by Tom Gaylord
Writing as B.B. Pelletier
The Benjamin Fortitude precharged air rifle.
This report covers:
- Second rifle
- Crosman Premier lites
- JSB Exact Heavy
- Air Arms Falcons
- Premier lites again
- Shot count
- Discharge sound
- Test target
Today we resume our look at the Benjamin Fortitude precharged air rifle. I will summarize where we have been, so folks reading this report for the first time will understand what is happening.
This is the second Fortitude I have tested. Parts 1 and 2 of this report belong to the first rifle. The first rifle’s inlet valve locked up at the end of the velocity test and remained open when I bled the air after the fill. The entire gun exhausted all its air. I tried to fill it several times, just to be sure. So I stopped the test at that point and requested a replacement rifle in the same .177 caliber. While this is Part 3, I will actually run another velocity test today, since this is a brand new airgun.
There have been no changes to the rifle. This is just a different airgun. So I will test it the same as I tested the last rifle, with one exception I will explain when we get there.
Crosman Premier lites
The first test string was with 10 Crosman Premier 7.9-grain domes. They averaged 896 f.p.s., which compares to 885 f.p.s. for the first rifle. The spread went from a low of 889 to a high of 907 f.p.s., which is a spread of 18 f.p.s. That’s the same as the first rifle. At the average velocity this pellet generated 14.09 foot-pounds at the muzzle.
Starting with a fill of 3,000 psi, at the end of this string of 10 the pressure gauge read 2600 psi.
JSB Exact Heavy
The second pellet I tested was the JSB Exact Heavy dome. In this rifle they averaged 826 f.p.s., while the previous rifle averaged 817 f.p.s. with the same pellet. The spread this time went from a low of 818 to a high of 845 f.p.s., so a spread of 27 f.p.s. HOWEVER — this time I was aware of the slow recovery time, so during the string I paused after the shot that went 818 f.p.s. I waited for about two full minutes and the very next shot went out at 831 f.p.s. The large velocity difference is caused by that slow transfer of air from the reservoir into the firing chamber I mentioned and even tested in the last velocity test with the first rifle. Apparently that is common to this model.
At the average velocity this pellet produced 15.67 foot pounds of energy at the muzzle. The starting air pressure was 2600 psi and at the end the gauge showed 2300 psi.
I said in Part 2 that the previous rifle had a definite 2-stage trigger pull. I still have that rifle and it does indeed have a 2-stage pull. This rifle, on the other hand, has a single-stage pull like the description claims. It is not too heavy, despite what the reviews say. It is also not a refined trigger like you will find on more expensive rifles and even on some of the other PPP rifles. It breaks crisply at 5 lbs. 12 oz. The first rifle’s trigger broke at 5 lbs. 7 oz., so they are roughly equivalent.
Air Arms Falcons
Next to be tested were some Air Arms Falcon pellets. They averaged 898 f.p.s. in the Fortitude, with a spread from 875 to 919 f.p.s. That’s 44 f.p.s. between the low and the high. As before, the first shot was always the fastest in the string. The first rifle averaged the same 989 f.p.s. with this pellet with a 37 f.p.s. spread.
I’m going to show this string, because I will come back to it.
The Falcon pellet was harder to load than the first two, which is identical to what happened with the first rifle and its mag. I had to press each one into the mag or the skirt would have jammed the mag.
The air pressure at the start of this string was 2300 psi. After 10 shots the onboard gauge registered 2100 psi.
Premier lites again
The first rifle fell off the reg around 35 shots. At this point in this test the rifle has fired 30 shots, so instead of loading RWS Superdomes I loaded another 10 Premier lites. We can compare this string with the first one. This time I’ll show the entire string.
The average for this string is 851 f.p.s., so the rifle has fallen off the reg. Looking back at the third string that were shot with Falcons I am guessing it happened on shot 28, when the velocity dropped from 900 to 875 f.p.s. So, being a little hotter also took away a few of the shots. The first rifle fell off the reg at shot 33. And, if you wait about 120 seconds between shots the rifle will shoot its fastest. It seems to take that long for the reg to equalize.
I will also say that even with the rifle off the reg the valve seems to be well balanced. Notice that it doesn’t start shooting wildly, but decreases on a steady curve.
The Fortitude is relatively quiet. That’s due to the power level, as much as the shrouded barrel.
There was a test target in the box with this rifle, just like the first one. The group is larger than the group made by the first rifle but still very respectable. This one is 0.354-inches. The first rifle’s test group was 0.136-inches between centers.
