-
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!
Euro vs. American???
- Thread starterWavespin
- 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.
WOW mark that is artwork!!!!!
Tell me, is that an old excalibur muzzle?
How did you fit the 2 rubbers into the hole?
Is this a prototype for a new Omer bluwater by any chance HAHAHAH
What is that shaft?
Man i should stop asking so many questions
Shane
Tell me, is that an old excalibur muzzle?
How did you fit the 2 rubbers into the hole?
Is this a prototype for a new Omer bluwater by any chance HAHAHAH
What is that shaft?
Man i should stop asking so many questions
Shane
Mark Jacobs- sure I'd let you try it but with the vis you get at the light tower that would be way too big. We never use a gun over 120cm there and even that is too long. A 90-110cm is ideal. My biggest Amberjack of 91lbs was with a 90cm and one pair of 20mm bands.
I use this gun for 5% of my diving, when I hope to encounter tuna for which its intended. The guy who built it imagine, thought it would be a good game gun but he said that for giant bluefin he would have to build me a much bigger gun since this wouldn't suffice. I first looked at him like he was exagerating and at the time I believed I could take any fish with a single band gun. A few years down the road and after hearing stories and seeing pictures I would have to agree that if you're going to try to kill an elephant you need elephant gear and you are one lucky SOB if you can do it with less. Regardless, I never could afford the type of trip to go shoot giant bluefins in exotic places around the world so I never pursued the big gun. Talking to Bill Kitto this season, I heard he was building 16 band monsters with 1/2" shafts (13mm) for Ron Mullins and a couple of those guys to hunt the Giant Bluefins. Now just imagine that gun...and the kick.
One interesting thing he mentioned was that he was finally in the working stages of his three piece triggers and showed me some picts of his "Millenium trigger". For those of you who don't know, most of all the spearguns on the market use two piece triggers including Alexanders and the guns deemed for huge bluewater action with 5+ bands. A two piece trigger has its limitations, its limited by the load it can hold while retaining trigger sensitivity without it locking up or stiffening or worse accidental firing.
Most of the time when I show people my bluewater gun they are amazed that the old Omer T-20 handle (void of line release) that was standard on smaller production guns can hold the three bands. But then again it's a three piece trigger mechanism (extra pivot-extra lever) and most people never realized it has been around over ten years and the mechanical advantage that "extra piece" can make
Trigger pull effort is diminished significantly compared to any two piece trigger with the same band load and it can also hold a much higher load while retaining sensitivity. Sorry for straying from the subject.
Mark
I use this gun for 5% of my diving, when I hope to encounter tuna for which its intended. The guy who built it imagine, thought it would be a good game gun but he said that for giant bluefin he would have to build me a much bigger gun since this wouldn't suffice. I first looked at him like he was exagerating and at the time I believed I could take any fish with a single band gun. A few years down the road and after hearing stories and seeing pictures I would have to agree that if you're going to try to kill an elephant you need elephant gear and you are one lucky SOB if you can do it with less. Regardless, I never could afford the type of trip to go shoot giant bluefins in exotic places around the world so I never pursued the big gun. Talking to Bill Kitto this season, I heard he was building 16 band monsters with 1/2" shafts (13mm) for Ron Mullins and a couple of those guys to hunt the Giant Bluefins. Now just imagine that gun...and the kick.
One interesting thing he mentioned was that he was finally in the working stages of his three piece triggers and showed me some picts of his "Millenium trigger". For those of you who don't know, most of all the spearguns on the market use two piece triggers including Alexanders and the guns deemed for huge bluewater action with 5+ bands. A two piece trigger has its limitations, its limited by the load it can hold while retaining trigger sensitivity without it locking up or stiffening or worse accidental firing.
Most of the time when I show people my bluewater gun they are amazed that the old Omer T-20 handle (void of line release) that was standard on smaller production guns can hold the three bands. But then again it's a three piece trigger mechanism (extra pivot-extra lever) and most people never realized it has been around over ten years and the mechanical advantage that "extra piece" can make
Trigger pull effort is diminished significantly compared to any two piece trigger with the same band load and it can also hold a much higher load while retaining sensitivity. Sorry for straying from the subject.Mark
Last edited:
the big rig
Thanks guys, yes she is a sweet one. A product that combines functionality with great design is a winner in my book.
