# Dankung 20/40



## ruthiexxxx

I've just had chance to try these for the first time (thanks very much Leon !) and find them wonderfully lively.

I've had to go back to half butterfly to avoid shortening the tubes but they seem to perform really well with 16mm lead and even quite creditably (going by the impact noise!) with the 38 gramme ovals. M10 hexnuts are very zippy indeed.

I was wondering whether I could keep the tubes more together to stop tangling by using a couple of little rubber 'O' rings on either side. Not tight enough to constrict the tubes, just to keep them more or less together. That wouldn't reduce tube life or impair performance would it?


----------



## GrayWolf

I've seen MJ do that on at least one set of tubes. It might have been for the world record attempt. I can't remember what he used, but it may have been theraband black tied just tight enough to keep them together. I need to find this info myself as I now have a dedicated speed shooter and want to keep the bands from tangling.

By the way, that is one awesome looking shooter.

Todd


----------



## ruthiexxxx

Thanks Todd 

I think I am going to have to shorten the tubes and maybe change it to a ringshooter rather than the short TTB tabs. I've just had my first fork hit in ages and I think I'm just having to reach back further than I feel safe for aiming


----------



## ruthiexxxx

Incidentally I stopped using TBB because of the sheer volume of rubber needed and its propensity for tangling. Four broad layers of it gave me one nasty RTS and one very scary one. The rubber 'O' rings would have prevented that I think.


----------



## GrayWolf

Safety first!! Especially with all the power you have there. the o ring might still be a good idea. If you get a knot in all that tubing, it could be hours before you get it untangled .


----------



## ruthiexxxx

yes...not exactly condusive to rapid reloading !


----------



## Dayhiker

20-40 is nice, but 4-strand is enough for me. I don't know which I like better between it and 1842?


----------



## JetBlack

Dayhiker said:


> 20-40 is nice, but 4-strand is enough for me. I don't know which I like better between it and 1842?


Id say 2040 as 1842 is slower than 1745 and single 2040s are faster than single 1842s ( with matched ammo ). At least thats what I've experienced. Now wheres Henrys reply?


----------



## Henry the Hermit

JetBlack said:


> Dayhiker said:
> 
> 
> 
> 20-40 is nice, but 4-strand is enough for me. I don't know which I like better between it and 1842?
> 
> 
> 
> Id say 2040 as 1842 is slower than 1745 and single 2040s are faster than single 1842s ( with matched ammo ). At least thats what I've experienced. Now wheres Henrys reply?
Click to expand...

 I found in my tests, that in terms of absolute speed, 2040 is faster than 1842 and 1842 is faster than 1745. As ammo weight increased, I reached a point where 1842 overtook 2040, and eventually 1745 became faster than 1842. Your obxervations are netirely consistent with the many variables involved.


----------



## squirrel squasher

Henry in Panama said:


> JetBlack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dayhiker said:
> 
> 
> 
> 20-40 is nice, but 4-strand is enough for me. I don't know which I like better between it and 1842?
> 
> 
> 
> Id say 2040 as 1842 is slower than 1745 and single 2040s are faster than single 1842s ( with matched ammo ). At least thats what I've experienced. Now wheres Henrys reply?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I found in my tests, that in terms of absolute speed, 2040 is faster than 1842 and 1842 is faster than 1745. As ammo weight increased, I reached a point where 1842 overtook 2040, and eventually 1745 became faster than 1842. Your obxervations are netirely consistent with the many variables involved.
Click to expand...

So1745 is the strongest?
Or am I confused


----------



## JetBlack

Well it depends on what you're shooting, for me at least 38 caliber with 2040s,,716 with single 1745s and half inch with looped 1745 or single 2050s. the best way to explain this is like comparing a truck to a sports car, Ferraris going to beat an 18 wheeler all day unless you drop 10000 pounds in it which is nothing to the truck, is going to be going roughly the same speed with a Ferrari she doesn't have the power to push that much weight and maintain high speeds. so even though the heavier tube is slower it's not going to be as affected by the weight increase but the lighter tube will therefore becoming slower than the heavier tubing. that's the point Henry's talking about. to lite you get hand slaps, too heavy you get lobs and need to go bigger. you always want to go as light as possible in my opinion. hope this made a little bit of sense


----------



## wombat

ruthiexxxx said:


> I've just had chance to try these for the first time (thanks very much Leon !) and find them wonderfully lively.
> 
> I've had to go back to half butterfly to avoid shortening the tubes but they seem to perform really well with 16mm lead and even quite creditably (going by the impact noise!) with the 38 gramme ovals. M10 hexnuts are very zippy indeed.
> 
> I was wondering whether I could keep the tubes more together to stop tangling by using a couple of little rubber 'O' rings on either side. Not tight enough to constrict the tubes, just to keep them more or less together. That wouldn't reduce tube life or impair performance would it?


