Who ever reported to this forum from Toronto tell me which TRU did u go to were is it?

assuming you meant me.....

the TRU in question was the one at Bathurst and Steeles. I also just got back from the TRU in Newmarket (Upper Canada Mall) and they had all of the ones I mentioned PLUS the 3B. So, if Illadar is correct (regarding the pattern of distribution form West to East), I guess the BIg Bad Bow has officially arrived in our neck of the woods.

OK I am Tired of people on this site that live in America I ENVY you guys so much all your stores are up to date with the finest firearms(nerf guns). Me I live in Toronto and I am tired of walking into a common toystore
(toys toys toys, Toys R us) And they don't have Jacksquat.
Is there anybody in Toronto or north york area that knows a good nerf retailer?

I live in the philippines. Seriously, you shouldn't be complaining.

rock on! I'm Filipino too. Mabuhay! I live in Canada though. what kind of blasters are available to you there?

Hahahahaha, that's cute.

Lot's of girls tell me I'm that.
to below: 10 posts in a day is enough? I'll try to edit, but for me that's less than 1 post an hour, well maybe 3 because I'm only on the net usually an hour, but today I went on a 4 hour rampage, I guess it got out of control. I have an average of 1.1 posts a day

You talk back to an admin like that and it'll turn into 0.0, you understand me?

Relevant to the conversation, Canada sucks. You guys don't even know how to make a cheese burger.

Guns kick ass. I own three guns. I've never killed anyone. Even if I did I wouldn't use a gun. To begin with there is too much evidence. They'll just match up the bullet, case solved. Besides, guns aren't cheap. Neither is ammo. There are far more cost efficient ways to commit murder. Besides, I'd look funny shooting a guy with a 22.

Florida sucks. Half of it is back assed southern, half of it is New Isreal and all of it is under attack by hurricanes.

Past that, I just want you Canadians to understand that A. You're not really a country, B. You only exist because we like you and you have nothing and C. you don't know what bacon is.

God help you if you ever strike oil.

Talio.

if Canada sucks then the US sucks more (ok, I'm being a bit juvenile).

But I mean George W? And I don't know what is more disturbing, the fact that the guy who lost the election became president OR the fact that after all he's done he gets re-elected (?)

OK I am Tired of people on this site that live in America I ENVY you guys so much all your stores are up to date with the finest firearms(nerf guns). Me I live in Toronto and I am tired of walking into a common toystore
(toys toys toys, Toys R us) And they don't have Jacksquat.
Is there anybody in Toronto or north york area that knows a good nerf retailer?

I'm in the TO area as well. Though I too get the impression we have less selection, I think there's still a wide range of stuff you can get around here. More than enough to keep me busy trying to mod stuff.

I have even recently seen some of the more elusive blasters at a few of my local TRUs. At one of the better stocked ones, I saw the Firefly, the Dart Tag and the AT3k (twin pack). Most of the TRUs in the TO area seem to have RF20, Mav, N-Strike Unity and NFs consistently in stock. Some also have the Lanard stuff (e.g. Blast Bazooka). I have yet to spot a BBB though.

How about Wal Marts? Though almost all seem to be devoid of NERF brand blasters except for the Tech Target, they typically have the whole line of Buzz Bee blasters and some of the Lanards (Max Shot and BB - no First shot or Triple Shot). Just by luck, I managed to find a couple of old AT2ks and a Lanard Speed Loader a few months ago.

Sears and Zellers often also carry the NF and the Mav.


And my take on living in Canada vs. the US of A:
- true, we do generally have a lower crime rate in Canada but also a way smaller population; and gun crime has been popping up an awful lot in Toronto in the past few years with no signs of slowing
- I don't know whether firearms in the US or Canada are the cause of crime or are merely the symptom - but I'm glad that most Canadians don't own them
- the safest part about living in this great country of ours is not the absence of guns, but rather the existence of FREE healthcare

First off - for the most part, I'm not so concerned with the ranges people post because, the way people measure ranges is so subjective, absolute ranges reported mean pretty much jack-shit. Not to mention that some just outright lie.

In principle, I like the fact that Badger is trying to 'standardize' ways to measure ranges but, despite his best intentions, the measurement is not done in a way that is easy to duplicate anyway.

The following problems make comparisons difficult:
- various darts were used
- performance depends on air temperature/pressure (as Badger alludes to)
- height/angle is not exactly controlled (e.g. "steadying with both hands" is hardly objective)
- not to mention that better summary statistics are required to make a fair assessment - its not just the 'average distance" but also the 'variance' in ranges that determines performance
- comparison to the modded max shot makes some sense in terms of allowing Badger to get a feel but that doesn't provide much objective information (e.g. Badger's mod is not identical to another person's mod). In actuality (this will sound counterintuitive at first) one should use an unmodded blaster and stock darts as a reference. For example, if Badger compared PN's NF ranges to a stock NF firing stock darts (so long as the testing for both blasters was done at the same temperature/height/angle), then this would provide a more objective comparison because, I anyone could make a similar comparison between their own mod and a stock NF/darts.
That is, if I knew my mod shot 15% (on average) further than a stock NF with stock darts (at any given temperature) but Badger's mod shot 20% further than a stock NF, then I'd know Badger's mod gets better ranges than mine. This would be true regardless of whether or not we test fired at different temperature/pressure etc. (even if my ABSOLUTE ranges were higher)


I'll illustrate with a fake dataset:


Assume two nerfers (Joe and Schmoe) live in very diferent climates. Joe lives in a place where it is hot and humid. Schmoe lives in a place that is cool and dry. Both agree to test their modded NFs against a stock NF, firing stock darts at the same height/angle.

