Mod: Motor Replaced Elite Rayven

March 16, 2015, 11:30 pm

≫ Next: Comparison: Nerf ZS Doublestrike vs Nerf Elite Triad

The Elite Rayven is one of my favourite blasters. I love its aesthetics and the way it feels, and it's my go-to flywheeler. Sadly as I normally run it with 2 Barricade motors on 2 IMRs, its performance doesn't quite stack up to my EAT with OMW spring, and in games against similar level modded blasters (spring replaced springers), I can really feel the difference in power. So I departed on a quest to get more power from my beloved Rayven, and I entered the world of motor replacements.

The motors I settled on were Tamiya Mach Dash Pros. They're a 130-sized motor (same as the stock ones) designed for small model race cars, hence the dual sided shaft. Tamiya is also a very reputable brand, so I knew I would be getting a quality product that should last a while and take a fair bit of abuse.
Obviously the double sided shaft means that the motor will not slot straight in to the blaster, but the unwanted side of the shaft (the side on the red end bell) is easily cut off using a rotary tool.
Just some stats on the Mach Dash Pros if you're interested. (pulled straight from the Tamiya USA site)

Voltage(V) - 2.4-3.0

Torque (nM-m) - 1.3-1.8

RPM(r/min) - 20000-24500

Current (A) - 2.6-3.52

For reference I believe Barricade motors are rated to spin at around 15000RPM, though I'm not sure of the rated voltage.
I also wore in the Mach Dashes by running them for around 90 minutes off a single AA. This process reduces arcing as well as resistance, allowing for a better current draw and a longer life.

Besides just throwing in the motors and cutting the shaft, I also had to make some electrical adjustments to the Rayven. The only external evidence of the mods I've done to it is a small switch in the carry handle, which in the above picture is barely visible inside the shadow. You can see it much more easily in the picture below.

A standard Rayven rewire has only 3 wires, but my adjustments have requisited many more than that. Note the red endbells of the new Tamiyas in the flywheel cage. I've also switched the flywheels themselves for those from a Stryfe, as the Stryfe flywheels are lighter and spun up to a higher RPM, giving greater range.

Mach Dashes are rated for 2.4-3V, where most Nerf blasters use 6V, so some changes were needed. Where the Rayven's standard battery tray has 4 14500-sized (AA-sized) cells in series, I've modified it to have 2 sets of 2 series batteries in parallel (2s2p). The battery tray is also capable of running 2 batteries in parallel (1s2p), and this all has to do with the one switch just in front of the flywheel cage.
When the switch is forward, the tray is in 2s2p configuration, and when the switch is backward, the tray is in 1s2p configuration.

Since Mach Dashes are rated for up to 3V, a single IMR is already overvolting them, though the spin-up time isn't the best as the Mach Dashes do draw a lot more current than stock Nerf motors. A single IMR also doesn't have a great capacity, with only 700mAh. Hence to help provide more current as well as improve run time, I use two IMRs in 1s2p configuration. This provides maximum power and nets ranges averaging 22 or so metres at near flat (0-10 degree elevation estimated), and can reach 25m or more with stray shots. It's about on par with my personal modded EAT, which was the target.
Motor spin-up is much better than with stock motors, the Mach Dashes reach "decent range" RPM in half a second, and full RPM in about 0.75s.

For near-stock performance, I use 2AAs in 1s2p configuration. It spins up quite slowly (AAs have terrible current output) and gets performance similar to stock grey trigger blasters. I would much rather use a stock springer such as a Retal or EAT over this config, as the spin up time is really really slow. It's much like how a stock N-Strike Rayven performs.

In both the above two configurations, the switch also acts as a safety, as if it is in the forward position the blaster is in 2s2p configuration, and the empty battery slots break the circuit, preventing any revving.

For Uni games and indoor, I would use 4AAs in 2s2p configuration. Spin-up still isn't great (again AAs have pretty bad current output), however the range is much more respectable being near par with any Elite flywheeler running stock motors on 2 IMRs. This configuration is the whole reason I implemented the complicated switch mechanism and battery tray mods, as without them I would not be able to use AAs in a 2s2p configuration using the stock battery tray.
If the switch is moved to 1s2p configuration (backwards) with all four battery slots filled, then the Rayven behaves like it is in 1s2p configuration, getting near stock ranges.

Since there are so many motor replacement options, I thought I'd give my thoughts on why I didn't choose various other motors.

Mabuchi FK180SH-3240 motors (usually colloquially known as "180s") are a popular choice as they have a good RPM and much more torque than most 130-sized motors, however as they are longer (being 180-sized) slots need to be cut in the blaster's shell to accomodate. As I love the Rayven's aesthetics and the motors already bulge out in the left side, I didn't want to cut holes to accomodate new motors, so 180s were not a choice for me.
Polulu RM2s are a 130-sized choice that also run off stock voltage, and are incredibly cheap, however RM2s are notorious for their brushes burning out, and running them on 4AAs also results in extremely slow spin-up. I wanted motors that could spin-up fast, and so needed motors that could run on Lithium battery voltage increments (3.7V) reliably. It is possible to replace the brushes of RM2s with much better carbon brushes, however having accidentally broken open a motor before, I really don't want to have to open up another motor as it's quite annoying to get everything lined back up properly.
Ranson 130s are motors that were available from various places on the internet and are rated to spin up to 77000RPM at about 16V, however they were significantly more expensive than the Mach Dashes I sourced, and at the time of looking for motors I couldn't find a source for them. They also have a larger than usual commutator, requisiting part cutting, which again I was against. Another downside of such a hot running motor, Ransons are known to burn out very quickly if run off of a high voltage (3s+) and not worn in correctly.
Tamiya Torque Tuned motors are a recommended motor option by some, however after looking at the specs I felt that it didn't spin fast enough at the voltages I would be using (does 12000-13600RPM at 2.4-3V). The main purpose of the motor replacement was to get more power, and Torque Tuned motors would not give me the power I desire.
Falcon 130s are a good 130 option that are also cheaply available from a Nerfer in Australia, and are reported to perform quite well run off LiPos of both 2s (7.4V) and 3s (11.1V), however I found out about those after ordering the Mach Dashes, and I also have a feeling that they would run too hot and draw a lot of current, which my pair of IMRs probably would not be able to handle. As is I'm having to run my IMRs in parallel to keep up with the current demand from the Mach Dashes.
NSR Shark 3005s are one of the best 130-sized motors around, hitting 40k RPM when run on a 3-4s LiPo. They also have much more torque than most 130-sized motors, meaning faster spin-up and less RPM loss in rapid fire. Unfortunately, with such high specs also comes a high price, with Sharks costing around 4 times as much as most Tamiyas, making them by far the most expensive motors of all the ones I've looked at/heard of. Additionally Sharks run best off of a 3s LiPo, where all I have is 2 IMRs, which don't provide a high enough voltage or large enough current to get the best performance out of the Sharks.

One of my biggest problems when choosing motors is that I'm currently limited to using just 2 IMRs. I'm planning to upgrade to using some LiPos when I get a little more disposable income, however my Rayven will probably remain as-is to maintain is versatility.

I'm quite happy with the way my Rayven is performing now, and it will probably see a lot of use in my Nerf games unless I do a complete Rapidstrike build.

↧

Comparison: Nerf ZS Doublestrike vs Nerf Elite Triad

March 25, 2015, 4:45 am

≫ Next: 2015 Birthday Presents

≪ Previous: Mod: Motor Replaced Elite Rayven

For a time the Triad was Nerf's best pocket pistol, packing 3 consecutive shots along with the small profile of a Jolt and the power of an Elite blaster. However in 2014, the Zombie Strike series received the Doublestrike, a small blaster also intended for the pocket pistol role. Which one is better at its job?

Aesthetics: This is probably the most controversial Aesthetics round so far; as you know if you've read other comparisons I don't score on aesthetics. The Doublestrike is one of the most stylised mini blasters around, clearly taking cues from the Derringer pocket pistol, packing a hammer prime, dual barrels and the faux grip tape seen in the early ZS blasters. The Triad on the other hand, packs the bare minimum of painting and styling, and sacrifices form for function. While I would agree with the majority that the Doublestrike is the better looking blaster, I don't score on aesthetics.
Accessories: The Doublestrike comes with two darts, the Triad three. I'm giving this round to the Triad, but since it's one dart, it's pretty meaningless.
Range/Power: The Triad reaches standard Elite ranges, getting about 14m average flat for a grey trigger.
The Doublestrike sadly does not live up to expectation, averaging 9-10m flat as a grey trigger. It's quite inconsistent, I had one dart soar to 12m and several dive at 7-8m.
The Triad easily wins this round.
Accuracy: Neither blaster is fantastic since both blasters use Elite style darts. The Triad's grouping is decent, getting through the 7-8m doorway pretty consistently, and only rarely hits the door frame. The Doublestrike on the other hand is pretty bad, of the ~20 test shots I've taken with it, around 8 have swerved into the doorframe. A further 8 of them dived straight into the ground at the 7-8m mark, and only about 4 of them achieved any significant distance from the door frame. Almost every single dart I've fired from the Doublestrike has swerved away from target.
The Triad wins this round easily too.
Usability: Both blasters have usability issues, primarily stemming from them being small.
The Triad's biggest issue is that its shell design leads to it being very uncomfortable to hold. Much like the Jolt, the front of the handle really digs into your hand if you hold it tightly, and this is made significantly worse with an upgraded spring. However besides that the Triad is fairly easy to load, prime and fire.
The Doublestrike also has a handle problem, though its problem is slightly different. The hook at the end of the handle limits the number of fingers you can comfortably fit on the handle, and that number is usually 2 unless you have particularly thin fingers. The remaining finger is thus forced to hang around awkwardly, or squish together with the other fingers to fit.
Additionally besides that handle issue, the Doublestrike is known for an over-prime problem. The draw on the Doublestrike's hammer is around a centimetre longer than the draw required for the hammer to catch. As a result, the excess draw results in the hammer springing forward a small distance. The primary effect of this is that upon overprime the Doublestrike would often spit out its top dart, as demonstrated perfectly by this GIF from Blasterlabs:

This defeats the main purpose of the Doublestrike's double dart firing.
An additional issue is the unusually high rate of catch breaks. Though there have been less reports of it recently, the Doublestrike is also known for breaking its catch even with light use. I believe this is also due to the overprime problem, which causes the hammer to swing into the catch with extra force.
Interestingly, my Doublestrike displayed neither of these overprime issues, though I'm not sure whether this is due to it being a newer, slightly improved version or simply because it's a grey trigger version (which seems to have a different spring).
The Doublestrike does have an advantage over the Triad in that its hammer prime, though harder than the Triad's, allows the Doublestrike to be one-hand primed. Though the overprime issue does come into effect again, being one-handable is a significant advantage in adverse situations.
However as the overprime issue is so well documented and occurred frequently upon release, I'm giving this round to the Triad.
Rate of Fire: The Doublestrike can get off both darts in around a second, thanks to its dual barrels and hammer prime. The Triad can get its three darts off in around a second and a half.
Since both blasters are such low capacity, making ROF basically meaningless, I'm going to count this round as a draw. If pressed though, I'd say that the Triad does have more potential for rapid fire.
Capacity: The Doublestrike holds two darts, while the Triad holds three.
The Triad wins this round obviously
Value for Money: The Doublestrike is available from Kmart for an extortionate 15AUD, while the Triad is only 8AUD, also from Kmart.
The Triad wins this by a long shot.

The Doublestrike has won no rounds, while the Triad has won 6, with 1 draw. Thus I declare the Triad EX-3 the totally and utterly superior blaster. Besides being one-handable and looking cooler, the Doublestrike is completely inferior to the Triad. If I were buying blasters to be practical, I would gladly trade the Doublestrike for two Triads or a Strongarm and a Jolt. Or even put a few more dollars along with the Doublestrike to get something better like a Stryfe, Hammershot or Sweet Revenge.
Though in fairness if you get blasters for cosmetic modding only, the Doublestrike is a clear winner.

↧

2015 Birthday Presents

March 28, 2015, 10:44 pm

≫ Next: Nerf Game Report 9/4/15

≪ Previous: Comparison: Nerf ZS Doublestrike vs Nerf Elite Triad

Yep, that time of year again.

BoomCo Rapid Madness
Rebelle Secret Shot
70784 Lewa - Master of Jungle
Fabrikations Chewbacca
Samsung Gear S
Many kashes

↧

Nerf Game Report 9/4/15

April 10, 2015, 6:32 pm

≫ Next: LiPo Mods: Elite Rayven and Rapidstrike PDW

≪ Previous: 2015 Birthday Presents

I attended a small Nerf war today at a local primary school run by Equalz Dee Foam Arms. It was a lot of fun, and was very different from the games I normally play.
Gamemodes:
Old:
None

New:
HvZ - depending on the play area, zombie hits were 5-10 second stuns or respawns from the ouside of the area. Humans were limited in blasters and ammo, and got upgrades as they survived. Zombies also got upgrades as humans got upgrades for balance. Double tap rules were also implemented for zombies- a hit would result in a 5 second stun, a second hit an elimination with 10 second respawn out of sight of the humans.
- Squad HvZ - a small group of humans would try to survive for a set amount of time against a larger group of zombies, usually respawning. Survivors remained human (to a limit of 3 humans in a row) while the fallen humans would turn into zombies, and the next players in line would become human.
- Runner HvZ - humans would try to run back and forth between two safe zones, with only a short time in those safe zones to reload and rest. The winner would be the final survivor, who would try to make one last run between safe zones for an "extraction" win, while getting tagged on the final run would result in a regular win (extraction win having more prestige).
- Recall HvZ - humans start with a large number, small blasters and low ammo. Every time a human is zombified, an upgrade is available to the humans and given to one zombie. The humans cam return to the designated safe upgrade area, and are still vulnerable while outside that area. Once most of the humans are present, they are given an upgrade (increase in ammo and blaster size/quantity), while the most recent zombie victim would receive an upgrade of some kind (for instance extra reach [sword] or shield). Humans who do not return to the area for an upgrade do not get that upgrade until the next human is zombified. Humans are given a short head start from the upgrade zone. Once one human is left, they win if they reach the upgrade area (again like an "extraction" win).
Capture the Box/VIP - one player would dress up in partial cardboard armour, with a cardboard body and two cardboard shields, and would be limited to walking. Teams would try to capture the box man by tagging them in exposed area (ie legs and arms, no headshots) and protecting them for as long as possible. Once tagged, the box man would follow the orders of the tagging team. The team who holds the box man for the longest after a set amount of time wins. As the box man can try to run away from players, if the box man remains untagged for the entire time limit, they alone win. Player hits are one-hit respawns, with respawns simply being 10 seconds out of sight.