I've had good results with the o ring on two bands, never tried it with four, but it's worth a try! The secret is to just let the o ring go where it wants to. i.e. one minute it will be at the pouch end and the next it will be by the forks.


----------



## Henry the Hermit

squirrel squasher said:


> Henry in Panama said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JetBlack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dayhiker said:
> 
> 
> 
> 20-40 is nice, but 4-strand is enough for me. I don't know which I like better between it and 1842?
> 
> 
> 
> Id say 2040 as 1842 is slower than 1745 and single 2040s are faster than single 1842s ( with matched ammo ). At least thats what I've experienced. Now wheres Henrys reply?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I found in my tests, that in terms of absolute speed, 2040 is faster than 1842 and 1842 is faster than 1745. As ammo weight increased, I reached a point where 1842 overtook 2040, and eventually 1745 became faster than 1842. Your obxervations are netirely consistent with the many variables involved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So1745 is the strongest?
> Or am I confused
Click to expand...

Yes, 1745 is the strongest of the three, but you will have to go pretty heavy on ammo to realize the extra power. JetBlack explained it pretty well.


----------



## squirrel squasher

Henry in Panama said:


> squirrel squasher said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Henry in Panama said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JetBlack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dayhiker said:
> 
> 
> 
> 20-40 is nice, but 4-strand is enough for me. I don't know which I like better between it and 1842?
> 
> 
> 
> Id say 2040 as 1842 is slower than 1745 and single 2040s are faster than single 1842s ( with matched ammo ). At least thats what I've experienced. Now wheres Henrys reply?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I found in my tests, that in terms of absolute speed, 2040 is faster than 1842 and 1842 is faster than 1745. As ammo weight increased, I reached a point where 1842 overtook 2040, and eventually 1745 became faster than 1842. Your obxervations are netirely consistent with the many variables involved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So1745 is the strongest?
> Or am I confused
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, 1745 is the strongest of the three, but you will have to go pretty heavy on ammo to realize the extra power. JetBlack explained it pretty well.
Click to expand...

Now I get it thank you both


----------



## Dayhiker

17-45 wrecked my wrist and broke my heart. :violin:


----------



## M.J

I prefer 2040s for regular ammo (mostly 7/16" steel) but if I had to narrow it down to the best set of bands for pretty much any occasion I would take looped 1842s. They'll shoot 3/8" if you insist, will shoot .50cal lead if you need them to, don't draw too heavy to shoot every day and you can run them a little long so they last forever.


----------



## HarryBee

To hold tubes together I use a strip of thin TB or similar in the wrap and tuck method as used for tying at the pouch. Works fine. Harry


----------



## ruthiexxxx

HarryBee said:


> To hold tubes together I use a strip of thin TB or similar in the wrap and tuck method as used for tying at the pouch. Works fine. Harry


I was hoping to keep them together loosely to avoid chafing but if you've had no problem with this then I'll give it a go. Thanks


----------



## Tube_Shooter

@ ruttie maybe something like these would work better

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/100-Rubber-Bands-Doll-Hair-Dog-Grooming-Bows-1-4-5-0-oz-/200320886073?pt=Dog_Clothing&hash=item2ea40e2539


----------



## ruthiexxxx

Tube_Shooter said:


> @ ruttie maybe something like these would work better
> 
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/100-Rubber-Bands-Doll-Hair-Dog-Grooming-Bows-1-4-5-0-oz-/200320886073?pt=Dog_Clothing&hash=item2ea40e2539


Thank you...those look promising. I think I'm going to up the 20/40 to 5 a side so it becomes even more necessary !


----------



## Tube_Shooter

ruthiexxxx said:


> Tube_Shooter said:
> 
> 
> 
> @ ruttie maybe something like these would work better
> 
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/100-Rubber-Bands-Doll-Hair-Dog-Grooming-Bows-1-4-5-0-oz-/200320886073?pt=Dog_Clothing&hash=item2ea40e2539
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you...those look promising. I think I'm going to up the 20/40 to 5 a side so it becomes even more necessary !
Click to expand...

Yes you would definitely need something to tame the tangle,I find it annoying with just two a side :banghead:


----------



## ruthiexxxx

Tube_Shooter said:


> ruthiexxxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tube_Shooter said:
> 
> 
> 
> @ ruttie maybe something like these would work better
> 
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/100-Rubber-Bands-Doll-Hair-Dog-Grooming-Bows-1-4-5-0-oz-/200320886073?pt=Dog_Clothing&hash=item2ea40e2539
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you...those look promising. I think I'm going to up the 20/40 to 5 a side so it becomes even more necessary !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> and I suspect tangles of that sort to be a source of RTS...and I REALLY don't like those!
> Yes you would definitely need something to tame the tangle,I find it annoying with just two a side :banghead:
Click to expand...