This one is hand made and with the time this person put into it, even if they were able to produce it, the cost would be absurd. Imagine all the wood alone you would have to discard just to find the right piece since it's not laminated. One dry nice strait piece of teak like that is not easy to find.
1.That is an MB-16 muzzle (5 years old), the older muzzles did not have a double male end capturing the inserted barrel wall thickness like the new ones (which is better for carbon and alluminum guns), but this was ideal for the wooden routed round end of the stock to fit inside. Same with the Master T-20 handle.
2.When you pull two rubbers they get thinner and you can squeeze them through tight places :duh
3. I wish, I don't think many people could afford to buy them even if they were laminated. I also don't think the size of the "bluewater" market would warrant investing too much time and money into production. It's just a perfect bluewater version of my other guns for me. But if guys like you ever want to go shoot tuna one day building something like this is a better alternative to an airgun. Believe me, I tried the former and it doesn't even compare. With this gun I have 8 meters (26ft) of range roughly with a 5/16" (8mmx170cm+ slip-tip) shaft.
Thanks guys, yes she is a sweet one. A product that combines functionality with great design is a winner in my book.
This one is hand made and with the time this person put into it, even if they were able to produce it, the cost would be absurd. Imagine all the wood alone you would have to discard just to find the right piece since it's not laminated. One dry nice strait piece of teak like that is not easy to find.
1.That is an MB-16 muzzle (5 years old), the older muzzles did not have a double male end capturing the inserted barrel wall thickness like the new ones (which is better for carbon and alluminum guns), but this was ideal for the wooden routed round end of the stock to fit inside. Same with the Master T-20 handle.
2.When you pull two rubbers they get thinner and you can squeeze them through tight places :duh
3. I wish, I don't think many people could afford to buy them even if they were laminated. I also don't think the size of the "bluewater" market would warrant investing too much time and money into production. It's just a perfect bluewater version of my other guns for me. But if guys like you ever want to go shoot tuna one day building something like this is a better alternative to an airgun. Believe me, I tried the former and it doesn't even compare. With this gun I have 8 meters (26ft) of range roughly with a 5/16" (8mmx170cm+ slip-tip) shaft.
this guy talks too much
I'm also compelled to tell you, and for those who care, the rational behind this speargun.
As an avid user I started to admire and apreciate the simplicity of rear handle European single band guns for their accuracy, lightweight and balance. I used to pay attention to Omer's in particular obviously and was very much attracted by the unconventional design of the Master shape and wondered about its differences compared to conventional round barrel spearguns.
This design in particular, a flared small integrated winged shape barrel, basically provided better horizontal tracking and was more stable and less likely to flutter around compared to a simple and lighter round shape. It eliminated vibrations completely and flexing.
I'm also compelled to tell you, and for those who care, the rational behind this speargun.
As an avid user I started to admire and apreciate the simplicity of rear handle European single band guns for their accuracy, lightweight and balance. I used to pay attention to Omer's in particular obviously and was very much attracted by the unconventional design of the Master shape and wondered about its differences compared to conventional round barrel spearguns.
This design in particular, a flared small integrated winged shape barrel, basically provided better horizontal tracking and was more stable and less likely to flutter around compared to a simple and lighter round shape. It eliminated vibrations completely and flexing.
Attachments
my BW Master story
After reading more and asking questions I had understood that this design had more than just the conventional diver in mind, and more so a dedicated fanatic, a Master of sorts for breath hold spearfisherman, whose favorite technique was that of lying on the bottom at 30,40,50,60+ft in wait and ambushing fish. Waiting for a fish and not moving or making noise can pick the curiosity and get the best of even the shiest and elusive fish. This technique is known as "lying in wait" but called "espera" in Spanish or "aspetto" in Italian.
In particular, divers who practice this technique, are not concerned so much with fast manueverability of poking around holes and swinging the gun around at fast moving fleeing fish, which makes the conventional round barrel better, but are more concerned about taking long shots and fine tuning their aim for a long stable shot. This design therefore allowed the use of very powerful rubbers without suffering from the effects of recoil and vibrations, and it translated into an accurate shot much farther away. These barrels and their unique shape where heavier and slightly more cumbersome for every day fishing but for waiting for amberjacks in wait or shy Dentex (the Mediterranean version of a snapper) they were more adept and their qualities lend themselves apropriately.
