26 replies to this topic

[badger]

Hello everyone out there in the NH community. About a month ago, I offered my services to precisionnerfer to evaluate his modded NF to get the real scoop on ranges and to end all of this bantering and bitching about it not being accurate. He defended his results and got flamed for it. He agreed to my evaluation of his gun and my testing methods. Here is how I tested his gun, for anyone that didn't see the list.

• Range test the gun using a parking lot at a local high school that has been marked with football field measurements for absolute range accuracy.
• Do 20 shots using the ammo you supply in addition to 20 shots using my own ammo that also uses Forsaken's FBR to eliminate any possibility of the results being rigged.
• Fire the gun an extra 50-100 times to confirm durability.
• Verfiy that the ranges are correct by pitting it against my modded Max Shot that has gotten ranges above 100 feet to also prove it can or can't reach 100 feet consistently.
• I'll even, if you agree to this evaluation, take it with me to DCNO to verify how well it handles at a war in a real Nerf environment, not just in controlled testing.

Save for the first test being modified (I changed the testing location to the warehouse at my job which measures in at about 150 feet in length and has no wind to skew the results) I followed the regiment exactly.

Now for the warning.

I am posting this, as promised, to show the results of everything I did to this gun. I chose to offer my help as to stop the constant flaming and bullshit that I was seeing constantly on the forums anytime he posted about the NF mod. I DO NOT want to see anymore bashing here in this thread! It took alot of guts for him to agree to this testing knowing that there could be a chance that his gun would not perform as he described. He went into this with the knowledge that if it did not perform as he thought it did, that he would either have to explain himself, or to alter his testing parameters to get more accurate data for the future, if he even decided to stay on NH. I commend him for taking this course of action to end all of the bullshit. Anyone that thinks of flaming PN after this should think about the gamble that he took here. He could have very well just said no to my offer and stuck by his results, but he didn't. I wonder if anyone who pounded on him in the past would do the same thing if they were in his shoes?

Here are the results.

(1)---I fired each shot level, using two hands to steady the gun and to reduce any chance of the gun's recoil from forcing the gun to fire high and skew the results. The darts that he provided were CDTS with an additional modification to the back of the darts. His darts flew an average of 72 feet. The stefans that I used next were made from FA_24's Red FBR, 1/4" Sling Shot ammo from OMC, and had a small divot bored into the back of each dart with a hot glue gun. These darts averaged about 70 feet. The distance was measured at the point of impact with the floor with a spotter to ensure accuracy. There is about a +/- of about 3 feet in the measurements.

The difference in your CDTS, PN, will actually hinder their range, not help it. You are creating more dead space between the tip of the dart, which is the ram point that the airflow of the plunger's forward motion impacts to propel the dart. It was a good idea, but it is better served when used in stefans, not CDTS. If anyone wants more information on what he did, ask him. He did not disclose the design of his CDTS anywhere on NH to my knowledge, so it is up to him to divulge it.

(2)---The gun is definitely durable to repeated firing, but there isn't much cushioning between the plunger rod and the plunger shaft, leading me to believe that it will eventually fail. It can be heard just when you dry-fire it. I have seen this issue with alot of modded guns and I don't know how to avoid it myself at this time. There is one issue though that makes for repairing the gun next to impossible. You glued the entire gun shut. You must have had your reasons, but it you need to repair it, you need a chisel.

(3)---My MaxShot outperforemd it consistently. Each shot of my gun was done with both the CDTS taht you provided and my stefans. The CDTS averaged about 95 feet, whilst the stefans averaged about 106 feet. The MaxShot uses a brass coupler with a removeable brass and PETG (OMC's supply) dogbone styled barrel. The NF makes for a good sidearm and actually has good ranges for pistol-only and Gunslinger rounds, but it is not suitable to be used as a primary.

(4)---I took the gun to DCNO with me and only used my stefans as I didn't want to lose any of the darts that were supplied to me before I finished my testing. It was good for use in both the pistol rounds and for playing Gunslinger's Heaven as it got pretty good ranges, but the suction loading doesn't always work, depending on the dart that is being used. One thing to remember, when you were selling the NFs on ebay, you have to realize that the people that were buying them probably would be using their own darts. The suction isn't going to work on all darts, as I had seen at DCNO. I had to use a ramrod from time to time to load the gun. As stated before, it makes for a great sidearm, but not a primary.