Joe's ranges:

modded NF:
67'
59'
55'
57'
60'

AVERAGE = 59.6'
STANDARD DEVIATION = 4.56'


stock NF:
45'
44'
40'
41'
43'

AVERAGE = 42.6'
STANDARD DEVIATION = 2.07'

_____


Schmoe's ranges:

modded NF:
81'
80'
65'
77'
88'

AVERAGE = 78.2'
STANDARD DEVIATION = 8.41'


stock NF:
77'
75'
67'
69'
70'

AVERAGE = 71.6'
STANDARD DEVIATION = 4.22'

------


so who's mod is better? I'd say that Joe's is better (despite having lower ABSOLUTE ranges - this is probably accounted for by the climate he lives/nerfs in). Joe's mod improved the range of a stock NF by 39.9% while Schmoe's mod improved the range of a stock NF by only 9.2%. Furthermore, the standard deviation of Joe's ranges (4.56') are about half of the ranges found by Schmoe (8.41'), suggesting that Joe's mod is also more consistent.

There are some simple statistical tests that could even be applied to such comparisons but I suspect that would be beyond the scope of the 'average' nerfer - but my only point is that there ARE ways to perform standardized tests of mods (not that I think anyone would ever implement this). I am also aware of the conundrum - who the hell would mod something to fire stock darts!!!

Again, my point is that if people want ways to compare the efficacy of their mods, there ARE ways! But if you won't do it right, then DON'T bother claiming ranges because they are pretty much meaningless (the way that people currently do it anyway). Besides, everyone who nerfs knows that the guy pulling the trigger is more important than the 'range' of the blaster. And anyone who mods, knows that a good mod is based on alot of things and the effectiveness of the mod is based on whether it achieves the desired SUBJECTIVE goal.

This is not to say that Badger's assessment is not a valuable 'review'. In fact, I think his comments regarding its efficacy in a war (DCNO), while subjective, is very informative. But it clearly does not provide a means for OBJECTIVE assessment things like ranges.



There is way too much talk of ranges on the NIC - sorry I just couldn't resist pointing out how ridiculous it is to see thread after thread (or flame after flame) about this shit ........



EDIT: 100th post !?!

In reply to Precision Nerfer:

quoting Precision Nerfer:
"[/quote]
Um, I would say "schmoe" is a liar... really man, no one is that bad."

- you missed the point - this (as I said) is an example using fake data. There are many plausibile reasons 'Joe' and 'Schmoe' could get different results (e.g. if each uses a slightly different standard or if fired under different ambient temperature) without having to invoke lying. Get outside, measure stuff. You'll see its an empircal truism that virtually everything exhibits alot of variation- figuring out 'why' is the trick.
But providing that both nerfers stick to their own standard while firing both the stock and the modded NF, useful (objective comparisons can be made).


quoting Precision Nerfer:
"Um, why should we mod then? Think about it. If we aren't doing it right now, then why even do a modification? "

- well, believe it or not, some people actually mod because they think it is fun and, as adjudged by them, it improves the quality of their nerfing experience. And they don't care about ranges in terms of somebody else's estimation.


quoting Precision Nerfer:
"It might get 30 feet less then what is said! "

- apparently.


quoting Precision Nerfer:
If we are not going to claim range, what's to tell a good mod from a great one?"

-this is exactly my point; you can't tell a good one if everyone measures things differently


quoting Precision Nerfer:
":Estimation from the mods done?"

- that would be a start. I don't know how other people measure things but I know what my NF or Max Shot perform like. A comparison to those mean more to me than distances. But like I said, not every one does the same mods but EVERYONE has fired their blasters stock (or have access to stock blasters).

quoting Precision Nerfer:
"We have to give at least a general range claim or else we just WON'T bother making a mod write up...."

- you might think so but I disagree. I've learned alot over the years on this site and it had nothing to do with ranges. Everyone who mods probably knows that writeups are always useful (ad that has nothing to do with posted ranges) and, similarly, many have learned that is is also best to trust your own instinct and know-how when it comes to deciding on what mods to do.

quoting Precision Nerfer:
"it would be meaningless without ranges."
- I think that is a pretty short-sighted view of modding/nerfing. I think posting the ranges as people have is the thing that is meaningless.

people on the NIC get into verbal wars about shit like ranges. If you don't believe it, fine - disscout the person who you think is lying or




In reply to Badger:

I'm not sure why you seem to take offense to my comments but you are, of course entitled to a rebuttal (and of course, I will doe the same).


quoting Badger:
"Hey Ambushbug, I think you took this topic the wrong way. I am not trying to "standardize" how one would test the ranges of a modified blaster, rather, I was simply giving my evaluation of his mod so as to dismiss all of the constant
flaming that was occuring every time PN talked about it."

- I suppose you're right - your main point was not standardization. So I guess I misunderstood. However, you seem to have also misunderstood my point. My point was not to 'attack' your approach to reviewing a blaster to evaluate PN's claims. As I said, it is valuable. I am really getting at the issue of "range testing" in standardized way and, while my comment may have been a bit tangental, it is just a general reaction to the issue of 'proving' ranges.


quoting Badger:
"Now I am going to pick apart your assessment of why my testing was not done in a way to be easily duplicated, whereas it is easy to replicate my results and my testing styles if one is careful and watchful of what they do.
[quote]various darts were used[/quote]
Two, not various, darts were used. PN supplied the darts that he made for the gun, which were CDTS (they are not considered stock anymore as they have an altered tip). The stefans were also used to get a view of distances when the gun fires the most commonly used type of ammo for a modified gun."