These 5 Crosman pellets shot at 10 meters measure 0.354-inches between centers.
This Fortitude is holding air fine and seems up to the task ahead. This brief interruption has just been a blip on the screen. The test results are close to those of the first gun, which is what we want to see. We can now proceed to test the accuracy.
89 thoughts on “Benjamin Fortitude precharged rifle: Part 3”
It’s good to see that the test targets are individual. It is also good to see that the performance appears to be also uniform in this model. Hopefully this one has its kinks worked out at the factory. Please check that the shroud is firmly in place and that all screws are properly fastened prior to the accuracy test.
So the slow fill is confirmed as a design problem on this model. Crosman, I am terribly disappointed in you.
The important question is did Crosman source out the inlet port or did they manufacture it themselves? Those Foster inlet ports can be had from numerous manufacturers. Knowing the bean counters they probably bought them from another company.
It’s not the inlet port that’s slow. It’s the passage between the reservoir and the regulator. Yes, Crosman designed and manufactured all of this, as far as I know.
I believe Siraniko was talking about the leak that your first Fortitude had with the Foster fill fitting.
Not the pressure equalizing from the regulator to the valve.
I apologise. I thought you were referring to the inlet port that failed in the first test. Turns out you were referring to the slow 2 minute fill of the chamber. I agree pairing a magazine feed to a slow firing rifle doesn’t make much sense.
There is a possibility that the regulator doesn’t need that much time between shots.
That’s the time BB chose.
That time will be something you figure out about the gun the longer you own it and shoot it.
I have encountered situations where I thought I had something figured out. But spent more time with it and found out other things. That’s how that goes if your a person that gets into getting the most out of a given product.
Interesting. The Huma reg. that I installed in the Maximus did not require a wait. It appears that this one that they chose is a bit slow in allowing air to pass on through. While setting it up, I had it in and out several times and adjusted at different levels. Even non regulated, the valve did seem pretty well balanced as you said. Something they should look into I suppose, being a repeater and all.
Looking forwards very much to the accuracy phase of testing. My .22 Maximus has done 30 shots into 1″ at 50 yards and kept 9/10 into 1 3/4″ at 70 yards.
Good Day to one and all,….. Chris
I bet you are well pleased with your Maximus. I would be. If I can expect this performance with the Fortitude, I will be happy.
Yes I am. Tweaking the trigger sealed the deal. Without checking notes,… that 30 shots in 1″ was shots 20-50 as I was checking the shot capacity after doing some other tests. For specific fps I would have to refer back to notes. But yup,…. nothing to complain about.
The pressure rebuild time is a bit disconcerting. Other reviews have been done, but I am not sure that ever showed up. Or,… if it did,… it was never mentioned. The lack of a leade on the Chaser has me rethinking that one. Someone with a lathe could add one easy enough though. I do not have one or access to one.
A few questions concerning the regulator. Would lubrication likely help? As a habit I like to introduce a drop of silicone chamber oil into the reservoir every few fills to my PCPs. It helps to eliminate slow leaks and maintain the seals. Would it likely help with the regulator?
Another question I have is the regulator a “drop in” type such as the Huma? It is my understanding that it is not adjustable, which I do not have an issue with. If it can be easily removed, spacers can be used to vary the size of the regulated chamber.
Yes, I have some interest in this air rifle. 😉
I think that the regulator would benefit from being broken in as it sounds like there has been less than 100 pellets through the rifle. The ES should be a lot tighter than it is right now.
Surprised at having to wait for the rifle to stabilize between shots. It could be a port issue but you’ed figure that Crosman would have noticed/fixed that during the development. Again, if the parts inside the regulator are rough and binding they would interfere with the air flow.
None of my regulated PCPs require any sort of wait period for the next shot – they are ready to rock faster than I can work the lever!
If a Huma/Maximus combination is working so well maybe Crosman should be looking at their regulator design.
I haver owned perhaps a dozen rifles with regs and some of them do, in fact, operate just this way. They take time between shots to fill and stabilize. My first Daystate Huntsman operated that way and I shot it a lot. My second Huntsman did operate much faster between shots and I never noticed a problem.
Thanks for the feed-back B.B.!
My experience is with FX, Weihrauch and Walther regulated PCPs and I haven’t noticed any lag with these brands when Chrony testing.
I will make a point of trying “timed” shots (e.g. 30 sec or 60 sec between shots) to see if it affects my results as I tend to “bash them through” when collecting velocity data.
