Cannon Poll

[Matt221985]

what one do you think is better?

[hi]

pneumatic cannons ( with the right valve) are way more powerful.

[Matt221985]

yea, my brother was saying that combustion was better, but air all the way for me, this is the best gun ive built, i have a combustion but never use it now that i have an air one.

[jackssmirkingrevenge]

It depends what you want, "better" for what?

Combustions are easier to make and not so demanding on the materials front, but when it comes to sheer power there's no contest, pneumatic is the way to go.

[Matt221985]

thats what im going for is power, more damage to stuff..lol

[turbohacker]

The only thing a cumbustion is better than a pnumatic at is blowing up and making a lot of noise when firing. You can stll get a good amount of noise out of a pnumatic if it is very large and a piston though

[Matt221985]

yea, very true, my pnumatic is pretty loud. Loud enough for me anyway. Makes a good boom. Combustion ones are no longer fun for me after building a pnumatic one.

[MrCrowley]

http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/pneumat ... t1161.html
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/combust ... t5158.html
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/which-c ... t5877.html
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/combust ... t6690.html
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/pneumat ... t6806.html
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/more-po ... -t809.html

Trust me that is only half of all the topics on this forum about Pneumatics vs Combustions. Have a look around next time. Check the wiki out, located at the top right corner of this page labeled 'Wiki'.

[Velocity]

This same question has easily come up at least fifty times in this forum... possibly more!

Both combustions and pneumatics have their pro's and cons. Combustions only generate around 40 PSI, and therefore do not have the raw potential power which pneumatics do. However, they do not have a valve, meaning unrestricted flow, and therefore are great to use on larger bore launchers. For spudgunning purposes, the largest valve size which is commonly built is 3" porting (OK, there have been 4" porting coaxials, dual 3" sprinkler valve cannons, and 10" butterfly valves on pumpkin chunkers, but that is very rare). Therefore, a combustion is much better than pneumatics for barrels above 4". If you are a spudgunner who can't make a homemade valve and the best valve which you have access to is a 1" sprinkler valve, then combustions beat pneumatics with barrel sizes of 1.5" and above.

Pneumatics involve compressed air, and can generate much more pressure in the chamber. The average pneumatic is generally taken up to around 100-125 PSI at the maximum. For small bore launchers, combustions don't stand a chance against pneumatics. The factors which limit the power of a pneumatic are the valve size and the pressure rating of the components of the chamber. The bigger the valve, the faster the air can be dumped, and the more power. The higher pressure that the chamber components are rated to, the more air pressure that can be safely be put into the chamber, and the more power.

Sorry for this broken up post; i'm kinda tired right now.

EDIT: IDEA!! I think we should make a thread, listing ALL of the pros and cons of pneumatics and combustions, and then sticky it. Finally we will have a single definitive source! Who's with me?

[Matt221985]

so pnumatic being powerful, can u put a spud thru thick plywood like u can with a combustion ?

[MrCrowley]

You can put anything through plywood with a pneumatic.

You don't understand. Pneumatics and Combustions have not *set* power. They are all different. Please stop making topics like this. They both have advantages and disadvantages but pneumatics can be more powerful then a propane metered combustion if they are built right. Alright. Search it. Check out the wiki.