- as I said in the original post, it is understandable that modded blasters/darts were used in the review of PN's NF, blaster and dart were designed for one another. But the method of evaluation doesn't allow someone (who doesn't have the same modded blaster stefans) to have any information independent of your review.


quoting Badger:
"[quote]performance depends on air temperature/pressure (as Badger alludes to)[/quote]
Where did I ever mention pressure? I also never mentioned air temperature, rather I was referring to ambient temperature. I have seen marked changes in performance in springers when they are subjected to long periods in both hot and cold climates. There was no eulding."

- I guess I misunderstood here too. I thought you were implicitly referring to factors (temperature/pressure etc.) that chemists and physicists (or engineers) have shown to influence all physical properties/measurement. Why would temperature & air pressure/density not be relevant to "ambient" condiitions? I though that was what you meant in the comment regarding Which is why you made the comment regarding playing "up in the mountains (well above 2000 feet) on a very hot and dry day" Surely alot of these factors probably have relatively small effects for processes at the velocities we are interested in but from the standpoint of making inferences, this is worth serious consideration.


quoting Badger:
"[quote]height/angle is not exactly controlled (e.g. "steadying with both hands" is hardly objective)[/quote]
I am 6'1" in height holding the gun at eye-level, so at a level of 5'7". As for the angle and your statement that the angle is not exactly controlled, once again, I am not developing a standard for testing, but the angle was controlled. Unlike over 90% of the nerfers, I do have a good understanding of how to stabilize a gun to prevent recoil. A real firearm has alot of recoil due to the bullet being propelled by a gunpowder charge so the recoil can't all be prevented, while a Nerf blaster that has been modified has such a small amount of recoil in comparison that it could be steadied with just a small amount of effort. I am trained to use both handguns, rifles, and automatics and I am an expert marksman with all three as per the standards of the USAF, so I think I know how to fire a Nerf blaster and steady it to eliminate the recoil as well as to keep it at a level trajectory."

- I'm sure you do know how to fire a real gun (I don't, nor do as you say "90% of nerfers"). So what? I'm a scientist by profession who gets paid to be objective (and teach university students to be objective). Still so what? One needs neither firearms training or a PhD to be able to say that a handheld setup is not very precise.
And of course a nerf blaster doesn't fire like a real gun does (who said it did?). But that has nothing to do with precision/repeatability.


quoting Badger:
"[quote]comparison to the modded max shot[/quote]
This comparison was done simply to verify that the measurements were correct and to show that the NF was not shooting 100 feet or better. It was not so much meant as a comparison. More of a guide. I used it as a simple test to see if it was possible for the gun to fire 100 feet or not. Once it didn't meet or surpass my MaxShot in the range tests, I proceeded with the individual measurements of the NF's performance. Just to let you know, my MaxShot simply has the AR sawed off, but the original front cone that the AR was attached to is still there. A piece of 21/32" brass was rammed onto the internal airflow stem that is found under the front cone. This acted as a coupler for my style of barrels. I then rammed (literally) the cone back into place, disabled the safety that is inside the gun, and screwed it back together. The spring is stock as is the rest of the gun. My barrels use the same PETG that PN used in his NF. Yes it is a different class of blaster as opposed to the NF, but it was only used as a ruler for what 100 feet looks like."

"I also didn't do a distance breakdown as the shots from both my MaxShot and his NF were in a consistent range with a simple +/- 3' range of error or miscalculation. No one can completely eliminate human error."

- of course human error cannot be eliminated (and here, the "error" is not necessarily of human origin, darts perform differently too), that's why there is a whole branch of stuy called statistics


quoting Badger:
"There is no need for a breakdown unless one shot flies much farther or shorter than the rest."

- not true, the variance (not just outliers or "one flying much farther than the rest") is important for making objective assessment of differences between two things (e.g. range of blasters). One can only tell whether one fires 'significantly' farther than another by knowing what's a big difference and a small difference (based on the standard deviation, i.e. determines what is a little and what is alot). That's what statistical tests do: they judge whether a difference is a little or alot based on an objective (i.e. data-based) criterion.


On another note, I never tried to measure distances at DCNO as it was an outdoors event, it had just recently stopped raining prior to the start of the war, and it was quite windy. Any ranges measured there would have been subjective, but when you are surrounded by at least 6 other experienced nerfers who, like yourself, have seen what a gun that can shoot 100 feet should look like, and the gun you just fired doesn't perform as such, it isn't subjective anymore as it is verified by multiple experienced modders and players.

- I know you didn't measure ranges at DCNO - nor should you have. You have better things to do, like NERF. Yes, its nice to have other people around to observe the results but it does not affect the subjectivity (unless they all indepedently tested/measured ranges). I never said you were a liar (which the only thing bystanders can guard against), I just said the range testing was not objective (e.g we all do it slightly differently and, thus, are expected to get slightly different results).


In closing, you picked apart my style of evaluating the NF without having any knowledge of what my personal background was, my experiences, or my knowledge base.

- I'm not judging your experiences or your background or your opinions. I can accept these at face value. I'm just pointing out that there is alot of subjectivity involved that provides a bystander (e.g. one who hasn't actually fired PN's NF) little data that he/she could actually use to compare with blasters he/she HAS fired (which is what I thought on of the purposes of sharing this information was). As your signature says, "you're brutally honest". Great - so am I. Reviews and statistics are separate things. Like reading a car review oniine: half is the opinion of the person who got to test drive it and others are actual facts/numbers (e.g. 0 to 60 mph in ...)


