breaking news ??? (runnaway, trigger bounce, NPPL rules etc) [Archive]

shartley

02-09-2003, 12:23 PM

Rules are made complicated because people will always try to “technically” get around them. Period. And “sweet spotting” would be allowed if you ONLY said that "a trigger is a thing u pull and makes the gun fire. cant fire more then one ball per trigger pull"… because folks would argue that since your finger moves only once per ball being fired, it is still only one pull per ball being fired…. No matter if the “pull” is actually being controlled by the “bounce” and not an actual physical pull and release caused by the will of the shooter.

As for “what Jim Drew thinks”… this is not about Jim Drew. He was at the meeting, yes, but if you notice many more important people in the Paintball Industry were not. ;)

The issues of padding seems logical to me, and I think we all know the difference between padding for comfort and safety reasons, and excessive padding designed specifically to reduce paint breakage.

I don’t see anything ground breaking, or even news worthy about this at all…. At least not for the general paintball community. I don’t even see as how it really changed anything for the NPPL scene. I do however, agree with what they are doing. Breaking news though… nahh. ;)

Bunny

02-09-2003, 12:27 PM

I like how they check for paint staining? cuz I hate when I get home from a day of paintball and my arms and hands(I don't wear gloves)are covered in paint marks after I took a shower and scrubbed real hard

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 02:24 AM

As for “what Jim Drew thinks”… this is not about Jim Drew. He was at the meeting, yes, but if you notice many more important people in the Paintball Industry were not.

I was asked to attend this meeting to set the standards by which trigger bounce could be detected by refs. Also invited for this subject was John Rice from WDP (inventor of the Angel). We were selected by the NPPL as being the most knowledgable people in the industry for marker electronics. I will likely be holding similar meetings with the PSP and PanAm, as all orginizations want to have a common set of rules.

Reactive triggers are illegal for NPPL.

TheBigRaguPB4L

03-20-2003, 02:50 AM

Can i get a ruling on that?

Miscue

03-20-2003, 05:24 AM

Humm. I have to wonder if this rule was specifically targeted against AGD. What else except a reactive tippy has a reactive trigger? This situation seems peculiar... the limited info available leaves questions...

Now, I can understand "limited" reactivity so that guns can't go into runaway... that's fine... and I hope that's what this rule is about. And, I also hope that this rule is focused on the likes of an EMag in Hybrid mode or something. If this applies to mechanical guns too, particularly the RTP... this is a completely unjustified rule. What is the point? So long as you're not doing runaway, you can't shoot quite as fast as an electro anyway. Are we trying to limit the speed here? Ban electro triggers before reactive triggers... if you're going downwards from the highest technological advantage. Well, it's not a safety issue either... assuming no runaway... which is and has been against the rules to begin with.

Here's an idea: Why not have a standardized max ROF cap? Who cares how people get there with whatever trigger so long as each shot is deliberate.

This TOTALLY sucks for me, as I have an RTP with an XRTP on the way... intended for tourny use. The mechanical advantage of a reactive trigger lets me shoot an RTP about as fast as an electro. I would never have got them if I couldn't get near electro ROF. Note that I said "near electro." So, you're telling me that my RTP's are now no good in NPPL until I toss the on/off? This totally pisses me off. If I wanted an AIR-valve like gun, I would have saved money and got classic mags. Actually, I would have purchased a cheaper non-AGD electro, since I can't afford to get an arsenal of EMags.

/me foresees the standard refs will use to measure trigger bounce: "If it's made by AGD and the back of the valve is steel, it's ok. It the back is black, particularly those that say RT, Retro, EMag, or XValve... look at the guy and toss his gun if he looks sneaky." Seriously, I'm sure/hoping some empirical method would be used.

Program a little IC, throw it on a circuit board... design them it to defy the laws of physics... and then this constitutes qualifying "expertise" to become part of the rule making process in which selling points of competing products (and not one's own) can be quashed. I'll have to figure out the logistics on that one.

NPPL rules should not be influenced by those who have a vested interest in the creation of such rules... the industry.

Somebody dropped the ball here.

ghideon

03-20-2003, 07:10 AM

The problem will not be anywhere closed to solved if they simply blanket-ban reactive triggers. It would seem to me that the end result is to limit max ROF. Miscue's right, either the OEMs or the NPPL need to start self-regulating and set down a limit. This seems to me to be an easier solution. Getting them to actually do it is the hard part.