I have no experience with Walthers or Weihrauch. The two FX rifles I tested did not have this problem.
I am surprised that you think so highly of TCFKAC. You must keep in mind that this is a PPPCP that has been rushed to market. The regulator may or may not improve with age. We shall likely see. It is my hope that this is a drop in reg also.
I have not heard that oil does anything for a reg. Oil slows things down and I think it might actually hinder the way the reg works. That said, I have owned many rifles with regs and have not hesitated to use silicone oil from time to time for the seals. So maybe I’m wrong about it.
I had a drop in Korick reg installed in a Career 707 and it worked well for about 8 years. But like all regs do it eventually failed and needed a rebuild.
8 years. I think that’s great.
And when it failed or started failing what did you see happen with how the gun performed?
I didn’t own it any longer. But it just quit working altogether. As in, no shootsky!
Ok wasn’t sure how a air gun regulator failed. Never had one fail. Had leak issues but not a fail so wasn’t sure what happened.
And that’s interesting that it just stopped shooting. That must mean when it failed it must of stopped supplying air pressure to the valve.
So that’s a bummer. Then the gun is done till it’s repaired. I was thinking it would keep shooting but be like a air gun with no regulator.
Well that’s something to think about if you get a internally regulated pcp.
That was just that reg. Others may fail in different ways. I don’t know.
Right. That should be realized also.
Just like anything. Sooner or later something will happen.
The question is do you let that thought bother you? Or do you get what you want to satisfy the current moment of how the gun is used.
All these price point pcp’s and regulator functions could drive a person crazy when making a choice on buying one.
Well if you let it. That could happen in anything you buy.
Probably research on falure would be the way to find out some info on the subject now days.
The way I see it is I’m going to get what I want for the purpose I intend to use it for. Then if it fails I’ll deal with it in whatever way is appropriate at the time.
It certainly helped to seal my Edge when it started leaking and did not seem to bother the reg. I will likely be putting one of these through the wringer once I sell something. We shall see if I have this same issue and whether it can be corrected.
Have you learned whether the reg is a drop in?
I am still new the the PCP darkside. I have owned a refurbished Hatsan BT65 QE in .25 cal and Air Venturi MK4 hand pump kit since April 2018. So far it has been great.
I purchased an extra cylinder and it loses air over time, not attached to the airgun. Is this normal when not attached to the airgun? And if so, what is the expected discharge rate? If not normal, is the valve seal leaking and will silicone chamber oil fix the issue?
Thank you in advance,
Not being attached to the gun is probably not the reason for air loss, though it can be. It means your connection is losing air but when connected to the gun the firing valve seals the air.
You might try silicone oil, it certainly won’t hurt.
If a PCP takes a week to bleed down most people just accept it. But loosing all the air in two days is often considered way too fast/ It’s a personal thing and many of them hold forever. All my AirForce guns hold indefinitely, but if you have been reading awhile you know that some PCPs do leak.
MUWAHAHAHAHA! Welcome to the Dark Side!
I personally would introduce a little silicone oil into the reservoir. It will migrate to the leak and lubricate the seals. If you still have a female foster on your pump you can place a couple of drops in it or you can do such in the Hatsan probe.
Will this fix your leak? Probably, but if it doesn’t you can either send it off to be replaced or delve deeper into the Dark Side yourself. Please use caution though. An air cylinder full of high pressure air can become a deadly missile. Bleed off the pressure before you attempt to disassemble it. I saw a video a short while back where two guys who should have known better were disassembling an air pistol while it was still charged. One of them ended up with the valve deeply imbedded in his thigh.
great info here. Since I still haven’t went over to the dark side of PCP, I’m wondering if/when I do, I might just should buy a non regulated gun? I don’t like having to work on stuff. A non reg. gun might be the way to go for me. Also I’m wondering if single shot might also fall under that less breaking down title. Hmm. Lots to ponder. As was said the other day, I too have been amazed at all the PPP that have had problems. I think that unacceptable, at least to me. But I’ve owned many brand new Marlin 60 semi auto 22’s and many brand new Ruger 10/22 semi auto 22’s. In each I’ve had a bad brand new one.
Yep even with rimfire and other firearms I’m sure.