I personally don't give a fuck about ranges either. If my MaxShot can hit a person that is running away from me into the woods and tag him in the back of the neck, it is good. If it is accurate enough to fire through a split tree and an opening in a bush that is only about 2" in diameter and hit someone, it is good. Some people are genuinely honest about their ranges. I take each person's word on a case-by-case basis.

-no argument there


- Anyway, I don't want to hijack this thread - but feel free to argue with me further (via PM).

hmmm, I assume you've never seen this:

http://nerfhaven.com...=mountain rifle



who needs a vest when you can block shots with your teeth?

Stefan Shotgun shells are merely theoretical, no one has ever done it and if they have, it didn't work well enough or was too complicated to be accepted by the community.

I thought it was just common knowledge in the community. I used to use them in short-range urban wars with any of my blasters using 1/2" adapters. It pretty much halves the range, but for a five-shot spread that ricochets to fill an alleyway, it's worth it.

Toss in more weight to each Stefan bit for more range... Keep in mind you won't find most of your shotgun darts afterwards, so I'd recommend not dedicating weights to their manufacture.

I think there might be some confusion here. Many have described shotgun 'rounds' as requested in Dark's original message. But I believe Talio was responding to Dark's message header asking about "shotgun SHELLS". I guess Ompa's description of the spare barrels method is the closest thing but I have no expertise in this area.

Couldn't the orange Buzz Bee shotgun-esque shells be modded to fire "shot"? Though both the Double Shot and RFR have pretty poor air volume, so its effectiveness may be limited.

Pretty much, the only real point to modding is making something cool yet practical for a war. By modifying a blaster to the point of it reaching its peak in awesomeness/practicability, it needs to be battle tested. Otherwise, it won't have a real purpose.

I disagree....partly. There are a few of us who seldom get to go to wars but for which modding is a creative outlet. Which, I think, means modding itself DOES serve a purpose even if it never gets used in a war. I do agree though, that the challenge is to mod something that is useful/cool/practical and that full realization/evaluation of a mod's utility can only be truly known after "battle-testing".

I don't see anything wrong with some individuals being primarily "research and development" types as long as that new inventions are shared with the community. Then, hopefully, somebody else can test whether the mod is practical.

I've played PB only a handful of times and I've never airsofted. Both are (sound like) pretty good fun but like a few others said, its alot easier and cheaper to mod nerf guns - which I'm starting to think I enjoy more than actually firing my guns. That means more cash for my many other sports/hobbies/recreation.

I don't think age has anything to do with it. I'm a 30 year old, married, PhD student with a social life who enjoys (and just discovered) nerf. And I'm not sure but I don't really recall many Nerf guns being around when I was 15. Maybe the bow n arrow.....

Slowing down the dart won't be a problem unless your string and reel are tight and slow. But if it's pretty loose then there won't be a difference in range.

seems like this would be very difficult to do. Anybody who's been fishing knows that without some decent resistance (usually weight), the line tends to tangle up in the reel or upon leaving it during casting. I imagine your average dart wouldn't be heavy enough to peel line out in a consistent way or without feeling the drag of the monofilament behind it. A heavy dart probably would but then range would suck majorly.

And who wants to wait for their dart to be reeled in while the enemy is peppering you with foam?

In any case, I'm only speculating but I remain to be convinced. Try it and show us some video.

I did not forget you, I simply couldn't find your mod. Sorry if that was insulting to you.

No worries. I didn't find it insulting at all. Just wanted Gho5t to be aware of it.

Pissbacon's http://nerfhaven.com...17&hl=bacon bow

Lukeinator's  http://nerfhaven.com...&hl=big bad bow

not to be a shameless self-promoter - actually, who am I kidding - I'm all about shameless self-promotion - but I've also posted a version of the Bacon Bow. Granted, the write up isn't as good as the original but its more along the lines of what Pat was describing (i.e. the "rear cocking" mechanism).

here's my version

So Speedloaders are at:
-Fred Meyers
-Walgreens
-HEB

And that 12 shot shotgun outdoors gun thingy is at:
-Gander Mountain
-Bass Pro Shops
-Any hunting store

I think i'll just go to Fred Meyers down in the states.

I got my speedloader from Wal Mart (Toronto area) - though personally, I don't think its too spectacular. With air restrictors (only) removed, I don't think it gets more than 30 feet.

Wow I just made a sorta stefan it is a stock dart with no head, hot glue, and a small metal tack in it. I put that in my nite finder (with about 15 small rubber bands) and actually pushed it in far (how does one push it in mor easily without using a ramrod?) It shot clear across my basement and actually started rising before it hit the oposite wall. I dont know why the darts it fires veer up after about 20 feet but they do. any advice?

I've also experimented with making darts from broken stock darts - probably most people have. I've got a few made using the hotglue/thumbtack method (adopted from somebody else's dart tips - was it Langley?). Although I wouldn't claim that these abruptly change direction as you suggest, I have noticed that they do carry alot farther than the original stock dart - but the accuracy is shit. I'm no physicist but my guess is that the modified darts are lighter (without the head), which contributes to slightly more distance (in lower-powered guns anyway)but the lack of weight also makes it more erratic in flight (more affected by air resistance/perturbations or imperfections in the dart). My NF has a bit of a recoil which tends to send shots a little high - I think this is effect becomes more apparent with these lighter darts.
But this is only conjecture.