Blasters:
Regulars:
Rebelle Sweet Revenges (modded) - my standard modded dual wield pistols. Worked excellently as usual, and won me a couple of rounds.
Elite Roughcut - performed as per usual.
Elite Strongarm - performed as usual.
Elite Alpha Trooper (OMW 5kg spring, AR removed) - insanely overpowered compared to the stock and near stock stuff that was there, was instantly relegated to show-off only duty.
ZS Hammershots - same as before, much the same as SRs with less range due to being stock. I maintain that they're superior to Strongarms, almost purely because of the hammer prime, but both were still excellent choices for most games.

New:
ZS Slingfire - performed ok, its main advantage was capacity due to being clip system. Range was quite meh, no official numbers but it's certainly not over 12m, though the darts were used Kooshes and Elites. Accuracy was nothing great either. Honestly the Slingfire seemed (performance wise) pretty boring, though I didn't see a whole lot of action from it. From what I did see of it, it performed well enough to survive, but did nothing notable.
Mega Thunderbow - a fun but very silly blaster, like the Slingfire range and accuracy were nothing special. What the Thunderbow did have was intimidation factor due to being huge and having larger ammo. In double tap HvZ the Thunderbow did have the advantage of one-shot elimination due to its use of mega darts but 5 shots for its amount of bulk is really not worth it otherwise.
Rebelle Secret Shot - another fun and silly blaster, the Secret Shot had surprising range but had the same unreliable accuracy as everything else. It didn't get much action being a 4-shot pump action, but it was fun and fabulous to use.
N-Strike Stampede - it did what it advertised, that is spray darts all over the place. Being an older N-Strike blaster, range was abysmal, as was accuracy. Paired up with a 35 drum the Stampede could put down some serious suppressive fire, however its low range, poor accuracy and huge bulk made it quite impractical, as a Stryfe could do the same job in a much smaller package with better range.
Vortex Praxis - it did the standard job of Vortex of high range, and besides that did not perform notably well or poorly. As with Mega, Vortex is a one-shot elim with double tap zombies, however the slow disc speed made it easily dodgeable. Disc scarcity also made scavenging extremely difficult. The Praxis didn't see much action, and honestly was not worth using over regular dart blasters.
Elite Demolisher (2x14500 IMR) - not as overpowered or scary as the EAT, but still made a huge mark and was banned after one round of use. With superior range to everything else (besides the EAT of course), high capacity and great spammability due to being semi auto, the Demolisher was extremely dominant on the field and pretty much single-handedly won the one round it was used in before being banned.
ZS Flipfury - basically a Strongarm with an extra cylinder, the Flipfury performed extremely well. It solved one of the Strongarm's biggest weaknesses, capacity, and in most rounds performed as well as, if not better than, Strongarms and Roughcuts. For these sorts of games the Flipfury is definitely a solid purchase. I personally still prefer dual Sweet Revenges, but if the Strongarm is more your style, you'll probably like the Flipfury a lot.
Elite Retaliator (US-spec spring, AR removed) - performed much like the Slingfire, except with pretty good range and better ROF (due to stock springs). I didn't see it used much, but it was used in several rounds and seemingly performed quite well.
Vortex Vigilon - the Vigilon is to Vortex what the Strongarm is to Elite, in that it's a solid pistol(ish) blaster with usable capacity and solid performance. As with the Praxis, the Vortex buff did give the user a better survival chance in HvZ, but again the slowness and scarcity of Vortex discs were big issues. Ultimately like the Praxis the Vigilon was dumped for other dart blasters.
Elite Stryfe - unlike the Stryfe I have/use, this one was stock. It performed much like the Demolisher, except with stock ranges, and so was fairly balanced. It was a pretty solid all round blaster.

Due to having an odd number of players for much of the day, we were forced to play mainly HvZ based games, though they flowed quite well and were a lot of fun.

Instead of the usually fairly open fields or playgrounds, we switched play area a lot, using some open areas, some areas with lots of buildings and some playgrounds. The variety made the games more interesting, though of course required the use of a school outside of school hours.The areas with buildings made HvZ
very interesting, as you would have to be wary of every corner lest you be ambushed and turned or stunned, but also meant that if you were particularly agile, you could lose less agile pursuers (or catch up to less agile prey) in the narrow corridors.

Squad HvZ was a little weird, and IMO didn't work out particularly well. Because zombies start of with superior numbers and have short respawns/stuns, the humans are always under a lot of pressure. Add on to that that most of the arenas were quite small areas, and more often than not the humans would all be tagged within 90 seconds. One time we did play in a larger area, however due to miscommunication the zombies forgot about one human and he ended up winning.
Usually as soon as one human fell, the others would too in quick succession, however I managed to survive solo longer than most solo humans did, but still not long enough to win.
A surviving human was meant to receive an upgrade, with a zombie also receiving an upgrade for every human upgrade, but as we only had one human survive twice, not much upgrading was done.
Some of the zombie wins were due to skill and human incompetence, however some arenas I felt were too small for such a gametype.
The Flipfury came into its own in Squad HvZ as we were limited to a single sidearm blaster, and has by far the highest capacity of any blaster considered a sidearm. Since Squad HvZ gives little time to reload, especially when only one human is left, the Flipfury's huge capacity allowed the user to survive significantly longer than if they were using for instance a Strongarm.

Runner HvZ was much better and worked very well to prevent human camping. After being given time to reload humans would have one minute to leave the safe zone, or else they would automatically be zombified. This forced the humans to keep moving pretty much all the time, and because a new run only started after every surviving human was accounted for in the safe zone, any humans who tried to hide would normally end up being zombified.
There was something to be said for stealth though. As the two safe zones were on opposite sides of the building occupied area, in earlier runs it would be fairly easy to pick a longer, less exposed route to run and still arrive with the other runners taking more staightforward routes. Obviously in later runs with more zombies and less humans, stealth was near impossible, as all the zombies would start around the safe zone, and so stunning and/or outrunning were your only options.
In the Runner HvZ we played, I was the final survivor. This wasn't due to my blaster choice at all, I'd chosen the Secret Shot and fired it only 5-6 times maybe, in the final 3 or so runs, the last of which I was tagged in. Instead my tactic was to let one or two other humans divert at least half of the zombies, after which I would simply outrun the rest and stun one or two if needed. Since humans would often run in groups, I would simply go with the groups and get ahead, and of course to survive all you need to do is be faster than the slowest member. By repeating this tactic several times, I would get through all the rounds unscathed and practically unnoticed, until the end of course.
Runner HvZ is a pretty good fast HvZ variant for smaller groups, as it keeps people moving and promotes both teamwork and solo play in different ways. It could probably work with more people with tweaked rules for the zombies.

Recall HvZ is a much longer lasting HvZ, designed for larger areas and more players. Since it starts with only a few zombies and mostly humans, early on is quite relaxed for the human players, while the zombies have to try and ambush humans to have any hope of a tag. Since the original zombies (OZs) are desparate for a tag, they will very quickly gang up on anyone not in a group to get the early tag. The main group remains relatively safe, although checking corners around buildings is always nerve-racking.
The double tap rule implemented also made it very dangerous for loners, as they would have to use at least two darts for any significant reprieve against even just a lone zombie, and would have to use a significant portion of ammo to escape just 2 zombies. Often humans would just get the stun, and use the 5 seconds to run as far as possible, which more often than not worked against solo zombies, but returns diminished quickly against multiple zombies.
The upgrade feature made things very interesting for humans nearby other humans in distress. Because humans receive an upgrade for every fallen human, a selfish human could potentially let others become zombie food to get access to a superior loadout to improve their own chance of survival.

We had 10 players in total, starting with 2 OZs.
Early on the OZs had avery low chance of a successful charge against the main group of humans because of the volume of fire that the group could put out compared to the zombie numbers. They would be forced to prey on either the frontrunner, the lagger or any loners. The main group of humans typically stayed close together and covered one another, making frontrunner/lagger option mostly unviable (unless the group was non-vigilant checking corners), forcing the zombies to resort to looking for loners. This would usually be achieved by charging at the group from close by, causingsome humans to panic and split away from the group, making them much easier prey.
The game would proceed in this manner for about 2 tags, up until the point where the zombies had significant numbers. At this point the zombies would start becoming much more aggressive, persistently pursuing the main human group while chasing down (and usually tagging) any stragglers. It was at this point that the upgrades given to humans began to be properly useful, as the increased ammo cap and better blasters gave the now smaller human group still a solid chance of survival, provided they worked together. Nevertheless the relentlessness of the pursuit would produce some mistakes from a few humans, allowing the zombies to get the upper hand and tag them.
Once the zombies outnumbered the humans, the real chase began. Earlier in the game the human group would typically just walk or jog as any zombie who got too close would be hosed down with darts, and so running was unnecessary. However with now inferior numbers, the humans would be easily overwhelmed if they didn't keep moving, and so the humans resorted to running to some area they could defend for a short while, turning around and stunning nearby zombies, then quickly running off again. Naturally this would become very taxing on the humans, and the more tired/less combat effective humans would fall behind, become vulnerable and get nommed.
Myself and a Stampede wielder were two of the last few humans left. After being separated from the other humans following another upgrade, we snuck up behind the zombie horde to try and get back into the upgrade zone, however ended up having to run from the horde, which now consisted of every other player. The other human fell behind and was eventually tagged, leaving me alone to face the horde. Knowing I had little energy left, instead of staying away from the horde to try and last them out, I simply went straight for the upgrade zone after evading one of the faster zombies. I managed to stun the 3 defending zombies and made it into the upgrade zone before the rest of the horde returned, achieving an"extraction" win.

The main reason for the loss of the humans late in the game was due to the humans splitting up. Lone humans were easy prey for a horde of any reasonable size, and even pairs or triples of humans had to be careful as a well planned zombie ambush and/or some bad decisions could easily lead to the humans being tagged.
The easiest ways for a human to survive are to either be fitter and faster than everyone else (which of course is not a solution viable for everyone), or to stick in a solid, cohesive group. A group's firepower is significantly greater than any single human's, and a well communicating group can combat just about any threat, even superior zombie numbers. Humans have the easiest job in early game, and the hardest job late in the game, due to the growth of the horde and diminishing of the survivors.
The easiest way for zombies to get early tags are to of course target the stragglers and loners, who are easily snuck up or ganged up on. Later tags can be achieved by slowly picking off group outliers, as a charge with a decent zombie number should be able to survive long enough to get at least one tag. Once the zombies have superior numbers they can simply chase down and surround the humans, and one by one take them down. Conversely to humans, zombies have the hardest job early in the game, and the easiest job in late game.

OZ choice was incredibly important for Recall HvZ, as if the OZs are not very good at being zombies, the humans could keep their numbers up for a very long time. In comparison, in Squad HvZ the zombies start with higher numbers in close quarters so they're practically guaranteed the tags within a few minutes, and with Runner HvZ the humans are bound to get tired so the slower ones become easy prey, and after that so do the loners. In Recall HvZ however, since the zombie respawn is specified as "out of sight", the many humans have plenty of time after taking out a zombie to pick up the used ammo, and so are unlikely to run out of ammo in the early stages, making easy pickings for zombies quite rare.
Communication was also an issue in Recall HvZ. There were no walkie talkies used, so even if a human was tagged, there was no way of knowing for the other humans unless they saw it, saw the tagged player with zombies, or heard it from the zombies/tagged player.
Despite these potential flaws, Recall HvZ was quite fun, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Capture the Box/VIP was again different to the games I'm used to, being another longer, slower game than the fast paced games I normally play. In this gamemode you would attempt to maintain control of a person in cardboard armour, by tagging them in exposed areas to take control. This game worked in a similar fashion to HvZ, except with symmetrical teams instead of the human-zombie assymetry. Teamwork was paramount, as taking on enemies while protecting and ordering around a person who can only walk is quite difficult, and having inferior numbers in such an engagement would usually result in defeat.
A more risky tactic would be to use the box man as mobile cover, as the cardboard armour blocks darts. This would give you and your teammates the ability to fire at will at enemies, however if the enemy tagged the box man, you would have to waste time and darts retagging them to maintain your cover. Furthermore, if you and your teammates were eliminated, you would have to go through the tedious process of hunting down and tagging the box man.
In this particular game I used my Demolisher, which was perhaps a mistake. While not signficantly modded by most modder's standards, compared to the stock blasters used it was insanely effective and quite overpowered. Being pretty much totally superior to just about every blaster there, I was able to hold the box man on my own, with enemies being incapable of getting within range without being sprayed down. While my teammates did help to ward off and distract enemies, at no point was I in any significant danger from being overwhelmed, and throughout the ~12 minute game I was only hit once.
Communication was a major issue. As there were only two walkie talkies, and they were used only to coordinate the start of the game, unless you got information directly from players who were recently near the box man (or saw the box man yourself), you had no way of knowing which team had the box, or where the box was. This resulted in several players spending several minutes simply wandering around, looking for any sign of combat or the box. As the box defender, I spent several minutes wandering around with the box looking for teammates who had split off earlier on after a skirmish with the other team.
We played with 2 teams of 3 players, and in the the play area used I feel that larger teams would have made the game more interesting, as there would have been a lot more skirmishes. As it played out in this particular game, 3v3 made it surprisingly difficult to find anyone else. Had I used more balanced blasters (such as perhaps my Sweet Revenges) perhaps there would have been more combat, because the enemy players were too afraid to attack me for fear of being hosed down by the Demolisher.
I feel that this sort of game benefits greatly from communication devices like walkie talkies, and would certainly benefit from either more players or a smaller play area.

