![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
| Ask The Experts You ask the tough questions |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Village Idiot | Blazer question So if you run a blazer on CO2, why use a Stab instead of a expansion chamber? Or for that matter why use an expansion chamber instead of a Stab? |
| | |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| CHEERS! Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Northern California | Truthfully... with a Blazer you really NEED neither. It can shoot on unregged CO2. Liquid CO2 won't hurt a Blazer. My opinion: Use a Stab. Good regulator with CO2. Blocks liquid just fine. Expansion chamber is just a big huge air passage where CO2 can expand from liquid. No regulation so you'll get less consistent shot velocities with temp changes. |
| | |
| | #4 (permalink) | |
| MCB Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The San Fernando Valley, CA | Stabalizer will keep the pressure regulated which will be a lot more consistent from shot to shot. An expansion chamber will allow C02 to expand to reduce the amount of liquid C02 that enters the valve which can help with efficiency. However, during rapid fire, this can be easily overcome.
__________________ POG # 877 ![]() Quote:
![]() http://www.mcarterbrown.com/forums/y...ay-season.html My MCB Feedback http://www.mcarterbrown.com/forums/f...tml#post331126 | |
| | |
| | #5 (permalink) |
| Village Idiot | ok thanks for the insight guys. |
| | |
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|