In terms of advice, I'd say put a bit more weight on the tip and your darts will follow a straighter path (i.e. the momentum of the weighted tip will tend to overcome the other preturbing forces acting on the dart).

I saw a buzz bee double shot and i thought couldnt you just glue the shells in smoothly and not have to put the shells back in each time?

I don't think you could just glue the shells in (the blaster probably won't close properly) but there are a few mods around that do something similar to avoid the use of shells:

http://nerfhq.com/ph...ight=doube shot

yep - I modded it to fire micros - I tried a few things - currently its rocking a chap-stick barrel with brass extension (my own barrel concoction which I'll try to post soon). Gets pretty good range - I'd say over 70ft, level; even more when the barrel extension is on - but I haven't done an official range test]

The blaster is really easy to mod but and has a HUGE plunger. However, the spring is weak and the toy is pretty expensive.

Problem being I live in Canada. No AT2K's here.

By fluke, I stumbled upon two AT2Ks at Wal Mart in Toronto (in a clearance aisle - returns?)- sorry, both tanks are integrated into active guns. But if I recall correctly, the airtank in the BLUE SM3k is the same/similar as my AT2Ks. Again, I'm not sure whether you already have/can find an SM3k (I got mine at a thrift shop). Or even if you'd be willing to sacrifice a 3k.

Good luck.

This will be less than mindblowing. Let's face it, it doesn't take a rocket (missile? ) scientist to come up with this mod. I'm sure this has been done before but it appears that there aren't even pics of modded missilestorms around (at least on their own), let alone a writeup. Perhaps this will end up in the "vintage" section of the mod directory.... the copyright date imprinted on the turret says 1993! This thing is older than probably half of the members on this forum. Curiously, it also says that it was manufactured by Kenner (a division of Tonka toys) - I didn't even realize NERF wasn't always owned by Hasbro.


I picked up this blaster from my local thrift shop ($0.99) and other than a broken missile rod/peg, it worked (no missiles included).



I figured I'd take it home and have some fun. Normally, I'd open it up right away but it uses these peculiar screws with star-shaped (hexalobular?) recesses - for which I don't own a screwdriver. So this write-up really just documents a simple "external" treatment. If can open it up in the future, I'll add some pics and possibly some internal (e.g. airseal) mods.

But modding the barrels is easy enough - first, I hacked off the rods down the nubs on the turret.




Then I cut some CPVC into four 3" sections. I use 2" darts for my CPVC barrels but ofcourse you can use whatever lengths you like. The extra clearance was to accommodate the turret nubs (about 3/4") over which the barrels fit. A small bit (~3") of e-tape around each nub and the CPVC barrels fit tightly. Add some hotglue to secure the connections. And voila:




the ranges are not spectacular (probably not more than 40') and very variable. Since this is a trigger-less blaster (you pull back the blue handle to rotate the turret and then push forward rapidly to fire), the range depends on how hard/fast you push. Truth be told, I don't get very good results with my CPVC/dart setup - if I get around to picking up more brass, I'm going to replace the barrels.

I also bought this with other plans in mind (e.g. integrating the turret and cocking mechanism with a powerful spring gun) - so this may well be a temporary solution.

Anyhoo - enjoy!

When I load my Pump Shotgun the seal is so good that when I pump it the dart gets sucked back into the plunger tube. I thought about putting somehting in the way to stop it, but when I tried it just got stuck and the pressure was so great I couldn't finish cocking it. Any help would be awsome.

the same happens with mine - though that's a small price to pay for a good airseal (muzzle loading is alot easier than the removable barrel method). As you probably figured out, even if you can only half-cock the blaster, if you release the pump handle quickly, the half-cocked spring spits the dart back out.

If your dart/barrel fit is pretty tight (e.g. the dart doesn't slide all the way down due to gravity alone), then maybe a slightly longer barrel will make it easier to cock (more air volume required to suck the dart towards the plunger - though this might also mean alot of friction on the way out). I personally prefer a slightly looser dart/barrel fit (e.g. 9/16 brass works for my darts) and using plumber's goop, I jam up the back end (the one closest to the plunger) with about 2" of 17/32 brass and 0.5" of 16/32" PETG nested in that to keep darts from being sucked into the plunger. The setup makes it effectively a nested brass barrel - if you get it right, about 1.5" of the dart should lodge in the 17/32" brass section, maximizing air pressure and, thus, the force/velocity of the shot.

And you could make it so the NF fires before the SSPB, by making the wire longer. I do belive that would work.

No shit buddy - that's what everybody has been saying.....


Nice mod Nerfturtle! I might pick up a new NF and SSPB because of this. I did the old 'vertical' SSPB integration on an NF for someone else but I wasn't a big fan of the button either.

its not easy but I've done it for several of my mods (I have yet to get around to investing in a Dremel). I did this by drawing the rectangular breech on the brass and making many diagonal criss-crossing cuts (e.g. X's). From there, I slowly bent/pried of the triangular sections as needed and filed down the edges. This needs to be done carefully - you don't want to warp the brass tubing. Takes a long time but it is possible.

EDIT: crap - I should have told you there was more coming. "Follower" huh? Thanks, I'll remember that.


then I added the "guide" that allows the clip to slide intor the proper position- just the scrap PETG:


Again, this was for my BBBB so.... the actual guide - I glued it to the brass/orange barrel stub junction. Its lined up diametrically opposite from where the breech opening is:


and some re-inforcement:



As you can see, the darts stay put until you install the clip:


The clip is loaded in front of the breech (upper pic) - the PETG flexes enough to allow it to be pressed into place. The black "strap" clips on easily (it fits looser than the PETG but it still offers the right support). Then I slide the clip back over the breech (lower pic). The guide makes sure its in the right spot.