↧

LiPo Mods: Elite Rayven and Rapidstrike PDW

April 18, 2015, 12:08 am

≫ Next: Loadouts 15: Personal Loadouts 4

≪ Previous: Nerf Game Report 9/4/15

So far in my electrical modding history, I've done several rewires and a few (minor) motor replacements [usually just Barricade motors], but I have never delved into the world of LiPo batteries. After experiencing some blasters that don't work too well even with the higher current IMRs, I decided to save up and jump in.

These are the two LiPos I currently have, with a Koosh dart for scale.
The top LiPo is a 1s (a single LiPo cell, with 3.7V nominal), 750mAh (capacity), 35-70C (discharge). It can continuously supply a current of around 26A (current = discharge * capacity), and burst supply nearly 53A. Compare this to two parallel IMRs that put out at most 20A in burst. This LiPo is for running the Tamiya Mach Dash Pros in my E.Rayven.
This particular 1S had a different connector, so I had to cut the wires to solder on the new connector, hence the e-tape insulation. It is incredibly important when doing such a modification to only cut one wire at a time, as shorting out a Lipo can have severe consequences, such as a fire.
The bottom LiPo is a 2s (two LiPo cells in series, with 7.4V nominal), 800mAh, 40-60C. It can continuously supply 32A, and burst supply 48A. Compare this to two series IMRs that put out 5-10A at most.

I chose these particular LiPos to start off with because they will power the blasters most in need of LiPos. The E.Rayven's Mach Dashes can pull quite a lot of current, and though parallel IMRs put out a decent amount, the extra resistance from the battery tray terminals (among other extra parts) meant that they didn't receive as much current as needed, resulting in a slower-than-ideal spin-up time, and noticeable loss of range in rapid fire.
The Rapidstrike's design means that it effectively has 3 motors in parallel as opposed to most flywheelers, which have 2 in parallel. This causes it to draw significantly more current than say a Stryfe. Because the two series IMRs can't put out enough current, when the flywheels are revved while the dart pusher is moving (as when you're firing), both receive a noticeable drop in speed. As a further issue, the low current put out by IMRs means that the loss of range in rapid fire is very significant, a major problem for a full-auto blaster.

Trustfires would do nothing but amplify the problems IMRs have. Unlike IMRs which can put out 5A or more, Trustfires are typically stuck with at most 1-2A. While Trustfires are typically much cheaper than IMRs, they are significantly worse for our purposes. Likewise, while IMRs are better than Trustfires, they are still not the best as just about every viable replacement motor draws more current than IMRs can supply.

Let's look at the Rayven first.

Externally it looks no different. While blasters need further modification beyond just a standard rewire to accept LiPos, it's not difficult or particularly space consuming.
The battery tray holds the major alterations.

Instead of housing 1-4 AA-sized batteries, the battery tray now houses the 1S LiPo and a LiPo connector, in my case an XT60 (male end, the battery has the female end). As shown above, the LiPo fits neatly in the tray without the connectors connected, so the battery is kept safe while the blaster is kept inert.

Naturally the battery tray had to be significantly altered, with holes made for the wires for the connector, and the ribs removed for the LiPo and connectors to fit.

Connected up, the stiffness of the wires keeps the LiPo in place along with the ribs.

The bottom of the tray has some foam to cushion the LiPo, as well as to keep it from sliding around.

The battery tray cover also has cushioning foam, andhad to be shaved down a little to allow for the height of the XT60 connectors.

Let's look at the RapidPDW.

Again from the outside nothing looks different to what it was last time.

Like the E.Rayven, the RapidPDW also has an XT60 (male end) for its LiPo in place of its old 2AA holder.

Unlike the E.Rayven's tiny 1S that fit in easily, the 2S for the RapidPDW only just fits. And by "only just", I mean that some grinding was needed to make the LiPo removable and insertable without opening up the whole blaster.
With some careful grinding though everything fits in nicely. The loose wires that are sticking out fold in behind the battery door, and are not exposed at all.

One other change was made to the RapidPDW, though not a LiPo-related one.

As we know, the Rapidstrike's stock can be retracted...

...or extended. However I had a slight problem. Even with the stock retracted the RapidPDW would be *just* long enough such that when put in my Uni backpack the muzzle would *just* stick out.

Solution? Make the stock removable. It's very basic, it just involves shaving down a few plastic protrusions to allow the stock to be pulled out. The metal pin also needs to be removed, though as that particular piece is free floating, chances are you've dropped it a couple times already if you've opened your Rapidstrike.
A not insignificant amount of force is required to remove or reinsert the stock, but for the average teenager or adult, it should be pretty easy with a single smooth motion.

I personally think the RapidPDW looks pretty cool without the stock, it still feels reasonably well balanced and is still easy to handle.

With the stock removed the RapidPDW now fits into a shorter space, and is now short enough to fit inconspicuously into my backpack.

So how have the LiPos affected the performance of these two blasters? Very, very well in fact.
The E.Rayven now spins up much faster than before, reaching max speed in just over half a second. Thanks to the extra current, the motors can now spin stock Rayven flywheels seemingly as fast as the lighter Stryfe flywheels, where IMRs spun the Rayven flys noticeably slower than the Stryfe flys. The E.Rayven is now easily one of my favourite and best performing blasters, and would be my go-to for most purposes.
The RapidPDW now shows no issues with revving the flywheels and cycling the dart pusher simultaneously. Additionally, the flywheels seem to spin up faster and the dart pusher seems to cycle slightly fast than when it was being run on IMRs.
I feel like getting a 40C 2S was pretty overkill for the RapidPDW, I've seen people run upgraded motors that draw heaps more current with 2S LiPos with lower discharge rates and comparable capacities. On stock motors you could probably get away with the slightly smaller and cheaper 20-25C.

The two biggest problems with LiPos that are can see are as follows.
Firstly and most obviously from my pictures, LiPos require a special connector to hook up to the blasters, unlike Trustfires/IMRs which are AA sized and so slot right in. Furthermore, due to their non-AA size and shape Lipos typically require some sanding/grinding/cutting/sawing of internal parts to have them fit internally, especially if you want them in an AA battery tray. However with a soldering iron (which you should already have if you're doing rewires and are considering LiPos) and a rotary tool (which is a universally useful tool, not just in Nerf), these problems are easily fixed.
Secondly and most economically important for entry into the LiPo world, LiPos require a special charger. While you can get a versatile, good quality Trustfire/IMR charger for about 20AUD, a reputable branded LiPo charger with power supply can cost upwards of 50AUD. It was this initial cost barrier that has prevented me from entering the LiPo world for the period I was considering LiPos during, and is likely the main cost that will repel many people from switching to LiPos.
Ironically however, LiPos themselves are quite cheap compared to IMRs and Trustfires, considering their capabilities. A pair of IMRs required to run just a single blaster typically costs about 20AUD, while my two LiPos cost less than 15AUD together, and the LiPos have much, much greater current output capabilities. Trustfires can be had for very cheap, let's say around 2AUD per Trusty. To match my 2S Lipo in current, which cost about 12AUD, you would have to string together about 32 pairs of Trustfires in parallel, which would cost 128AUD for all 64 Trustfires required. Simply put, LiPos completely outclass Trustfires and IMRs in current output per dollar. For that reason, after overcoming the initial cost barrier LiPos can become surprisingly cheap, and are incredibly good at their job.

All in all, the switch to LiPos I think is a good choice for me. They put out the current required for higher spec flywheel builds, which is far beyond the capabilities of IMRs or Trustfires, and are also cheaper (after the initial cost) than IMRs.

And in other non-Nerf related news, Star Wars Battlefront! *much excite*
Also second Star Wars trailer, IMO much better than the first.

↧

Loadouts 15: Personal Loadouts 4

April 27, 2015, 12:07 am

≫ Next: Review: HobbyMods EAT Spring Mod Kit

≪ Previous: LiPo Mods: Elite Rayven and Rapidstrike PDW

A couple of new loadouts from newer acquisitions.
Do note that in the games I host with just my friends, I almost never run with a secondary because I can't be bothered, and noone else uses them. Heck, me being able to carry more than two clips is already overpowered.

Scenario Description: Loadouts that we use, tailored to our needs.
Keys to Victory: N/A
Unnecessary Burdens: N/A

P13c30fch33s3

Clip System 2c (General use)

Primary: Elite Rayven CS-18 (EPPS, Shortened Retal barrel with Retal Foregrip, Tamiya Mach Dash Pros + 1S LiPo)

Secondary: Rebelle Sweet Revenge (x1 or 2)
Gear: BSUK Battle Belt, Sweet Revenge holster (x1 or 2)
Ammo: 18 dart clips, Kooshes
Purpose: To provide longer range flywheel goodness
Strengths: Range, accuracy (slightly superior to that of Stryfe), can dual wield both blasters, reloading is easy, ROF, fairly compact and light, almost no rev time
Weaknesses: Minimal range loss over time and in rapid fire
Description: I personally prefer using the Rayven to the Stryfe, because I prefer the Rayven's design and I like bullpup things. It's also more compact than an equivalently tacticool Stryfe because of the bullpup design. Ranges are excellent thanks to the new motors and battery, comparable to that of my EAT, yet with the ROF of a flywheeler, which combine to make a great blaster.
This is also probably what I would run in an HvZ or any larger Nerf wars (that don't use half length darts), hence the SRs. If not the Rayven I'd run my EAT, or possibly an overhauled Rapidstrike if I get one done.
If possible I would run with 5 18 clips, one loaded and 4 in the Belt, I just couldn't be bothered fishing out my 18 clips for the pic on the right.

Clip System 2c (Close range)

Primary: Elite Rapidstrike CS-18 (EPPS, minimised [RapidPDW], 2S LiPo)
Secondary: None or Rebelle Bliss
Gear: BSUK Battle Belt
Ammo: 18 dart clips, Kooshes
Purpose: To provide compact rapid fire flywheel goodness for close quarters
Strengths: Ease of spamming, one-handability, faster rev time than stock, sufficient range for CQC, ROF, reloading
Weaknesses: Not very comfortable to hold in two hands, heavier and bulkier than a similar size Stryfe, small rev time
Description: With the E.Rayven's new motors, it's now a blaster I can't use safely in close quarters as it hits extremely hard at such ranges. The RapidPDW was the blaster I built to replace the E.Rayven for close quarters and Uni games, and it performs extremely well. The power of the LiPo gives the RPDW a good rate of fire of about 6-7dps and a respectable range without sacrificing either (which was an issue with IMRs). The stock makes the RPDW solid and comfortable to shoulder and aim, and can also be removed to make the RPDW smaller and more maneuverable. While I typically prefer springers for close quarters, the power of the LiPo greatly reduces the typical weakness of a flywheeler in CQC, rev up time. With the greatly reduced rev up time, the RPDW can get off a solid shot a fraction of a second after a primed springer, however after that it can spray out a burst of darts before most springers can get off a second or third shot.
With this CQC loadout, I take less 18 clips than I normally would, as CQC games are typically shorter, and the reduction in bulk helps in maneuverability.

Revolver 1 (Close range)

Primary: Rebelle Sweet Revenge x 2
Secondary: None

Gear: Dart pouch, Sweet Revenge holster x 2
Ammo: Whatever darts are available, preferably Kooshes
Purpose: To provide highly mobile dual wielding awesomeness for times when clip system stuff is unsuitable
Strengths: Range, dual wielding is easy, comfortable and highly effective against comparable blasters, very light and highly mobile
Weaknesses: ROF isn't as good as slam fire, less capacity than dual Strongarms, accuracy isn't great
Description: This loadout has been devastatingly effective for me in the wars I use it in, even when I had just one Sweet Revenge. I use it primarily at Tag Recon games, where the majority of blasters are Strongarms, Roughcuts and other small/mid sized non-clip system blasters.
My primary (right hand) Sweet Revenge is my modded one, and gets a fair bit more range than stock thanks to a spring upgrade, though the prime is a fair bit harder. It's also compatible with just about any type of Nerf micro dart, and fires them all well, even the worn out slightly thinner ones that can jam up other blasters (though not as well of course). It's the one I use for longer ranged potshots and suppression. This was my first Sweet Revenge, and is my secondary for just about every loadout where it's not a primary. The extra range of this Sweet Revenge allows me to get solid tags on opponents who can barely get a shot near me.
My secondary (left hand) Sweet Revenge is not as powerful, as my left thumb tends to slip if the spring load is too strong. It can misfire with old worn out darts thanks to the AR, but is mainly used to support my primary. It provides follow-up shots and the ability to threaten two opponents at once, or threaten an opponent with two shots which is very helpful especially in mini HvZ. The secondary Sweet Revenge also helps give me cover when I'm reloading or repriming the primary one. I got this Sweet Revenge pretty much entirely for dual wielding, and I'm very glad I did.
I tried dual wielding Strongarms, and it feels far clunkier and clumsier than dual Sweet Revenges. I also personally don't like Hammershots as much, they don't feel as good in hand, and aesthetically don't appeal to me.

Rockets 1 (Light)

Primary: Buzz Bee Extreme Blastzooka (on sling)
Secondary: Rebelle Sweet Revenge (x1 or 2)
Gear: Nerf Tactical Vest, Sweet Revenge holster (x1 or 2)
Ammo: Buzz Bee or Demolisher rockets, Kooshes
Purpose: To provide lightweight rocket firepower
Strengths: Lightweight for a rocket blaster, light and mobile
Weaknesses: Lack of range compared to dart blasters, long pump time, single shot, overall lack of practicality unless rockets have special powers, overall is very weak compared to more generalised (usually clip system) based loadouts
Description: The Blastzooka is currently the only standalone rocket blaster available in stores (albeit not Aussie stores *sigh*) and for that reason it's the most suitable blaster for this role. While you probably wouldn't want to use it in a regular gamemode, in games where rockets have special powers (such as taking someone out of the game or destroying shields) the threat of a rocket shot is more than enough to cover up the general impracticality and weakness of the loadout.
Sweet Revenges are my standard secondary, and chances are they'll be used a lot because of the Blastzooka's slow reload time and single shot.
The Nerf Tac Vest conveniently holds Buzz Bee rockets quite well.