(5)---This testing was not on the list, but I felt that it needed to be done. I tested the gun to see how it performed under sharp temperature changes. When I was at HCNO early this year, many of the people that were using springers noticed a decrease in range with their guns due to the cold temps. I think it was about 35-40 deg F that day. I was using a BBB spring modded LS. After a few hours outside, the gun was firing stock ranges. I took the NF and placed it in a refridgeration unit that is at my job that has an adjustable guage for temperature. It was kept at 40 deg F for about 5 hours. I then fired 10 shots with the CDTS and got a significant range loss. The average was only about 47 feet. This was to be expected though as the spring was cold and its flexibility would be reduced. I then placed the gun in a heater case that we use for drying circuit boards after they have been washed. The maximum temperature for the dryer is 90 deg F ( thank the gods I don't use the dryer anymore as it took about 4 hours to dry 20 boards) which would be a good example of playing on a hot summer day, like at Deal War or Apoc. The gun's ranges increased by about 7 feet. The wide gap between the cold ranges and the warm ranges is due to the fact that the spring would have to reach much higher temps to get a more substantial increase in distance.

Final Conclusion

The gun was modified quite well, but it does not produce the 100 feet ranges as advertised. It is well suited as a gun for any type of pistol match and it makes for a great sidearm in a pinch situation, but it is only sutiable as a primary in a war location where the field's play area is restricted significantly. It is not viable as a primary in any of the locations that any major wars that I have attended have been held. The gun can't be maintained as it is glued shut, so if the gun fails, it is garbage. I am impressed that it is getting the average range for any modded NF considering it uses no rubber bands or bungees and it may get further ranges if one was used, but there is no way it can get 100 feet unless, and this isn't to be sarcastic, you play up in the mountains (well above 2000 feet) on a very hot and dry day.

I applaud your efforts PN with this gun, as well as your choice to let me test the gun for you to get some solid data. You mentioned to me that this evaluation would be a factor in your deciding to stay at NH or not. I say stay anyways. Use this post as a learning tool, not a report card. Stick around and learn what you can do to improve your modding skills. I'm sure there is more you can offer to the NIC, so don't be discouraged by this setback.

[penguin807]

70 ft isn't bad. The mod was very clean and quite good.

I was rooting for you PN. Hope you stay.

[Blasphemy]

I don't care whether it got 100 feet, 70 feet, or didn't even come out of the barrel, Pn stuck to his guns (bad pun) and I applaud him for that. People flamed him that he couldn't get 100 feet out of a Nitefinder and how he was ridiculous for not telling his "modification secrets" on a site like this. What did he do? He released the Nitefinder mod contrary to what everyone thought he would do and still bravely claimed the 100 foot mark. Hey you never know though, maybe this modification could achieve 100's with some adjustments (i.e. different barreling material, longer barrel, or a better lubricant).

Edited by Blasphemy, 08 November 2007 - 09:23 PM.

[precisionnerfer]

Well, I think I'll stick around. Thanks for not flaming me, and thanks for the report Badger, I accept it all the way. Of course, naturally, there are a few things I would like to say/ask:

Did you test the gun before or after DNCO? [or however you spell that] The reason I'm asking is because after
a medium amount of use my NF decreased in range to wadiya know, 70 feet. At first I thought this was because I replaced the barrel without taking the gun apart, but now I think there is something else at play, since you are getting similar ranges. This theory would only work if you tested after the war though. If you did, that helps explain a few things. I will probably need to open one of my other guns later and check it out, to see what is different.

The second thing is, I am quite sure that it shot 100 feet flat when I had it. I do live in NW Arkansas, I'm not sure how high up, but a bit high. There wasn't any wind at play either, although from what I'm hearing the gun might have angled a bit every time I fired, due to the kick.

Don't take this as an insult, anyone. I'm just saying what happened on my side of the deal, just as truthfully as Badger did. I respect and believe his report 100%, but I also believe mine. I'm not saying you have to, but....