Here's the final product (loaded up):



Of course, the exact details of this setup are specific to this particular blaster but the idea behind it could be adapted to most breech systems. A plus with the CPVC advancing thing is that it is just the right diameter to fit in the breech (meaning it is pushing darts up until the very end) but not to allow the breech to clse over it. It effectively prevents me from re-cocking when I'm out of ammo - so the blaster tells me when I'm out. Another bonus, is that because I didn't glue the original barrel stub to the gun casing, it can still rotate around. Of course, being spring-fed, it works in any position. Also means that if my clip(s) are empty, I just pull off the clip, rotate the breech facing upwards and I can still access the breech for loading single darts manually (whcih I couldn't do with my old clip).

I still hate the spring that's in there but I'll get around to replacing it. Otherwise, though the clip works reasonably well.


Wel, not the Grand Unified Theory of Everything but I hope its useful to someone else.

I've been struggling with a satisfactory clip system for my version of the Bacon Bow. My original clip was gravity-fed but I wanted something spring-fed as I figure, the jiggling around of running/ducking/jumping would cause some complications for a gravity-fed clip (especially when half-empty).

I followed the basics of Ompa's clip mod but I also wanted to remedy the whole issue of having to keep a head count of darts to prevent the spring/dart advancing mechanism from getting accidentally chambered. Furthermore, the whole point of a clip-system for me was to have one that I could easily change/reload even on the run. That means having a mechanism that limits the advance of darts so the darts don't pop out by themselves.

Well, here's my attempt:


my darts are about 1.5" long so the cassette case option wasn't gonna do it for me. I found some of these boxes that hold photo slides (think vacation slides before PowerPoint was invented) in my office desk. You have to dremel/cut out a divider in it. Then cut out one (short) wall and glue the lid closed.
(this one's already been messed with)


then I made a spring out of two old air-restrictors (SM3K - I think), some craft foam (black) and a piece of CPVC for the barrel advancing (platform-like) thing


Here's a cross-section of that advancing thingy (hotglue was used to attach the spring to it):


Then I constructed my "dart-limiting" mechanism. I took some 5/8" PETG (I'm actually not sure if this is really PETG, its the stuff for home aquarium use - to extend suction tubes; its got a little bit of flex). I cut out a small section on the side destined to be the top (in RED marker) - keep this piece for later (for making the 'guide' -see below. This has to be narrower than the diameter of the darts so darts don't pop through it. Then I cout out a bit from the other side destined to be the bottom (in BLUE marker). The cut out has to be large enough to allow darts through, while still leaving enough to glue to the rectangular clip "box".



I found these 1/2" straps for piping at the hardware store:


Then I glued both the "limiter" and a strap to the box. It might be easier if you also install the spring beforehand - but it didn't matter for me.

I believe the Bow n Arrow is among the first of Nerf weapons - you've never seen it? There are numerous reviews/images out on the www.

Here are a few to get you started:

http://www.geocities...784/primary.htm

http://www.nerfcente...f/BownArrow.htm

Lanard also makes a bow (the Blast Bow):

http://www.flyingtoy...uk/lanardx.html

Since you're a LOTR fan, I imagine you're also aware of the Uruk-Hai crossbow? It would be cool if you could do some cosmetic work on the BnA to make it look like Legolas'

EDIT: hey, I just realized that there is a pic and review of the bow n arrow on nerfworld (under "Reviews")

good luck.

I still dont understand where you can get them or if they are still being sold... What the frick is TRU? I guess im not up to date on Nerf jargon...

TRU = toys R us

Where can you get this new BBB and how are they different from the old ones? Why isn't there a BBB mod on the modification page?

"old" depends on your own perception. For some of the folks here, who have been nerfing for years, the version you see in stores is new. According to this thread, the only real difference is the new air restrictor.

I don't know why there isn't one on the modfications page. Probably because you could easily find one on the mod write-up directory or by searching. Shit, there have been at least 2 or 3 BBB mods in this forum in the past week.

edit: crap, AssassinNF beat me to it.

Some of this was also articulated in a mod write-up a few months ago:

mustang six


In one person's opinion, it performs better than the Mav. But you be the judge - I just thought I'd point out the existing info.

Oh yeah I forgot the Duct Tape Strap idea.
And where do I reinforce in the RFR? I have no idea where the "plunger, catch" is. Please give me a tutorial preferably with pictures. Where do I get sheel metal? I know I can get epoxy in lowes, but do they offer sheet metal in lowes too? I can't do it right now, because I am out of town...

You guys got any good ideas for the ammo holster? I plan on getting either extra clips + shells + darts and just shells + darts.

Thanks.

My friend, the best thing to do is to open things up yourself and see how things work - then you should be able to figure out what people are referring to when they refer to a "catch".

There are already some pics of the guts of this blaster. Look at the orange thing at the right of the 2nd last pic.
That's the part that 'catches' the plunger when you cock it.

That said, I haven't ever had an RFR (I have 3) break on me, though admittedly, I don't use them much anymore.

In terms of straps/ammo holders, the duct tape method is okay but looks pretty ghetto. Go steal the shoulder strap of your sister's gym bag and clip it onto the some zipties installed somewhere at the rear and front of the blaster. Again, you can experiment to see which positions you like best. If you're creative, you should easily be able to turn your strap into an ammo holder/bandolier.

