mtaylor, on Dec 11 2007, 09:52 PM, said:
Jackson, on Dec 11 2007, 07:28 PM, said:
I don't know if this is true, as I don't own a Phantom, but I've heard that they like CO2 better. They are sprung for CO2 use. And at the ROF you'll be shooting, you aren't going to notice a significant difference in consistency between CO2 and HPA. Why use HPA? So you can use a bigger, heavier, more expensive tank that gets fewer shots for the amount of volume for a marginal increase in consistency? Depending on your setup, you could use a Palmers Stabilizer and get similar consistency for a lot cheaper and with a smaller, lighter tank. I always though being smaller and lighter was one of the benefits of playing pump...
some people prefer hpa, and my 13 ci air tank weighs about as much as my 3.5 oz co2.
Let's compare the two then. The Phantom is pretty efficient, yes? For comparison, my Blazer gets 80 shots per ounce of CO2. Roughly 30 shots out of a 12 gram, semi-auto. They get about 12 shots per C.I. of HPA at 3000 psi. Phantoms are more efficient, but we can still use those numbers as a rough estimate.
A 13/3000 tank will yield about 156 shots per fill. A 3.5oz tank will yield about 280. A nearly 80% increase in shots. Same weight. But the 3.5oz tank is a few inches shorter as well. For what? If you are shooting slow (which you will with a pump), a marginal increase in consistency. To me, the choice is clear.