Olympos 200 -A B C, irregular grade B and their modification

[DaveG]

Dave do you think these 200 ABC airbrushes, if they are at their best, perhaps with a replacement nozzle for the 771 or C1 and a homemade nozzle cup with an inner tube, will be able to approach the micron SP or MP series airbrushes or even the micron?

nope.

 

[Mitya Ka]

nope.

Thanks for the reply! Why not? At least on HP-A(B)?

 

[DaveG]

I was thinking I should have expanded on that a little - I should have said that whether or not their actual performance approaches that of a true Micron has little bearing on how you feel using one. For example, the brushes I feel I do the best work with are the Iwata HP-B (and its variations) or a Richpen 212B. Micron or not, their performance matches my style of use as well, if not better than anything else I use. Under a microscope my CM-SB Takumi may produce finer results - but, to my hand and eye - while in use my HP-B feels like it is doing a better job (for me).

To work like a Micron, the air inside the brush needs to be handled like a Micron. The 200a/b/c could approach that performance if and only if the air was diffused and evenly spread down at the nozzle post base - where the single air channel is. I would imagine there is more turbulence inside the base of the nozzle cap on the 200 than the SP, so that too would be something that needed to be overcome. Would it be worth it? Only if you were comfortable using the brush...

 

[Mitya Ka]

I was thinking I should have expanded on that a little - I should have said that whether or not their actual performance approaches that of a true Micron has little bearing on how you feel using one. For example, the brushes I feel I do the best work with are the Iwata HP-B (and its variations) or a Richpen 212B. Micron or not, their performance matches my style of use as well, if not better than anything else I use. Under a microscope my CM-SB Takumi may produce finer results - but, to my hand and eye - while in use my HP-B feels like it is doing a better job (for me).

To work like a Micron, the air inside the brush needs to be handled like a Micron. The 200a/b/c could approach that performance if and only if the air was diffused and evenly spread down at the nozzle post base - where the single air channel is. I would imagine there is more turbulence inside the base of the nozzle cap on the 200 than the SP, so that too would be something that needed to be overcome. Would it be worth it? Only if you were comfortable using the brush...

Thanks for the detailed reply. Yes individual preference of how brushes work plays a key role in this issue. I like the way my 289 and 270 brushes work with the Iwata HP-A I can't make friends with yet, it requires more dilution and/or more pressure (for me), but I like the performance of the 771 and CM-SB even more so I'm looking for similar characteristics in other brushes.
Yes, the 200a/b/c has one air outlet from the brush, unlike the micron (there are 3), and in the micron the air is more evenly distributed through the center tube. Also in the micron, that tube has a smaller inner diameter and length, which limits turbolence more. The only option I see now to improve the performance of the 200a/b/c brush is to reduce the inner diameter of this tube as much as possible, and to reduce to +/- critical values the distance between the nozzle and the nozzle cup (which is an extension of this tube). You correctly asked if it's worth it, but no one will know until they try it. This question is most likely dominated by a Game of Turner

 

[Mitya Ka]

Made the following modifications to the Olympos 200B brush. I machined a copper washer with three holes that centre the air flow and also the volume of the washer reduces the internal space of the nozzle cup.
The nozzle was further polished on the inside and also centred. The needle was replaced with a .15 V2 H&S. Installed nozzle cup RichPen 112A/B.
This brush is working very well, it makes very fine lines on par with micron lines, but works at higher pressure than Micron, but it is more detailed than HP-A/B.
In the testing process...

 

[ausf]

Wow, some great info here.

Bear with for a second, am I to understand I can get better performance from my 200A if I take the nozzle cap and shorten it, which I can achieve by carefully sanding or filing down the back, allowing it to sit closer to the body?

That and I can use a H&S .15mm needle from my CR plus?

 

[Mitya Ka]

Wow, some great info here.

Bear with for a second, am I to understand I can get better performance from my 200A if I take the nozzle cap and shorten it, which I can achieve by carefully sanding or filing down the back, allowing it to sit closer to the body?

That and I can use a H&S .15mm needle from my CR plus?

Yes you can remove a few hundredths of a millimeter from the nozzle cup, maybe it will improve the performance, but you can't go wrong here, you only have one nozzle cup. It is better to put nozzle cup from Iwata HP-A/B (not plus), Creos 270, RichPen 112A/B. and see what suits you, and keep the original nozzle cup for comparison. I also recommend polishing the inside of the nozzle. I have an H&S .15 V2 needle installed.

 

[DaveG]

I got better results switching out the nozzle cap vs. trying to modify one. I think I have one that is no longer available (HP-62) - but thee HP-A/B (not plus) cap is a good alternative.

 

[Mitya Ka]

which I can achieve by carefully sanding or filing down the back, allowing it to sit closer to the body?