What I'm trying to say is, I did not mistake my ranges on purpose. Any mistakes I made in range testing were accidental.

I honestly thought that the gun would shoot 100" when I sent it to Badger, knowing full and well he would test and post what it did. I don't even sell any more, [except prototypes and custom orders] so it wouldn't do me any good to lie. The only thing it would do for me is to verify what I said so I could post more write ups for the benefit of everyone.

So basically; I just made a mistake and did not thoroughly test my guns to make sure they could shoot as far as I said consistently. For that I apologize to you all.
However, I am working on a longshot mod, and I think it will be sweet, but before I post it I will have it for 2 months or more in use, so I know what ranges to post. I will now do this to all of my guns and write ups, and since I have no reason to lie anymore, [not selling] you will hopefully be able to trust me then.

In conclusion: Sorry for the mistakes, confusions, and noobishness I have displayed, I'm sorry for it and you won't see that again. I am now going to personally do a "Badger test" on all of my mods before I post them, so don't worry about trusting me anymore. Thanks for not flaming.
-PN

PS: I know it's over and done; my NF does not go 100" flat consistently. BUT there is one thing. There are some customers locally that heard about my former selling biz and contacted me about it. They play assassins at a local high school and wanted me to do some mods for them. 2 ordered Nf's, and I showed them personally in my yard how they shot, and let them shoot themselves. We even estimated and paced it off, and it was 90-100" They were very happy. They have recently sent emails about how they say the gun does not shoot as far as it used too, but still great. There is definitely a good reason to believe that the gun does shoot 100" when first modded, but for some unknown reason stops the good range later. Anyone have ideas?

[Lynx]

Weaker spring after use?
A possibility of damage during the transport (bent barrel)?

[Blasphemy]

I'd say the only reason the gun decreases ranges is because of general use. The glue between the barrel and plunger tube could wear away, the lubricant could dry out, any number of things. A factor you should consider is dirt and grime. After being exposed to the outside I've seen a gun's performance significantly decrease because the plunger head became covered with dirt and foreign objects which caused friction and a less than ideal seal, I saw the ranges decrease from a good 60' to around 30', the same 30' difference you saw in the performance of your Nitefinder over time. After realizing this I saw that the purpose of most air restrictors isn't only to restrict the air and in some cases bridge the barrel to the plunger tube, but to keep the whole plunger assembly clean and free of foreign objects.

EDIT: Forgot one thing, after repeated use of a cut down Handyman #9713 spring with my Disk Shot, which is as you all know very similar to the Nitefinder, I found the plunger head to be covered with plastic shavings. The plunger head had be accelerated at such a high velocity uncontrollably because of the poor stock catch that the plastic rim around the plunger head scraped against the plunger tube and damged it slightly. This can be easily solved though, by finding a better catch or covering the whole plastic rim with e-tape you should be able to eliminate the problem.

Edited by Blasphemy, 08 November 2007 - 09:46 PM.

[precisionnerfer]

Thanks guys, I'm planning a lot more now. With my LS though, the barrel will be 3 feet long and it is cartridge loading, so the dirt deal won't be as bad. Changed avatar for new start feel.

[PvtMcFlurry]

With my LS though, the barrel will be 3 feet long and it is cartridge loading

Did I read that correctly? If so may I ask why?

Edited by Pvt.McFlurry, 08 November 2007 - 09:54 PM.

[precisionnerfer]

With my LS though, the barrel will be 3 feet long and it is cartridge loading

Did I read that correctly? If so may I ask why?

whoops, 2 foot barrel with the front gun on, so it won't get knocked off.

[AJAQ]

Did you heat treat the springs by chance?

The less time it is treated, the quicker the spring will permanently deflect.

I had to do some work because of that issue with my longshots.

[precisionnerfer]

Well I don't know the first thing about heat treating so, nope, not yet. I think it might be something else though, because springs take a little longer to wear down in my NF's. I have took them out and switched them around a lot.
Thanks for your help again, everyone; I am learning. I think it might be the e-tape in the plunger, combined with the lube going dry because I put so much of it in there. Combined with dirt and grime in the plunger I think I have figured it out.