If you are interested in a .22 caliber PPP PCP, I can recommend the Gamo Urban. It isn’t regulated but the two that I have give 10 shot groups that are less than 15 fps Extreme Spread with nearly half of the 50+ pellets that I have tested in them. With a really heavy pellet like the JSB Ultra Shock, I got a 20 shot string with just a 10.5 fps spread and Crosman Ultra Magnums gave 28 shots with a 30 fps spread. It also has an adjustable hammer spring tension which none of the other PPPs have, so you can tailor it for high shot count or more power. Right out of the box it is tuned great, though. And if you keep a lookout, you can find them for sub $230
Thank You so much for that info. I will surely keep it in mind! Glad you are happy with yours and are having good luck with it!!
I too own a Gamo Urban and I highly recommend it. It has many wonderful attributes. I bought mine in March this spring and it’s been perfect for me. I normally only use it for pesting sparrows, starlings, etc.
so I don’t take a lot of shots at one time, except to verify the POI is still good. It’s an easy fill with a hand pump and I normally fill it after two mags of 20 shots. It has been sitting in the corner for over a month since I last shot it and the pressure has not dropped a pound. The Urban has been great airgun.
Thanks for your review too. You guys are making it hard for me not to pick the Urban when I go to the dark side LOL.
Too bad the first gun quit, I realy wanted to see how it performed at 25 and 50 yards. The test target for this one is ok but the first one was impressive. The first five shots on a gun are not conclusive but still.
If you still have the first one maybe you can get it repaired and test it for accuracy. Or you can send it to me and I would be glad to test it.
It sure seems like an extreamly long time for the regulator to stabilize, I could see a few maybe 5 seconds but two minuites is a lot.
I will probably still get a Fortitude, but the regulator issue is worse than the leak. It sounds like a design issue.
Maybe that much time wasn’t needed.
That’s what BB chose for his test.
If you look at the RWS superdomes in Part 2, B.B. waited 2, 10, 30, and 60 seconds. The longer he waited the more velocity for the next shot. A more extensive test and a graph could show how long you need to wait for a stable velocity but even 10 seconds is longer than I think is reasonable, especially with a repeater.
It would be interestng to compare the Fortitude regulator design to other airgun regulators.
The two Huma regulators I have needed tome between shots to stabilize.
Just looked at my data,…. no time required between shots with my Huma. Since I do it indoors and not at a target,… I fired as fast as I could load them (at an easy pace). Maybe 15 seconds.
Remember the other day I mentioned Dave came over and was using my compressor so he could set up a Huma regulator in a Marauder. Well that Marauder has a .30 caliber conversion and is fed by a unregulated bottle and has a high flow valve feeding the barrel.
Guess what he gets a big drop in pressure between shots. Basically the gun uses so much air on each shot that regulator can’t fill the valve fast enough for the next shot. So now he has to put a spacer between the regulator and the guns valve to have some extra volume to feed the valve to the barrel from the regulator.
So just because a Huma regulator or any other regulator works one way on one guns setup doesn’t mean it’s going to work the same on another guns set up.
To me,… the spacer allows enough (volume) of regulated air for the valve to complete the shot. How fast that the spacer is filled up (through the reg.),.. is a separate issue.
It’s all about if there is enough volume of air left to supply the guns valve for a fast follow up shot.
You might need the volume of 2 spacers the same size instead of one to have enough air left after the regulator for the fast follow up shot.
So the regulator can only move as much air as it can in a given time. It’s up to the person setting up the gun to have enough volume of air after the regulator to supply air to the guns valve. Then you have to determine if you have enough volume of air to complete a follow up shot quickly. Remember we are talking time between shots. Not just filling a area with air. When time is involved it changes everything.
That is what I am saying too. The reg. needs set up to allow (quicker recovery) on post reg. pressure. And yes,.. the post reg. spacer needs to be adequately sized to allow proper/full valve function for each shot.
Your missing this though.
The regulator only flows a given amount through it at the pressure you have it set at to supply the gun in a given amount of time.
If you change the supply bottle or reivor pressure before the regulator from let’s say 1500 psi or 4500 psi the regulator will only flow so much through it in a given time. It might change the flow time a little bit but not enough for what we are talking about.
When the system as I will call it transfers air from the bottle to the regulator to the guns valve is different than how the guns valve transfers air to the pellet in the barrel. The guns valve dumps it’s air fast to the open atmosphere. The high pressure air in the system trys to equalize at it flows. So that’s why I mentioned when time gets involved it changes the way you have to think about the flow.
Yesterday I spoke about scopes being added to airguns to enhance sales that may not be compatible with the performance of the rifle. In the same entry I spoke about the Seneca Aspen and it just happened to have a scope added to replace fixed ( removable ) sights.
