Posts by JimCuda

    Hey JimCuda, I've been looking at that exact Abellan 120 and wishing they made it as a midhandle. Then amazingly saw your build. Couple of questions: with the same bands, did you make the distances from muzzle to spear identical? Also, would you consider making another of those? It looks awesome- if so what would you want for it? thx!

    The distances are nearly identical. The point was that I could use the same shafts and bands for each gun, so they serve as backups. The visibility here can change quite a bit, so it's nice to have two guns.

    As far as selling; I'm not really interested. The thing is, you're probably going to be served well by getting a standard setup. If you want to shoot euro shafts, the new wide mouth mechs are better in some respects, there's more room for line. The overall length of a gun isn't that critical in a midhandle, so if you make it an inch or two longer, you won't notice it as much.

    Oh, and thanks for all the nice fish comments, guys!

    I dont mean to derail but after contemplating the last 4 years I've spent diving I've come to realize that the only setup I can hit fish with on a 120 pipegun is with one short 16mm band. I dove a lot and started using two 16mm bands and switched to one 20(or 19mm) band and always come back to the nice, new snappy single 16mm band

    You must be shooting a 6.75 or 7mm shaft, max. A single 16 won't push a 7.5mm hard to a single wrap without dropping.

    There's no way that a 5/8" band is going to shoot a 9/32" shaft slow. A lot of people I know use that same setup on 7.5mm shafts, which are heavier.

    Do what Dan says, cut it shorter. Also, bands deteriorate a lot with time.

    Neat diagrams Pete.

    The "can be eliminated" drawing doesn't say the whole truth. The roller doesn't allow the use of a 2nd band. So that shorter gun with two bands would be no less powerful than the roller.

    Dan, Jeff and I spent a couple weeks figuring it out. The roller translates to about the same work (force times distance) as 1.6 to 1.75 bands, but you can increase the thickness of bands. There are other factors the diagrams don't show; the power delivery of the bands are not exactly linear like that, but can be closely approximated. I can't remember if Jeff created a thread, but here it is if not.

    I also have the spreadsheet calculator if anyone is really interested. The results do not seem to match what people experience in the field; rollers have a lot of power. Maybe it's because people don't actually cut their bands to 3.5x stretch.

    Dan, there are two companies in the US that make polyethylene boats that I know of. Triumph and Polar (might be out of business). I've ridden on a Triumph and kinda know the downsides.

    1. The finish isn't shiny. It's a dull plastic that also gets marred easier than fiberglass gelcoat, so it kinda looks dirty.

    2. It's flexible. This is a good thing because it makes it durable, but it also means that the boats flex a lot. This can affect how the console stays attached because they are screwed in. Supposedly it makes the ride better, but I couldn't tell.

    Those are really the downsides I know. The good thing is that they're durable and relatively easy to fix with what looks like melted plastic that you glue on.

    **These boats may have been polypropelene, but I think the result is similar.

    Roller guns without the reel is no fun, that's almost too easy to deal with! Dan and I have spent hours over this discussion, but I just prefer reels versus a floatline.

    I'm a believer in the benefits of an ET, in the sense that they keep the shaft from whipping. My buddy has a 57" ET that he's been using with a bent to hell Mori shaft, but still gets lots of fish. This shaft is visibly bent from a distance, so I think the shaft straightening aspect of the track does work. I only built it for a Bluewater gun and for the simplicity in the roller. They have to slow the shaft down.

    Good rubber is the key. That small ID stuff is da shit. It stretches and stretches as far as you can pull it. How much power are you missing?:plusone: and I don't feel this contradicts what I said before about liking to feel the "good" recoil. Still I think eventually you'll come back to the 2 x 16mm configuration :)

    I should have been more clear. I am a huge 2x16mm band user/gay lover! It's just this one gun that I'm trying it out. I'm also using a thinner shaft for that 6.75mm vs 7.5mm.

    I've spent quite a bit of time thinking about rollerguns. The idea intrigues me because I want to know where the "future" of spearguns lay. The current designs have pretty much maxed out the range. The only way I think we can get more would be some variation of the rollergun. The only way the standard gun design gets better range is by getting better rubber and stiffer shafts.

    Rollers are an interesting problem to solve, but they're a pain in the butt. The lines get tangled on the rollers and the muzzle gets too bulky, so it's hard to swing. One way they get more range is that they deliver the same amount of power more gradually, so shaft whip becomes less of an issue. This gives a lighter shaft more range because you can put more total force on it.

