Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor
Realistically, what is the big advantage in the water? The true leveller in the water is buoyancy, like it or lump it. If a gun as a higher mass and a lower volume than water it will sink no matter what it is made of. Gun design is the important thing, not what it is made of.
...but to my mind it makes sense to increase the volume and mass and for that wood is the better choice. Each to their own I guess.
|
...And there's the point. If you want a 120cm gun that is neutral with a 7mm spear in it, you can forget aluminium (need a 30cm+ ID for 1.8mm walls), use a 36mm OD woodie, or use a standard 25mm ID gun with 1.8mm walls in carbon fibre. Unless you're going to load it up with three or more bands, you won't need the extra weight of the woodie, so with the carbon gun you get a much thinner (read more manuverable) gun with less than half the swing weight.
The advantages of wood, and read this carefully and think about it, only come about in barrel diameters greater than 32mm, where you want to balance out a heavy spear and load it up with multiple bands. From a purely technical perspective, carbon fibre is better than other materials up to that point. Of course with thin guns, the advantage is almost not worth bothering with, so aluminium is fine.
In my opinion, below 90cm (not that I own one), the differences for normal-diameter spearguns is not worth discussing, so aluminium is fine. This does not hold true for guns like the Omer XXV. 100 - 120 suits 1.5 - 2mm wall carbon fibre for guns with 6.5 - 7mm spears loaded with no more than 2 x 16mm bands. 130 - 140 is best with 2mm wall carbon fibre with ID of 25mm for 6.5 - 7mm spears and 28mm ID for 7.5 - 8mm spears. Maximum load of twin 18s. Anything larger than this, or a 120+ gun with more power would require a wooden gun.