I’m not saying that particular scope is bad or of low quality, heck it could be a 4 star scope. But, it is strange that they can replace a set of ‘fixed’ sights with a scope and keep the price the same. Must have been some good quality sights it replaced?
Then again, it sure is a hell of a deal on a scope if it’s half way decent and good for all round use.
The scope I have on my FX Independence is a simple 4×32 mil dot UTG Golden Image, now called a hunter, with a ‘ 35 yard ‘ parallax setting and it turns out to be perfect for pest control. No fiddling with any adjustments. Just pick it up aim and shoot. It works fine at any reasonable distance. However it is about a $50. scope of reasonable quality.
You don’t always need all the bells and whistles or to spend a lot of money for a scope that works just fine for your needs but you do need to find one that ‘ fills ‘ your needs, be it target shooting, hunting, plinking or a combination of them all.
Point is only you can decide which scope is appropriate for your rifle and needs.
In the case with the Seneca Aspen your just about getting the scope for free so even if you decide to get a better one your at no big loss at all. You can always use it for another less accurate airgun.
They did not jack up the price for a cheap scope and that’s just fine with me.
I have had two of those exact golden image scopes.
All I can say is they are great low cost scopes.
Very crisp and clear all the way out to the edge of the scope feild of veiw.
Now if we could only get the manufacturers to offer that with their guns they are selling.
But then again. Maybe the gun won’t own up to the scope it’s wearing.
But yep there are some nice low cost scopes out there. That is if you can get info about how they are before you buy.
If you wanted to humor Benji-Don ( okay, and me) by testing that first gun, it could probably be accomplished by just filling your carbon fiber tank to between 3000 psi and 1000 psi and leaving it tethered to that first gun.
On the subject of the valve tuning on this gun, it almost seems that the regulator is PREVENTING some, otherwise, pretty good consistency, as the Standard Deviation and Extreme Spread seemed to really tighten up after the gun went off the reg.
I’m sure they didn’t take the time to tune each guns regulator or striker spring.
That’s the thing now that the regulator was added to the equation.
How much time did Crosman spend to make sure that the components repeated to give equal performance over multiple guns.
Again maybe we shouldn’t even have price point pcp’s. Or should we?
Or maybe we are getting a bit to critical here on the chrony results. I have always said don’t let the chrony results speak for a guns accuracy.
Get the Fortitude shooting some paper before criticizing the performance. Right now it’s all a guess in what could happen.
I have to agree. At the distances that I shoot, shot to shot velocity doesn’t make that much difference. Some of the most accurate pellets in some of my guns have been pretty bad performers in the velocity spread department and they may string vertically at 60 or 70 yards, but I don’t shoot that far, as a rule.
BTW, I have been getting really consistent velocities out of my .177 Gauntlet, no matter what speed I fire it at. I think you said that you saw a difference in yours when you fired slow.
My Gauntlet is pretty consistent well as the Maximus with the tethered bottle. My Condor SS is the one that I need to wait between shots for the tethered regulated bottle to stabilize.
Some data from the Fortitude in .22 cal with JSB Exact Jumbo Heavy Diabolo 18.13 gr pellets.
Column A was with the Fortitude just out of the box, Column B was after 500-600 shots. I guess this is an indication that the regulator and valve are breaking in.
Column A shows the first “90” shots out of the Fortitude, actually 88 shots as I made a rookie mistake on shot 3 and got a double feed, did not know this till I shot and saw 2 holes appear reading 475 on the chrony, deleted that shot. This was done before B.B. presented his data. I was shooting thru the 10 shot mags and taking a short break between each mag, that means that for Column A the new mag starts at 9,19,29 ect for Column B the new mag starts at 11,21,31 ect I do not see a huge change except for the first shots of Column B, both strings started at a full fill that had sat ovenight.
Data on the strings
Column A first 70 shots
High 687 Low 645 Average 673 Spread 42 SD 9
For all 88 shots: Start pressure 3100 psi end 800 psi about 26 psi per shot
Column B first 70 shots
High 679 Low 654 Average 663 Spread 25 SD 5
For all 90 shots: Start pressure 3000 psi end 1000 psi about 22 psi per shot
Point of impact was lost in Column A at shot 82, Column B did not lose POI.
Hope this string of numbers stays intact, took a minute to type, anyway I will put a graph at the bottom to make it easier to look at.
Thanks for the information, the graph is a big help. How is your gun doing for accuracy? I wanted a Fortitude in .177 but I like .22 better in general. I wonder if there are any differences in the power plant and transfer port between the two calibers.