50ap5ud5

Revolver 1 (Close range)

Primary: Rebelle Sweet Revenge x 2

Secondary: None
Gear: Dart pouch, Sweet Revenge holster x 2
Ammo: Whatever darts are available, preferably Elites
Purpose: To provide highly mobile dual wielding awesomeness
Strengths: Range, dual wielding is easy, comfortable and highly effective against comparable blasters, very light and highly mobile
Weaknesses: ROF isn't as good as slam fire, accuracy isn't great
Description:This loadout has been highly effective at the small casual Nerf games I attend, with 3-4 people (including me)and where most blasters are old N-Strike clip-system blasters and occassionally some non-clip system Elite blasters like Firestrikes and Strongarms,
My primary( right hand) Sweet Revenge is currently modded, with a Jolt spring added and gives me a range advantage over almost every other blaster available and is also lightweight, giving me the advantage to run fast and potshot people from far away, with its range even coming close to the incredibly powerful Wipeout Chalk Blaster that one of my friends uses.
My secondary (stock) Sweet Revenge is simply there for dual-wielding awesomeness and to back me up when I'm reloading my primary SR. In the first game where I used this loadout, I won a Free-for-All round and afterwards my loadout was deemed "incredibly OP" so now I generally use only my primary Sweet Revenge (Which is still overpowered nevertheless).

↧

Review: HobbyMods EAT Spring Mod Kit

May 4, 2015, 3:58 am

≫ Next: N-Strike vs Elite Round 6: Elite Strongarm vs N-Strike Maverick REV-6

≪ Previous: Loadouts 15: Personal Loadouts 4

HobbyMods (link left) is an Aussie based aftermarket/mod parts seller who does springs and 3D mod parts. Being that the EAT is one of my favourite blasters and HobbyMods have an excellent mod kit for it, I decided to pick up a set (as well as another for a friend).

As I installed the kit at night, unfortunately the pics have rather bad lighting, but hopefully you can still see the important parts.

Here's all the parts you get. From top to bottom, left to right, we have:

7kg main spring
upgraded catch spring
lubricant
3D printed catch
3D printed spring rest

The 3D printed stuff is of a quality I've never seen before, the resolution is extremely good and it's very difficult to see or even feel that the parts are even printed (except the back surfaces). The surfaces are extremely smooth and are extremely cleanly done.

Here's a comparison of the stock parts (right) vs the new mod parts (left).
Looking at the main spring (top) first, you can see that the mod spring is made of a much thicker wire than the stock spring, which gives it the extra power.
The catch springs (middle) differ in the same way as the main springs, in that the mod spring uses much thicker wire and is much stronger than the stock spring.
Finally the catch plates, and immediately you can see that the new catch plate is significantly thicker and more heavily reinforced than the stock plate. This makes the new plate much less flexible and far more robust compared to the old plate.

Naturally the best way to get more power from a springer is to put in a more powerful main spring, which is the main component in the kit. To contain and catch a more powerful spring, a more powerful catch spring is required. Now due to the extra force of the new main spring, the catch plate also comes under a lot more force. While a number of blasters have fairly robust stock catch plates (thus not requiring a new one), the EAT's catch plate is quite thin and flexible. While I haven't personally seen any issues arise from it, I believe there are other Nerfers who use their blasters extremely frequently who have complained about the weakness of the stock catch.

The spring rest fits the main spring quite well, and has a hole for the plunger tube. As far as I can tell it's not a necessity as I've run OMW springs in EATs for over a year with no issue. It does help to ensure that the spring remains in place and the plunger feeds smoothly, so if your blaster is extremely worn you may feel a difference.

Here's the stock internals.

Here's the internals with the all the new mod parts. Note the location of the spring rest.
The new catch and catch spring also significantly improve the feel of pulling the trigger, giving a solid pull more akin to that of a Retaliator, as opposed to the "squishy" feel of a stock EAT due to the slam fire mech.

Installation is easy if you have any experience with removing and inserting internal components. Since all of the mod parts are drop-in pieces, no shell work is required, and thus the only tool needed is a suitable sized screwdriver (0pt should do).
New performance is quite impressive. I don't have a chronograph or a long enough tape measure, but Foam Data Services has a data sheet on it here, with an average of 85fps using either Elite darts or Kooshes (I'm not sure), with the AR intact. For reference, a stock grey trigger EAT gets maybe 50fps average, and an orange trigger gets up to 60fps average. An increase of up to 30fps for just a few minutes work and no effort at all is pretty good.
Priming is naturally significantly harder thanks to the new spring, which is a little under 3x stronger than an orange trigger spring, and about 3.5x stronger than a grey trigger spring. If you're as strong as even an average 14 or so year old, you should have no trouble priming it, though of course kids will probably have trouble using it if they're not fairly strong.
Accuracy is still mostly dependent on the darts you use, with my Kooshes I was getting quite good groupings from both the stock and modded EATs. Elites are likely to fly all over the place, as they really don't tolerate high power very well.

The HobbyMods EAT kit costs 20AUD + postage, which starts at about 8AUD for a domestic parcel. Is it worth the cost?
Well the kit is certainly more expensive than the equivalent OMW mod kit (the "Stage 1"), which includes largerly the same pieces and costs 13USD. However if the OMW kit is similar to the other kits they've produced, the springs and lubricant are the only useful bits, as I've heard about issues with the metal catches not catching properly and shaving out of the shell. Every single part of the HobbyMods kit does its job well, and each of the 3D pieces is beautifully produced and shaped, and fit perfectly.
For me personally I would definitely stick with the HobbyMods kit. Though the price is higher (and shipping will be pretty high for you non-Aussies), the HobbyMods kit overall fits better and works better than the OMW kit.
20AUD is quite a lot to pay for a blaster that cost at most 30AUD (and regularly went on sale for 20AUD and even less), but the HobbyMods kit really makes it quite a lot better, giving it excellent power while still maintaining usability, as well as providing everything needed to support the new power.

If you're on a tight budget and want a good EAT, you only need the main spring (which is available for 12AUD) and a new catch spring, which can be salvaged from all manner of Nerf and non-Nerf related things. If you want a solid, reliable EAT that you won't need to worry about for a long time, the full HobbyMods kit is what you'll want.

↧

N-Strike vs Elite Round 6: Elite Strongarm vs N-Strike Maverick REV-6

May 11, 2015, 3:24 am

≫ Next: Mini Review: Nerf Rebelle Bliss

≪ Previous: Review: HobbyMods EAT Spring Mod Kit

The Strongarm and Maverick are both staples of their respective lines. Both are the quintessential 6-shot revolver that's easy to use and very cheap. Which one is better?

I do realise that in the scheme of things this comparison is pretty late, but I really want to keep up the Elite vs N-Strike comparison records.

Aesthetics: The Maverick takes after classic revolver styling. It's big, it's brash, it looks cool, and is a staple in aesthetic modding. It's almost impossible to look around Nerf aesthetic modding without seeing some Mavericks. The Strongarm on the other hand has a much sleeker, slightly thinner, overall more modern design. Both have very distinct styles, and so like every other aesthetics round I'm not awarding points.
Accessories: Both blasters come with themselves and 6 darts (Strongarm has Elites, Mav has Suctions, though the double pack has Whistlers). It's a draw here.
Range/Power: The Maverick, being an N-Strike blaster, has a poor range of about 8-9m, not helped by the unaerodynamic Suctions. Use of Whistlers bumps the range up to maybe 10-11m. The Strongarm, though a little inconsistent with Elites, easily breaks the 12m mark, even with a grey trigger.
The Strongarm wins naturally.
Accuracy: Thanks to the Suctions/Whistlers it comes with, the Maverick is surprisingly accurate, though the Whistlers do veer a little bit. Most darts will easily fly straight through the usual doorway at 7-8m. The same cannot be said about the Strongarm, primarily due to the Elite darts. While a few darts do fly straight through the doorway, most veer off, whether hitting the doorframe or just flying away.
The Mav wins this round.
Usability: Both blasters have issues, though the Mav's are far more prominent.
The Maverick has a horrible rotation mech. It's directly linked to the trigger, and so the trigger pull directly determines how good of a rotation you will get. Too slow and the plunger will fire too early, resulting in a weak shot. Too fast and you risk the cylinder not rotating at all. Basically if you don't pull the trigger at the perfect speed, you'll get a weaker shot, totally misfire or just not rotate properly.
This gets even worse as the Mav gets older, as the rotation mech gets worn down and so rotation becomes less and less reliable.
The Strongarm is known to over time get worn down in such a way that it slowly begins to fail rotating. I've seen this occur to one of META's Strongarms, though that one was already like that since it was second hand. Besides that, all of META's main use Strongarms still work perfectly despite the abuse they've gone through, however I have read a number of cases (more than most one-off issues) of Strongarms failing to rotate. Rotating after firing has greatly improved the Strongarm's consistency over the Mav, as it removes the variability of the trigger pull from the equation. It also almost totally removes any misfires or misrotations.
The Strongarm's issue is less severe than the Mav's, and on top of that doesn't have as many issues as the Mav does.
Strongarm wins of course.
Rate of Fire: The Maverick is limited to about 2-3dps before you start getting misfires and misrotations. The instability of the rotating mech really lets it down here.
The Strongarm, thanks to slam-fire, can pump out its 6 darts in about a second if you really push it.
The Strongarm wins naturally.
Capacity: Both blasters have 6 dart cylinders so this round is a draw too.
Value for Money: Both blasters were available for similar price ranges, 10AUD outside of sales is about the best you could get. The Strongarm however performs much better out of box and has far fewer issues than the Mav, so it's a much better purchase, and so wins this round.

The Strongarm has won 4 rounds, the Maverick 1, with 2 draws. And the Maverick's sole round was entirely dependent on the darts included, if you gave the Strongarm the same ammo you'd probably get similar spread patterns. Therefore I declare the Strongarm to be the unambiguously superior blaster. The Maverick has no practical place in the Nerf world any more, it's value is purely aesthetic, nostalgic or for collection (and even then, only the special colourings).

After this sixth round of N-Strike vs Elite, the score is:
Elite: 4.5 -- N-Strike: 1.5

I should have a new review up in the next week if I don't get swamped by some surprise assignments and tests.

↧

Mini Review: Nerf Rebelle Bliss

May 13, 2015, 4:54 am

≫ Next: Mini Mod: Semi Auto Rapidstrike (aka Slowstrike)

≪ Previous: N-Strike vs Elite Round 6: Elite Strongarm vs N-Strike Maverick REV-6

The Bliss is one of the many Jolt variants available, however is a more recent release and is one of the few distinctly different Jolt variants available individually.

The box is much the same style as the Jolt box, a basic blister package with minimal information.

The Bliss comes with just itself, one black and one teal dart.

The Bliss clearly has a distinct Jolt-like design, with the plunger tube in the handle leading straight into the barrel. It combines that with Rebelle-styling and colouring, including the Rebelle motif on the right side of the barrel (see below) and the curved priming loop.

Close up of the trigger and the Rebelle motif. No grey trigger here! Besides that, also note the curve trigger guard up front, distinctly different from the Jolt's straight one.

Standard Jolt-style plunger tube, with a similar length draw. Nothing too special here.

Like with the Jolt, a fully loaded dart will insert just about all the way with just the tip protruding. The muzzle has a recess that allows the use of fat head darts like Whistlers and Suctions.

One of the important differences between the Bliss and the Jolt is the curving on the handle. Where the Jolt's is quite straight and has recesses too small for my fingers, the Bliss has curves that much better fit my hand.
In fact it fits my hand so well I can barely feel the sharp edges that you get on basically all Jolt variants.
Like with the Jolt, I can spin the Bliss around my trigger finger quite easily.

As with most Jolt variants, the Bliss has a mini iron sight, and as usual it's totally useless since it's far too hard to line up.

Let's look at the Bliss next to the Elite Jolt.

Besides the obvious priming handle difference (pull ring vs handle), notice also that the angle between the barrel and grip is slightly larger on the Bliss compared to the Jolt. On top of that note the obviously different shell designs to fit with their respective lines.

Performance is much the same as the Elite Jolt, since the Bliss has a similar feeling spring, a similar system and the same dart type (Elite/Rebelle coloured Elite).
Range is quite good especially considering its size, 13-14m average with Elite-style darts. It's fairly consistent, few darts go wild.
Accuracy is also pretty good considering it uses Elite-style darts, hits on human sized targets at about 9m are quite easy.
Rate of fire is poor as you'd expect from a single shot, being largely dependent on your skill and dexterity. 2-3 seconds per dart is what I'd estimate, as with all other single shots.

The Bliss is a Target exclusive, and retails at 8AUD, though it regularly goes down to 6AUD in sales (the Elite Jolt retails for 5AUD at BigW).
I personally prefer the Bliss to the Jolt (mainly for comfort), but the huge price difference means the Bliss doesn't have quite the same value the Jolt has.
If you're after a basic last resort single shot, both the Bliss and Jolt fill the same role, though if you're willing to spend 8AUD for the Bliss, you really should just go and get a Triad from Kmart instead, those two extra shots can come in really useful (and if you get orange triggers, the Triad will also be that little bit more powerful).

Power: 6/7
Accuracy: 4/5
Value for Money: 4/5
Usability: 4.5/5
Rate of Fire: 1/5
Overall: 3.56/5

Personal Rating: 4.5/5 - I personally find it much more comfortable to hold than a Jolt, the curves in the handle help to minimise how much it cuts into your hand. The price is a little offputting though.

