lefttop righttop
leftborder
rightborder
leftborder
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: The mQ valve that wouldn't fit ...  (Read 8141 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
drg
Administrator
Semi-pro
*****
Posts: 425



View Profile WWW
« on: November 25, 2005, 04:28:31 PM »

Here's a quick writeup of what I did to make my mQ valve fit my slightly out-of-spec Turtle body.

The problem: The valve body -- the front portion of the valve housing the poppet -- would not fit all the way into the gun body. It bottomed out on a shoulder of metal just before the jam nut threading, so the exhaust holes would not like up with the valve set screw hole and thus the transfer hole to the bolt. The front o-ring did not fully clear the set screw hole, so it could not have worked despite the misalignment.

Apparently on some guns this metal shoulder is too far back and the valves were designed for a certain specification.

The solution: There are several solutions to this problem. The factory-suggested solution is to have the body drilled out a little more to move the shoulder further in. This requires a drill press and a large drill bit (the size of the lower tube).

The valve body could be turned down at the "flange" that bottoms against the shoulder inside the body. This would allow the valve to slide past the shoulder and sit deeper in the body.

A custom valve body could be made (or released by PBX) but that is more work that necessary and a factory release is not likely.

My solution: I chose to try to turn down the valve body, by hand. Yeah, by hand. Ideally one would use a lathe for this but anyone with such access could probably drill out the body without too much trouble.

But I felt that hand-sanding might work, as long as I was careful. It was the only option open to me at home at night, and the keen cockerholic (that sounds dirty) doesn't suffer a non-fitting mQ valve lightly.

Now if you choose to do this fix if you have the same problem, I have to add a disclaimer here. I was fully ready to accept the possibility of ruining the valve body in this process. YOU SHOULD BE TOO. I contacted PBX and they will sell replacement parts to prior owners. They reiterated that I should probably fix the body. But I needed it fixed NOW.  :twisted:

Anyway my suggested process is to use coarse sandpaper (80 or coarser) to gradually sand down the outer edge of the valve body flange. Before you start, wrap some easily removable tape around the front of the valve, leaving only the flange exposed. This will prevent scuffing and save your fingers from the edges of the exhaust holes and the o-ring seat. It will also make the thing easier to turn by hand. Remove the poppet and set it aside.

I cut the sandpaper into strips to wrap around the outside of the flange, and turned the valve body both continuously in one direction and back and forth, to keep it even. Be prepared to do this for a LONG time, you want to remove a little at a time and check it often. Remove the tape and wash the body out before each check, to keep any shavings out of the body.

You want a fairly tight fit. Eventually the valve should seat properly. You an finish with diminishing grades of sandpaper and polish if you like.

During the process, be careful to sand only the outer edge of the flange. Make especially sure you don't damage the poppet bore in any way.

When you are done, lube, reassemble, and you should be good to go. Some might say this is a "ghetto" fix, but hey, my mQ is installed and working, and I didn't have to pay anyone a cent.

Here is a photo of the area I sanded, the outer edge of the flange. Note that this is for reference only, you MUST disassemble the poppet assembly before sanding!

Logged
m3ph0l0gy
Rec-baller
***
Posts: 52



View Profile
hey
« Reply #1 on: November 25, 2005, 06:11:37 PM »

Cool, nice work man... I havn't aired up my gun yet. I forgot I still need to cut down my cocking pin. But, im just curious, what kind of turtle body do you have?
Logged

drg
Administrator
Semi-pro
*****
Posts: 425



View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 26, 2005, 02:30:22 AM »

Genuine Turtle, don't know the original make (it's an A+ Annodizing gun but I don't know if the bodies are based on another make). Just get yourself a detent style pushpin, like a freeflow or kapp.
Logged
drg
Administrator
Semi-pro
*****
Posts: 425



View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2005, 08:03:09 PM »

Okay A+ says the body is cut from a WGP blank. Odd, eh?