I never understood many of these concepts because at the time these guns came out I was not a great hunter but later it all made sense. Since when you are stalking, lying in wait doing "aspetto" like is popular among great divers, you are more concerned with precision and range hoping to close the gap between you and the prey as much as possible. This same aproach is ideal for blue water hunting since manueverability and fast aiming correction is not as much a priority as a long stable and precise shot at a big pelagic fish.
We set out to make a gun that met the following criteria:
-it has to be able to be used with one hand. Most bluewater guns have a mid-handle requiring the right hand on the handle and the left hand on the butt of the gun to counter the recoil and to help pivot the gun and turn it. I wanted a gun that I could fully extend with my right hand as far as possible before squeezing the trigger while my left hand was behind me and was free.
-the gun could not be wrist heavy
-It had to be balanced just like smaller Masters near neutral with the shaft in the water.
-it needed enough mass and distribution of mass to counteract recoil without making it wrist heavy since it was a rear handle.
the front of the gun has more mass and flotation to achieve that purpose
-the bands should be in line with the shaft and as close as possible to the stock to avoid vibrations
-it should have enough mass so that there is no recoil to avoid any waste of power and energy or to mess up the aim.
-the weight up front should help keep the front end stable during the shock of the bands during the shot.
This gun basically met all of these premises and up to today I have used it to shoot wahoo to 87lbs, tuna, and other large pelagic fish.
Gilbert C, what do you think of the physics-are they sound? Most of this even though in practice seems to hold true by those who designed it and use it was never confirmed and checked off by a professional physics professor. What's your take ?
Mark
After reading more and asking questions I had understood that this design had more than just the conventional diver in mind, and more so a dedicated fanatic, a Master of sorts for breath hold spearfisherman, whose favorite technique was that of lying on the bottom at 30,40,50,60+ft in wait and ambushing fish. Waiting for a fish and not moving or making noise can pick the curiosity and get the best of even the shiest and elusive fish. This technique is known as "lying in wait" but called "espera" in Spanish or "aspetto" in Italian.
In particular, divers who practice this technique, are not concerned so much with fast manueverability of poking around holes and swinging the gun around at fast moving fleeing fish, which makes the conventional round barrel better, but are more concerned about taking long shots and fine tuning their aim for a long stable shot. This design therefore allowed the use of very powerful rubbers without suffering from the effects of recoil and vibrations, and it translated into an accurate shot much farther away. These barrels and their unique shape where heavier and slightly more cumbersome for every day fishing but for waiting for amberjacks in wait or shy Dentex (the Mediterranean version of a snapper) they were more adept and their qualities lend themselves apropriately.
I never understood many of these concepts because at the time these guns came out I was not a great hunter but later it all made sense. Since when you are stalking, lying in wait doing "aspetto" like is popular among great divers, you are more concerned with precision and range hoping to close the gap between you and the prey as much as possible. This same aproach is ideal for blue water hunting since manueverability and fast aiming correction is not as much a priority as a long stable and precise shot at a big pelagic fish.
We set out to make a gun that met the following criteria:
-it has to be able to be used with one hand. Most bluewater guns have a mid-handle requiring the right hand on the handle and the left hand on the butt of the gun to counter the recoil and to help pivot the gun and turn it. I wanted a gun that I could fully extend with my right hand as far as possible before squeezing the trigger while my left hand was behind me and was free.
-the gun could not be wrist heavy
-It had to be balanced just like smaller Masters near neutral with the shaft in the water.
-it needed enough mass and distribution of mass to counteract recoil without making it wrist heavy since it was a rear handle.
the front of the gun has more mass and flotation to achieve that purpose
-the bands should be in line with the shaft and as close as possible to the stock to avoid vibrations
-it should have enough mass so that there is no recoil to avoid any waste of power and energy or to mess up the aim.
-the weight up front should help keep the front end stable during the shock of the bands during the shot.
