This is a 3D printed drop-in replacement for the barrel of a Nerf brand Tech Target blaster.
The standard barrel replacement is compatible with standard foam darts, simply push the darts into the barrel from the front. This works well with the stock spring, but is not recommended with an upgraded spring, as the high pressures will tend to damage stock darts. The standard barrel is compatible with half length darts, but requires a ramrod to fully insert them. With the stock spring, you can expect velocities of about 80fps.
The CPVC insert compatible barrel is a receptacle for a CPVC barrel replacement. This is recommended if you are using half length darts and an upgraded spring. A 4" CPVC barrel is optimal, and you can expect velocities of about 140fps.
I think what's happening is a combination of a short, tight barrel and a small-radius plunger tube, combined with full length darts, means that when the dart is half-way out of the barrel, the pressure inside the hollow stem of the dart is quite high relative to atmospheric pressure. Cylinders that are experiencing stress due to positive pressure on it's inner surface will tend to split in the longitudinal direction. This is because axial stress is about twice as high as radial stress. The splitting you see is in the direction you would expect if the pressure inside the dart got high enough to rupture the foam. You normally only see this kind of splitting on air valve blasters with large volume pressure chambers, such as Big Blasts or Jobars. With those blasters, the pressure in the barrel remains quite high even when you're using a very long barrel - they're releasing so much high pressure air that even a very long barrel doesn't drop the pressure very much.
The solutions to this problem are:
Lower the peak pressure of your blaster. You can do that by using a weaker spring, or pumping up your air blaster less. This approach sucks because you lose range.
Use a longer barrel, so that the pressure inside the barrel (and dart stem) is lower when it exits the barrel. On a high volume air blaster, this sometimes requires you to use an impractically long barrel. On this pistol, you maybe only need a few more inches (maybe just 2-4 more inches?).
Use half-length darts, which will clear the barrel sooner and so there won't be as long of a section of the darts with a pressure gradient acting to split them. It's still possible for these to split, though.
Use solid foam darts. This is the most straight-forward solution, but most darts you can buy have hollow cores, so this is usually a no-go.
A lot of people will tell you that it doesn't help your ranges to go over 200 fps. This is basically true. However, it absolutely helps your accuracy. Time to target can be noticeably reduced for closer range encounters, so you don't have to lead as much.
Yep. Raw power is an advantage at all ranges, and regardless of ammo type. Lightweight ammo only helps curb some of the egregious differences in maximum range.
It all comes down to inclusivity. If you want more people at a war, you set strict fps limits.
I mainly shy away from FPS limits at wars I host because most people don't have a chronograph at home, and so can't get a reasonable sense of how powerful their blasters are.
But FPS caps have their merits, and there's a reason that they're the standard way of leveling the playing field in paintball (along with rate of fire caps). I think a 200fps limit is good maximum for outdoor nerf. It eliminates silly airguns that punch holes in people, and reins in a lot of high-powered springers. Blasters that shoot lasers are not particularly interesting to play with or against. The paradox of shooting games is that maximizing equipment performance is often at odds with fun game play.
+ Hanging out with Koree, Hoongu, JLego, IceNine, Ryan, Zorn, Pants, Bags and others. I wouldn't be nearly as enthusiastic about going to big nerf wars if it wasn't for the cool people I get to spend time with.
+ Driving around LA on Sunday and eating a ton of food and ice cream.
+ Minimal faffing. We nerfed a lot.
+ A lot of footage was taken. Hoongfu's helmet cam footage of the first Carpe round is now my go-to war footage to show people who don't know what nerf is about.
+ Pretty good weather. The overcast and drizzle wasn't the best, but I suppose that beats dying from heat exhaustion.
+ Tiny children wrecking shit.
+ Decent play area. The outer areas of the school were sparse on cover, but I liked that you always had an option of trying to sneak around the buildings and try to get behind the enemy team (rather than just having a continuous line of line of scrimmage).
+ Our Airbnb house was super cool.
+ I saved Zeke from having to use his Supermaxx 2k by breaking the handle right away.
- Fucking darts, man. I need to stop being lazy and make some good darts, so I don't get angry when I can't hit anything.
- Some of these hard-tipped plastic darts hurt. This was the first war where I felt there was a real regression fun factor due to darts.
- Air travel sucks, there's not any way around that.
- Holy hell was I stiff the next day. That kind of nuked our Airsoft plans for Sunday, but we got to do a bit of sightseeing instead.
Do you feel superstock-style blasters and ammo are viable in an NIC war, where many people are using homemade darts and blasters? Would you be more or less likely to attend an NIC war that had a few superstock rounds mixed into it?
In short: yes, I do think superstock is viable in outdoor wars, even when competing against modern homemade blasters and darts. But only with the proper ingredients. Homemade guns have a very clear range advantage over superstock, so you need to minimize that advantage to level the playing field. Having lots of cover is basically the only way to do that - you want to shorten the average fire lane down to the average effective range of a superstock blaster.
Easy answer, but difficult to implement in practice. At it's core, nerf wars are a low-cost event that utilizes existing public parks as a play space. And the average public park doesn't have enough cover to make superstock effective. You either have to bring your own obstacles (which is significantly more effort), or play at an airsoft/paintball field (which is significantly more expensive). I won't trivialize the problem - this is a major issue for war organizers who want to make the game more accessible to players who want to use stock and superstock blasters.
When I was going to outdoor wars in 2008-2010, we generally just showed up and played, without setting up any obstacles. Occasionally some of us would dick around with stock/superstock blasters at these wars, but the performance difference was so exacerbated by the lack of cover that our local community stopped using superstock in favor of very heavily modified or homemade blasters. I enjoyed this style of play, but I will admit that it was significantly less accessible to new players who were not yet capable of the same level of DIY customization. This kind of play also has a distinctly different feel than stock wars, which can turn off some people who expected something closer to what office nerf wars are like. Since then, I've made much more of an effort to choose locations with lots of existing cover, and supplement it with homemade obstacles.
There has been a trend towards hosting superstock-only wars, as kind of a stopgap solution. I'm not against these kinds of limits in principle (I was very much involved in pushing people to not use heavy or hard-tipped darts at wars, for gameplay reasons). But there is a cost to limiting the game too far in the superstock direction - it pushes out very enthusiastic players like myself who wants to use my homemade and heavily modded blasters. I'm okay with superstock rounds in a war, but I want to use my SNAP for most of the day.
It saddens me how much this concept of owning ideas has permeated society.
If you guys really want to go down the route of defining how people own ideas, then you can take a look at the creative commons licenses. I use the CC Attribution license for all my website and youtube stuff (which includes all my writeups, and so by extension the original Rainbow writeups). Basically, it just means that you can use it for whatever the hell you want (re-post it, modify it, sell it, whatever) as long as you credit the original author. It's about as lax of a license as you can have without actually just totally winging it out into the public domain (which means that you don't have to even attribute, you can just use it for whatever). This only applies to actual "works" - e.g., videos, pictures and text. The actual mechanical designs for stuff you would have to patent if you wanted to gain a temporary monopoly on it (which is all that "intellectual property" is in the end - you don't "own" ideas, you're just granted a legal monopoly for a temporary period).
The new Zombiestrike Longshot is beginning to hit shelves, and I'm curious as to what NH thinks about it. The Longshot is a much-beloved blaster, partly because of it's excellent internals - what changes have been made in this blaster? Is it basically just a re-skin of the 2006 Longshot, or have they re-worked it in any way?