<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

350 Vs 460 Power Could someone answer a technical question please

April 6 2009 at 9:31 AM
Barry.g  (no login)
from IP address 195.92.194.12

 
First I think that 22ft/lbs is about right for a spring gun but it seems that most people think that the 460 is between the 48/54 and the 350 and when people tune and tweak for high power like Chris and I have no doubt about his 28ft/lbs, I have not heard of anyone using a 460 to experiment with.
What I cant understand is on paper the 460 should be more powerful. The 52 has a 28mm bore 100mm stroke with a short transfer port, the 350 has a 28mm bore 115mm stroke and a longer transfer port and a 460 has a 28mm bore and I think 115mm stroke ? with a short transfer port so once the breach lock up and seal on the 460 have been sorted out WHY is the 460 not more powerful?
Now I know that I might have it all completely wrong but that is my question.
Barry.

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
warren
(no login)
71.180.32.113

and

April 6 2009, 10:09 AM 

your simple question will get you in big problems WHY?

because you cannot compare the 48/52/54 with the 350 and neither with the 460

the air chamber volume sweep in all of these is 1 1/4" in diameter BUT the lenght is not the same

advantage to the 350 in that department

1. the 460 has limitations, like the fixed barrel's they cannot be cut, re-choke or re-crowned; what you have is what you get

2. which means nothing in the front (Barrel) can be changed for the 46 and 460

3. the 46 and 460 can be worked but since they are not big sellers like the 34 and 350 not enough mods are available, economics 101

4. under and side levels are 150% harder to modify compared to brake air guns

5. how many modifications can you do to the AA TX 200 compared to the 34 or the 350??

warren

PS: I also have 6, 7, 8, 9, more


 
 Respond to this message   
Dave Sawyer
(Login Daveinvabch)
68.98.243.152

The 460

April 6 2009, 10:38 AM 

The 460 is a very powerful magnum. Most of the velocity test I have seen the 460 does beat the 350 out. The cocking effort on the 460 was hard enough at velocities of 20 to 22lbs. I saw one report that the true cocking effort was around 40lbs. I had mine detuned to enjoy the gun more. I also have an additional JM modified spring to get the gun more like a TX 200. I personally would not have any need or desire for a gun shooting 28lbs.

http://www.straightshooters.com/rws/r460.html

Dave

 
 Respond to this message   
Barry.g
(no login)
195.92.194.11

Re:460 vs 350

April 6 2009, 10:57 AM 

Hi Dave why do you think that most people thin that the 350 is more powerful than a 460?
Barry.

 
 Respond to this message   
Barry.g
(no login)
195.92.194.12

Re:

April 6 2009, 10:50 AM 

Warren thanks for your reply but a tx200 has a smaller sweep volume than a 34 but can go to 17-18ft/lbs.
You also say that the stroke on the 350 is longer could you tell me by how much? but the 460 still has a more efficient transfer port.
I suspect that tuners just haven't tried yet with a 460.
Barry.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave Sawyer
(Login Daveinvabch)
68.98.243.152

460

April 6 2009, 12:05 PM 

Barry, I think the reason that most think that the 350 is more powerful, because the 350 came out first and that was all the chatter. When the gun first came out, you heard about so much power, the gun had a enormous kick, and ate scopes like m&m's, all of which related to power and velocity. I think that most of the "magnumitis" crowd that wanted this magnum rifle, are not the type that would be interested in a underlever like the TX200 because it is not a magnum gun, which in my opinion the 460 closely resembles. It is my belief that Jim Maccarri made the "Modified" spring because it brought the 460 down to the level of the TX, which the gun is much better suited for. It appears that the modified spring was NOT what the Magumitis guy's wanted so he then made the more powerful "Artic" spring.I believe that the new spring still did not deliver what the magnum guys wanted so he became frustrated and stopped making the springs for the 460 gun altogether. These are my opinions only and not the words of the great spring maker JM.

Dave

 
 Respond to this message   
Barry.g
(no login)
195.92.194.11

Re:460

April 6 2009, 1:23 PM 

Interesting answer Dave but I am still a bit surprised of the general lack of interest and knowledge about this nice gun I think that it has it all, I dont even know what the official length of the stroke is, perhaps someone can tell me.
Barry.