I've thought a little about trying to wire a laser pointer to one of my blasters. It wasn't nearly as easy as I thought as the laser pointer I have has a metal (aluminum) casing making harder to get at some of the internals. I settled on putting the laser on the side of the blaster (max shot), on the grip parallel to the barrel. I just use my steadying hand to depress the laser button with my thumb. At about 40 feet, the laser does help (especially since I don't find the max shot intuitive to aim, given its shape). Although not as cool as wiring to the trigger, the benefit is that the laser can be put on only when you want it (I'm not sure about the FF but in the NF, the light can give you away).

Of course a laser pointer isn't all that useful unless you play in the dark but you're right, it is cool. Not to mention, I have used it for intimidation purposes. For example, some of my friends had to think twice before sticking their head/arm out of a hiding place when my laser said "I see you".

In today's culture, the NIC is in NO WAY served by making guns 'realistic' or naming them after real firearms, etc.

I am going to be making flyers to distribute on my college campus, and I know that the word 'gun', despite the context, stands a large chance of me not getting them approved.

I am going to take a hint from paintball and come up with a name that doesn't involve 'gun' (foam launchers? Dart tag?) to use on my flyer. People who know nothing about the sport can only criticize the verbage choosen, something I noticed played heavily in the news story floating around on youtube about the Assasination game.

I thought convention on NH was to use the term 'blaster' - not 'guns'. At least, that's what I refer to them as.

I think people can paint their blasters however they please - but judging from what I've read over the couple years on this forum, they definitely don't get props around here for 'realism'

I think it looks bad-ass. But if its only got four crappy shots, that doesn't mean s**t. You say "loud chamber" - I assume, its a springer? I'd like to see what the insides look like. Got any pics? And you never told us what its stock range is.

First of all, this is going to seem like a big time yawner following Carrtoon's air-pressured clip system for the 3B but I had already started working on this a couple of weeks ago. So bear with me.

Second, this is only a slight modification of the original Bacon Bow


First the barrel: I used several pieces of 3 different sizes of brass to achieve the nesting/breech setup.

- Piece #1: I cut out the rectangular breech from approx 4" of 1/2" brass. This was permanently gooped to the original (orange) barrel stub.
- Piece #2: I also glued a 17/32" stub directly to the front disk of the plunger tube (after drilling out the centre, of course).
- Piece #3: An even shorter piece of 9/16" brass was nested over ths stub to form a nice solid series of nested brass to support Piece #1.

you can see Piece #2 at the base of the breech in Piece #1 (Piece #3 is in there but not visible):


- A fourth piece was about 9 inches of 9/16 tubing which acted as the barrel. This barrel slides back when the spring/plunger head is pulled back/cocked.


Unlike Piss Bacon's and Lukeinator's version though, I decided to take advantage of the existing (sliding) guide rod located above the plunger (below and forward of the built-in "scope").



I drilled out a hole at the front of the cavity that accommodated the sliding rod and added a length of PETG to extend the guide rod anteriorly (forward). I used some Crazy Glue and hotglue with a piece of the air restrictor from a NiteFinder to connect the PETG to the rod. Sorry, I only took AFTER pics. You can see some of this from above the rod cavity (the front "sight" was hacked off).

here's a view from above the cavity (notice you can see the PETG dimensions on the sticker and part of the NF air restrictor)


This PETG is the "arm" that moves the brass barrel backwards to close the breech. The PETG and barrel were linked using a a copper T coupler, some hose clamps and a piece of picture frame hanging material (metal) bent into a loop (looks a bit like the Omega in the greek alphabet). Oh yeah and some glue and a cable tie to secure the union of the coupler and the bent metal.


Here's the assembled blaster (breech closed):



(more in sec.....)

Now for the clip:

I was struggling for ages to build a decent spring-fed clip (a la Ompa's) but I couldn't find a system that worked reliably (the crappy spring I made from old SM3K air restrictors) kept jamming.

So for now, I'm settling for the gravity-fed (non-removable but reloadable) clip.

This one's made from an old plastic container that used to house my snowboard wax. I thought it would be useful because the lid slides on these little tracks:


The container is a little wide (for the length of my darts) so I filled some of this space by gluing halves of 1/2" CPVC tubing to either side. Also because of the dimensions, I had to add a rectangular piece of plastic near the bottom of the container that funnels the darts into the breech:



The container has some space to accommodate the barrel drilled out of the bottom - I hotglued the container to the barrel (mostly to the orange barrel stub of course; hotglue doesn't really stick to brass). Since the original concept was to use a clip-fed system, the gravity-fed clip can't be positioned perfectly upright (perpendicular to the floor) but rather at an angle.


It works fine though, so long as the weight of a section of CPVC used as a weight (pushing the darts downwards) stays in place. By some stroke of luck, the CPVC is just big enough to not fit all the way down the "funnel" so it does not interfere with the chambering of the last dart.

The clip holds 7 shots (plus one in the pipe):


The clip occasionally fails to chamber a dart (fires a blank) but simply re-cocking the blaster fixes that. Reloading the clip is not too difficult (well, at least while you're not moving) because the clip has a sliding door. Since the clip is attached to the orange barrel stub, the whole thing (with the brass breech) can rotate, though obviously when firing, the clip should be upright as possible.

I'm still trying to figure out a good spring-fed clip system (removable) but for now I guess this will have to do.


P.S. I fought the temptation to give it a name (like the "Bug Bad Bow") - to everyone's relief, I'm sure.