You are very welcome, as B.B. would say it’ not accuracy day but I would say that as far as my example of the Fortitude the accuracy is excellent with several different pellets I have laying around. Here is the sample target that came with the gun, looks like about .093.
As for differences in power plant and transfer port I do not know.
Seems to me that the Fortitude should be tested at 25 yards minimum. 10 yards just does not seem to be enough distance to determine a rifle’s accuracy.
You are very right but that is what they chose for whatever reason.
Thank you. Very nice data and quite impressive performance on the reg..
Glad you like it, I did not really see what B.B. is talking about with my Fortitude, it is possible that tomorrow I can try to duplicate his results.
That might be a good idea (your test). I popped over to HAM for some video and could not find anything (definitive). With some searching,.. someone should be able to find a video of someone shooting a .177 live on camera and timing the shots. The chrony could be posted real time or after,… but the question at the moment seems to be the timing between shots. The best one I found (.22) showed 20-25 seconds between shots and did show live chrony and did not show much variation.
If the same reg. is used on a .177 as a .22,… then that is a done deal. Is it (set) the same for .177 as it is for a .22? If the same and set the same,… then your test could reveal another chink in the armor. Reveal what? Well,.. maybe,.. expect to expect some inconsistencies in performance from rifle to rifle. If .177 video is found, then that may further bolster the point. Maybe B.B. got another dud?
Dud? Well,.. in a way. Is it performing to what other Fortitudes are doing? If it is not, shown through well done testing,… then I would have to question if the current test rifle is representative of the majority of what is out there. I am talking chrony and timing only,… not accuracy.
Looking forwards to getting it sorted (hopefully) and moving on.
Thanks, I reviewed my data again for Column B, 90 shots in 9 shot strings, looking at each string I saw this;
String 1 spread 23 fps
String 2 spread 10 fps
String 3 spread 9 fps
String 4 spread 11 fps
String 5 spread 8 fps
String 6 spread 8 fps
String 7 spread 7 fps
String 8 spread 17 fps
String 9 spread 17 fps
The first string is odd, the others not so much and 8 and 9 were well off reg.
Here is my plan to test the slow regulator fill issue that B.B. has seen with his Fortitude.
Shoot 3 10 shot strings fast waiting 5 minutes between strings this is for a baseline.
Re-air the the gun to full.
Shoot 1 10 shot string shooting for accuracy.
Shoot 1 10 shot string waiting 60 seconds between shots.
Shoot 1 10 shot string waiting 2 minutes between shots.
I think this will help to clairfy and define the issue.
Good. Very good. 23 to 10 is dramatic. Perhaps that shows an over fill/partial valve lock/partial reg. lock situation,… as B.B. eluded to the other day?
While I have yet to test the theory,… is there a “sweet spot/fill” with a regulated gun just as their is with a non-regulated one? Your data suggest a slight overfill,.. perhaps? I have the Red Wolf and the Maximus, both regulated,…. so my ponderings do have some direct merit.
I don’t really know this is my first move to the dark side, but if you look at the chart above shot one is very high and shot five is very low those 2 shots blow up the string to 23. As for overfill, the gun was filled to 3000 psi the night before and shot one was the first shot of the day. Hmmm did the reg pass more than the limit it is supposed to do by sitting all night? Don’t know.
Me either. I figure that 3500 pushing on a 3000 input reg. (putting out 2000) might have the same effect as putting 2500 to a 2000 valve on an un-regulated gun. Partial locking,… of some sorts.
(all theoretical),… but you get the idea.
Extreme variances in fps could be due to pellet alone. Too loose, too tight, damage.
But in theory it should not matter if I put 2500 psi in the gun or 3500 psi in there, the reg should handle it and the pressure should (key word) hold at what the reg is set for on the low pressure side. A second gauge would be really cool, but there goes the price point.
Using quality pellets, I think it is just the gun breaking in but time will tell.
Yep about the fill pressure. The regulator sets the working pressure.
And she understands like you got a nice .22 Fortitude.
I bet it’s going to be a nice shooter at that velocity.
Wow that comment got screed up by my phone.
Suppose to say and it looks like you got a nice .22 Fortitude.
I only brought it up as B.B. said the other day that regs. are set to work within a range,…. even on the high pressure/non-regulated side. Perhaps he might elaborate in a future PCP article?,…. as there seems to be some confusion.
Yes it does shoot nicely.
I understand, that is why I used the words “in theory” and “should”.