You will reduce the distance between the nozzle and the nozzle cap, the outlet airflow will work differently, the airbrush will be able to push the paint at a lower pressure. A lot will depend on your airbrush handling habits and personal preferences.

 

[DaveG]

I had to go back and refresh my memory - been a lot of brushes between these and today . I went through a lot of configurations with these when I got them. They were 200B irregulars with .18 nozzle/needle combos as delivered. As pictured here the top one is set up with an Iwata .2 nozzle/needle and HP-B+ nozzle cap. The bottom uses a .18 Micron (or PS771) nozzle and needle combo with a HP-62B nozzle cap. The exit bore on this cap is @0.002" smaller than the HP-A/B cap. I was very satisfied with both of these vs. the as delivered performance of the Olympos .18 nozzle/needle combo.

 

[Mitya Ka]

I had to go back and refresh my memory - been a lot of brushes between these and today . I went through a lot of configurations with these when I got them. They were 200B irregulars with .18 nozzle/needle combos as delivered. As pictured here the top one is set up with an Iwata .2 nozzle/needle and HP-B+ nozzle cap. The bottom uses a .18 Micron (or PS771) nozzle and needle combo with a HP-62B nozzle cap. The exit bore on this cap is @0.002" smaller than the HP-A/B cap. I was very satisfied with both of these vs. the as delivered performance of the Olympos .18 nozzle/needle combo.

View attachment 88071

I currently have the nozzle from the 771 and the nozzle cup from the Apollo 112A/B on my 200C and it's a very good bundle for me at the moment, but I'll be experimenting some more. Great idea to install the handle from the Chinese brush, now it's more like a Micron

 

[Mitya Ka]

The exit bore on this cap is @0.002" smaller than the HP-A/B cap.

Less than 50 microns is a very good result, too bad the HP-62 nozzle cup is no longer available. It is likely that this brush atomizes very well at lower pressures and comes close to Micron in terms of performance.

 

[tatocorvette]

I am really trying to follow. I have read this thread more than once trying to fully understand it but I may fail this course's test.

 

[JackEb]

I am really trying to follow. I have read this thread more than once trying to fully understand it but I may fail this course's test.

Me too, but I do enjoy reading these posts

 

[DaveG]

the Iwata HP-A I can't make friends with yet, it requires more dilution and/or more pressure (for me)

If you have a v2 .2 H&S needle, you may give that a try in your HP-A (not the .15 - taper is very different). I have one in a HP-BH that I have been using for a few years now. Might have given up the finest of details, but the versatility and prolonged use without interrupted paint flow more than makes up for it.

 

[Mitya Ka]

If you have a v2 .2 H&S needle, you may give that a try in your HP-A (not the .15 - taper is very different). I have one in a HP-BH that I have been using for a few years now. Might have given up the finest of details, but the versatility and prolonged use without interrupted paint flow more than makes up for it.

Thanks for the idea, I have a .2 V2, I'll check it out.

 

[ausf]

Yes you can remove a few hundredths of a millimeter from the nozzle cup, maybe it will improve the performance, but you can't go wrong here, you only have one nozzle cup. It is better to put nozzle cup from Iwata HP-A/B (not plus), Creos 270, RichPen 112A/B. and see what suits you, and keep the original nozzle cup for comparison. I also recommend polishing the inside of the nozzle. I have an H&S .15 V2 needle installed.

Thanks. On hand I have a HP-BC2 (from 1982) and a HP-AH. I'll gently try out those cups.

Tonight I smoothed out the 200's trigger and polished the needle. It was immediately better, but still a bit temperamental over time. I've noticed I can get a very fine line further away from the surface than my others, but the trigger response starts very late.

 

[Mitya Ka]

Thanks. On hand I have a HP-BC2 (from 1982) and a HP-AH. I'll gently try out those cups.

Tonight I smoothed out the 200's trigger and polished the needle. It was immediately better, but still a bit temperamental over time. I've noticed I can get a very fine line further away from the surface than my others, but the trigger response starts very late.

Dilute the paint and/or increase the pressure in the compressor. The information in this post will help you achieve the best results.

 

[Mitya Ka]

Photographs taken under a microscope. Visual comparative characterization of the interaction between nozzle cup and nozzle of different configurations on Olympos 200 airbrushes.

 

[Mitya Ka]

Photographs taken under a microscope. Visual comparative characterization of the interaction between nozzle cup and nozzle of different configurations on Olympos 200 airbrushes.

Note the large distance between nozzle and nozzle cap in the standard assembly (bottom right photo) and in the assembly with the 771 nozzle and RichPen cap this distance is reduced. Also note the wall thickness of the 771 and Olympos .18/ nozzles.