This gun basically met all of these premises and up to today I have used it to shoot wahoo to 87lbs, tuna, and other large pelagic fish.
Gilbert C, what do you think of the physics-are they sound? Most of this even though in practice seems to hold true by those who designed it and use it was never confirmed and checked off by a professional physics professor. What's your take ?
Mark
Last edited:
Mark,
I was quietly enjoying your posts and your pics. Beautiful gun by the way. I feel obliged to respond as you asked me directly. In case you haven't noticed I have remained neutral about the Euro versus American debate. That's because I like both styles of guns. I'm fascinated by spearguns altogether and take appreciation to particular designs that show innovation. The first time I ran across the Master America (on the internet of course), I immediately thought WOW! I don't get wowed very often. And my second thought was that the designer(s) had certainly thought about the physical behavior of spearguns in this latest design. Without getting into specifics, my take on speargun design is that the final form will follow its intended function if you apply the physics correctly. And if done so, it will come pretty damn close to doing what you intend it to do. I say "pretty damn close" because all designs aren't perfect and almost always require a tweak here and a tweak there. This is true of all products, not just spearguns. You don't want to put a product out for sale that doesn't work. This is why companies will invest heavily into testing and tweaking prototypes before finalizing a design that is suitable for market. And then there are a few brilliant ones out there who will design entirely by feel and practical experience, knowing what works and what doesn't, paying little attention to the physics, yet the outcome every bit as functional as the first.
From what you've described, I would assume the Master America is meeting its intended function; killing fish with the accuracy, consistency, range, and feel that you demanded from it. Whether or not engineers or physicists had a part in its design, I can tell just by looking at the pictures that no dummies were behind it. My hats off to Omer. Your points are made clear as to why certain features of the Master America are designed as such to address certain physical behavior of spearguns. I find nothing to balk at. Take it from a guy who engineers aircraft by day and designs and builds his own guns by night.
Kind regards,
Gilbert
Sorry guys, I put you to sleep again...
I was quietly enjoying your posts and your pics. Beautiful gun by the way. I feel obliged to respond as you asked me directly. In case you haven't noticed I have remained neutral about the Euro versus American debate. That's because I like both styles of guns. I'm fascinated by spearguns altogether and take appreciation to particular designs that show innovation. The first time I ran across the Master America (on the internet of course), I immediately thought WOW! I don't get wowed very often. And my second thought was that the designer(s) had certainly thought about the physical behavior of spearguns in this latest design. Without getting into specifics, my take on speargun design is that the final form will follow its intended function if you apply the physics correctly. And if done so, it will come pretty damn close to doing what you intend it to do. I say "pretty damn close" because all designs aren't perfect and almost always require a tweak here and a tweak there. This is true of all products, not just spearguns. You don't want to put a product out for sale that doesn't work. This is why companies will invest heavily into testing and tweaking prototypes before finalizing a design that is suitable for market. And then there are a few brilliant ones out there who will design entirely by feel and practical experience, knowing what works and what doesn't, paying little attention to the physics, yet the outcome every bit as functional as the first.
From what you've described, I would assume the Master America is meeting its intended function; killing fish with the accuracy, consistency, range, and feel that you demanded from it. Whether or not engineers or physicists had a part in its design, I can tell just by looking at the pictures that no dummies were behind it. My hats off to Omer. Your points are made clear as to why certain features of the Master America are designed as such to address certain physical behavior of spearguns. I find nothing to balk at. Take it from a guy who engineers aircraft by day and designs and builds his own guns by night.
Kind regards,
Gilbert
Sorry guys, I put you to sleep again...
