TargetTalk

Any info on this accessory used by the Korean Team?

I haven't handled a Steyr, and certainly haven't measured one, but aren't they (like most of the big name 10 metre pistols) pretty close to the maximum length at the muzzle already? I watched both those matches and was quite surprised to see those extended front sights, made me wonder if there's some sort of exception to fitting in the box if it's only the front sight... but that seems very unlikely. I'd come to the temporary conclusion, bending hearing something concrete, that these must be shorter-barrelled models and that the front sight unit was extending out only to the legal maximum of 420mm or a bit less. I'd love to hear something solid about this though!

Yes, it crossed my mind so I looked again and again at the vids and they appear to be the standard length LP10E, not the Compact version, but I could be wrong of course.

What would the advantage of the Compact one be other than a bit less weight? Balance? Young Wook KIM has even added a counterweight amidbarrelsleeve.

I do prefer the Compact versions too, if that's the case, but I always thought I were the odd one out...

My guess woiuld be that the compact would be more accurate for the reason that pellet is in the barrel less time after ignition. Add the extended front sight so it still fits in the box and you get the advantage of the longer sight radius. I gunsmith once told me that longer barrels are not really more accurate. The length has to be long enough to stabilize the bullet. In normal rifles and pistols added length will affect (increase) velocity.

Thank you mrgt350.

It makes sense, if only from other's experience as well.

When I was younger/ish I shot a FWB Model 2 standard barrel length with the "junior" lenght CO2 cylinder. I liked the balance. I later moved to the Walther CPM1 which had the dropped cyclinder. Balance is so important over the match. Those extended sights must fit in the box.

Also it reminds me of the old BoMar extended front sight in bullseye shooting which provided a longer sight radius, thus better accuuracy in sighting ( they say)

Greg Derr wrote:Also it reminds me of the old BoMar extended front sight in bullseye shooting which provided a longer sight radius, thus better accuuracy in sighting ( they say)

As we all know, if you think it helps, then it probably does!

Its difficult to be sure (we would need a side picture) but when I look at the picture it doesn't seem to me that its a short version.

The extension isn't that big, so to fit into the box, I see at least two solutions:
- reduce the size of the grip at the back (like done on some Walther GSP for the same reason, i'e' fit into the box) and/or put the grip more vertical.
- a gunsmith can easily shorten the barrel and barrel cover at the rear just enough to compensate for the extended sight. But I don't think that this is what they did because the cylinder lokks like a long cylinder, not a short one.

Note that the grip of Jang Mi Kim seems very small (look at the position of the palm shelf) she must have very small hands.

About the accuracy of short barrel AP: yes, the travel of the pellet is shorter but the velocity is also lower. Due to the shorter barrel but also to the adjustment of the regulator: manufacturers adjust the velocity lower to use less air per shot and keep a decent number of shots out of the shorter cylinder.

I was under the impression that the Steyr LP10's rear sight can be extended further back towards the shooter, which I would have imagined was allowing for just about the maximum distance from the foresight. If such extended front sights like the ones pictured are present then the rear was kept at the factory setting, i.e. away from the shooter's eye: ergo the foresight extension that compensates for the "unused" rearward extension of the rear sight. It sort of makes sense somehow.

Crete wrote:........which I would have imagined was allowing for just about the maximum distance from the foresight.

Remember that under ISSF rules, providing that it fits in the box, there is no maximum sight radius for Air Pistol.

" the travel of the pellet is shorter but the velocity is also lower. Due to the shorter barrel"

Doesn't seem right in an air gun but I could be wrong. In a gun that uses .22 cartridge the longer barrel allows the powder to more completely burn thus giving it more velocity. In an air gun I am not sure the same principal applies.

Anyone else?

The longer the barrel, the more potential volume of air to push the pellet, the higher the potential velocity. But this depends on the correct adjustment/timing of the valve and the pressure in the tank. All adjustments being correctly matched, a longer barrel should make for a faster travelling pellet.

On my Pardini K10 I've deliberately slowed the pellet down with the bolt made for this purpose. When I received the used pistol the velocity was set very high, so much so that the barrel tip was jumping up about 2 rings unless I gripped it very solidly. Dialing it down to about 450fps has eliminated this, as by trial and error it seems I've matched the push of the air to the compensating factors of the 3 barrel-top holes and the compensator unit on the tip. If the barrel jumps now, it's my fault, not the gun's.

In light of this thread I decided today to move my front sight forward. My grip is carved such that the total gun length was about 11mm short of the legal maximum of 420mm anyway, so I brought the front sight unit out 10mm to stay just within the limit. I'm not certain yet whether it's changed anything for me besides apparently necessitating a 1-click adjustment downward. Just shot one target today. I'll learn more about it during tomorrow's longer training session. But for today it seemed just fine, let me shoot a very tight cluster of 8 pellets and sighting looked good.

