Discussion in 'Air Arms' started by 450kid, Nov 29, 2015.
Hi what things are been done to the ftp 900 and are people modding to lower the weight on this?
Three weeks ago I searched the forum for exactly this question .
I have orderered the UK Neil carbon shroud and alu air stripper, shaves off quite a bit and it makes the barrel full-floated.
I have taken of the original hamster and palmrest, and now it's okay for me. You'll find posts of people who have even taken material of the stock ... I don't dare to do that .
rowan eng are doing a kit now as well
Removing the A frame, center support and pointless barrel shrouds will help reduce weight but more importantly reduce POI shift errors. The big muzzle brake weighs about half a pound and needs to go as well. Most opt for the UK Neil / Rowan kit but one of our club members shot his just with a bare barrel and said it was fine?
Of course none of this really helps to much if you then go and throw on a big nikko and industrial size side wheel like i did
I've fitted the air stripper and carbon shroud, removed the gunk and the barrel is now floating, I've also removed the hamster. It feels a lot more balanced now. What other things can be done to slim her down a bit?
Over Christmas I spent a few days giving my FTP a diet and managed to save just over a pound in weight.
Most of this involved drilling out the underside of things like the hamster/butt/cheek support metal which is solid and can be easily lightened with a pillar drill.
Stage two was to lighten the stock by carefully measuring and drilling a series of holes along the inside fore-end of the stock, I then left a strip of laminate down the middle of the recess as I still have the clamp support and clamp. The U section clamp support was also drilled to halve it's weight.
My main critea was to reduce weight but without affecting the look of the rifle, so it still looks completely stock apart from the shrouds which I ditched almost on day one.
The main benefit to me of this was to bring the CG back and make the balance better as before the diet the rifle was too nose heavy. I 'might' ditch the muzzle brake at some time, but I have to be careful not to bring the CG too far back otherwise I'll end up with an unstable rifle.
Col funny you mention the Cg bit , i, m actally adding about 10 oz to the rear neat the butt, sits on your shoulder much better
Well it does, it just puts you back to square one but means it offsets the scopes weight as well which is good.
Apart from drilling the stock or drastically changing the rifle altogether there is not much more you can do to it.
FT'ers with huge scopes will suffer more than HFTer's with smaller but even then still not a lot in it.
Can't say I could bring myself to start drilling bits out though, great if you got the balls to do it, I think I like mine as it is...........a surgical fly testical removal tool it's so spot on
Im going to have a new stock made so I don't have to butcher mine. Also going to machine the metal down on the mounting bits too. Just can't decide on design or colour lol.
It's not a case of butchering the stock, more getting rid of surplus material to improve balance. As it stands the fore-end has a mass of laminate of which the only structural bit needed is a small strip down the middle if you still have the clamp & support.
If you have a pillar drill, it's simple to make a series of closely spaced holes in the bottom of the fore-end about 5mm deep which still leaves about 5mm of laminate. Then just join up the holes with a Dremel. I also drilled out inside the pistol grip, the cheek-piece and hamster, all without looking any different externally.
Dave Welham actually took away the side sections, part of the hand-grip and rear stock completely on one FTP, but that is going too far in my opinion, though I think he lost something like 2.5 pounds which is impressive.
The problem is that as stock the FTP is too nose heavy, especially with the muzzle brake, removing this and some forestock laminate helps bring the cg back closer to the shoulder.
Drilling out the surplus metalwork just helps reduce the overall weight which is a help on unsupported standers.
Hehe, that will be my final stage once I've finished lightening everything as it's easier to add weight in the correct place than remove it.
My cunning plan is to add lead shot into the holes I've drilled in the butt support and rear stock as it's easy to add and remove, though I'll probably need less than you due to my fore-end being lightened.
Still, good fun this modifying lark especially when you can feel the benefit...
It is also amazing how quite small weights, added in the right place an make a huge difference.
A previous owner of my Walther added a small lead slug into the back of the stock. Out of interest I removed it and tried a couple of standing shots. I immediately put it back again, as it really helps balance / stabilise the back of the rifle.
Yep, the knack is knowing where and how much....
Yep makes sense , dunno how much check piece or butt post you've got protruding ( ooer matron ) , but I was going to make a few weights to slide on there , been toying with the idea of placing a rod between the arch at the underside of the stock end and pistol grip with a few sliding weights on there , I think that would look cool too !
In fact looking at part number 94 ( cheek piece and butt post pillar plates ) , I could probably add those on top of the existing ones with some extra long bolts to make up the weight
Good idea Vinny, I have plenty of space on both the butt and check posts to add circular weights. I was also looking at drilling two weight wells either side of the cheek stock support and sticking a couple of Steyr type weights in there flush with the surface.
Stainless post replacing ally original on no 1 test pilots steyr ...weight gain... Over100grams
Plus one of these
food 4 thought
Ok , so made a few lead weights to fit on the 16mm cheek/butt posts, one thing I will say is it seems a better idea adding weights to the lower part of the stock rather than the top , makes me wonder if the steyr weights would be better placed under the butt rather than on top, specially with a rail and a tall set of mounts / scope , had a feeling this might be the case after playing with the acz stock, I suppose the lower the cg the more stable it should be , anyone with any experience of this or suggestions
Defo think lower down would be better for balance Vinny
I think your original idea of a rail and weights hooked in the rear lower curve of the stock is the best idea. Maybe use a length of stud so that the weights can be spun back and forward?
Something like this might work:
Best weight loss mod. ever.Brings the balance right back, deadens the firing cycle and even looks good.
Keith Allen alloy barrel shroud with internal stripper:
Separate names with a comma.