roller vs standard speargun, range and penetration 

I have tried a dozen rollers at différent time, starting with the old beuchat from 15 years ago. I was never overly impressed and i share the same level of satisfaction with those guns as their owners do (mostly highly experienced competitors).

@@potvinr Cant really tell i usually make my own "standard guns" and never used a roller but in theory it should be stronger with less recoil and also easier to load. Due to the pulley system - the pull force required to pull the rubber is cut in half (more power and easier to load) - the stretch length is now 100%ish of the gun (no waste of power) while a standard gun stops pulling the spear 1-1.5/3 of the way which is why a longer gun makes a huge difference in traditional guns. - the recoil cancel itself out due to the rubber pushing the gun in both directions at once. based on your results i can imagine you did not make the rollergun rubber short enough

I tested a few commercial rollers since this test. I'll revisit the test with new guns... but from what i observe.... overall the rollers dont provide any significant advantage in terms of reach, not anything that would convince me. I still like them though. I'm making three more right now.

@@potvinr ... can't wait to see them mate , really enjoying your videos .

The coefficient is 3.7... Using the two step loading you see here, you could go over 4 and still have some band to grab (but the gun would not shoot well and the elastics would not last long). Basically, if you can load a gun with a loop like you see on normal commercially available rollers, you cannot pretension them very much, at least not like guns with multiple tabs on the bottom.

still not true. I use rollers regularly.

Seems to me the roller did outperform, but maybe not by much? And close distances it underperformed. I’d like to see more real world tests like yours. I think the best roller argument is the recoil myself, I’m not sold on the power argument.

yeah, no, I now have four rollers. They are fun to shoot but fall short in too many ways to be practical, and even a moderately powerful 3 band gun blows them out of the water. The invert rollers are the way to go if you want something useful, yet non traditional.@@bluedoggum8373

They would be false equivalences... the roller and the traditionnal are not optimized at the same stretch. I was comparing working setups.

I need to find five ardent roller guys bring their most souped up rollers and have try to beat normal spearguns. That would probably not help either but it would be entertaining

@@potvinr check out the mannysub rollers. My buddies swear by them, but setup is everything

@@castandspear I like the mannysub double rollers. We'd have to compare them to four band spearguns. I'm sure I would prefer shooting a double roller over a four band spearguns... the only issue i can see, has to do with the ability to use slip-tips and large shafts on the rollers.

​@@potvinr double roller is not to be compared to 4 band speargun. The only similarity is the amount of rubber. But on a double roller you load 2 rubbers not 4. Even though you have as much rubber material on double roller as 4 band standard gun, only one end of the rubber is "working" as the other end is anchored. Same thing applies to single roller vs 2 band standard gun.

A roller is a double band gun. The amount of material is very similar.

@@potvinr But isn’t the stretch itself different on a longer piece of rubber though?

no, it's still stretched 300 to 350%. bands do work the same way on each type of gun.@@whynottalklikeapirat

@@potvinr What I am getting at is that there is a relationship between the power of the amount of material and the way it is distributed during accelleration, depending on how that material is shaped and how those factors relate to the weight of the projectile. If you make a sling shot for example and you make a shorter but broader band and a longer, slimmer and slightly tapered one, and the amount of material is the same and you stretch them not to the same lenght but to the same capacity in terms of stored power (so it’s the same), then slightly depending on the weight of the projectile, the long tapered (and consequently further drawn out) band should mostly outperform the short broad one because of the manner in which power is transferred during the acceleration which changes the speed and velocity. I hope I explained that in an understandable way 😂

rollers give a less jerky pull on the shaft... that's supposed to make a large difference. it should reduce shaft wip, but it's not always a factor, especially if you use weak bands and stiffer galvanized shafts, on you guns... and inclosed track will do it much better than the roller btw. @@whynottalklikeapirat

It was an example of two common guns that are super similar. I have a video coming were I take a souped up to the max roller, with and without booster band. and it still does nothing special in terms of range or penetration. I like them, but don't expect a miracle. I'd like to see someone do a video showing the exceptional range and penetration of ANY roller side by side with a traditional gun with similarish specs.

@@potvinr The thickness of the band on the Roller is really important. Was it 16mm like the other guns? looks thinner, and hence would perform weaker.

@@lukephilpot5660 This was simply a comparison of two family of guns to showcase something I had noticed using a dozen different rollers owned by TOP spearfishermen (and another dozen rollers since then) that rollers are not magical. I'll do another video soon. I have a 130 cm roller well balanced for 16 mm that i will compare to a standard 130 and maybe a Rob Allen roller of the same length. Alas, again they are very close in performance. BTW, the roller in the video works better with 14 mm stretched like crazy than with 16s.

Awsome, put it online lol..

I should, but I feel the time of the rollers is pretty much over lol. The good ones will continue to be used, but the almost religious beliefs in attributes that defied physics did not survive the test of actual use by a lot of people. We now know what to expect. BTW, that small gun was overpowered. It had a ratio of 3.7. It works better at 3.4, but no magic.

How?

Well i would go for a second roller instead... and it beats the purpose. You might as well get a proper two band gun.

I'd go with an inverted. I see more of a difference with them. I only tested small sizes though.

@@potvinr the concept is brilliant and the mechanical advantage would make it easier to load. Thanks!

6.5 mm shaft and the pretention is mostly irrelevant (it depends on your initial setup). The band is stretched at 3,7 once loaded. I used quite a few rollers and overstretched bands don't do good anyway.

@@potvinr Pretension is everything on roler gun...it must be around 30-35 %...if you dont have pretension on rubbers you dont heve max power. Pretension is basic for roler!

i think in one of his other videos he said he made it (roller gun) from cedar wood.

I normally use iroko, padook or teak, but I make a lot of prototypes in cedar@@fishmut

They work but not a big fan. I hate loading them

@@potvinr it's just interesting hearing people discussing gains on roller when a pneumatic will blow them all away. I find loading & reloading a pneumatic quicker & easier. I can understand that some people find them difficult. Thing is, even with less pressure loaded they become easier to load & yet still perform better. People talking about adding pressure to pneumatics when they can probably be reduced for most. I'm back on pneumatics now after couple years of band.

@@somethingnotmaterial Well, the pneumatics don't do very good in many situations, but they are faster to load than rollers.

I do mention ideology muddling opinions. It's crazy how people attach their self worth and pride to opinions about silly things. I'm all for rollers but not for kidding myself.

thanks, I'm still in the process of measuring different roller effectiveness, but yeah, enough with the magic thinking.