Hi all, fairly new to the sport and was just wondering what the pro's and also the con's (if any) are to using a carbon air tank as opposed to using a basic steel air tank and are they worth the money?
Cheers, Sam.
Cheers, Sam.
Hi all, are carbon tanks worth the money?
- Thread starter Sampaint
- Start date
The biggest differences tend to be colour, shape and price.
Some carbon tanks are lighter but not all of them are.
The carbon tanks can hold more air if you get the larger ones than equivalent sizes steel tanks but most sites only let you fill to the standard 3k psi anyway.
There are loads of threads on this forum listing the pros and cons of both tank types. So many discussions and preferences to list. Take a minute to have a browse and see what you think.
Some carbon tanks are lighter but not all of them are.
The carbon tanks can hold more air if you get the larger ones than equivalent sizes steel tanks but most sites only let you fill to the standard 3k psi anyway.
There are loads of threads on this forum listing the pros and cons of both tank types. So many discussions and preferences to list. Take a minute to have a browse and see what you think.
a basic steel tank system will cost you around £40 a carbon one will cost around £150, like Pingu has said, walkons normally will only fill to 3k, so depend on if you plan to attend many big events etc, my advice is start with a cheaper system and move up as and when required. 
Thanks for the advice guys I will have a browse and do a little research myself but I suppose it relates to most things, you pay for what you get
Your basic aluminium tank (those that people call steelies but aren't made from steel) will only be able to be filled to 3000psi, generally carbon fibre tanks are able to be filled to 4500psi (though you can buy 3000psi fibre tanks). Basic aluminium tanks are heavier than carbon fibre tanks but a lot cheaper. So as has already been said it depends on where you're going to be playing most, if you're going to be only doing walkons you won't get chance to fill to 4500psi very often but if you do big games then you most probably will.
Value for money against air capacity and lifetime, the steel / aluminium is the winner
The fibre lasts 15 years, but needs two tests to achieve that - making the cost around £200
Aluminium/steel cylinders can last forever if tested, but are cheap enough to be disposable, and you could get 20-30 years of new cylinders every 5 years for the same money
With equivalent sizes of cylinder the fibre is lighter, but with 'standard' sizes the normal fibre is bigger and bulkier
The best feature of fibres is the range of shapes and sizes, the right one will ergonomicaly fit you and balance with your gun
If money is being discussed then steel/aluminium is the answer, save over £100 and use it to play
The fibre lasts 15 years, but needs two tests to achieve that - making the cost around £200
Aluminium/steel cylinders can last forever if tested, but are cheap enough to be disposable, and you could get 20-30 years of new cylinders every 5 years for the same money
With equivalent sizes of cylinder the fibre is lighter, but with 'standard' sizes the normal fibre is bigger and bulkier
The best feature of fibres is the range of shapes and sizes, the right one will ergonomicaly fit you and balance with your gun
If money is being discussed then steel/aluminium is the answer, save over £100 and use it to play
Sam I believe that carbon fibre tanks are the best, even though they're be more expensive the carbon fibre tanks are usually more efficient and of course are lighter... Gain some more advice and do some research then decide fr yourself
Good luck!
Good luck!
Those points are valid, but seperately.Sam I believe that carbon fibre tanks are the best, even though they're be more expensive the carbon fibre tanks are usually more efficient and of course are lighter... Gain some more advice and do some research then decide fr yourself
A number of years ago I found on this and many forums that I would often be shouted down for promoting 3000psi cylinders rather than fibres when new players were asking about what to get.
The comment was always that the fibre would be bought soon after so the money spent on a 3000psi was always wasted. Possibly people set in their way, possibly that they didn't want to be the one speaking differently.
It can be a waste of a starters budget - there is so much to take money from the beginner
The general point of view has changed and players appear more informed.
A fibre cylinder is never 'more efficient' - by being able to take a higher pressure it can take more air for its size. (You could say its more efficient for its bulk)
A regulator could be more efficient in its operation - but that's to do with its refresh rate, how quickly you can keep firing and for how long. But with rof caps most players won't notice
£ for air quantity and £ for life, a 3000psi cylinder is always more value for money - even if you throw it away at the 5 year point
Fibre cylinders aren't always lighter - of course you are right for an equivalent comparison. If two cylinders are the same size the fibre is lighter. But if you take a 'standard' 3000psi and a 'standard' fibre then you will find the 3000psi is the same, lighter or pretty close (because the standard fibre is bigger and bulkier)
If you wanted light back then what you needed was a disposable Stako - new every 5 years, so you were paying serious money to get the weight saving, now you can buy retestable similar light cylinders
Balance is more important then weight anyway
Fibres are best for weight at a given size/capacity, choice of size and shape - if you don't get the right bottle ergonomicaly for you then you just waste over £100 extra on the cost of a cylinder
In addition it's also more fragile. One bump or scratch can mean either binning the cylinder or paying around £25 on an extra inspection and hydro test for piece of mind of safety