...and they most certainly didn't give me anything free, other than some odd looks. I guess that's the price to pay when you buy toy guns at my age, huh?

I hear ya. I'm 30 years old and can frequently be found in the toy aisles of any department store or scouring the TRUs in my area. I'm always amused and a little embarrassed whenever I'm at the check out counter and they ask me if I need a gift receipt...

many have used cassette cases as clips (the names of these people escape me).

I have also used a different type of casing for my own spring-fed clips; described in:4Bmod and re-visited in my mod for the ERTL-FS1010 shotgun.

Carrtoon also came up with an interesting, much different air pressure-fed magazine for his 3B.

There are lots of possiblities, depending on the type of blaster, ammo and materials you have handy.

First of all, I've read on several occasions that the old (dark blue and orange) Nite Finder has a better spring than the newer ones, though the difference isn't supposed to be obvious just from looking at it visually (mentioned here)

I've also read a few comments by members saying that the Disk Shot is "basically the old (dark blue and orange) Nite Finder" yet, in Renegade's mod, he shows pics of the spring for the Disk Shot compared with the 'new' NF and they look nothing alike. Given that the old and new NF supposedly look similar, then (via the transitive property) obviously the Disk Shot and old NF springs should look pretty different too.

I can only conclude that the comments regarding Disk Shot = old NF are referring to performance (despite apparently different springs) but just judging from the tension felt when cocking and firing both blasters, I got the impression that the old NF still packs more punch. As such, I decided to transplant the apparently more powerful guts of the old NF into the shell of the Disk Shot, which I like more than the old NF.

Regardless, for the sake of others who might be curious, I decided to post some pics comparing the assembly of my old (modded) NF and a recently acquired (stock) DS. As it turns out, the whole cocking handle (plus spring) can be swapped, with only a few differences (outlined below). The successful transplant of the old NF cocking handle and spring into the Disk Shot (and vice versa) corroborates Renegade's earlier assertion that the plunger assembly is nearly identical.


Here are pics of:

them side by side




the plunger tubes are practically the same length and ID (judging from the success of the transplant); old NF above, DS below.





the springs (old NF above, DS below). Like Renegade said, the cocking handle is a little longer in the DS




Note that the catch/trigger mechanisms are slightly different leading to some minor incompatibilities; my upgraded Disk Shot (with NF cocking handle) takes a bit of a longer trigger pull to discharge (if you like a hair-trigger, this is less than ideal) - notice the gap between catch and trigger:



Conversely, the old NF (with DS guts) is a bit easier to pull



Just for starters, I did a basic barrel mod (17/32" brass) but will be looking into some integration ideas in the future. Oh yeah, I also added a second O-ring to the plunger head (of the Disk Shot only).




Some other basic differences I noticed: the quality of screws has really slipped in the newer blaster (Disk Shot). The screws are smaller and strip alot easier than the ones for the old NF. Even the plastic tabs that anchor the plunger tube to the shell of the stock DS seem pretty weak - the rear one was already cracking when I opened it up. These factors discouraged me from making a more robust/objective comparison between the two springs; the ideal way to do this would be to compare the ranges of the DS (modded or otherwise) with the stock cocking handle/spring versus with the NF assembly--but I was worried that the tabs would snap off (or I'd strip the screws) after repeated fooling. Also, if you noticed in the pics of the trigger/catch mechanism, the Disk Shot's trigger is much flimsier looking than the old NF's.


Anyhoo, there it is - now if anyone had all three (old NF, new NF and the DS), it would be great to see the differences and, ideally, see some actual quantification of these differences that people often claim.

___EDIT: interpretation for those still unclear (e.g. Sixfivetwo) -> clearly, the springs of the old NF and the DS don't look alike. Whether they perform the same remains to be tested - but I'm betting that the old NF still beats the DS. Unfortunately, I don't have a new NF so I can't comment on performance here, but Renegade's write-up (in the mod directory and referenced in earlier in the text) suggests that the DS is better than the new NF. So in my mind:
oldNF > DS > newNF

BUT it would be best if someone who has ALL THREE actually tested this by measuring ranges using each spring placed in the same stock blaster (or at least with the same barrel mod)

It would be nice to take the time to actually type out what gun you're talking about. If you're going to ask a question, at least be precise.

Otherwise:

I didn't know the Nintendo DS had air restrictors.

I agree, one should type out (explicitly) the blaster in question somewhere in the text or header. I thought he was referring to the Disk Shot.

NirvanaScorpion:

1. your original post is virtually incomprehensible

2. your idea of air restrictor modification is incorrect, as are your ideas regarding the effects of hotglue in the back of darts

3. your "old thread" defense is absolutely ridiculous

4. your post count is 55 (in about 20 days), so you shouldn't be talking about people's post counts


#1 and #2, I think most poeple could live with because they can be corrected.
#3 and #4 is why everyone is pissed off.

The power or the joules is around 1.6 joules, yes I did some math.

Not to be a science geek but I just had a question regarding how you calculated the "power" of the blaster. You reported a number in Joules (a measure of work). If I recall, one equation for measuring this is:
work = force (in Newtons) x distance (in metres)

How did you calculate force (if this is the equation you used)? Cause if there's an easy way, this might be a cool metric to use when reporting ranges for my mods (I live in the city, where I don't have the required distance for outdoor range testing).


edit: it occurred to me that force = mass x acceleration. Mass can be measured with a pretty high precision electronic balance but I imagine acceleration must be even trickier to measure.