[ambushbug]

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 !?!

Edited by ambushbug, 09 November 2007 - 10:22 PM.

[precisionnerfer]

[/quote]
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'

------
[/quote]
Um, I would say "schmoe" is a liar... really man, no one is that bad.
[/quote]
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.
[/quote]
True.

[/quote]
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.
[/quote]

[/quote]
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).
[quote]

Um, why should we mod then? Think about it. If we aren't doing it right now, then why even do a modification? It might get 30 feet less then what is said! If we are not going to claim range, what's to tell a good mod from a great one? Estimation from the mods done? We have to give at least a general range claim or else we just WON'T bother making a mod write up.... it would be meaningless without ranges.

[/quote]
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 ........
[/quote]

Yeah I guess, but we need an easier solution then the one you posted. Maybe we could have, "Certified Mod Testers" or something that did that. Anyone like myself who clam[s][ed] to have a revolutionary mod could send it to them? I don't know, maybe a clear uncut video would help, like in FA24's mods.



EDIT: Having a horrible time with quotes.... at least you know what I mean.

Edited by precisionnerfer, 09 November 2007 - 11:34 PM.

[bobafan]

Nice bias-fre evaluation badger.
I was kinda hoping it would get closer to the 100', but oh well.
I do have one different theory about why the heat effects ranges though. I think it if the result of the air in the foam of the darts expanding and contracting, creating a looser seal with the barrel.

[badger]

This following post was written after I spent the last 10 hours on a flight back from Germany to see that someone decided to pick apart my testing style. This was written with no intent to hurt anyone, but I was a bit pissed after I read their post, so deal with it.

* * * * * * * * * *

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.

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.

various darts were used

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.

performance depends on air temperature/pressure (as Badger alludes to)

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.

height/angle is not exactly controlled (e.g. "steadying with both hands" is hardly objective)

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.

comparison to the modded max shot

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

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.

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 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.

OH and to answer your question PN, I tested your gun at first at DCNO as I had no time to do any other testing before DCNO and my subsequent trip to Germany to yell at some people for almost two weeks. The ranges it was achieving, while they were eyeballed and guaged against two guns that could fire 100 feet and were doing so at DCNO throughout the day (not that accurate, but a part of the baseline I used to see what further tests would be done next), were only around the average of any modded NF or TTG (mega-style). This range stayed constant throughtout the day as well as during the majority of the tests. I'm sorry, but the gun did not achieve the 100-foot mark. You even said it yourself that you heard from others at the war that it didn't shoot 100 feet.

[precisionnerfer]

OH and to answer your question PN, I tested your gun at first at DCNO as I had no time to do any other testing before DCNO and my subsequent trip to Germany to yell at some people for almost two weeks. The ranges it was achieving, while they were eyeballed and guaged against two guns that could fire 100 feet and were doing so at DCNO throughout the day (not that accurate, but a part of the baseline I used to see what further tests would be done next), were only around the average of any modded NF or TTG (mega-style). This range stayed constant throughtout the day as well as during the majority of the tests. I'm sorry, but the gun did not achieve the 100-foot mark. You even said it yourself that you heard from others at the war that it didn't shoot 100 feet.

But that does make me feel a little better, because you said that you used your own Stefans at the war. If the gun does go through a quick range decrease over time, and you didn't use my CDTS at the war, it could have possibly got more with my darts. Not saying your Stefans are bad, but mine might have worked better with that gun at that time.

[The Metal Bullet]

OH and to answer your question PN, I tested your gun at first at DCNO as I had no time to do any other testing before DCNO and my subsequent trip to Germany to yell at some people for almost two weeks. The ranges it was achieving, while they were eyeballed and guaged against two guns that could fire 100 feet and were doing so at DCNO throughout the day (not that accurate, but a part of the baseline I used to see what further tests would be done next), were only around the average of any modded NF or TTG (mega-style). This range stayed constant throughtout the day as well as during the majority of the tests. I'm sorry, but the gun did not achieve the 100-foot mark. You even said it yourself that you heard from others at the war that it didn't shoot 100 feet.