----------



## libel

I think those o-rings will increase your problems. Be careful when you try them out and come back with the results.


----------



## ruthiexxxx

libel said:


> I think those o-rings will increase your problems. Be careful when you try them out and come back with the results.


will do.


----------



## ruthiexxxx

ruthiexxxx said:


> libel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think those o-rings will increase your problems. Be careful when you try them out and come back with the results.
> 
> 
> 
> will do.
Click to expand...

Well the 'O' rings do help. I upped the 20/40 to 6 a side and without the 'O' rings it really was a mess of spaghetti! With them it's fine. They do tend to migrate towards the pouch so need repositioning frequently. Perhaps if I used a smaller size...


----------



## Tube_Shooter

Are you using more than one o ring a side? or are the floaters in my eyes adding a couple? :rofl: I was thinking one a side would tame the tangle :iono:


----------



## ruthiexxxx

Tube_Shooter said:


> Are you using more than one o ring a side? or are the floaters in my eyes adding a couple? :rofl: I was thinking one a side would tame the tangle :iono:


I put two on a side. It shoots very well...but, to be honest, I prefer doubled 50/80s. As far as tubes go I think the 50/80s are the best performing I have tried so far....and less messy!


----------



## Tube_Shooter

ruthiexxxx said:


> Tube_Shooter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you using more than one o ring a side? or are the floaters in my eyes adding a couple? :rofl: I was thinking one a side would tame the tangle :iono:
> 
> 
> 
> I put two on a side. It shoots very well...but, to be honest, I prefer doubled 50/80s. As far as tubes go I think the 50/80s are the best performing I have tried so far....and less messy!
Click to expand...

For arrows that's what I would use I mostly target shoot using 9.5mm so all that rubber would be overkill


----------



## wombat

ruthiexxxx said:


> ruthiexxxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> libel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think those o-rings will increase your problems. Be careful when you try them out and come back with the results.
> 
> 
> 
> will do.rands
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well the 'O' rings do help. I upped the 20/40 to 6 a side and without the 'O' rings it really was a mess of spaghetti! With them it's fine. They do tend to migrate towards the pouch so need repositioning frequently. Perhaps if I used a smaller size...
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if you need "larger" ones rather smaller ones? admittedly I only used them on two strands, but found they floated! I never had to reposition them, one time they were at the fork and the next at the pouch??


----------



## libel

The o-ring are not a universal fix. I've tried them myself and they work on some setups and not on others. On some instances they get the two sides to behave the same while on others they cause more problems than they solve. In general, I think it's another level of unnecessary complexity.


----------



## JetBlack

Just use cuffs from tubing, sometime s turning inside out helps grip too


----------



## JetBlack

Ok I officially fell in love with these, My draw is around 50 inches and with singles they rip 7/16 steel to my surprise and looped same goes for 50. cal steel. I like the versatility of these. Wish I could get a chrony reading of single 1745 vs 2040. I asked a buddy to chrony this however if someone else has please post results. Ordering some very soon.


----------



## Aussie Allan In Thailand

Generally speaking Jetblack the 1745, will be faster for the lighter ammo; but the 20/40, 30/60 will handle the heavier ammo better. However my Dankung Alien model has a 4 tube pouch for 17/45's, along with my looped 30/60's; and man that gets up to 15 gram ammo moving really fast.

Myself besides the flats in my signature block; I use mostly looped 30/60, but also have made up ready to clip on looped 40/70 tube sets.

I am awaiting proper Chronograph tests of these verses the flats I use.
However, I expect the flats to be faster, but the tubes to be far better longevity wise. Also the tubes are fast enough, that the trajectory for my heavy ammo, is so close to exactly the same, that any difference is inconsequential, out to 20 meters.

Cheers Allan


----------



## JetBlack

I used to think I need 8 piece because that's what the Chinese use for half inch steel. but they(most) have much shorter draws than I do so prefer to generate power from shorter heavier pull. with looped 24 s given time to accelerate feels like its getting some pretty good speed judging from the damage im doing. then I noticed bill killed that Ginny foul with a similar set up in his draw pretty damn long too.


----------



## S.S. sLinGeR

Sorry about the crappy photo. I picked these up at Home Depot. I got them for looped tubes. so you may need a slightly bigger ring but they have a ton of sizes.


----------

