-
Welcome to the DeeperBlue.com Forums, the largest online community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing. To gain full access to the DeeperBlue.com Forums you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
- Join over 44,280+ fellow diving enthusiasts from around the world on this forum
- Participate in and browse from over 516,210+ posts.
- Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
- Post your own photos or view from 7,441+ user submitted images.
- All this and much more...
You can gain access to all this absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
cayman hf2
- Thread starterholdown
- Start date
Thread Status: Hello
, There was no answer in this thread for more than 60 days.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
Marwan has that gun, I have the regular HF, very accurate, very light, every easy to move but loud.
I found that it scratches the barrel easily. But lets face it we are not down there for presentation.
HELLO! The Cayman HF2 is a very precise and very light gun, same muzzle as XXV GOLD, I do agree with stranglove it is very noisy.
Tomy.
Tomy.
At least someone else thinks the gun is loud, I am probably buying a HF carbon next.
I discussed the differences between the HF and HF2 in this thread on my local forum. Copying below:
Gun manufacturers who make higher power guns intentionally make their guns stockier in order to counteract the recoil produced by the higher band power (e.g., the thicker wooden stocks of Riffe guns). The drawback to this is that heavier guns are harder to maneuver. The HF/HF2 barrel designs represent an innovative solution by OMER to add extra stability to a gun without adding lots of mass, thereby preserving the excellent maneuverability euro guns are known for. Whereas other brands make their guns beefier to provide stability, OMER figured out a way to achieve the same goal without making their guns heavier: the extra width of the HF barrel inhibits vertical travel, thereby reducing recoil when firing. Good idea, but it required some manufacturing innovation (the [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroforming"]hydroform process[/ame]) and comes at a price.
A side benefit of the oval shape is improved horizontal tracking, though at the expense of vertical tracking, but this is specifically what provides the extra stability; vertical tracking not nearly is important as horizontal anyway (how often do you have a fish swim vertically?). Yet another benefit, which is actually really significant, is that the HF design and manufacturing process yields a barrel that is much stiffer than any other style of euro gun, even a carbon barrel:
This chart indicates that in OMER's testing, the HF barrel was 21% stiffer than a round carbon barrel with integrated track, and nearly 50% stiffer than a round aluminum barrel with track (for 100cm barrels).
As you know, the HF2 barrel shape differs somewhat from that of the HF barrel. I'm sure when we all saw the HF2 for the first time we instantly thought that it must be superior to the HF. Not necessarily so. The HF2 is meant to be a more maneuverable version of their hydroform design, while the HF is a more stable one. Mark Laboccetta explained to me that the length of gun you're after should determine whether you go with the HF or HF2. If you want a longer gun (110cm and up) go with the HF, as the extra stability and stiffness will be more beneficial with the more powerful gun, while maneuverability won't be as much of a concern since longer guns are usually used for longer shots on slower-moving targets. Conversely, since shorter guns are usually used for faster-moving closer targets, the increased maneuverability of the HF2 design will be more favorable when shopping for a shorter gun (100cm and below).
One other difference between the HF2 and the other Caymans is the muzzle (the HF shares the same muzzle as the carbon Cayman). The HF2 features a muzzle that has never been seen before in the U.S. market, but which has existed in the XXV gun of the European line for a few years now.
The muzzle is meant to offer versatility, allowing four different muzzle configurations. If you follow the guidelines I mentioned and go with the HF2 in a shorter size, then the in-line single bands that come stock should be fine. Divers who want more range, though, who favor double circular bands and an open muzzle, should go with the HF.
Gun manufacturers who make higher power guns intentionally make their guns stockier in order to counteract the recoil produced by the higher band power (e.g., the thicker wooden stocks of Riffe guns). The drawback to this is that heavier guns are harder to maneuver. The HF/HF2 barrel designs represent an innovative solution by OMER to add extra stability to a gun without adding lots of mass, thereby preserving the excellent maneuverability euro guns are known for. Whereas other brands make their guns beefier to provide stability, OMER figured out a way to achieve the same goal without making their guns heavier: the extra width of the HF barrel inhibits vertical travel, thereby reducing recoil when firing. Good idea, but it required some manufacturing innovation (the [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroforming"]hydroform process[/ame]) and comes at a price.
A side benefit of the oval shape is improved horizontal tracking, though at the expense of vertical tracking, but this is specifically what provides the extra stability; vertical tracking not nearly is important as horizontal anyway (how often do you have a fish swim vertically?). Yet another benefit, which is actually really significant, is that the HF design and manufacturing process yields a barrel that is much stiffer than any other style of euro gun, even a carbon barrel:
This chart indicates that in OMER's testing, the HF barrel was 21% stiffer than a round carbon barrel with integrated track, and nearly 50% stiffer than a round aluminum barrel with track (for 100cm barrels).
As you know, the HF2 barrel shape differs somewhat from that of the HF barrel. I'm sure when we all saw the HF2 for the first time we instantly thought that it must be superior to the HF. Not necessarily so. The HF2 is meant to be a more maneuverable version of their hydroform design, while the HF is a more stable one. Mark Laboccetta explained to me that the length of gun you're after should determine whether you go with the HF or HF2. If you want a longer gun (110cm and up) go with the HF, as the extra stability and stiffness will be more beneficial with the more powerful gun, while maneuverability won't be as much of a concern since longer guns are usually used for longer shots on slower-moving targets. Conversely, since shorter guns are usually used for faster-moving closer targets, the increased maneuverability of the HF2 design will be more favorable when shopping for a shorter gun (100cm and below).
One other difference between the HF2 and the other Caymans is the muzzle (the HF shares the same muzzle as the carbon Cayman). The HF2 features a muzzle that has never been seen before in the U.S. market, but which has existed in the XXV gun of the European line for a few years now.
The muzzle is meant to offer versatility, allowing four different muzzle configurations. If you follow the guidelines I mentioned and go with the HF2 in a shorter size, then the in-line single bands that come stock should be fine. Divers who want more range, though, who favor double circular bands and an open muzzle, should go with the HF.
The gist of that was that if you want a gun 100cm and shorter, go with the HF2. If you want 110cm and longer, go with the HF.
How do you guys like my HF 130cm? Should be in production next year...
How do you guys like my HF 130cm? Should be in production next year...
Hey Spaghetti,
he beat you to this one ! HF130 2009
I still think they should coat it with plastic , that would make it quite.