↧

Mini Mod: Semi Auto Rapidstrike (aka Slowstrike)

May 15, 2015, 10:48 pm

≫ Next: Game Report 23/5/15

≪ Previous: Mini Review: Nerf Rebelle Bliss

I have plans to make my Elite Rayven full auto. Those plans involve a Rapidstrike pusher, Longshot stock, Falcons and a 3S. As I'm currently waiting for the Falcons and 3S to arrive, I thought I'd make use of my now useless pusher donating RS.

Externally it looks no different, which was part of the goal. Internally however...

This is a progress shot part way through modding. At this point the pusher had been put in place, and the trigger had been linked up using epoxy. However the rev trigger was not set up, and the pusher had not been calibrated.
The pusher was taken from one of the four Barricades I had lying around, as they were the only spare junked flywheelers I had. Naturally it needed some calibration as Barricades are set up for feeding Whistlers from a cylinder, rather than Kooshes from a clip.

All set up, with everything else back in place. Rev switch has been replaced as per my usual, and the pusher and trigger have been properly calibrated and grinded down to feed and fire smoothly.
The pusher is not perfectly calibrated, there is a short pusher delay after every shot, but it's not noticeable at around 3dps.

The only external change is this small slot cut into the stock, needed to accomodate the new trigger when the stock is retraced. In fairness I could have just cut down the trigger instead.

The Slowstrike has been rewired as per usual fare, though is still using the stock battery tray. It's not a priority of mine to make the Slowstrike run off a LiPo, as I have no practical use for it over other blasters. Thanks to the rewire though, even using 4 C batteries it gets ranges similar to a stock orange trigger blaster (around 15m with blue Kooshes at near flat).

Let me reiterate, the reason I converted this RS to semi auto was that the pusher is being used in my Autorayven project, and so this RS became useless. I would not convert a regular RS to semi auto unless it was done electronically as part of a selective fire setup.

↧

Game Report 23/5/15

May 23, 2015, 11:32 pm

≫ Next: Review: Buzz Bee Range Master

≪ Previous: Mini Mod: Semi Auto Rapidstrike (aka Slowstrike)

Another game with Equalz Dee Foam Arms.

Gamemodes:
Old:
None

New:
HvZ - Humans try to survive against the zombie horde, and sometimes additional forces. Humans were limited in blasters and ammo, and got upgrades as they survived. Zombies also usually got upgrades as humans got upgrades for balance. Double tap rules were implemented for zombies - a first hit would stun the zombie and cause them to crouch for 3-5 seconds. A second hit during that stunned time would eliminate them. Bleed out rules were implemented for humans - if they are tagged they are stunned and crouch for 15-30 seconds. If a teammate touches their shoulder for 5 seconds before the time is up, the stunned human returns to play. If the time runs out, the human either is eliminated or becomes a zombie, depending on exact gamemode.
Zombie upgrades include vests (Mega and Vortex aren't insta-elims), swords (extra reach) and Pocket Howlers (ranged throw attack).
- Squad HvZv1.1 - a small group of humans would try to defend an objective (an ammo box) against a larger group of zombies. Unlike the previous squad HvZ, the zombies do not respawn. If the humans eliminate all zombies, they win. If all humans are eliminated or a zombie touches the objective (ammo box), the zombies win.
- Supply Drop HvZ - similar to Recall HvZ as described in the previous game report, with some changes. Initially there may or may not be zombies depending on player count. Alongside zombies, the humans also have to fight scavengers, essentially a second mod-run human team. Instead of having one single safe point filled with ammo and blasters, supplies are "dropped" in certain locations by scavengers/mods, and their location is relayed to the humans via walkie talkie, which is kept with the humans. To receive extra blasters and ammo, the humans must eliminate all scavengers, who as the game progresses get more and more powerful blasters. To make matters worse for the humans, they are not safe from zombies while collecting their newly acquired gear, and furthermore they usually acquire only a little bit of ammo and a single blaster for the whole group.
Humans who are eliminated become zombies, although at mod's discretion they may join the scavengers instead if the scavs are not threatening enough to the humans.
Rush - conceptually a little similar to Siege the Fort, but functionally very different. It's basically Rush from Battlefield, except with just one objective instead of multiple sets. In Rush the defenders are defending an objective from attackers, who try to touch the objective. Defenders have infinite lives and respawn at fellow defenders or behind the objective, after a 5 second delay after elimination. Attackers are larger in number, respawn at a given location well away from the objective, and have a set amount of lives. If the attackers touch the objective, they win immediately. If all attackers run out of lives, the defenders win. Defenders are typically loaded up with larger Vortex and Mega blasters, while attackers get dart firing pistols.
Both sides receive a few additional pieces, in the form of a few shields, swords and other such gear.

Blasters:
Regulars:
Rebelle Sweet Revenges (modded) - my standard modded dual wield pistols. Due to blaster restrictions and classes they didn't get as much action, but they were still extremely effective.
Elite Roughcut - performed as usual, they were especially effective for double-tapping zombies.
Elite Strongarm - performed as usual.
Elite Alpha Trooper (OMW 5kg spring, AR removed) - insanely overpowered compared to the stock and near stock stuff that was there, was instantly relegated to show-off only duty.
ZS Hammershots - same usual, solid all round pistols that worked great with dual wielding.
Rebelle Secret Shot - despite its apparent impracticality, I won every Squad HvZ round I played when I used the SS. It also worked well enough for Supply Drop, being that I actually spent less time in combat and spent more time just carrying blasters. People just loved how fabulous it was, and it'll probably become a staple just for that.
Mega Thunderbow - fairly large, bulky and all round silly as usual, with its main advantages being ROF (surprisingly good once you get some practice), range (better than most other stock blasters) and the extra abilities of Mega darts, typically being an instant elimination, bypassing double tap.
ZS Flipfury - as before, basically a Strongarm with a second cylinder. Worked just as a Strongarm does, except with the extra capacity which is always helpful.
Elite Stryfe -rev up time was quite slow as it was stock, so often I would rev it up for too short a time resulting in a pathetic shot. Additionally the Stryfe would often jam or plop out the Elite knock-offs that were in the dart mix, resulting in pretty much guaranteed elimination. Nevertheless, the high capacity and superior rate of fire it had was a big advantage if used correctly.

New:
Vortex Praxis - saw a little use in Rush alongside the Revonix. As standard for Vortex, superior range was its big selling point and gave it a significant advantage over most of the stock blasters. However the low velocity of Vortex discs meant that even at close range dodging the discs was not difficult.
Vortex Vigilon - this thing saw almost no use, however in the Supply Drop HvZ it was used in, it constantly jammed up with knock-off discs so it wasn't useful in any way.
Vortex Revonix 360- the only entirely new blaster to see any significant use. Alongside the Praxis, it only saw use in Rush, so my assessment of it will not be the best. Nevertheless, against a larger number of lesser armed opponents it was able to put out a very effective spray of discs, and the reload-on-the-fly feature was also quite helpful to keep topped up in lulls in combat. The Vortex range as usual was good for keeping the attackers back and out of effective range. As with the Praxis though, dodging the discs was fairly easy even at close range.

We played in 3 distinct areas. The first was around a house, so primarily close quarters with a fair bit of cover. We played Rush in this area as it's too small to play anything else. The second was an oval, used for Squad HvZ, with no cover. The third was a local school, used for Supply Drop HvZ. It had reasonable cover in some areas, and had enough twists and turns to keep you on your guard.

Rush was played with 2 defenders and 3 attackers. It was reasonably balanced in the sense that the attackers lost half to two thirds of their lives, but managed to win. Unbalanced would be if the attackers got annihilated or lost very few lives in winning. The biggest problem with this gamemode was the choke point, just before the area the objective was in. It was practically impossible to hit any of the defenders without luck, as they were able to either duck completely behind cover or just use a shield to block. This stalemate was only broken through luck, not through any skill or tactics.
I personally dislike any gamemode or area that forces narrow choke point combat, especially when the teams are unbalanced blaster wise, as it reduces combat to just a spray/potshot/luck fest, giving the team with the higher capacity/higher ROF blasters the advantage.
I would have preferred a play area that had cover, but was fairly open so the numerically superior attackers could try to flank or otherwise outmaneuver the defenders, reducing the proliferation of luck-based combat and emphasising more tactical play.
That's part of the reason I like playing around playgrounds - you get generally fairly open areas but still get some good cover, making tactical play more important to break stalemates.

After Rush, one more person arrived so we switched over to Squad HvZ on the oval, with 4 zombies and 2 humans.
For this particular Squad HvZ, there were 5 human classes in play for some semblence of balance:

Dual Hammershots, with minimal spare ammo
Strongarm with lots of spare ammo and two small arm shields (that block all zombie attacks)
Stryfe with a single set of 18 jungle clips (no spare ammo)
Thunderbow with spare megas
Secret Shot with no spare ammo (Veteran mode)

The dual Hammershots were all round solid and effective, as expected. There's not really much more I could say about them considering I usually dual wield Sweet Revenges.
The Strongarm was pretty much never used, because although the shields did help to block zombie attacks, a Strongarm on its own offered few advantages and as it required two-hand priming, also hindered the use of the arm shields.
The Stryfe was very effective, however did have some jamming issues as mentioned earlier. Those jams did get me eliminated a few times, however once the knock-offs were culled from the clips the Stryfe performed admirably, effectively taking down several zombies with ease, with the only threat being zombies throwing Pocket Howlers. Zombies would be very afraid of approaching the Stryfe knowing they would get a face full of foam.
The Thunderbow had the advantage of insta-elimination against zombies where everything else had to double-tap. Its longer range was also helpful for keeping the horde at bay, however the low capacity often got its user nommed by zombies if they didn't keep it topped up. The vest zombie was the only zombie that the Thunderbow didn't insta-elim, requiring standard double-tap, and so the vest zombie was very effective for draining the Thunderbow's ammo.
The Secret Shot was there primarily to balance any human who was simply too good, however ironically in both rounds I used it in, the humans won without casualty. I was always paired with a Stryfe-wielding human though, so they usually put in the main hits and attack the zombies, and I would be there to finish off zombies and protect the objective. This worked very well as the Secret Shot had enough ammo to finish off two zombies and double tap a third if necessary.

By far the most threatening zombies were the ranged ones, as they were the only ones who were still a threat at range. All other zombies could be easily taken down and eliminated, as was the case if the humans were feeling aggressive enough. However the ranged zombies scored very few hits, probably due to poor throwing ability, so becoming regular zombies until they picked their Pocket Howler up again.
Besides the threat of ranged zombies, tunnel vision and running out of ammo were by far the biggest enemies of the humans. Running out of ammo naturally would get a human eliminated, with their partner or the objective falling shortly after. Most humans made sure to keep their ammo topped up so that was rarely a problem. Tunnel vision however was a problem that occurred frequently and caused a lot of humans to lose. Normally what would happen is the two humans would focus on 3 of the 4 zombies (an engagement heavily favouring the humans), but forget about the 4th zombie who would run up from behind and either tag a human or two, or take down the objective, resulting in a quick and humiliating human defeat.

Squad HvZ was a good way to get people moving (primarily as zombies), and also promote teamwork, as the zombies had little chance if they acted alone, and the humans had little chance if they didn't cover each other. A group of cooperating zombies versus a pair of cooperating humans would make for a pretty good game, though naturally that didn't quite happen in these games.
As the play area wasn't restricted to a small space, we didn't get the same issues as last time, however one problem was that if there was just one zombie left, they would just get chased away by a human. That could easily be fixed by implementing a timer or a zombie concede condition.
Squad HvZ was what we played most as it was easy to set up, worked well, and easy to pack up.

Lastly we played a round of Supply Drop HvZ. As we still only had 6 people we started off with one scavenger and 5 humans. This was perhaps a mistake, as for the first few supply drops we could casually walk up to the scavenger, eliminate him and receive our reward. This caused the mod to force one of us to become the first zombie, after which point the game really picked up. The constant threat of the zombie meant that the human group either had to keep moving or be prepared to stand and fight in an open area. In Supply Drop HvZ, if a zombie is eliminated they can immediately respawn out of sight of the humans, naturally meaning that the zombie would respawn behind trees or other obstacles as close to the humans as possible.
Having to fight the scavenger as well meant the humans had to effectively split into two groups - one to hold off the zombie and one to take out the scavenger. This tactic also worked well for picking up ammo just after a firefight and receiving and loading up the reward from every supply drop. Since the supply drop itself offered no protection from the zombie, the humans would always be in combat with the zombie.
Near the end of the game the human group tried to lose the zombie in the winding passages of the school (outside of buildings of course) and it worked for the most part, we didn't sight the zombie again until the final supply drop was radioed to us. The humans were eventually able to hold off the zombie long enough to receive the final supply drop and win.

One of the problems with the current iteration of Supply Drop is that there is no incentive to get rid of humans from the group, having more humans is pretty much entirely beneficial. As such, the humans willingly work together to fight all threats, making it very difficult for the zombie or scavenger to do any damage thanks to the bleed out mechanic. One proposed change is to make the supply drops more like Recall HvZ from last time, in which rewards are given out as humans are lost to the horde. Another is to make ammo very scarce, thus making fallen humans a valuable source of ammo. Nevertheless, the problem of humans being too valuable to sacrifice is one that needs to be solved for Supply Drop.
Supply Drop also benefits from having a larger player base so there can be an OZ, more scavengers and all round more danger to the humans. As it was, one zombie was easy to deal with and one scavenger was easily outgunned in a straight firefight, and at the start of the game there was no sense of urgency or threat as there were no OZs.
An awkward situation we ran into was the humans running into the scavenger before he got into position for the supply drop. Due to the size of the play area, we then knew roughly where the scav and supply drop would be. This would likely be avoided with slightly better organisation and a larger play area.
Also due to the size of the play area, the humans ended up just walking in circles waiting for the next supply drop. This would also likely be avoided with a larger play area.