grazie
Gilbert G,
I accidentally made a mistake in the initial in your name on the last post but I wanted to thank you for sharing your opinion. After following some of the threads where you posted I could tell you knew what you are talking about which is why I asked for your input and could value it. It's not everyday a spearfisherman gets to check his theories with a professional
One small thing you might have noticed that might be interesting to you was the ballast compartment location in my custom gun compared to where it is in the production Master America. After looking at my earlier prototype at Omer they decided, rightfully so, that the ballast compartment to fine tune the balance would play a more significant role in the front portion of the gun rather than the center where it was placed in my custom gun. I'm sure you understand why. As you can see my gun was not perfect and we had made a small mistake, but then again how many people would notice the difference afterall
Thanks again,
Mark Laboccetta
Gilbert G,
I accidentally made a mistake in the initial in your name on the last post but I wanted to thank you for sharing your opinion. After following some of the threads where you posted I could tell you knew what you are talking about which is why I asked for your input and could value it. It's not everyday a spearfisherman gets to check his theories with a professional
One small thing you might have noticed that might be interesting to you was the ballast compartment location in my custom gun compared to where it is in the production Master America. After looking at my earlier prototype at Omer they decided, rightfully so, that the ballast compartment to fine tune the balance would play a more significant role in the front portion of the gun rather than the center where it was placed in my custom gun. I'm sure you understand why. As you can see my gun was not perfect and we had made a small mistake, but then again how many people would notice the difference afterall
Thanks again,
Mark Laboccetta
Hey Mark,
I just love your gun soo much!!! Any ideas how much it would cost to make one like that? I wouldnt mind cashing up for a blue water gun
I just love your gun soo much!!! Any ideas how much it would cost to make one like that? I wouldnt mind cashing up for a blue water gun
You can use it in the middle part of the gun too but the problem is that handle is negative at the very end of the gun, stock is positive so this handle's weight compensate little of the positive buoyancy but it will bot be ballanced, in other words butt end will sink first. If you assume that central garvitational point of the stock is somewhere close to the middle, handle will apply force to downward at the buttend which is away from the gravitational point, to balance this handle's force you need to put lead weight. you can put those weight anywhere from gravitation point to the muzzle end but more close you put those leads to the gravitational point (somewhere in the middle) more amount you have to put in order to balance the handle's force. I think thats why OMER puts leads to the front.
Edit: This the case while the gun is stationary but while it was actice there are different forces applies on it like muzzle kick, in order to minimize this we use those wings on the barrel, and weight leads also helps to neglect the effect of muzzle kick
Edit: This the case while the gun is stationary but while it was actice there are different forces applies on it like muzzle kick, in order to minimize this we use those wings on the barrel, and weight leads also helps to neglect the effect of muzzle kick
Last edited:
Memo and Snorkel Bum, thank you for the compliment on my gun.
Also, thanks for you know what Snorkel Bum I don't know what costs would be for another gun like mine, more than anything that's a labor of love so it's hard to put a price on it. I'm just happy that it looks good and it kills big fish too where I aim
To answer your question, from a production stand point theoretically a gun like that would be a limited production and small quantity, discard of wood would be high to find the right pieces of teak with the right density and straightness for lamination, material costs, machine setup, CAD design and computer time would be the same as any other product, so my rough guess would be that with the correct 8mm shaft with big shark fins or tabs, multiple bands, wishbones and special tip like mine it would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,000 + - $200.
Murat you're pretty savvy about spearguns ballistics considering you spend more time on the internet than you do in the water!
I must admit, I've been on the internet more than I've been diving too lately
Basically like you said, the wood stock is wider and more positively buoyant towards the front end of the gun so the weights positioned at the extremity from the center of mass play a more significant role in effecting the balance of the gun there rather than positioning it closer to the center (they also help counteract the Buoyancy). It also adds some stability to the front end from the shock of the bands, especially when using two bands instead of one. The stock Master Americas are balanced better than mine and the center of gravity or balance (whatever its called) is right in the middle 70cm for the complete 140cm gun length including handle on a 115cm.
Later guys,
Mark
Also, thanks for you know what Snorkel Bum
I don't know what costs would be for another gun like mine, more than anything that's a labor of love so it's hard to put a price on it. I'm just happy that it looks good and it kills big fish too where I aim To answer your question, from a production stand point theoretically a gun like that would be a limited production and small quantity, discard of wood would be high to find the right pieces of teak with the right density and straightness for lamination, material costs, machine setup, CAD design and computer time would be the same as any other product, so my rough guess would be that with the correct 8mm shaft with big shark fins or tabs, multiple bands, wishbones and special tip like mine it would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,000 + - $200.
Murat you're pretty savvy about spearguns ballistics considering you spend more time on the internet than you do in the water!