 
 Respond to this message   
Larry Pirrone
(Login LPIRRONE)
67.72.98.96

i think the 460 was incorrectly slotted in the lineup and should

April 6 2009, 2:05 PM 

have been more tx like in power. they had the 46 in the lineup at that time and
that was the 11-12 fpe gun. probably folks were asking for more power in the 46 and of course the platform can't support it due to the breach design and seals that would never hold big power. diana decided that a underlever magnum fit their marketing plans and now we have the 460 which has its own issues.

i still wonder what the accuracy potential of the 460 is in detuned state. if it was the equal of a tx i would be interested in one for FT use at 12 FPE.
the seals would probably be a lot happier at that reduced output as well. i wonder if a 46 piston would de-stroke a 460? the diameter is the same i think.
and it has the cocking slot in the right place. anyone know what the 46 stroke is? is the piston stem longer or shorter? hmmmm? a short stroke 460 with a little weaker spring would be smooth i think.

i know, i know. we should not go there.

 
 Respond to this message   
Barry.g
(no login)
195.92.194.12

460

April 6 2009, 2:43 PM 

Larry I am sorry but I have to disagree with you I have a TX and it is a completely different animal to a 460 and what do you mean there is issues with the 460 only two small things put right easy.
But no one is answering the power question that I am asking in a satisfing way with facts just opinions, I would like to see some technical answers why the 350 is more powerful than the 460 as I cant see any to debate.
Barry.

 
 Respond to this message   
Larry Pirrone
(Login LPIRRONE)
67.72.98.96

barry, you need to re-read what i said.

April 6 2009, 3:16 PM 

never said is was equal to a tx. i do think the 460 SHOULD have been made more like a tx. or even a 97. 460 might have been a good platform if it has the accuracy of a tx. so far no one has said what kind of accuracy it has. issues? i hear about them all the time. or maybe just one issue and that is sealing the breach seems to be a problem but a solveable one.

 
 Respond to this message   

RedFeather
(Login RedFeather)
Owner Moderator
173.73.138.204

Warren, why can't you bob these guns?

April 6 2009, 2:46 PM 

Granted, they would be a pita to cock with the shorter lever, but you ought to be able to cut/re-choke one. The main obstacle would be the lever latch. What would be neat is some kind of telescoping extension so that you could still have some mechanical advantage akin to a full sized gun. I wish I could handle the recoil on either a 350 or 460 so that I could try one of these, myself. The 350, in particular, is a fine looking air gun.


 
 Respond to this message   
JC
(no login)
96.245.42.185

You shouldn't go there.....

April 6 2009, 3:09 PM 

Larry,

The 46 piston is slotted, but the slot is not in the right place for the 460 as the 460 piston does not have a slot. The cocking lever moves the sliding cylinder, which in turn moves the piston - more like the piston in the 300r....

The 46 spring in the 460 is a smoother shooter at 16fpe, but still not 46 (or TX200 smooth). I think a JM GRT kit might be the ticket.

Dave,

Speaking of JM, I think that he quit making springs for the 460 as they had a tendency to break things (like lockup spring, cocking issues, etc) and he got complaints back in his direction - not worth the agrevation. These are my opinions only and not the words of the great spring maker JM. And its probably just a concidence that these words showed up next to the XLR2 kit recently: Not for use in Diana 350 or 460.

PS - I think I fixed my 460's problem of breaking guides by replacing the piston...

Warren,

Are you sure you can't chop and rechoke a 460 barrel by taking off the plastic front site, cutting and machining, rechoke, then shorten the cocking lever accordingly?

Barry,

name bore stroke swept volume
Diana 52 28mm 100mm 61.5
Diana 350 28mm 115mm 70.8

I have seen this posted before and I have seen 4,4.5 and 5 inch strokes listed, which roughly convert to:

Diana 52 28mm 100mm
Diana 460 28mm 115mm
Diana 350 28mm 125mm

I can confirm the ~115mm stroke for the 460, so I tend to believe the latter; although I tend to disbelieve the post that says the transfer port of the 460 is shorter/more efficient than the 350's; I think they are virtually the same.