Anyway I played with the gun this weekend, here are my findings:
- Kick is reduced but not THAT much, most of the kick has always come from the recoil from the actual shot, and you have to keep the LPR pressure somewhat up to keep speed up.
- Gun got a bit quieter
- Efficiency is either the same or slightly worse
- The ram shaft wants to back out of the pump arm a LOT now, I guess without spring pressure during the backstroke, the vibration is really free to work the arm loose
- Consistency went WAY up, I had always had consistency problems with my Tornado/mini body combination. With the mQ, super stable!
Logged
m3ph0l0gy
Rec-baller
***
Posts: 52



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2005, 12:15:14 AM »

the mq didn't improve much for me either.. i mean when it is working of course. I couldn't time my zforce properly. But, I've got settings from a guy on pbn with a zforce e2 as well. I'll try to put his on mine and see how it worked. Mine was relatively the same but he had his coff at 50 and mine was at 25... could be the cause of blowback and choppage.  I noticed the same changes in my gun as you, drg. My bolt moves back much further than it used to too.
Logged

drg
Administrator
Semi-pro
*****
Posts: 425



View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2005, 01:34:58 PM »

My preliminary settings changes are:
Raised SON to 4.0ms
Raised CDEL from 3.0 to 3.5 ms -- I am not sure why I had to raise it and I can only assume it wasn't set properly before. But, hmmm...
Raised COFF from 24 to 26.

It works fine now up to 15 bps (my max, no bounce or ramp) with no shootdown.

Ok posted a video here, my fingers top out at about 16bps on a good string, this is about 15 tops.
Logged
m3ph0l0gy
Rec-baller
***
Posts: 52



View Profile
so
« Reply #6 on: November 30, 2005, 11:42:15 PM »

are you shooting faster than u used to or is it just the same ?
Logged

drg
Administrator
Semi-pro
*****
Posts: 425



View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2005, 02:08:13 AM »

The same, my fingers have always been the limit, as far as I know.
Logged
m3ph0l0gy
Rec-baller
***
Posts: 52



View Profile
hmm
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2005, 11:54:42 PM »

so the mq valve is not a real improvment.
Logged

seldon
Backyard baller
**
Posts: 23



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: December 02, 2005, 03:41:52 AM »

itīs not about bps Wink
Logged
drg
Administrator
Semi-pro
*****
Posts: 425



View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 02, 2005, 01:49:37 PM »

Quote from: "m3ph0l0gy"
so the mq valve is not a real improvment.


That's kind of a silly conclusion ... what about a new valve would possibly affect my finger speed? I did not tax the upper limits of the mechanical valve system (I do not bounce or ramp, as I said), so there's no reason to think I would be able to realize any additional speed from the mQ system, which most likely is capable of a faster ultimate cycle speed than the mechanical system.

The mQ valve, like halfblocking, is not about ultimate speed, although I am sure it could give you better ultimate speed than a mechanical valve. It's just that over the course of normal marker operation, this difference will never be realized. There are so many other benefits. I most definitely would not go back.

Speaking of which, I should clarify that I was able to significantly lower my LPR and maintain the same speed as before.
Logged
m3ph0l0gy
Rec-baller
***
Posts: 52



View Profile
ah
« Reply #11 on: December 02, 2005, 08:17:42 PM »

yes now in my defense. I didn't mean that the mq should make your marker shoot faster and if it didn't then the mq wasn't worth it. I was looking at the overall pros and cons. Seems to me, from my personal experience, the long wait, expense and timing issues along with custom cocker and mq valve fittability. It didn't seem like it was well worth it all. My question about if you can shoot faster now than before was about the timing. If you have seen any improvment with your guns timing. Thats all. Also, I've just learned that my sidewinder reg is not as suitable to the mq as some other regs such as the CP.
Logged

drg
Administrator
Semi-pro
*****
Posts: 425



View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 03, 2005, 12:14:40 PM »

I kind of know what you mean about the long wait, etc. But in the end, it is the best valve system there is out ther and will give you certain things that nothing else will. I think as long as expectations were realistic, it does deliver as advertised.

What's up with your sidewinder?
Logged
m3ph0l0gy
Rec-baller
***
Posts: 52



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 03, 2005, 12:34:21 PM »

I was reading on the mq valve thread again and i saw that the aka regs don't work so great with the mq valve because of different operating pressures.  Could be a reason why my gun is being so inconsistant.
Logged

drg
Administrator
Semi-pro
*****
Posts: 425



View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: December 03, 2005, 12:44:24 PM »

what do you mean "different operating pressures"? I'm using a Sidewinder and it's fine. Are you talking about the 2-liter? The 2 liter has two versions, a LP and HP version, and you need the HP version for the mQ since the LP version tops out at something like 225 psi. The Sidewinder adjusts full range up to 700 psi or so, so it doesn't have this issue.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
 
Jump to:  

rightborder
leftborder
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
Waltz design by IchBin
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
leftbottomborder   rightbottomborder