With better organisation, more players and a larger play area Supply Drop could become quite a fun gamemode, though it would take a lot more effort to set up than Recall HvZ since the supply drops need to be put in certain locations at certain times, rather than everything being stashed in one location.

I personally feel that the previous school was a better play area, it felt larger and all round seemed to have better terrain. Runner HvZ would probably have worked quite well in this school, there were multiple paths between the two open ends of the school, and I think we had enough players to pull it off nicely.
I personally didn't enjoy Rush too much, primarily due to the narrow choke point turning the game into a luck-fest. Had it been played in a more open covered area I would have probably enjoyed it more.
Squad HvZ was significantly improved over its previous iteration, both humans and zombies won multiple games and there was a bigger teamwork aspect.
Supply Drop HvZ wasn't too well balanced, though as mentioned earlier that's probably due to a small player count. With a larger player count like the one we had in Recall HvZ last time it would probably be better, with combat being a little more of a challenge.

↧

Review: Buzz Bee Range Master

May 29, 2015, 5:42 am

≫ Next: WIP Mod: Full Auto Rayven (Autorayven) - Prototype Mk0

≪ Previous: Game Report 23/5/15

The Range Master is the largest blaster in Buzz Bee's Air Max line, although it has been around for several years in a grey colour scheme instead of the new blue. Nerf has released several sniper-style blasters and none of them have really lived up to expectation, so how does the Range Master stack up?

As usual for Buzz Bee, an open style box even for one of their biggest blasters. It shows everything the RM comes with, as well as standard 60 feet range claim and "3 feet long!" (much like Nerf's snipers) to really emphasise the sniper part.

Back of the box, as standard for Buzz Bee.

All the bits you get out of the package.
The base blaster, barrel extension, scope, bipod and 10 Extreme darts.

Let's look at the base blaster, as usual.

Immediately obvious, as with most other Buzz Bee blasters, the RM lacks the intricate shell details and prints that most Nerf blasters have. Note that outside of the stickers and orange parts, the RM has no colour besides blue, as with so many other Buzz Bee blasters.

Where Nerf blasters often have their instructions in raised plastic, the RM just has a sticker.

Besides also lacking much shell detail, the RM is also quite thin.

The underside. Note the small hole in the grip like area, and the large section further forward. These both contribute to the bipod's functionality, which we'll look at next.

The bipod is nothing special, it just has two legs on angled swivels, and two clips to slot into place on the RM. Here it is with the legs folded.

And here with the legs deployed.

Here it is on the RM, deployed. The legs are tapered so that when placed on the ground the feet of the bipod are flat, and the stock of the RM rests on the ground.
Attaching it is simple, simply line up the clips with the slots and push in. Removing is just a matter of pressing down both clip release buttons and pulling down.

Here's the bipod folded up. Note that the small nubs on the bipod legs pop into the small slot in the RM's body that was shown earlier.

The grooves in the bipod are meant to for a grip pattern, however I personally found that particular grip position to be rather awkward, and the grip pattern isn't very comfortable for me.
I personally prefer to grip the RM around the bipod mount, but personal preferences so that won't affect ratings.

Also note that the bipod can be attached backwards, but the legs don't click into place, and when deployed the RM doesn't mount a flat surface properly.

The Range Master wouldn't really be a sniper blaster without a pointless long barrel. Let's take a quick look at it.

As immediately obvious, the RM's barrel is a screw-on attachment, removeable at will. It's extremely wide, and also fairly long.

Unlike Nerf's faux barrels, the RM's faux barrel is smoothbore, and is extremely wide.

Here's the barrel next to a dart. The barrel is possibly 3 times wider than the dart, making the barrel's effects on dart flight minimal, though that's purely anecdotal evidence, I haven't actually measured muzzle velocity and accuracy with and without the barrel.

Here's a close up of the thread on the barrel and inside the RM's muzzle. They screw together quite well, being tight enough to not slip off but loose enough to remove will minimal effort

Naturally, no sniper blaster would be complete without a scope.

It's pretty standard toy scope fare, pure plastic, nothing precisely machined or calibrated.

It attaches to the RM using a system similar to Nerf's tac rail system. It's a friction based system like Nerf's, so it's easily removed and attached but for light use probably won't fall off.

Through the scope, it has a fairly basic but neat crosshair design. No magnification of course.

The scope mounts pretty easily on the small tac rail on top of the RM. It's a small, specially designed tac rail that I haven't seen on any other Buzz Bee blasters.

Note the width difference between the RM's tac rail (left) and a Nerf tac rail (right), on a Stryfe.

Nerf attachments do fit on the tac rail, but not particularly well. It's quite tight, though can be brute forced off easily.

The RM scope is too loose to stay on Nerf tac rails.

Let's assemble the RM together and look at its firing mechanism, which is a very unusual one.

The RM is close to 1m long, much like Nerf's Longshot and Longstrike. It doesn't have the same modern styling that the Longshot and Longstrike have that make them so great for aesthetic mods. Instead like many of Buzz Bee's other products the RM has a much more distinct toy look and feel to it.

If you play first person shooters with bolt action rifles, you'll probably be at least somewhat familiar with their cycling action, but let's run through it anyway.

Here's the bolt handle in its resting position.

Firstly you pull the bolt handle up to horizontal.

Then pull the bolt handle all the way back. This exposes the breech and the chamber...

...into which you insert the dart.
Closing the bolt is as simple as just pushing the bolt handle forward, and flipping the handle down to lock the bolt in place. You could fire it with the handle up, but you risk the bolt opening slightly during firing, which will cause the dart tooth (like that of Nerf's clip system blasters) to come up slightly, blocking the dart.

Now if this were a normal springer blaster, you would just close the bolt and fire. If you do that with the RM, you'll just get maybe a weak puff and no result. The Range Master is an air powered blaster, requiring you to pull the bolt back and forth a further 4-5 times to fill up the air tank. Less pumps will fire, but naturally at the cost of some power.

From my casual use I'd say the RM is fairly easy to load and pump up, though under pressure (ie in Nerf games) you might end up accidentally dropping out a few darts, or having the stock slip off your shoulder, as it is smooth and insufficiently concave. Even without pressure I've had the stock slip off my shoulder from pumping up.
Much like the Hammershot/Sweet Revenge and the Slingfire, the Range Master is just extremely fun to prime. Only one other blaster I can think of has this style of bolt action, and that's another Buzz Bee blaster (the Hunter) that's a springer, and is horribly undersized.

When folded up, the bipod covers a grip area and acts as a grip. When deployed, you get access to the built in grip just under the bolt handle. Due to the RM being quite a thin blaster, and also due to the grip being very close to the handle and trigger, I personally find it quite uncomfortable to hold in this position.
Holding it in this position also potentially causes your pinky to hit the bolt handle, though only if you're right handed (which most people are).

I personally find it more comfortable and more natural to hold the RM just in front of the bipod mount. Though not designed to be a grip, it's main advantage is that it's further away from the handle.
I personally would have preferred if the grip was further forward, with the bipod also further forward just under the barrel.

Beyond the lack of a well placed front grip, the Range Master has a few more ergonomic issues. One thing that will vary between people is that I personally find the shoulder stock quite short, and so a little uncomfortable. For younger persons (especially children/young teenagers) the shoulder stock is probably a reasonable length.
Besides that though, the RM has a bit of a handle issue relating to the trigger guard. As you can see in the above picture the trigger guard is quite large. This makes the handle a little uncomfortable to hold, as to reach and use the trigger comfortably you often have to push your fingers right up to the trigger guard, which I find extremely uncomfortable, and even slightly painful over long periods of time. This could have been solved with a smaller trigger guard, or possibly no trigger guard at all.

All these ergonomic issues force me to dock a few points from the usability rating.

Now performance. Most of Nerf's sniper-style blasters don't perform like they look (which is a shame), so how about the Range Master?
Range is quite good at full power, getting to 14-15m quite easily with the Extreme darts. The Range Master is very, very consistent, with range variance being a metre at most. Naturally pumping it up less than maximum results in lower ranges.
Accuracy is very impressive. Using the included scope and aiming at a target around 9m I can nail a 30cmx30cm square with Extreme darts every single time ignoring duds. Hitting a (stationary) human sized target at 14-15m would be fairly easy, especially compared to most Nerf blasters.
Rate of fire is horrible, naturally. Besides being a single shot, you also have to pump the Range Master 5-6 times for maximum range. One shot every five seconds is probably optimistic.

As far as I'm aware the Range Master does not have a general Aussie release. In the US, it appears to retail for around 20USD, the same price as a full price Stryfe, and 10USD cheaper than the retail price of the Longshot and Longstrike when they were still available. Buzz Bee blasters are typically cheaper than Nerf counterparts, and the Range Master is yet another example of that.
For a funsies or target practice blaster, the Range Master is a pretty solid choice. It's very fun to use with its relatively unique bolt action mechanism, and has the range and accuracy to make it a great target practice blaster. For actual Nerf war usage though, I'd recommend against using the RM at all. While its range is competitive with Elite blasters and its accuracy is impressive, the accuracy is entirely dependent on the Extreme darts (which are rather uncommon), and the very slow reload process means you'd probably be better off firing multiple less accurate shots, probably using one of Nerf's clip system blasters.

I've personally enjoyed using the Range Master just for target blasting and actuating the bolt, but if you're a Nerf practicalist you'll probably want to give it a miss.

Power: 6.5/7
Accuracy: 5/5
Value for Money: 4/5
Usability: 3/5
Rate of Fire: 0.5/5
Overall: 3.53/5

Personal Rating: 4/5 - the accuracy and power is pretty good, so it's really fun to fire at targets. The bolt action is also really fun since none of Nerf's blasters have this style of bolt.

As with the other Buzz Bee Extreme Air Max blasters, the Range Master was sent to me by Buzz Bee for review. I thank them for the kind gesture, however as with all other reviews their contribution does not affect the review in any way.

↧

WIP Mod: Full Auto Rayven (Autorayven) - Prototype Mk0

May 30, 2015, 10:04 pm

≫ Next: Video: Firing of the Autorayven Prototype

≪ Previous: Review: Buzz Bee Range Master

Just thought I'd keep you guys up to date on my current main project.

This here is my Autorayven Mk0, or Autorayven Prototype. It uses the body of an old N-Strike Rayven I got from a friend, with all the internals bound for use in my Elite Rayven. The shell will probably be dumped for spare parts or something.

It uses Falcon motors as I didn't want to cut the motor cover off. Intended to run off a 3S, but for testing was run using a 2S.

Prototype assembled. In the MkI, there will be a Longshot stock attached to the back to house the Rapidstrike pusher and the 3S that it'll run.

Just a close up of the pusher box and the Falcon before I started wiring it up. The switch is a roller switch that has been hotglued in place and reinforced with bits of plastic.

Running off a full charge 2S the Autorayven Prototype is getting about 6dps (360rpm), so hopefully when run off a full charge 3S it will get close to the 10dps (600rpm) ROF I'm hoping for. It's about on par with my RapidPDW with stock Rapidstrike motors.
Range is decent on 2S. The guys over at BritNerf have done some pretty good Falcon testing here, indicating that Falcons on 2S seem to get 80-100fps, again comparable to Rapidstrike motors. Running off a 3S, Falcons can get around 100-115fps, which is the bracket I was aiming for.

The reduced but still effective performance of the Falcons on 2S compared to 3S means that when complete, the Autorayven may still be within the power bracket for Uni games, while also being viable and highly effective in my standard games, as well as the local Nerf groups if I attend those.

There's still a ways to go though, I'm waiting for my 3S to arrive so I can start transferring the internals from my Prototype into my Elite Rayven, and also start working on attaching the Longshot stock. That will probably be a difficult process as I don't want to have to paint, so I'll be doing my best to keep the stock integration as clean as possible.

↧

Video: Firing of the Autorayven Prototype

June 4, 2015, 10:54 pm

≫ Next: Comparison: Nerf Elite Stryfe vs Nerf Elite Demolisher

≪ Previous: WIP Mod: Full Auto Rayven (Autorayven) - Prototype Mk0

My 3S Lipo arrived today so I threw together a quick video on my Autorayven firing.

Approx ROF: 8.6dps or 516rpm
LiPo voltage: 11.5 +- 0.1V

I'm pretty happy with it, once I get some spare time (3 exams next week) I'll be transferring the internals into my Elite Rayven, and grafting on the Longshot stock.

↧

Comparison: Nerf Elite Stryfe vs Nerf Elite Demolisher

June 15, 2015, 11:51 pm

≫ Next: Motor Replacements: Falcon'd Rapidstrike, Meishel'd E.Rayven

≪ Previous: Video: Firing of the Autorayven Prototype

Now that I finally got my hands on a stock grey trigger Stryfe, I can start doing all the Stryfe related comparisons. Let's start with an orange vs orange one.

