have you gotten your lv2 yet? is there a huge difference or minor difference between the tm40 and lv2

@@gamingwithaiden9751 yes i have and i sold the TM40. there are a few big differences the front grip was the biggest for me i just never felt like i could hold on to the tm40 or when swaping hands i was hunting for the grip more. i like the shot of the lv2 more and the other guys that have been at the field i let shoot the lv2 didnt want to hand it back to me.

@@deathsucks13 do you think the shot is worth an extra few hundred? Cuz im buying used

Shot difference*

@@gamingwithaiden9751 personally it was more how it felt in my hands really. the lv2 was the first marker i have played with in a long time that i didnt want to try something different. i think its very personal feel im sure you can find some videos comparing the two.

At this point in paintball, no one gun is more "accurate" than another - they all achieve 300 fps velocity and shoot a ball out of a metal tube. So really we're referring to the way it recoils and feels as it cycles, and the LV2 is just such a smooth shooter with a very satisfying shot response.

I made the same transition to the LV 1.6

nice, how do u like it?@@kokonolike

Super smooth and VERY lite. Also the bolt is super easy to remove and clean. The LVs are fantastic guns.

If you break the eyes on the cs2/ cs3 your an idiot and shouldn't have a paintball gun. It's almost impossible to break them. You are more likely to screw up the eyes on the lv2. That why you are a pro at soldering eyes together lol

1.6 or 2, the exact same methodology applies. There's no reason to spell it out for each variant.

@@axledog7297 Yeah, same methodology but Dwell and LPR are different, cause lower opperating pressure, and more LPR volume, so you need for best result a pressure tester that fits all LVs

@@matwey967 The 1.6 and 2 use the same solenoid, thus the same dwell time applies. PE simply reduced the "overdwell" effect from the 1.6 (11.5ms) to the 2 (9.5ms). Don't let different setpoints and layouts impact what matters - same methodology.

Can you identify areas of the LV2 that can be reduced in order to reduce grip area? I think you'll have a very tough time with it once you actually start your analysis.

@@axledog7297 the angle of grip frame and still is quite a lot that could be done. Cs1 initial launch all the way to 3 is a slim down.

@@TheMindUnlocked I'm well aware on how they accomplished the thinning down of the frame from the CS1 to the CS2 and to the CS3. The big thing you're missing here, and the one item that destroys this comparison, is the solenoid. The CS1 places the solenoid in the forward position since it's an air-sear system. The Gamma (CS2/CS3) solenoid is tiny and doesn't interfere with the frame angle, height or packaging in any manner due to it being a simple, compact 3 way with a singular roll. The LV1.6/LV2 SMC 4 way solenoid is large and long, and has to be located in the back (the wrong location for ergonomic's sake) due to its communication with the ram. If you look at the marker (or a cutaway diagram), take a look at the packaging constraints within the LV2 - you've got the solenoid, the trigger assembly and PE's desire to place the frame as high up as possible. Thus, the fat front-rear dimension of the frame is fixed. The side to side width isn't the issue - it's the front-back dimension that disagrees with so many, and that dimension cannot be changed unless the frame drops further away from the body (Jack will not do that) or you can find a way to reduce the size of the solenoid body or pilot valve (not much to be gained). The LV2 is an example of packaging constraints.

There is no way to reduce the Frame so much to notice it, cause it is much more complex system with 2 regulators LPR and HPR and long rammer than CS line , you cant fit both regs in the frame like CSs does, double AA Batteries are not much better in saving space , only a small Lithium Battery like in Dye or Luxe can save very much space, but i doubt that PE will use Lithium Batteries, and you cant shave more matherial of the frame, at the front you have air flowing, and at the back your 3 stacked boards, if they had no screen and only one stacked board like in old first etha and first eteks 1-4, you could save very huge amount of space like 1/2 inch or more and combined with small but powerfull lithium battery maybe a little more

@@matwey967 every engineer is able to work out something after initial concept and designs. Just takes time , more research, development and viola changes made.