    I'm sorta done with rollers, for now anyway. I realize that I like a soft shooting gun; so that I'm done remodeling the hose, I'll get back to my 110cm euro project. Ballasted, wood, 1-16mm + 1-14mm band (a la GR Tarr), 6.75mm -7mm shafts.

    Side question:
    Why are we pretty much stuck at 250% (3.5x) stretch? Is it because of the rubber's ability to retain power?

    Jump in 50 degree water from a boat; water will force it's way up your leg. I like waisted suits for 3-5mm I have suspenders on my 7mm for max warmth. I even wear a vest sometimes. Once you're at 7mm, it's hard to find a warmer suit.

    Be careful with how your route your shooting line. It will get caught in the bottom band on the hook or against the band and roller. I recommend you use a floatline when testing, in case the line gets stuck. My first roller cracked the wood on the front where the stainless roller retainer was screwed in, so look at that part of your gun after you shoot.

    Please do not take my comments other than me trying to help. Happy diving!

    The standard one I had trouble aiming, the Magnum was much better in both respects. It may not seem like it from this thread, but I vastly prefer wood guns.

    Yes, I have never fired one. But they are very appealing to me. If money was no question, I'd have a couple for sure.
    So Wong owners chime in..... What is it. It's got to be more than tracking and epoxy camo. What is it?

    It doesn't have to be more than tracking and Camo.

    If it tracks better than an equivalently powerful gun, it's worth it right there. Wong owners have a high quality item that feels special and works well. That's really all it takes.

    I prefer wood guns for the feel of the recoil versus pipe guns. I'm partial to certain trigger assemblies because they make shooting more pleasurable. It's not one thing, but a totality. I don't own any Wongs any more, but it's nice to feel like you had something special/desirable.

    If I was ever fortunate enough to live in Hawaii, I'd probably get one for the hell of it, even though I could build one.

    It allows use of a good stand alone trigger mechanism with a pipe. I see no other advantage. The "more mass to absorb recoil" idea simply doesn't work, as the mass is at the back of the gun not at the front where it's needed to control muzzle lift. People get the hybrids thinking they can add more band power, and the gun ends up shooting erratically. To shoot decent they need to be powered just like a pipe gun. Nowadays there are production pipe guns with good full stainless steel triggers, so the hybrid is obsolete IMO. They look pretty and allow for some creativity in the building of the gun, that's about it. If someone likes how something looks, they'll find all the theoretical reasons necessary to convince themselves why it's the ultimate solution to their spearfishing needs.

    The rear ballast makes a difference on midhandles. It's not as significant as the front, certainly, but mass at the ends help control the midhandle motions. They like to rotate around the middle, so mass at each end helps. I had to add some to my midhandle and it made a noticeable difference in accuracy and shooting feel.

    That said, I greatly prefer rear handles or close to it (rear +)

    I've had a Wong Hybrid and shot a friends Wong Magnum. I got a basic open track model and found that I didn't like it because of the way it recoiled, it was my first midhandle, which I wasn't very good at using. It tracked well, and shot accurately, especially with a tighter grip or two hands. I really only sold it because I wanted to offset the planer and stuff I bought for gun building. If I kept it, I'd just add some ballast and be happy with it.

    A Wong Magnum is a really good gun. The ballast added soaks up the recoil much more nicely. The ability to add ballast is where the hybrid shines over rail guns. For much of the diving here in the northeast (15' vis, large, bony fish that school around you) it's pretty hard to beat a 50-55" Wong Magnum midhandle and 9/32" shaft.

    Ballastable = more power
    Easy to swing
    Midhandle option

    Handle is below the stock, not in line like a euro
    Muzzle can be heavy, depending on shaft because of no flotation
    Midhandles are difficult for some (me)

    I dive with a 7mm open cell wetsuit all the time. That said, the coldest water I dive in is 49 degree F. My face went numb, but I was OK for about an hour before getting cold. My cold tolerance is crap, though. It really depends on the type of diving you do. I do mostly aspetto, so I'm motionless a lot. If you're moving a lot, that will make all the difference, but your dive times will be short. For me, I wouldn't even think about going to 5mm until the mid 60 degree water. Keep in mind, the surface temp is often ten degrees water here, than 30 feet down.