Post by **j-team** » Mon Jul 02, 2012 2:54 am

taz wrote:So guys it is not a matter of opinion, it is the law, and nobody (the ISSF or the manufacturers) can suggest or accept anything outside of this.

But, in most countries the regulations regarding pressure vessels only apply if they are over a specified size (volume). Those that are smaller are exempt.

taz · Post by **taz** » Mon Jul 02, 2012 3:48 am

That is correct. Usually there is a limit in either the volume, pressure or their product which categorizes pressure equipment. All that taking into account the fluid which is contained.
It seems that in this case there is no lower limit on the volume.
If somebody is interested here you can find all the relevant directives

http://europa.eu/documentation/legislation/index_en.htm

ronpistolero · Post by **ronpistolero** » Mon Jul 02, 2012 5:38 am

Periodic inspection (which includes but is not limited to pressure testing) for pressure vessels is mandated by each country's legislation.

I would agree without second thoughts to mandated periodic testing. Safety is paramount. However, if such cylinder was deemed safe after universally acceptable testing protocols, therefore, it should follow that such is useable beyond the 10 year period and may be acceptable to the issf. I know part of the reason is sales but if the issf were to make some concessions, that would make life for the financially less capable shooters/enthusiasts less difficult. Here in southeast asia, we do this. The quality airgun is a steep investment as it is. This would alleviate many of such quite expensive requisites.

taz · Post by **taz** » Mon Jul 02, 2012 5:51 am

ISSF has already done what it can to help shooters.
Rule 6.2.2.8 simply states that safety or your cylinders is the shooter's responsibility.

TargetTalk

Help on LP1

Help on LP1

pcp cylinder

lp1