When your high pressure side is too low the reg does nothing, when your high pressure side is too high it could actually damage the reg or just not work as expected.
I have seen enough odd things concerning how unregulated PCPs can behave after a fill, after sitting overnight (or longer), or after power adjustments . I see no reason to believe that a regulated PCP would not be inclined to do some of the same things .
Learn if these things happen consistently under the same conditions .
You could also start with a lower fill pressure and see what happens . If that takes care of the problem, then you could start up with the lower fill and run it that way for a while before you check to see if the reg has smoothed out and will allow you the full fill .
What is a few shots off the max count for a while?
I was hoping to get to looking at these very things today but my testing got sidetracked due to my neighbors truck issues, perhaps tomorrow.
Thanks again for your input.
In a pneumatics course that I took for my old job, we were taught that, with the type of pressure regulators found in industrial air systems and on your shop compressor out in the garage, as the upstream pressure (supply air) rises the downstream pressure (regulated air to equipment) will decline and vice versa. The discussion was for 250 psi rated regulators constructed with rubber diaphragms, so I don’t know if it carries over to the regs found in airguns or not, but I thought I’d throw the info out there anyway.
Mike In Atl,
Okay!! That’s my kind of data collection! (and presentation) My first thought when I saw your chart was that I wanted to break it down into separate 10 shot groups to see how consistency changed. Was very pleasantly surprised when I looked further down and found that you had already done that. Great job!
May I assume that you were racking the bolt at a normal pace with no thought towards letting the reg stabilize? If that is so, I would definitely like to own one of these in each caliber, provided I could get that performance from both.
Thanks for sharing the fruits of your labor.
You are welcome, and thanks for your comments.
As for the pace of shooting, I was shooting for accuracy and over the chrony so however much time it took me to sight and shoot between shots. After each 10 shots I would pause to make sure of the chrony-gun alignment with the next target.
You also saw that I wanted to do a more regulator specific test today. Dang as luck would have it my neighbor had a caliper blow out on his truck so I took him to the parts store and helped him replace it, so I may not get the test in today.
Mike In Atl,
Okay, it sounds like I may want to wait until you post your dedicated regulator tests before I rush out to buy one. I would like to get the results that you got without having to think about pacing.
Your a good neighbor. Mine just stand around asking inane questions and distract me from whatever auto repair I am attempting. I have even resorted to waiting until after dark to work on my truck to avoid them.
I really do not think you will have to think about pacing, in my chart the first 5 shots were odd, don’t know if that was a problem or an anomaly. The 2 shot strings shown are the only 2 times I chronyed the Fortitude, got it on August 31 and shot column a on September 1 column b was shot on September 17. At that time I was unaware of a dwell time for regulators, I only want to do this test to better understand exactly what is happening with my Fortitude, each one will probably be somewhat different.
There has been a lot of less than favorable reviews on the Fortitude but so far I am quite satisfied.
Good neighbor, thanks, I try to help whenever I can, guess it comes from my upbringing.
Fortitude more reg musings. JSB 18.13 gr.
The gun was dry fired then I waited the delay times indicated before the first shot.
Changed up the plan a little and did it this way, it does seem that delaying the shot does increase the speed of the shot however that does not appear to be a really large increase.
I did get a couple of spikes when shooting the 2 minute delay. I think I will attribute that to the gun being new and not yet fully broken in.
Shooting 10 shots in 50 seconds was cool, accuracy did suffer quite a bit. LOL Interesting that that was the most stable group of the lot, must be that I was hitting it at the same point in the dwell time.
My plan for now is to put the chrony away and just shoot and enjoy till I get at least 2000 more pellets through the gun and then re-examine the gun then.
Shooting with a 30 second delay between shots.
High 673 low 661 Average 667 Spread 12 SD 3
Shooting with a 1 minute delay between shots.
High 669 Low 661 Average 665 Spread 8 SD 2
Shooting with a 2 minute delay between shots.
High 682 Low 658 Average 666 Spread 24 SD 7
Shooting as fast as I could, 10 shots in 50 seconds.
High 664 Low 660 Average 662 Spread 4 SD 1
Thank you your time and efforts. Very interesting. I think you answered the question on if recovery time is required. No. (At least with yours, anyways). The rapid fire string was amazing on spread and SD. The other thing that is interesting is that the longer pauses worsened things. If anything, you would expect those would be even better yet.
So,.. while you answered 1 question,.. you have also raised another.
The other thing that has now become obvious is that there appears to be some inconsistencies from gun to gun on as if waiting between shots is needed.
