you get too carried away with insignificant bullshit spazzbox. This gun is not going to land you better fish. I'm sure it goes ok, but stating



makes you sound like someone with absolutely no idea. The handle looks uncomfortable and i prefer closed muzzle guns because they are easier to load. What is the big deal about it being a railgun?? Railgun's are a marketting fad and really make no difference to a spearguns accuracy and i doubt they even strengthen a gun barrel as claimed. Who the fuck as ever snapped a gun barrel? If a barrel warps it will be replaced from the manufacturer anyways.

Even a Sea Hornet can take good fish in the hands of a skilled hunter. I hope newbies read this post and ignore your bullshit.

_________________
It's shining in the harbour....

If rails don't improve accuracy then I guess guns don't need barrels either. Be sure to forward your engineering calculations and tests proving this design to weapons manufacturers. You'll be an overnight millionare.

Do you really have trouble loading an open muzzle? Are you missing fingers? I am not, so its actually easier and faster for me.

The handle looks like the handle of a regular hand gun. Have a good look at the grip on that gun and tell me it is not going to keep it in your hand.

You have your preferences I have mine. Please explain why your gun is better than this one. I'll buy the one you have instead if I am convinced. That's a challenge. You make the remarks, well go on, walk the walk.

_________________
"o o o ooo o oo o o o 0000o0o 0 oo000 OOo O0O o 0o0 o0o0O"

Rails don't improve accuracy, that is a proven fact.
A closed muzzle gun can be loaded quicker and can even be fired accurately without re rigging the spearline. I use open muzzle and closed muzzle guns.
I have used 28mm pipe, and rail guns as well as a HF2 and to be honest the only thing that seems to make that much of a difference to me in the way they track are length and total height.
It's the diver that gets the fish Jazz, not the gun.

_________________
WARNING: CONTAINS CARROT

I disagree Greg, I'm with Jazzbox on this one. I once had a gun that was so technologically advanced, it didn't even need a diver to shoot fish.

_________________
Breathing is cheating

I went to the Rob Allen night a while back and the question was raised about rail and open muzzle the reply was that the rail doesn't really come into play until the gun length is over 1.2m in length and the rail helps limit the flex in the spear when leaving the barrel once fired and supposedly does help the accuracey. As to the muzzle question it's the persons own preference but Rob Allen himself said he is now using open muzzle guns where once he didn't think he would. I suppose it's the old saying pratice makes perfect , what may feel awkward at the start becomes easier with time. I'm not saying either party is right but what feels right for one person mighten be another persons cup of tea.

An open muzzle speargun, just improves aiming from behind on eye level. If someone takes aim looking down at the spear tip from above,
it makes no difference if its an open or closed muzzle... Accuracy doesnt improve, whatever the muzzle type is, as long as the user is well
familiarized with his speargun...

After shot shaft vibration is decreased with the use of heavier and thicker shafts, not rails. A rail mainly helps sighting, by actually making the shaft
sit lower and closer to the spearguns body. When using longer spearguns, it can add help decreasing shaft vibration, but slightly.
Personally i consider railguns shorter than 1,00m and with less than 2 sets of rubber, just a marketing trick...

_________________
Gone....Fishing !!!

My response wasn’t intended to trigger a discussion about whether rails are gimmicks. That’s going off the point. The gun has good features that are clearly useful (and I hate to repeat myself): aqua-forming shape, line release towards the back of the gun, open muzzle (my personal preference), noise reducing material. Etc.

I prefer to use a thinner shaft and prefer a gun that is 105cm+. I have shot the majority of the targeted species in Vic and frankly, I don’t like the taste of most of them, neither are they good sport. The fish I want to shoot are whiting and snapper, but I will take snook, squid, goats, gars, bigger LJ for a feed when I can’t get those other fish. I will continue trying to shoot fish I have not yet tasted, but there really isn’t that many common species left I can think of (luderick, Trump, King fish). A thinner shaft will be more susceptible to bending on a gun without a rail. If this is true for a longer gun, this will be true to a lesser extent for a shorter gun. Why would you go without it when clearly the implication is that it does help? Not only that, there are other arguments for this: http://sumora.com/about_railguns.php - standard information as far as I am concerned. Thats really enough for me. If I can improve the accuracy of the gun by 1cm, thats great!

Right-o, gang. Please critically evaluate why the remaining features of this gun don’t make it a ‘decent’ gun for the purposes intended. I don't won't this to turn into a 'rail' topic and have to abort the discussion. Please no personal attacks or excessively inflammatory comments.

_________________
"o o o ooo o oo o o o 0000o0o 0 oo000 OOo O0O o 0o0 o0o0O"

Little John you are correct about the open muzzle for sighting . As to the rail I am only stating on the comments on a person who is one of the worlds leaders in making spearguns. Yes the thicker shafts will stop shaft vibration, but the velocity of spear will decrease as you increase shaft thickness, but as jazzbox stated some people like using a 6.5 or 7mm shaft on longer guns depending on what species they are going for. I have a 1.3 omer hf and that comes standard with a 6.5 mm shaft. As for the rail on guns below 1.2m totally agree.

All i know is, M.K.A. is rubbing his hands together at the sight of jazzbox.

My crystal ball tells me that the hydroformed carbon gun will make ever-increasing appearances in the future and within a couple of years RA/Picasso/Beuchat/Cressi/Omer will all have at least one in their catalogues. Consider them the 'Euro gun 2.0' in that I'm sure Euro guns were initially seen as a fad in Aus before becoming widely accepted. Surely most major design changes are greeted with the gimmick tag before popularity slowly grows (open-cell, carbon fins, camo suits, weight harnesses, etc).

Gun manufacturers need this shakeup as, from my noob perspective, it seems that there aren't all that many design difference between brands and companies seem to be slow to try something different and perhaps move gun design forward. If this gun is indeed rubbish then at least this design can be sidestepped on the way to putting together something better.

All that said, I'm more than happy to make do with my not-so-glamorous aluminium gun.

BULLSHIT.



BULLSHIT.

Look at the road bikes used in the Tour De France. They are the same shape now as they were 60 years ago. They have pretty much evolved into the best they can be. Sure there are a few differences here and there which a lot of the time get changed back to the old school way anyways.........obviously materials have also changed. Spearguns are similar. The best spearguns are basic - made up of a barrel, handle with mech, muzzle, shaft with shooting line and rubbers. A good gun should be powerful, accurate and reliable. In Australia these days we are spoilt for choice and there are many good guns on the market. Many of these good guns ARE NOT railguns.

To see just a few pics of this carbon gun (which i'm sure goes ok) and say 'FINALLY A DECENT GUN' - you would have to be an outright knob.

_________________
It's shining in the harbour....

Agreed. This is a F*cken wank of a discussion.



This is all that is needed with some diving skills & hunting technique.

+1 'IH"

My goodness, with so many expert endorsements these things will be selling like hot cakes...

_________________
That's where I saw the leprechaun. He tells me to burn things...

_________________