But that does make me feel a little better, because you said that you used your own Stefans at the war. If the gun does go through a quick range decrease over time, and you didn't use my CDTS at the war, it could have possibly got more with my darts. Not saying your Stefans are bad, but mine might have worked better with that gun at that time.

After reading this whole thread I have come to senses and made my opinion... PN, in your attempts to declare that your ranges reached 100' you failed. It was proven with hundreds of shots with Badger who is a well respected nerfer. Honestly, if you say one more time that it was his darts at fault or that it wasn't exactly 74.7 Degrees out then you are just pathetic. That is not a valid excuse because using your darts he got even worse ranges at some times. I think you should just admit that you pulled the ranges out of your ass instead of dragging this out to the point where this whole ordeal gets blown out of proportions...

But then again, I and it seems many others respect the fact that you did not pussy out of badgers offer, even though it was proven that your ranges were not what you said them to be. I also think that Badger is owed a big thank you for the time that he spent dealing with you. He did not, by any means, have to do that for you even though your ranges were proven as BS.

And all you other people that are saying that there was possible damage during shipping... You may be right but honestly you push up the barrel a little bit and it is fixed. Common sense people, the main point is the gun did not get 100' or anywhere near it. 30 feet is a big difference... That would be like me saying my manta ray gets 150' when it averages about 105'.

The main point here, "Don't claim that your ranges are godly, because you will be found,most times, to be a liar and this type of shit can occur.


PN don't let this ordeal ruin your nerfing career. Keep at it and eventually it will simmer down.

[Cmdrmack]

You're awfully belligerent for someone who has been here less than a month. Perhaps you should tone it down a bit. PrecisionNerfer had the balls to be evaluated by a third party, he stepped up to the plate, and he dealt with the results. He is to be commended for that.

Metal Bullet, you've not honored Badger's request to treat PN with the respect he deserves for allowing himself to be proven wrong. I'd recommend that you back off until you've proven yourself a little more. You're not yet at the point where you can make posts like that and have people really listen in my opinion. Perhaps you should watch, read, and learn a little bit more before you make inflammatory posts like this.

[nerfturtle]

I still believe PN, and have since he posted his write-up. It is not crazy to have an NF reach 100 feet, I have one that does. Also, there is no standard way of recording ranges. Badger said that he "used two hands to steady the gun and to reduce any chance of the gun's recoil from forcing the gun to fire high and skew the results." This might have been different from what PN was doing, so PN was being truthfull when he saw his darts hitting down at around 100' because of this and many other different variables that were different from when Badger tested it. I'm with you PN, and this is not meant as offence to Badger, I respect you and your agreement to test the gun.

[blister]

That would be like me saying my manta ray gets 150' when it averages about 105'.

Are you talking about your own manta or just making up an example? Either way, it just proves that you don't know what you're talking about.

I commend both badger and PN on their follow through with this experiment.

[Tofu]

So,pn stood up for his guns. It wasnt 100 but it was better than Ive gotten my nf to go. I typically manage to get 60, he got 70. So I appluad him anyways for making a gun that can outshoot mine. Iplan to do his mod with one of my nf's in a couple of days.

[precisionnerfer]

Well it seems like we are all resolved and done. Can a mod close this one just in case it turns into a flame thread? I don't see why it would, but a lot of mine do.

[Lynx]

I was one of the people to repeatably bash precisionnerfer, BUT:

He showed balls to send the nitefinder to badger.

I bet that precisionnerfer is a solid nerfer.

I also think that if precisionnerfer can document his work and demonstrate the modding and ranges, he would show that he CAN shoot 100 feet.

NO MATTER WHAT, precisionnerfer made a solid and strong mod that looks good and performs well. I bet it's durable as f*** and consistent at 70 feet.

[precisionnerfer]

Haha, we were posting at the same time. Anyway, I think an uncut video will acompany my next one, as well as a great write up. If it is really good, I might send it to badger first and ask him what ranges he got, and then compare them to my own, so it would be a blind test. Or another respected nerfer could test it since I already did da badg' *new nickname*

[precisionnerfer]

EDIT: sorry guys, I was making a new sig and messed up.
/thread

Edited by precisionnerfer, 10 November 2007 - 08:47 PM.