 
 Respond to this message   

RedFeather
(Login RedFeather)
Owner Moderator
173.73.138.204

Here's one reason you don't see too many 460 mods

April 6 2009, 3:25 PM 

Going by PA's website, they are about $150 more expensive than the 350. Not saying that a increase in price deters modding but it doesn't lend the gun to tinkering with like, say, a B28. That, combined with what appears to be initially disappointing fps numbers might also be limiting the number of 460's floating around.


 
 Respond to this message   
Larry Pirrone
(Login LPIRRONE)
67.72.98.96

that was really dumb of me. sliding cylinder.

April 6 2009, 3:49 PM 

sheesh!. the 460 piston probably has a flaired end to ride on the inside of the action tube like in a 48. that would preclude using a 46 piston.

 
 Respond to this message   
warren
(no login)
71.180.32.113

the 460

April 6 2009, 4:07 PM 

is not a TX200 and never will be even close

even with more FPS (460) compared to the TX which has less fps to the 460

the jewel of the M&G is the 34 and it's big brother the 350

that is why the Chinese COPY the 34, 48 and the 350 but NOT the 460, the 460 is a mystery air gun left for those that talk about it OR want one

warren

PS: you don't have an air gun unless you have shoot a Model RWS 34. IMHO

PS: to PS: let the flames beging

 
 Respond to this message   
JC
(no login)
96.245.42.185

you don't have an air gun unless....

April 6 2009, 4:56 PM 

Now Warren; are you "trolling"! What ARE the forum rules here anyway???

 
 Respond to this message   
warren
(no login)
71.180.32.113

just for you

April 6 2009, 5:34 PM 

JC:

this place is the BEST forum in the internet

NO rules just real gentlemen

are you one of them??

warren

 
 Respond to this message   
warren
(no login)
71.180.32.113

B

April 6 2009, 5:23 PM 

I never said the sweep volume was the same in the 34 compared to the TX

and transfer port means nothing when you talk about volume sweep but it does have to go thru the transfer port

volume in 1/2" is less than 1", add lenght in 1" with a volume of 1 1/2" and you have POWER, now for the formula about air volume and diameter sweep

1/2" diameter X 10" = 5 which = .0347222 cubic feet

3/4" diameter x 12" = 9 which = .0625 cubic feet

1 1/2" diameter air chamber X 12" 18 / 144 = .125

what does the capacity of .125 compare to .034722 or to .0625

add the barrel lenght, transfer port and pellet weight and you have a HEADACK.

Warrem

PS: enyoy the formulas and the math

 
 Respond to this message   
RedFeather
(no login)
173.73.138.204

Civility is appreciated

April 6 2009, 6:15 PM 

There's been some contention on a couple of the other forums lately and I would hate to see that here. I'm sure we are all gentlemen (or genteel women, as the case may be.)

No, you can own a world of air guns without ever laying hands on a 34. But, Warren, I will concede your devotion and, should you ever find yourself in the same situation as Son of Kong, I am sure it will be the 34 that you raise high as the waves close over your head. (Seen that old movie?)

The 460 seems to have been a flash in the pan. If they weren't so few and expensive it would be neat to see if converting to a .25 might make them shoot a bit better. Actually, maybe a failure for Diana in the "super magnum" race is not such a bad thing. They can concentrate on guns which both shoot well and hard but not try to be a .22 short.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave Sawyer
(Login Daveinvabch)
68.98.243.152

Equations, samations

April 6 2009, 6:19 PM 

You don't need to take out a slide rule to see that the 460 is a great gun. I disagree with Warren that it is not to be compared with the TX. I do not own a TX but have shot the 460 extensively, and it is a lot nicer shooter than my 34. which by the way was tuned to perfection.I think the 460. is more of a FT gun than a "magnititis" rifle. It sure as hell shot a lot better from the factory, than my 34. I mean a hell of a lot BETTER! Shorter firing cycle,no twang etc and very powerful. The detune made it even a nicer gun. I do not own a slide rule, nor do I care about mathematical equations that look pretty on paper, or meant to prove a point. All I care about is how the gun shoots. As Mark Twaine is quoted"

STATISTICS

Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Autobiography of Mark Twain

dave

 
 Respond to this message   
 
< Previous Page 1 2 3 Next >
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Find more forums on Air GunsCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement