What's the difference between #3, #4 and #10?
#3 and #4 looks the same? #1o looks like dyneema instead of mono?
#3 and #4 looks the same? #1o looks like dyneema instead of mono?
-
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!
Tomba - All in One barrel sealing
- Thread startertromic
- 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.
#3 and #4 are different sliders. #10 is with 0.92 mm Climax instead of 1 mm nylon.
Also, does the slider shaft have the same spear tip as the freeshaft? Can we compare those two different setups directly?
If yes, then the best slider is a lot more efficient that the fastest freeshaft. That would be a huge surprise for me.
Best,
David
If yes, then the best slider is a lot more efficient that the fastest freeshaft. That would be a huge surprise for me.
Best,
David
Yes Davide! All measurements were done using the same spear. It was a surprise to me too! Also, the speargun was water barrel, no vacuum!
Wow, sliders (many of them) are better than one spear-length of mono...! That's crazy... just wow...!
Now, we need to settle the old question about the accuracy..
I would think a slider would be most precise, but who knows...
I kinda wish we could somehow shoot your test to pieces and restore order to the world, haha. But you probably did a good job on the test.
The only thing I can come up with is whether the very bulky spear tip could make a difference between the two types of shafts? It shouldn't as it is the same for both...
I am just speculating whether it could have made the water flow down the shaft so turbulent, perhaps even cavitating, that the two types of shaft would not react much different in those sort of conditions?
I know this is highly speculative but it comes from my days of sailing where you differentiate between turbulent and laminar flow over foils (same as in aerodynamics). Some shapes have less drag in a laminar flow while others have less drag in a turbulent flow. You get the least drag of all in laminar flow with a shape optimized for that flow. Even lower than a foil in turbulent flow equally optimized for that particular turbulent type of flow. But the interesting thing is, iircc, that a laminar foil shape in a turbulent flow will have more drag than a foil shaped for turbulent flow.
I am probably way, way off. But I am just trying to do due diligence here and look at any reasons why this "upsetting" test result could be marred;-)
Now, we need to settle the old question about the accuracy..
I would think a slider would be most precise, but who knows...
I kinda wish we could somehow shoot your test to pieces and restore order to the world, haha. But you probably did a good job on the test
.The only thing I can come up with is whether the very bulky spear tip could make a difference between the two types of shafts? It shouldn't as it is the same for both...
I am just speculating whether it could have made the water flow down the shaft so turbulent, perhaps even cavitating, that the two types of shaft would not react much different in those sort of conditions?
I know this is highly speculative but it comes from my days of sailing where you differentiate between turbulent and laminar flow over foils (same as in aerodynamics). Some shapes have less drag in a laminar flow while others have less drag in a turbulent flow. You get the least drag of all in laminar flow with a shape optimized for that flow. Even lower than a foil in turbulent flow equally optimized for that particular turbulent type of flow. But the interesting thing is, iircc, that a laminar foil shape in a turbulent flow will have more drag than a foil shaped for turbulent flow.
I am probably way, way off. But I am just trying to do due diligence here and look at any reasons why this "upsetting" test result could be marred;-)
Last edited:
Another possibility:
Finally, this might be the realization of the idea above. Maybe one new Tomba - Tomba7X.
The cone and the slider are one piece.
Finally, this might be the realization of the idea above. Maybe one new Tomba - Tomba7X.
The cone and the slider are one piece.
More simple:
I had actually already tested this but with water barrel. I tested it with original, 8 mm OD butt, but it would be better to reduce it to 7.5 mm.
Not to hijack your thread, but I promised you some info on the titanium sliders I had coming in:
So, about 1.7g per slider.
They are supposed to work without a PU damper nor slide ring. Just a bit of hydro damping straight onto the tail end. OD is 9mm for these sliders (for 7mm shafts).
So, about 1.7g per slider.
They are supposed to work without a PU damper nor slide ring. Just a bit of hydro damping straight onto the tail end. OD is 9mm for these sliders (for 7mm shafts).
Nice small sliders! It would be interesting if I had one of this on my last test. Where did you buy them? You wrote earlier that you would get a butt for them too. What is the ID od slider and the OD od the butt? And how deep is the boring in slider? Have you tried them on any shaft? And what about the PU? Did you get it?
Yeah, the sliders are tiny... And I think the "wing" with the hole for the mono can be made even smaller.
They are from UBL, Dima, the Ukranian guy in Cyprus. Not so far from you
Let me check how he feels about me sharing the dimensions. Maybe no issue.
There are more pics or the tail ends over in my Mirage thread. No PU bumpers on this design. Hope it will be OK...
They are from UBL, Dima, the Ukranian guy in Cyprus. Not so far from you
Let me check how he feels about me sharing the dimensions. Maybe no issue.
There are more pics or the tail ends over in my Mirage thread. No PU bumpers on this design. Hope it will be OK...
I asked for dimensions so I can try to calculate hydro damping capabilities... But If they are supposed to be used with PU it doesn't matter. It is different thing. PU changes its shape. It is not constant over time. For such a light slider hydro damping is not necessary. PU damper is sufficient.
Hi Tomi,
Just wanted to share a few pics for my upcoming splicing tests.
These are thin-walled 304 SS tubes that I intend to use for splicing needles. I bought a whole bunch of them in different sizes. Just cut off a bit here for the pics.
The ones in the pics, though the look bigger, are between 1.5 and 2.5mm in outer diameter. Walls are 0.1 - 0.25mm.
E.g. I have a tube which is 2.5 x 2.0mm (OD x ID). Hopefully, that would be suitable for splicing 1.5-1.8mm dyneema. Another one is 1.8mm x 1.5mm (OD x ID), maybe that one can work for 1.2-1.3mm dyneema.
We will see
Just wanted to share a few pics for my upcoming splicing tests.
These are thin-walled 304 SS tubes that I intend to use for splicing needles. I bought a whole bunch of them in different sizes. Just cut off a bit here for the pics.
The ones in the pics, though the look bigger, are between 1.5 and 2.5mm in outer diameter. Walls are 0.1 - 0.25mm.
E.g. I have a tube which is 2.5 x 2.0mm (OD x ID). Hopefully, that would be suitable for splicing 1.5-1.8mm dyneema. Another one is 1.8mm x 1.5mm (OD x ID), maybe that one can work for 1.2-1.3mm dyneema.
We will see
Last edited:
No luck with Salvimar Climax 1.25mm (the orange one) which happens to be the only line I have at home right now. I'd venture a guess and say it's because of the very tight weave and stiff waxing. This is quite a stiff line which is supposedly good for resisting tangles. Also, it was the line from the front of my reel so it has probably been stretched and set a lot by now.
I will make some new, heavier duty float lines over the next few months and I think I will go to app. 2.5mm dyneema. That should make things much easier. If I get some more malleable thin line I will keep trying to splice it. It would be nice to be able to splice 1.5mm-1.8mm reel line. If nothing else, just for the sake of it
I will make some new, heavier duty float lines over the next few months and I think I will go to app. 2.5mm dyneema. That should make things much easier. If I get some more malleable thin line I will keep trying to splice it. It would be nice to be able to splice 1.5mm-1.8mm reel line. If nothing else, just for the sake of it
Last edited:
