Paintball

[flyweightnate]

What is the difference between say, an SCM-III and a stock WGP reg, Rock, or Eclipse Dart? And between the 2-liter and Sidewinder, Stabilizer, and Black Magic regs?

I notice the SCM and 2Liter are advertised as "pressure-compensating" to give a theoretically higher refresh rate, but I've also heard people claim less stability and more fluctuation. How are they different (as far as design), and what advantages/ disadvantages does this create?


...and completely off topic, are the old Black Magic regs any good? I came by three in a package deal, along with a GX-2 and old Vigilante.

[drg]

Here is a diagram of the Evolve Pi balanced regulator:
http://www.zdspb.com/media/tech/regs_pi.JPG

I believe the "balanced" part is the floating spring seat. I could be wrong though. Does anyone have schematic diagrams of SCMs or 2 Liters?

[Shane-O]

"Pressure Compensating" is a term many reg makers like to use. Now I havent tested every reg out there. The premise is that the reg will put out the same pressure, regardless of inout pressure, within limits of course. The PI reg wasnt very good at all, it went crazy once the input pressures got lower. IMO, there just really isnt such a beast. Now using two regs, a tank reg and a secondary reg, you will not have any issues with pressure flucuations. and an lpr has at least one reg in front of it, so it will also be stable without extra "Tricks". Of course it has to be a quality built LPR, or secondary reg............

All the regs you listed are good, except the Eclipse, and I have no idea on that one. Go with Palmers regs and you wont go wrong..........................

[flyweightnate]

Yeah, I figured they were all about the same, but I was just curious as to what PC meant. I'm running the Dart LPR (like on the Nexus cockers) and an old Vigilante on my cocker for now, and it's pretty decent... got my hands on three Black Magics (2 old, one new), the Vigilante, and a GX-2, all for 35 bucks though, so I might just hang on to what I've got...

[drg]

Originally Posted by Shane-O

"Pressure Compensating" is a term many reg makers like to use.

Only if their reg is actually pressure compensating. There is a design difference.

[Shane-O]

Originally Posted by drg

Only if their reg is actually pressure compensating. There is a design difference.

Problem is I havent seen proof of an actual "Pressure Componsating" reg. I have tested and tore apart alot of regs and would welcome any real proof and actual testing to prove that claim. A PC Lpr isnt really needed, the secondary reg shouldnt flucuate more than 10 psi, which wouldnt make a difference to the LPR.

[drg]

Whether or not pressure compensating paintball regs do anything meaningful has no bearing on whether they are pressure compensating designs or not. There is a distinct design difference, you can't just call a normal, non-compensating design "pressure compensating".

Anyway JDS for one has some videos which supposedly show the efficacy of their pressure compensating design here: http://www.stdindustry.com/JLFSinfo.htm

Don't know whether that rises to your requirements of proof or not.

[flyweightnate]

Wow, impressive consistency. Is it the same as an SCM-III? The 3 was supposed to fix the creep problems, the JDS was made by Aaron...

And I noticed somewhere PPS advertised their regs as a "70 to 1 ratio", meaning 70psi input shift caused 1psi output shift. Small enough shift they don't need to compensate, it seems... (that sounded Freudian...)

[Cunha]

The PPS fatty is probably the best LP regulator you can get.

Also, i would take an STD reg over an AKA scm. SCM's are too creepy.

[Shane-O]

Originally Posted by drg

Whether or not pressure compensating paintball regs do anything meaningful has no bearing on whether they are pressure compensating designs or not. There is a distinct design difference, you can't just call a normal, non-compensating design "pressure compensating".

Anyway JDS for one has some videos which supposedly show the efficacy of their pressure compensating design here: http://www.stdindustry.com/JLFSinfo.htm

Don't know whether that rises to your requirements of proof or not.

Couldnt get the vids to work on my computer, will try again soon. But in the mean time, judging by the title of the vids, I dont see a test to show the lpr keeping the same output, with varying input pressures. JDS does make good LPR's, but when you say "Pressure Compensating" it leads me to beleive that the LPR when set at 75 psi, with a 250psi input, that it would be the same 75pai with 400psi input into it.

Heres why I am saying what I am. Palmers claims that their regs are a 70:1 ratio. That means their reg wont change 1 psi, until the pressure input changes by 70psi. So the question is this, Why do we need "Pressure Compensating"? Think about this. In a typical setup for a typical electro gun, you have 3 regulators, the primary (Tank), the secondary (HPR on gun) and the LPR. A typical tank reg will fluctuate approximately 100 psi (some worse, some better) from 4500psi to 1000psi. So if your secondary reg has an input of 100 psi higher, its output change would be no more than 2 psi, (assuming the 70:1 ratio). A change of 2 psi to the lpr will make NO change to the lpr output. So with quality regs, there is no need for "Pressure Compensating"

My point is, buy a quality, well known regulator, and dont read the hype. The video that JDS has, shows a Freestyle LPR versus their LPR. The ICD LPR's have never been known for high quality from the factory, but with a little tweaking (polishing mostly) it will perform much, much better, so the video makes JDS LPR's look really good.

And I would buy a JDS LPR reg before an AKA LPR..................BUT I would buy Palmers regs over them.