So, if a longer barrel has a higher velocity which allows the pellet to reach the target faster vs. a shorter barrel with less "lock time", it seems that both have the same precision. If the late Don Nygord chopped off an inch or so off his FWB 65 and won the World Championship in 81' then there must be an advantage with the short version.

Don's FWB retained the same power plant while being an inch or so shorter, so... the pellet must have left the barrel a small percentage of the previous time sooner, and slightly slower. The only compensation required would have been to slightly elevate the rear sight for the slightly lower point of impact. Less barrel time = less time for errors between triggering and clearing the gun. If he had also modified the spring for higher velocity (shims for pre-compression, heavier spring, lighter piston, etc) he'd have even less time in the barrel for errors to be introduced. But springers are complicated. It's easy to make one recoil badly by a small change in tension or over-springing.

kevinweiho wrote:If the late Don Nygord chopped off an inch or so off his FWB 65 and won the World Championship in 81' then there must be an advantage with the short version.

Or, maybe it was because Don was a world class shooter who knew how to compete at that level!

j-team wrote:/
Or, maybe it was because Don was a world class shooter who knew how to compete at that level!

Yeah, that too.

If somebody posted all threads about long vs short AP in here, the last post would be on page 128... nothing new.

The Steyr's are almost certainly standard versions. Remember that the AP measuring box is 200mm high, so diagonally, there is a lot of space. And the Koreans like their FP very long, too, see the Morinis they shoot there (contrary to many of the Chinese). So it seems to be a philosophical thing to them, they just believe in long sight radius'.

That's something I've been curious about for a while Tycho. When I entered my first competition last fall, the fellow inspecting my 46m put it into the box diagonally. Made no difference, as I'd checked and adjusted the heel length of my home made grip such that it fit into 419mm when measured with the barrel parallel to the box edge, it's just that he put it in that way.

When I entered a match this spring, a different fellow put it in the box squarely. Fit a bit close, but it fit with no pushing.

Now with this front sight question and a Pardini, which is a bit more compact in the grip, I'm wondering whether a diagonal fit is 'legal' for all competitions, even when the judges are at their most strict. In the ISSF rules, 2009 edition, section 8.9 on pistol specifications (PDF), I see the dimensions of the box and other rules about pistol shape and such, but no mention of the pistol orientation within that box. Are we to interpret this as something like 'the pistol must fit within the 420 x 200mm length x width... somehow'? As in, could I put it into the box on the diagonal and so long as it fit, the elongated front sight would be fine? Marking out an exact 420 x 200mm rectangle with perfectly square corners here and putting my K10 onto it, it seems I could make a front sight unit to extend to a total of 29mm beyond the front of the compensator, as the total diagonal is a bit over 460mm. Should I wish to get crazy (like these Korean shooters) and do that, would I get booted out of a match?

I've got lots of metal bits around. Might just give it a try sometime to see what the extra inch or more does to my groups. We could call it a 'reverse Nygord' maybe. No hacksaw required, at least not for the barrel.

The rules are clear. The pistol's got to fit in the box, no matter how. If that is squarely, diagonally or upside down, doesn't matter. Most current SP wouldn't fit into the 300 / 150 / 50 box without using every corner available. The AP box is much bigger, because there was a time before compressed air when many AP had big cocking levers and such things. You could probably squeeze some more cm out of your sighting radius by moving the rear sight, but I (IMO, YMMV etc.) don't believe that's a useful thing - what you're looking for in a competition is a stable sight picture, and that's exactly what you're not getting by making the thing longer.

Nah, moving the rear sight closer to the eye wouldn't be a good idea for me. I like the arm length I have, don't want to mimic shorter arms when sighting. Moving the front sight further forward might suit me, as I don't focus on the sights, at least not this year. Since January I've been working with focusing on the target and finding it's easier to bring the sights into comfortable, non-nerve-wracking alignment when they're both blurred. It's a similar effect to blurring the target in terms of stressing out less over exactly pointing at the 10, just shifts that blur to the pistol. Seems to work for me, after a year of fighting to do it the other way around (standard front sight focus), and I suspect it's due to having grown up sighting that way. Something burned into my brain from pellet rifle plinking and hunting as a kid.

If diagonal's cool with officials I'll give it a whirl, no harm but an hour or so spent carving a bit of steel into a new, longer front sight unit and blackening it. At worst I've wasted an hour plus a session or two testing it. The way I see it is that rifles are easier to aim with a longer sight radius, so why shouldn't pistols? Or at least that seems to be the aim of the Korean shooters just now... or so I'm guessing.