I must admit, I've been on the internet more than I've been diving too lately
Basically like you said, the wood stock is wider and more positively buoyant towards the front end of the gun so the weights positioned at the extremity from the center of mass play a more significant role in effecting the balance of the gun there rather than positioning it closer to the center (they also help counteract the Buoyancy). It also adds some stability to the front end from the shock of the bands, especially when using two bands instead of one. The stock Master Americas are balanced better than mine and the center of gravity or balance (whatever its called) is right in the middle 70cm for the complete 140cm gun length including handle on a 115cm.
Later guys,
Mark
Last edited:
Small Euro Vs Big American
Now that I've gotten to illustrate and make all my points and made you guys listen to all my ramblings, which I appreciate by the way, concerning the design of the Master America and my custom version of the gun, I think it's only fair that I give you my unbiased feelings and perspective based on my experiences on the classic American style speargun, the mid-handle design.
I am not as close minded and biased as some of you may think even though I represent Omer in the USA, I just like the new approach of the innovative Master America design which is why I have been excited to preach its innovations and new concepts like the muzzle and balancing system. Like any other new design that is well thought out by a professional architect paid to do it, it opens new doors and excitment to speargun designs for the future and avoids stagnation in the market.
Like Gilbert ,even though it may not be obvious, I find plenty of faults and fascinating advantages to both styles and I also understand the draw and the conventional adaptation of the Mid-handle design in the hands of those who use them. Especially for truly big game hunting.
I see the design that Jack Prodanovich pioneered and later Terry Maas and then Riffe and Alexander and Heinrich followed through in their own versions during their years chasing giant tunas, becoming symbolic of the style of weapon used for bluewater hunting for huge fish, because it has proven itself thoroughly in the last few decades with incredible feats of huge fish that no other style of speargun has been able to emulate consistently with the same results. The system they devised comprised of expensive high tech norprene bungee lines, multiple floats or single high density foam boards, and fancy break away tips has had the lowest failure rate for landing truly huge fish over 100lbs.
Having said that and going back to their spearguns, considering I've tried most of them, I can apreciate the virtues of the mid-handle design for a few reasons. The practicality of loading it compared to a rear handle design, the distribution of the mass centered around the back third portion of the gun and handle area to reduce the recoil of 4,5,6 bands or more, and how mostly these factors make it easy to pivot the gun to aim such a bulky weapon quickly underwater. For the huge fish they're designed to tackle no other design with so many bands packing this much power seems to be more practical. I think that for any gun bigger than 130cm or so like my custom Master America (62" overall), the mid-handle with push rod system for the mechanism is the way to go to hunt huge fish. The rear handle just has its limitations and I feel my gun is at its peak of those limitations. Any longer or bigger and I would prefer a mid-handle myself.
As far as actual manufacturers themselves of these cannons are concerned only one really sticks in my mind as the one I would like to have for the pursuit of hunting giants. In my lifetime I will probably have to treat myself to one eventually. Merlo makes the most beautiful and well made blue water gun money can buy in my opinion. He has some very innovative ideas and trademarks with his handle design and trigger mechanism as well as his enclosed track system. And the gun itself is truly a piece of fine craftsmanship you would only expect from a perfectionist. He uses all sorts of exotic woods laminated together to achieve great form and function giving it a very illustrious design. I don't even own one at $3,000 a piece, but I've tried one a couple times and I wouldn't say this about anyone else’s guns but I think his deserve it. So if like me one of these days you want to dedicate yourself to staring into the blue for days on end in the pursuit of moby dick or the last underwater buffalo you might as well treat yourself to the weapon of choice and beg Scott to build you one since he is a surgeon by profession and doesn’t do it full time.
Well now you heard all of it I think, clear waters and most of all safe diving,
Mark Laboccetta
Now that I've gotten to illustrate and make all my points and made you guys listen to all my ramblings, which I appreciate by the way, concerning the design of the Master America and my custom version of the gun, I think it's only fair that I give you my unbiased feelings and perspective based on my experiences on the classic American style speargun, the mid-handle design.
I am not as close minded and biased as some of you may think even though I represent Omer in the USA, I just like the new approach of the innovative Master America design which is why I have been excited to preach its innovations and new concepts like the muzzle and balancing system. Like any other new design that is well thought out by a professional architect paid to do it, it opens new doors and excitment to speargun designs for the future and avoids stagnation in the market.
Like Gilbert ,even though it may not be obvious, I find plenty of faults and fascinating advantages to both styles and I also understand the draw and the conventional adaptation of the Mid-handle design in the hands of those who use them. Especially for truly big game hunting.
I see the design that Jack Prodanovich pioneered and later Terry Maas and then Riffe and Alexander and Heinrich followed through in their own versions during their years chasing giant tunas, becoming symbolic of the style of weapon used for bluewater hunting for huge fish, because it has proven itself thoroughly in the last few decades with incredible feats of huge fish that no other style of speargun has been able to emulate consistently with the same results. The system they devised comprised of expensive high tech norprene bungee lines, multiple floats or single high density foam boards, and fancy break away tips has had the lowest failure rate for landing truly huge fish over 100lbs.
Having said that and going back to their spearguns, considering I've tried most of them, I can apreciate the virtues of the mid-handle design for a few reasons. The practicality of loading it compared to a rear handle design, the distribution of the mass centered around the back third portion of the gun and handle area to reduce the recoil of 4,5,6 bands or more, and how mostly these factors make it easy to pivot the gun to aim such a bulky weapon quickly underwater. For the huge fish they're designed to tackle no other design with so many bands packing this much power seems to be more practical. I think that for any gun bigger than 130cm or so like my custom Master America (62" overall), the mid-handle with push rod system for the mechanism is the way to go to hunt huge fish. The rear handle just has its limitations and I feel my gun is at its peak of those limitations. Any longer or bigger and I would prefer a mid-handle myself.
As far as actual manufacturers themselves of these cannons are concerned only one really sticks in my mind as the one I would like to have for the pursuit of hunting giants. In my lifetime I will probably have to treat myself to one eventually. Merlo makes the most beautiful and well made blue water gun money can buy in my opinion. He has some very innovative ideas and trademarks with his handle design and trigger mechanism as well as his enclosed track system. And the gun itself is truly a piece of fine craftsmanship you would only expect from a perfectionist. He uses all sorts of exotic woods laminated together to achieve great form and function giving it a very illustrious design. I don't even own one at $3,000 a piece, but I've tried one a couple times and I wouldn't say this about anyone else’s guns but I think his deserve it. So if like me one of these days you want to dedicate yourself to staring into the blue for days on end in the pursuit of moby dick or the last underwater buffalo you might as well treat yourself to the weapon of choice and beg Scott to build you one since he is a surgeon by profession and doesn’t do it full time.
Well now you heard all of it I think, clear waters and most of all safe diving,
Mark Laboccetta
Originally posted by Mark Laboccetta
Murat you're pretty savvy about spearguns ballistics considering you spend more time on the internet than you do in the water!
I must admit, I've been on the internet more than I've been diving too lately
No man i did not learned speargun ballistic from the net. I just applied simple physic rules to the speargun knowledge that i gained from the net, and belive me we deal with more complex problems in university. May be i should do my master about spearguns Nowadays i dive more than i hang on here. I dove yesterday and i will dive tomorrow...
I increased my performance and i am little frightened about whether i will do mistake in the water or not while diving deeper and deeper. You know the problem is finding regular dive buddy that you can trust him about your life. We lost two good spero in last two months.:waterwork I am not very religious people but i hope God will be with all of us
Murat,
I'd like to see you pursue that thesis. If you need a letter of recommendation I'll write one up for you. Seriously. I was shut down when I proposed a speargun for my senior design project back when I was working on my degree. They all seemed to think it was trivial and that their was no science involved. So they refused to provide the funding and I ended up designing a mechanical toilet seat that could lift a 500 pound paraplegic. True story…
Gil
I'd like to see you pursue that thesis. If you need a letter of recommendation I'll write one up for you. Seriously. I was shut down when I proposed a speargun for my senior design project back when I was working on my degree. They all seemed to think it was trivial and that their was no science involved. So they refused to provide the funding and I ended up designing a mechanical toilet seat that could lift a 500 pound paraplegic. True story…
Gil