HPA or CO2

In summary:

CO2:
Cheap, lighter, more effecient, less maintenence, easier to use.

HPA:
Less Shootdown. Not effected by cold weather. Better FPS stability. Does not harm pneumatics.

In general, CO2 is usually the best propellant for newbies to use. HPA won't provide them any advantage since they won't fire the gun enough to have shootdown, or notice the FPS problems.

But a PRO will notice those problems. If you are going to shoot more then 200 rounds a game, you will notice the major problems with CO2. Your tank will freeze, your FPS will spike and cause penalties, and it might damage your pneumatics.
These are serious issues, and its worth the cost/weight/effeciency issues for the other benefits.

Co2 is stored as a liquid. Much like propane, and its measured by weight, NOT pressure.

HPA/N2 is stored as a gas. A 68/3K HPA tank is 68 cubic inches, and the gas is 3,000psi.
Its roughly equivalent to a 45/45 tank (45 cubic inches, at 4,500psi).
Its usually best to avoid the 45/3K tanks. They are very cheap, but hardly supply enough gas for even one game.

What if you don't like CO2, but your local field does not have HPA? There are options.
For electros, you can use a mixture of anti-siphons, regs, expansion chamers, remotes, and drops to get pretty good results.
For blowbacks, you can use a siphon tank.

Nick

One thing to keep in mind about the whole CO2-HPA debate is that the biggest advantage from using HPA is because of the built-in regulator not because of the gas source. HPA's pressure actually varies more then CO2's, going from 4500-0 PSI while CO2 will stay roughly around 850 and might vary +/-500psi depending on the outside temperature and rate of fire(+/-500 assuming normal operation. Leave your tank in the sun or overfill it and you could go up to several Ks). The problem in using CO2 is that most lower-end guns are calibrated to shoot with a roughly 850PSI airsource. As rapid firing occurs the temperature and pressure drops in the CO2 tank which causes a velocity drop off. With a regulator set to output well below 850, say 450psi and the gun tuned to fire at an acceptible velocity at that pressure you will get many of the gains of a HPA setup with few of the minuses of a CO2 one.
1.- Less noise 2.-More shots per fill (Liquid CO2 stores much more gas then HPA per volume) 3.-reliable velocity (no spiking or dropoff assuming no liquid passes the reg) 4.-Cheaper price.

I have yet to see proof that CO2, being considered a dirtier air causes any more damage to the internals then regular friction does apart from Tank O-rings failing after improper removal.

Not at all. I'm just posting a different perspective then what many people have.

HPA is a nice thing to have for higher end guns which have delicate parts (regulation is manditory) or shoots at extreme speeds, but for lower-end guns there is no need. If the gun is properly set up to prevent siphoning (Down angled ASA, Anti-siphon tube or expansion chamber) Liquid CO2 isn't going to be a problem. It has the potential to ruin ASA O-rings but only if the tank is removed improperly. It does get very cold as a gas, but not to the point of damaging seals. There is so much metal mass throughout the gas system that it acts like a heatsink preventing the gas from super chilling. I've used unregulated CO2 for over 5 years and have never had to replace an internal O-ring. As long as O-rings are lubed correctly to prevent friction damage they should last a long time. I covered the inconsistancy part in my previous post.

The claim that CO2 is dirtier is, I believe, a big load of crap. There might very well be other gasses in the tank which make it unpure but that's the same case with HPA unless you are running Nitro. It's all a moot point because guns are exposed to the huge mix of gasses in the atmosphere all the time. In the sense of having particulate dirt in the tank that can be a problem with all air sources. Does everyone keep a plug on their HPA fill nipple? If not it'll inject dust or paint into the HPA tank during the next fill if it happens to get dirty or shot. I can't speak for all guns, but most of the guns I've worked on have inline screens to block dirt and other particles from getting into the valve area.

That is a very good price for HPA tanks but does that include the price of the built in regulator?

Assuming that it is a fiber wrapped tank you might be right. Does anyone know what CO2 tank size is equivelant to the number of shots you would get from a 45/4500 tank?

BTW, what part of the upstate are you from? Let's hook up and play sometime!

bunkertime said:

Java Man? are you protecting CO2 or something?

Co2 Damages your internals in that it can freeze and DESTORY $70 noids, Destory all types of o-rings, causes Many inconsistancys, and is very dirty.

HPA is the way to go. Spend $60-$80 on the Tank and you are set. and when u say CO2 store more per volumze think of the weight too. you can store a good amount of gas in a 45/4500 and it will always be light weight

Click to expand...