Aesthetics: The (orange) Stryfe and Demo look quite similar, both with the sharp lines typical to Elite. The stryfe is a much slimmer and more compact pistol/SMG type blaster, where the Demo is more of a carbine/assault rifle. I (and many others) am not a fan of the orange, I much preferred the standard Elite blue.
As usual I don't score on aesthetics, but even if I did this would have been a pretty tough round, I like both styles a lot (if not the colour).
In fairness, the Demolisher is in many ways just a bulked up Stryfe with some extra parts.
Accessories: The Stryfe comes with itself, a 6 dart clip and 6 Elites.
The Demolisher comes with itself, a 10 dart banana clip, a stock, 10 Elites and 2 Elite missiles.
Naturally the Demolisher wins.
Range/Power: This is probably the saddest round of the lot. In my grey trigger Demo review, I complained quite a fair bit about how bad the range was, being 7-8m at best. I'm sad to say that the grey trigger Stryfe is no better, 7-8m is what I was getting with 4 fully charged AAs.
Going into modding just for a second, the grey trigger Stryfe's motors are incredibly horrible. The Demo at least performs respectably with a rewire and 2 IMRs, being on par with Barricade motor'd blasters. The GT Stryfe with a rewire and 2IMRs performs about on par with a stock grey trigger Retaliator.
This round is an all round depressing draw.
Accuracy: Accuracy is surprisingly decent from both blasters, primarily due to the lack of power. I'm going to call it a draw because both fire darts so poorly range wise that accuracy is actually quite hard to compare.
Usability: The main thing here is going to be the effectiveness of the locks in both blasters, since the Stryfe just doesn't come with a stock so comfort in that regard is not comparable, and both blasters use essentially the same firing mechanism and so feel pretty much the same. The biggest difference between the two comfort wise is that the Stryfe can be held underbarrel a little awkwardly, but still in a good place. The Demo's underbarrel grip is the firing grip for the missile launcher, which is quite far below the barrel, making it somewhat awkward and uncomfortable. It's not the worst, so I won't focus on that.
Lock wise, both blasters have essentially the same (clip detector, jam door, etc) with one key exception. The Stryfe has a dart checker just above the magwell that the Demo lacks. Now in concept it seems like a decent idea, lock up the trigger if there's nothing loaded so as to tell the user the clip is empty. Sadly it doesn't work as well as it should, frequently locking up the trigger even if the blaster is loaded, as well as during rapid fire. I heard reports of people struggling to use anything besides an Elite clip and good condition Elite darts because of how bad the dart sensor is.
The Demolisher simply doesn't have this lock, and neither do any other flywheelers that Nerf's made. To put it bluntly, the Stryfe's dart sensor is a total failure at its job and threatens to completely ruin the Stryfe
The Demolisher wins this round naturally.
Rate of Fire: ROF is a little bit of an odd category. Both blasters are semi auto flywheelers and have very similar internals, so they should have similar ROFs right? Well when modded, yes they perform very similarly.
When out of the box however, the Stryfe has a terrible dart sensor that frequently causes trigger jamming, limiting your ROF to about 3 darts a second, where a stock Demo can fire at about 5 darts per second before it starts jamming from flywheel deceleration.
Modded Stryfes and Demos can put out darts extremely fast, I've recorded a video of the Demo firing around 9dps, and the Stryfe not far behind at around 8.
If you're willing to remove the dart sensor in the Stryfe, this round is a draw. If not, the Demo wins this round.
Capacity: The Stryfe comes with a 6 dart clip, the Demo comes with a 10 dart clip and holds 2 missiles.
Demo wins obviously.
Value for Money: The Stryfe is available for 25AUD from Kmart only, and occasionally goes on sale for 19AUD. The Demo retails for about 60AUD in various stores, and regularly drops to 50AUD or less during sales.
The Demolisher is the more complete blaster and more usable blaster out of box, however the huge price difference allows you to buy a Retaliator alongside a Stryfe, giving you more accessories and a higher overall capacity.
I'm giving this round to the Stryfe on the basis that the massive price difference easily allows you to cover the Stryfe's lack of accessories compared to the Demo.

At the end of this comparison, the Stryfe has won 1 round, the Demolisher 3 (or 4 if you ignore modding) with 3 draws (2 if you ignore modding). Therefore I declare the Demolisher to be the superior out-of-box blaster. Do note that if you take into account buying a Retaliator alongside the Stryfe, it will win the Accessories and Capacity rounds, however the key deciding factor here is the Stryfe's dart sensor piece.
If you are absolutely against removing that piece, the Demolisher is by far superior purely because of how much of a pain that one lock is. If you're fine with removing the lock, then the Stryfe and Demolisher are functionally pretty much the same blaster and so your choice will come down to personal preference.

Posts have been a bit scarce recently because exams, but they'll end next week and I hope to pick up a Crossbolt and Rapid Red in BigW's upcoming sale, so there's that at least.

↧

Motor Replacements: Falcon'd Rapidstrike, Meishel'd E.Rayven

June 18, 2015, 1:04 am

≫ Next: Quick Mod: Armless Nerf Crossbolt, Removable Arms

≪ Previous: Comparison: Nerf Elite Stryfe vs Nerf Elite Demolisher

Further progress and updates on motor replacements. The Autorayven project has been shelved for now, partly due to Rayven related alignment issues and partly because of how perfect the Rapidstrike is. But more on that later.

This is the LiPo I bought to run my Falcons. Turnigy 3S 1Ah 45-90C, it should put out more than enough current to run any single stage Falcon build. This was for when I originally wanted it for my now-shelved Autorayven project, but it conveniently fits just above a Rapidstrike's pusher box, ideal for a Bullpup Rapidstrike.

The E.Ray previously ran Tamiya Mach Dashes on a 1S, so further battery tray alteration was needed to provide the Meishel motors with a 2S. I managed to get my 2S (800mAh 40-50C) to fit in with a little battery tray cover bulge, which is good enough for me.

Here's a firing vid of the E.Rayven.
I'm not happy with it, there are still some alignment issues that cause squibbing and serious range loss, but I'm not sure what else to do. If anyone has any suggestions (besides shivving the magwell which I've already done), I'm all ears.

Now on to the Rapidstrike. ~~Externally it's no different (as seen in the top picture)~~, but internally it's been completely overhauled.
Derp completely forgot about my lever clip release.

Not the best looking but it works. It was constructed using one of the many junked pieces of plastic amassed from modding.

Obviously its motors have been replaced with Falcons, but besides that all switches have been replaced with high current microswitches, and wire with what I think is 17AWG.

The 3S fits in the Rapidstrike's battery box with plenty of room to spare, had I foreseen Falcon-ing a Rapidstrike I would have bought a larger 3S. The battery box cover (removed from the battery tray) fits on easily with plenty of room to spare.

Unlike the E.Ray, I'm really happy with how the Rapidstrike turned out. It handles quite well, is very comfortable to use, and performs incredibly well.

I'm quite happy with Falcons, they rev high enough to get really good performance, spin up very fast, and are really cheap (~3USD per motor). It's probably my go-to 130 motor where battery space is not a huge issue (such as Rapidstrikes), so that a good sized 3S will fit in no problem.

I'm not so happy with Meishels, though I'm fairly sure that's primarily due to Rayven alignment issues. They rev up higher and louder than Falcons, yet I was getting performance that was on par or worse than the Falcon'd Rapidstrike. I attribute this to Rayven issues. They also seemed to rev up slower than Falcons, which I don't like. Meishels are even cheaper than Falcons though, at less than 2USD per motor.

The Rapidstrike will probably get combat use soon, exams are over in a few days so I'll be inviting some friends over. The E.Ray won't be until I can get the alignment issues fixed.

EDIT 19/6/15:
I've made a few tweaks to the E.Rayven and it's much better now. One of the things I did do was replace the rubber skirt that goes in front of the flywheels. Interestingly, with the rubber skirt in I seemed to get better consistency, groupings and a slightly higher average range compared to not having the skirt. Note that this is purely from anecdotal obvervations, I don't have a chrono to give proper scientific numbers and it wasn't tested in a properly controlled environment.
Nevertheless I'm fairly happy with its performance, with a decent fly residue coating it seems to get slightly better ranges than the Rapidstrike that currently has almost no residue.

↧

Quick Mod: Armless Nerf Crossbolt, Removable Arms

June 23, 2015, 8:52 pm

≫ Next: BW12 Koosh Observations, June 2015

≪ Previous: Motor Replacements: Falcon'd Rapidstrike, Meishel'd E.Rayven

Just a quick mod I did to my newly acquired Crossbolt. Review will be done pretty soon now that exams are over.

The Crossbolt's bow arms, while they do add to the bow feel, introduce all sorts of issues such as making priming awkward and uncomfortable (more on that in the upcoming review), and also significantly increasing the width of the Crossbolt, making it a pain for storage and transportation.
Solution? Simply remove the cord from the bow arms, which can be accessed by removing a single screw on the end of each bow arm, and tie them into the hole where the bow arms are inserted into.

Here's a close up of the cord in unprimed position. I've tied it around the top of the hole.

Here's a closer look at my knot and the tied off length. I'm not skilled at knotting, but this knot is tight enough to not become unraveled upon firing. More important to note is the length of the tied off string. A longer tied off length gives more power, but also increases dart damage and risk of misfires/jams. The length I've got here doesn't appear to jam much but still provides decent power.

Here's the cord when fully primed. As you may or may not be able to see the cord dips into the priming track.

Performance is largely unchanged to using bow arms, though it depends a lot on how much you tie off. More importantly, I seemed to be getting inferior accuracy to having the bow arms on, possibly due to how much extra the cord expands/contracts with the armless mod. I'll be tweaking the armless mod to get it up to par with an armed Crossbolt.

Storing and transporting a Crossbolt is a pain thanks to the bow arms sticking out so much. If you're not using an armless Crossbolt though, you'll need the arms to function. Solution? Make the bow arms removable.

Making the bow arms removable is simple. All you need to do is shave off the ridges from where the screwdriver is pointing to. (I'd shaved the ridges off already and covered in e-tape for friction)

As I inserted my bow arms *before* shaving off the ridges, I had to open up the Crossbolt and faff about with a rotary tool to cut off the ridges, so cut off the ridges *before* inserting the bow arms into the Crossbolt. You may need e-tape or a similar material to increase friction if your arms fit in too loose.
There are 4 ridges, two on each arm, one on each side.

And here's my Crossbolt in its current state, with easily removable friction fit bow arms. As I much prefer the ergonomics of not having bow arms at all, I'll probably revisit the armless mod at a later stage.

↧

BW12 Koosh Observations, June 2015

June 23, 2015, 9:51 pm

≫ Next: Review: Nerf Elite Crossbolt (Aus 21m grey trigger)

≪ Previous: Quick Mod: Armless Nerf Crossbolt, Removable Arms

Some observations on the new BW12 Koosh darts I just received, akin to Torukmakto's posts on The Dart Zone (link left). Batch was ordered on the 6th of June, 2015.

I ordered a batch of 600 blues and 400 yellows, as I wanted a replacement for the now-discontinued greens.

From left to right: New blue, New yellow, Old green, Old blue

First up is the foam difference. While the picture isn't the best, courtesy of iPotato, you should still be able to see some difference. The new foams are slightly thicker than the older foams, with the new blue also being slightly darker. The green foam I noted in my previous review as being unusually thin, which is especially apparent went comapred against the new foams.
Comparing the two blues together, the new foam is also more consistent throughout. In the old batches I bought I noticed two distinctly different blue foam sizes - one thicker foam closer to the new foam, and one older, thinner foam closer to Elite/green Koosh foam. The new Kooshes have no such difference, being largely quite uniform.

My original Koosh batches were older batches form before the eBay listings had "improved adhesive" on them, and a lot of them had uncured glue on the foam. The uncured glue is no longer a problem post-"improved adhesive", however excess glue is still a problem. I found excess glue on about 15 of the 20 darts I opened up initially, and it's not particularly easy to remove either, which means you'll have to spend some time removing the excess glue from most of the darts.

One dart I found had other issues. While it didn't have a significant buildup of excess glue around the tip, it had an off-centre tip as well as seemingly having had glue along the body of the dart, contributing to the additional shininess you see in the above picture.
This dart is a bit of a freak, I didn't see any others notable off in my quick look over the dart packs.

A number of the yellows for some reason have black marks on the back, ranging from an almost imperceptible smudge to a clearly darkened base, such as the one in the bottom left. As far as I can tell it seems to be just a colouring and not any significant additional material, as it appears similar to what you get when making a stamp without enough ink.

I test-fired the new darts from my Sweet Revenge and modded Rapidstrike and got similar performances to my old blues, nothing I personally could notice (nothing was tested scientifically), however Toruk noted with a newer batch that he got a significant muzzle velocity increase from his modded Rapidstrike Tacmod 2.1 with the new Kooshes compared to older batches. I'd attribute this to the new foam.

TL;DR: All Kooshes are the same now, no unglued/uncured darts but still a lot of excess glue. Foam is slightly thicker and better.

↧

Review: Nerf Elite Crossbolt (Aus 21m grey trigger)

June 25, 2015, 6:45 pm

≫ Next: Mod: Titan Triple Missile Attachment

≪ Previous: BW12 Koosh Observations, June 2015

The Crossbolt is one of Nerf's latest Elite releases, and is one of an increasing number of blasters powered by a tensioned cord instead of flywheels or a plunger. How does it stack up to its more conventional brethren?

Here's the box, pretty standard stuff.

Here's how the Crossbolt comes in box, it's pretty tightly packed.

This note never ceases to amuse me. Obviously as the Crossbolt is a "stringer", cutting the cord would render it inoperable.

All the stuff you get out of the box. The Crossbolt itself with its two bow arms, a 12 dart Elite clip, 12 Elites and some instructions.

Obviously some assembly is required for the Crossbolt, as the arms come unattached to keep the box small.

The small chamfered ridge in the middle is what retains the bow arms in the Crossbolt. Shave them down and the arms should be removable, though be careful not to shave all of it off otherwise it may be quite loose.
The bow arms have protrusions that simply need to be slotted into the corresponding holes in the Crossbolt...

...and pushed in fully until it clicks.

The arms are pretty tightly attached, and I've been so far unsuccessful in my efforts to detach them through brute force, though admittedly I'm not notably strong. I hope to be able to remove them after opening up the shell.

The darts are "K." coded if you're interested in such.

Here's the Crossbolt all assembled and loaded up.

Since the 12 dart clip isn't new to us, we'll just look at the Crossbolt itself.

Without the bow arms attached I think the Crossbolt has an awesome Sci-fi carbine/PDW look. With the bow arms attached it's a little more odd, but still looks pretty cool.

The base Crossbolt (excluding bow arms) is a pretty thin blaster, allowing it to fit in a thin box. It's also quite a light blaster, I was a little surprised how light the box was.

The Crossbolt is an all round pretty good looking blaster, if a little unusual thanks to the bow arms. It looks pretty awesome and tacticool, and is quite compact.

Here's a close up on the front of the Crossbolt. Note the lone tactical rail under the barrel, meaning that you can mount grips, lights, etc. Unlike the Retaliator there's no slide tac rail, which was a good idea since attachments on the slide made priming horrible, so there's no tac rail on the top of the Crossbolt, meaning no place to mount tacticool sights like the Elite Pinpoint.
Interestingly the Crossbolt cannot mount any barrel extensions either, which is unfortunate as that would have made converting it to pump action super easy, and also added some tacticool.

The Crossbolt has 3 sling points: one just behind the iron sight...

...one on the thumbhole stock's lower support (essentially the same as the traditional handle one)...

...and one on the back of the stock.

The Crossbolt is a top slide primed blaster, much like the Retaliator and Strongarm. Unfortunately, while it works *ok* for the aforementioned blasters (comparatively), it's simply abysmal for the Crossbolt.

Here's the full slide. Notice that unlike the Retal's or Strongarms, the slide tapers away towards the front. I don't find it to be too much of an issue, but if you have long fingers you may end up dragging them along the shell.

Instead, one of the main issues with the slide is the raised plastic for the Elite badges. Having sharp edges, they dig straight into your palm and fingers, more so when gripping tightly for rapid fire. However that's not the worst of it. Sure it's uncomfortable, but with a file it's easily remedied.

I find that the slide is perhaps a little too small to be properly comfortable, my fingers only just fit in between the rear iron sight and the front screw port. I would have personally preferred a few centimetres of clearance to be less restrictive on hand position.

What makes the Crossbolt's top prime particularly awful is that the slide is positioned directly ahead of the cord, meaning that if you adopt a similar wrist position to priming a Retal, you'll end up with burn marks all over your forearm from the cord.

To avoid this, I've adopted a horizontal arm position, meaning that I have to constantly hold my arm. It's quite uncomfortable to maintain, however completely avoids hitting the cord or the bow arms.

The Crossbolt has its magwell behind the handle, hence being a "bullpup" blaster. While Nerf has done it before with the Rayven (which was ok, up until the alignment issues), the Crossbolt's design introduces a few new issues.

Here's the magwell with and without a clip, fairly standard.
Note the proximity of the magwell to the handle. That will come into play later.

This is the clip release. Notice that it's actually completely exposed, unlike the Rayven's or really any other blaster's clip release. This has resulted in people having the Crossbolt drop the clip upon shouldering.
I personally haven't experienced that, partly because I don't shoulder the Crossbolt much (we'll get to that later), and partly because my Crossbolt's magwell is very tight on clips. Even with the clip release depressed, a clip's not coming out without significant force.

Due to the unusual angle of the clip release, I find myself having to push off the clip release with my thumb to keep the clip release depressed while trying to remove the clip. It's a minor issue that I got used to quickly, but it is rather annoying coming from a Rayven or Rapidstrike/Stryfe.
Notice also that the Crossbolt's magwell also acts as the Crossbolt's stock, making it very short. How short?

Well here's the Crossbolt roughly next to the Elite Rayven and Retaliator, with their handles roughly lined up. Since perspective ruins the comparison between the Crossbolt and Retal in this picture, we'll just look at the E.Rayven and Crossbolt.
The E.Rayven and Crossbolt have similar distances between the handle and magwell, however as clearly obvious while the Crossbolt simply ends at the magwell, the E.Rayven has a further ~6cm of stock. While that may not sound like a lot, when we're talking about stock lengths 2cm makes a huge difference. I personally find the E.Rayven stock reasonably comfortable to shoulder, while I find the Crossbolt almost impossible to comfortably shoulder.

Here's a better picture of the Crossbolt and Retaliator. As you can see, the Crossbolt's stock length is roughly equivalent to having a Retal stock, which is the shortest stock excepting a retracted Raider stock, and is pretty uncomfortable for everyone over the age of maybe 15.
The Crossbolt's stock is extremely short and practically un-shoulderable, just another ergonomic issue to add to its fast growing tally.

Interestingly, the Crossbolt in fact has two jam doors - one above the magwell (as is tradition), and one above the dart loading area.

Here's the jam doors open. With the front jam door you get a direct look into where a dart would sit when loaded. Having the front door open also locks the trigger (and obviously blocks the slide), however the back door can be left open without any issue. There are no locks connected to the back jam door interestingly.

Here's a look down the back jam door with a clip loaded. Note the two grey pieces of plastic in the top left and bottom right of the magwell - these are dart sensors. When depressed, these allow the slide to move, and so if no dart is loaded the slide cannot move. This causes some issues in rapid fire, as noted below.

Continuing with the theme of ergonomic nightmares is the Crossbolt's handle.

At first glance it looks ok, it's long enough and it has curves, it can't be that bad can it?

Unfortunately, yes, it can. Unless you adopt and awkward wrist/arm position, your wrist or hand will be constantly pressed against the the thumbhole stock support. Now this wasn't an issue with the Rayven, which had a very similar design, so what gives?

While my pictures may not do it full justice, the thumbhole stock support is actually very wide - wider than the handle and it even increases in width as you go towards the back. The Rayven's was about as wide as its handle, if not a little thinner. On top of that, the handle is not the best design, as it is quite wide and quite squared, similar to how a Rapidstrike's handle compares to a Stryfe's.
I had a friend who was considering getting a Crossbolt pick up mine, then immediately say "nope" because of how uncomfortable the handle was.
Admittedly the Crossbolt's handle issues are the least of its worries, its other ergonomic issues are much worse.

Finally we can get to Crossbolt operation, which is pretty simple. If you've used a manual clip system blaster before you'll be able to pick it up and use it no problem.

To prime, the slide must be pulled all the way back, as far as possible to make sure that the dart pusher can hook on to the next dart. It can be a little bit jarring to pull the slide as far as it needs to be, as the draw is longer than on most other blasters.

As I said before, the rear jam door can be opened and any time without locking up anything, and here it's open when the slide is fully back. This orange construct collects a dart and pulls it into the firing chamber.

Pulling the slide forward chambers the dart. Note that the string is now hooked onto the catch (look for the small hook at the end of the track), and the dart is now loaded just in front of the cord.
Fire by pulling the trigger, obviously, and the cord returns to unprimed position.
Note that the trigger can only be pulled when the slide is fully forward, and when the slide is pushed forward half-way after priming, it cannot be pulled back past half way until it is closed forward, as with most other manual clip system blasters. This is thanks to a few lock pieces, which can be removed without too much difficulty.

If a jam occurs with the cord firing past the dart, leaving a dart chambered but the cord unprimed, the Crossbolt becomes a pain to unjam. The best method for that jam is to remove the clip then manually pull the cord back to push the dart back out of the chamber. Besides that particular unique jam, most jams should be relatively easily cleared using traditional methods and the dual jam doors.
I haven't experienced many jams. I can only recall one jam occuring with the stock Crossbolt and that was easily cleared.

Now for performance. Crossbolt performance is quite impressive for a grey trigger blaster, I was pleasantly surprised upon first firing it.
Range wise, I was getting 13-14m at true flat (verified with bubble level) very consistently. It's certainly one of the better performing stock blasters I've tested. At high enough angles the claimed range of 21m is probably possible.
Accuracy is very impressive, even when using Elite darts. I was achieving groups of 0.5m wide, which when compared to what most blasters achieve with Elites, is quite impressive. Hitting a human target is pretty easy at 8-9m, and even at 10-11m you still have a solid chance of a hit.
Using Kooshes accuracy was dead on, firing a 12 clip of blue Kooshes about 10/12 went dead straight, with the other two firing to the left for some unknown reason.
Rate of fire sadly is not a strength of the Crossbolt's. Thanks to the awkward top prime, unusually long draw length and the ever annoying locks, a ROF of about 1.6dps is the best I can achieve before causing locking up and all round unpleasantness. The locking up is primarily caused by the dart sensors, in the same way as a Stryfe's dart sensor locking up as a dart is in the process of moving upwards. Without locks, I'd say 2dps would be possible.

One thing about the Crossbolt is that due to its use of a cord that directly propels the dart, the back of the darts tend to become softer after being fired from the Crossbolt, more noticeably so with a modded, more powerful Crossbolt. This increases the chance of jamming and misfiring, which typically has the cord simply fire past the dart (by going underneath it) instead of firing the dart, causing the dart to get stuck in the chamber with the cord in unprimed position. This can be fixed by pushing the dart back out into the magwell using the cord itself, however it's quite a tedious process and can take quite some time, also necessitating the removal of the clip.
Darts that have been softened also tend to lose a little range and fly more erratically.

Does the Crossbolt have any place in the "practical" Nerfing scene of in-game use?
Well it's extremely quiet upon firing, with a soft 'twang', which is slightly quieter than a stock springer. Naturally it's much quieter than a flywheeler's hum, and compared to modded blasters it's ridiculously quiet. That much could make it a pretty decent stealth/run and gun type blaster, since most other blasters have quite an audible noise when firing.
Besides that, it's a decent clip-fed blaster, similar to the Retaliator except more awkward and uncomfortable. I'm fairly sure it could be reasonably used as a primary, although if you're used to shouldering primaries like me you'll probably find the super short stock rather uncomfortable and awkward.

As clearly shown in my HFCBE video, the Crossbolt is not meant to be rapid fired. The slide is not comfortable to hold, and has a longer than usual draw, and the Crossbolt has a lot of locks that slow down operation, unless you want the slide to lock up temporarily, which happened to me a lot in my video. It's certainly no Stryfe or Magstrike.

So if your style is to rush in and spray and pray, the Crossbolt is not for you, it simply fires too slowly to be any good at spray and pray.
If you're more of a longer ranged potshotter, then the Crossbolt is certainly an option. It's more accurate than any other Elite-firing blasters I've used, and achieves respectable and usable ranges.
If you're looking for a fun blaster, the Crossbolt is certainly a solid option. It's not the most expensive blaster, it performs well and is rather unique and quite fun to use.
If you're looking for an awesome bow/bow-like blaster, the Crossbolt is again a solid choice, as it's the most practical of all the bows, being a clip system blaster. However if you're looking for a true bow/crossbow style blaster, you're probably best off looking at the Rebelle line's arrow shooters as those are more akin to traditional bow/crossbow design and actually shoot arrow-like ammo.

In Australia the Crossbolt retails for around 35-40AUD, though sales take it down to about 30AUD and I got mine due to an error for 21AUD from BigW (more details on this on the FB page). I'd say 40AUD is a little steep considering the EAT was available for 30AUD, and the Retal is now available for 30AUD regularly. The Crossbolt offers little extra over the EAT with regards to value, and certainly nothing over the Retal, but its unique firing mech and design mean it's not something you can easily substitute. 30AUD is what I'd consider reasonable for the Crossbolt.

Being that I got mine for 21AUD, I have a slight personal bias towards buying the Crossbolt, but it's an all round decent buy. Its impressive performance makes it quite a solid blaster, however the shockingly bad ergonomics of the slide, stock and handle hold it back from being a must buy. Because of the ergonomics, if you're on the fence about it I'd highly recommend trying a friend's before picking one up for yourself, that could easily be a make or break.

Pros: Pretty good power and impressive accuracy for a stock blaster, looks awesome, is bullpup, extremely quiet to fire, two jam doors improve jam clearing ability, easily modified for more power
Cons: Shockingly bad ergonomics, slow ROF, very little tacticool, ridiculously bad ergonomics, long prime length, clip release is exposed and vulnerable, painfully bad ergonomics, bow arms drastically increase bulk and width making storage/transportation a pain, did I mention how terrible the ergonomics are?

Power: 6/7
Accuracy: 5/5
Value for Money: 3.5/5
Usability: 2/5
Rate of Fire: 3/5
Overall: 3.56/5

Personal Rating: 3.5/5 - has some major ergonomic issues and an annoying dart sensor that slows down ROF, which is a shame because the Crossbolt shoots darts really well for a stock blaster. Getting more power out of it is hilariously easy too.

↧

Mod: Titan Triple Missile Attachment

June 27, 2015, 11:11 pm

≫ Next: Review: Nerf Mega Bigshock (grey trigger)

≪ Previous: Review: Nerf Elite Crossbolt (Aus 21m grey trigger)

The Nerf Titan is a fun blaster to tinker with, because of its incredible power. Making it shoot one dart is easy and incredibly effective, but I wanted something more unique and more ridiculous. With the release of the Demoliser, Thunderblast and missile refill packs, I decided to make something that would utilise those missiles. Now compared to the Titan's original Mega Missile, the new Elite missiles are significantly smaller and lighter, which would enable the Titan to fire several of them at once.

This is what I came up with. The main coupler (on the right) that attaches to the Titan uses a screw adaptor 3D printed by one of the guys at Make Test Battle (link left), which is attached to a couple of pipes and fittings that form the coupler. This coupler allows attaching of all my pre-existing attachments from my Big Blast and Berserker.
The coupler using the thread on the Titan muzzle means that the original barrel can be reattached to use stock Titan rockets, however I have none.

This is the triple rocket launcher attachment. It uses a bunch of pipes, a few fittings and a lot of hot glue to redirect the main airflow into three barrels. These barrels fit into the holes in Elite missiles, however as they were a little too loose I used some e-tape to tighten and improve the seal.

Here's the attachment loaded up with the missiles. The three barrels were positioned in such a way that the rockets will only touch each other by their fin tips, and only if the fins are pointed directly at one another.

The barrels also fits darts, and so can fire a mix of missiles and darts, but the barrels are nowhere near long enough for optimum dart firing. If I wanted to fire a burst of darts I would use one of my absolvers.

Here's the loaded attachment on the Titan.

And finishing with an FPS shot.

How does it perform? Hilariously badly. While ranges are usable, nudging 12-13m with 12 pumps, consistency and accuracy are non-existent. The missiles just love flying away in random directions, sometimes nosediving into the ground, sometimes veering to the sides, sometimes soaring upwards.
Ranges and consistency are best balanced around 8-9 pumps, hitting 8-10m with severe veering being less common.
I don't really care about consistency though, I wasn't aiming to make a practical blaster. I was aiming to make something incredibly fun and totally ridiculous, and that's exactly what I did, so I'm pretty happy with how this project turned out.

↧