Looking back at my records on when I did the Huma reg. on my .22 Maximus,…. I see I got spreads of 9, 6, 7, 9, 12, over the various settings that I tried. All were done as fast as I could load and fire without aiming. For me, for any regulated gun, I would like to a 10 or less spread without any special requirements.
Thanks again,… Chris
Indeed answering one question leads to others, I saw a rabbit hole opening up and decided just not to go there. The gun is accurate and fills my needs nicely, plinking, spinners, field targets, altoid tins, punching paper and any other targets of opportunity that show up in my 25 yard range. I need a bigger yard.
On the inconsistencies, with inexpensive guns they to be expected but for the most part you get what you pay for. Also as far as I know B.B. has not put nearly as many shots through his as I have mine, think break-in period.
I just hope that in the longer run this gun proves to be of good enough quality to make it to the 5 year warranty Crosman gave it.
“I saw a rabbit hole opening up and decided just not to go there.” You sound to be a very wise man! 😉
Yes,… perhaps “break-in”. It will be interesting to see what results are as time goes on. Ideally, a new owner would chrony at new and then after 1000 shots or so. Info. like that will be like finding a needle in a haystack. That said, there is current testing results,… since it is new,… that should shine some light on the matter if anyone cares to look. Key factor would be,… how long was the time between the shots for reported chrony strings?
Thanks again for taking the time,….. Chris
I may not have been clear in my 90 shot string or perhaps I am misunderstanding you, I got my Fortitude August 31 and first string (ended at 88) was shot September 1, those shots were the first shots out of the box. The second all 90 was shot September 17 after about 500-600 shots. I will wait this time to reach 2500 shots before running a full string over the chrony.
As for the time between shots are you asking about the 90 shot string or the 10 shot string?
I was not aware that I was asking anything. My comment regarding time between shots was geared towards,….. on other reports, on other sites, if chrony data is posted,…. then how do we know how long the tester waited between shots? Nothing more.
On other sites,.. I would assume that the testing and wait between shots was minimal and more representative of your rapid fire round or your 30 second round. The video sites,… while maybe the time is not stated,.. at least you can watch and judge the time between shots, if shown.
This whole pause to shoot thing may not even be known yet. If it ever will be. Anybody not shooting/testing over a chrony will never know.
Further testing after being well broken in will be a nice thing. Looking forwards to it once you get there.
For my money the data collected from the chrony should be gathered the same way you would normally shoot the gun, that way it will be consistent for you and your gun.
I agree. Anyone getting a magazine gun is likely to be “bangin’ ’em out”. I am not so sure that the average user of the Fortitude will ever know the difference though. For those that are aware,… it is a bit disconcerting. And,.. like you said,… you get what you pay for, in most cases.
As a side note, I find that I have had very good results when doing rapid fire from a magazine. Correction is instant, almost to the point that it becomes an automatic reaction.
For a magazine gun,… 30 seconds seems reasonable to rack the bolt, get on target, aim and shoot. 45 tops.
That reminds me that I meant to measure my time between shots when shooting for accuracy, guess my rememberer is failing, again other factors conspired to leave me shotless for today. Weather report for tomorrow says it should be a great shooting day and I hope to get in a lot of shooting.
I may even remember to time my shots just to see how long it takes.
Mike In Atl,
Those results would suit my needs perfectly. I may take a short time just to look at what others are posting before I buy, but I think a couple of these are in my future.
And thanks again for taking the time to test and post the results.
You are welcome, the reviews on Pyramyd Air are all over the board a lot of folks are talking leak.
I had a leak in mine as well, went from 3000 to 2000 over night. When I pulled off the fill nipple cover there was a little pop sound, guess that points at the leak directly. Added a few drops of silicone oil into the fill nipple and it started blowing tiny bubbles, aired it up and It stopped leaking. I think that was the 2nd week of September.
My advice to any new Fortitude owner and this would apply to other PCP’s as well is to lube the fill nipple on the first fill, and then on every other or 3rd fill had I done that I probably would never had that leak.
Mike In Atl,
Had the same issue with my new Gauntlet. It arrived empty and I aired it up to see if it would hold air. Set it aside and in a few minutes the nipple cover went flying across the room with a POP. Added a few drops of silicone oil, got bubbles, just as you said. Added a little more air to force the oil into the check valve and haven’t had any more problems.
Cool, just a dry check valve problem I think.
After much reading about the Fortitude I’ve already waiting for GENll 🙂