Doc Nickel

03-20-2003, 07:12 AM

The point, as I understand it, is setting an electronic trigger so tightly, that if you gently hold the trigger back, the vibration/recoil of the marker firing gives you a "full auto" effect. This is "trigger bounce" or "sweet spotting".

Almost any electronic marker with decent trigger geometry can be set to do this, if the switch is good, and your stops are tight.

A RaceFramed-'Cocker, for example, is absurdly easy to set this way, especially if you have a relatively heavy block and bolt.

And the convoluted rules defining a trigger pull really started to come about in '98 when Smart Parts teams took preproduction "Turbo" Shockers onto the field. Turbo, at the time, was not specifically disallowed, and SP's crew sucessfully argued that the phenomena called "switch noise" was in fact a series of microscopic, infinitesimal "trigger pulls".

In other words, they were arguing that the tiny metal contact dome in the original Shocker controller dome switches, was in fact the actual trigger- that's what made the gun fire. And thus, as it "bounced" (switch noise is a common, recognized phenomena- your keyboard has either a mechanical or an electronic method to supress it, lest you get six letters when you actually press the key once) each bounce was identified by the circuit as an individual pull.

They got away with it that year, but the NPPL changed the rules to specifically disallow it later. So now we have convoluted rules telling us what is and what is not the "trigger".

It also defines "autoresponse" triggers- mechanical or electronic- as illegal, as one "pull" is both pull and release.

Doc.

PzYcO

03-20-2003, 07:28 AM

is there anyway to get rid of trigger bounce on a xvalve?

JEDI

03-20-2003, 08:46 AM

Originally posted by p8ntball72
LOL ..Jim drew on the subject of trigger bounce..
What does this have to do with Jim Drew? Other than the fact that his name is mentioned. Please don't start any unneeded drama.

warpfeedmod

03-20-2003, 09:07 AM

Originally posted by PzYcO
is there anyway to get rid of trigger bounce on a xvalve?

tone down the input pressure so as not to allow so much "push" on the trigger rod. Makes it harder to "sweet spot".

At least that's what I'd do with my RTP when I was using it. I wasn't too fond of the "reactivity" of it when I first got it. I liked it mainly for the snappy trigger return.

Now on my Emag I can't even sweetspot it in e-mode or manual. Hybrid is another story altogether but I still have trouble sweetspotting it.

tobz

03-20-2003, 09:31 AM

that I would like to mention is that ROF is not the issue here. The issue is safety. You can setup an eBlade cocker with so much bounce and so light of a pull that it will ACTUALLY GO INTO FULL AUTO if you drop the gun on the ground, or even set it down nicely, but "too hard".

The safety is the mainthing. When you start pulling your RT, imagine if you COULDN"T STOP THE FIRING. That is one of the main points. People put so much bounce on triggers that are so light already that the vibration of the gun will set the gun off again, sometimes whether or not a person's finger is on the trigger.

It's a safety issue. Imagine how effective barrel plugs/condoms are if more than one shot is fired with paint? It's possible to push condoms off, break strings, break stitching, there are huge safety issues here.

P.S. I still own 1 cocker + 1 mag and love them both. Keep it up AGD.

T.J.

-Safety first!

thecavemankevin

03-20-2003, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by Miscue

NPPL rules should not be influenced by those who have a vested interest in the creation of such rules... the industry.

Somebody dropped the ball here.

Couldn't agree more!

As far as lessening the mechanicle trigger bounce of AGD products Tom said in a thread a couple weeks ago that they are in R&D to stop this so you can still crank the input pressure and not have our beloved bounce. If i remember correctly he said that they are working on a different size on/off pin and if they increase the diameter that should do it. It is just a matter of getting it to the exact right size. That thread is actually where the quote in my sig comes from :)

As far as padding, apperantly last year it became a rather large problem with many of the bigger events that teams were wearing two sets of elbow pads. One for there elbows and the other to protect there fore-arms and wrists from paintballs (thus makeing them bounce off). So this allowed players to lean out and expose their arms and gun, but the paint wouldn't break on their arms. When it caught on...the only way to fight back was to do it yourself because the other team had an unfair advantage. So how to handle this it the issue.

Tobz:
Have you ever seen and RT mag or Tippmann RT get dropped or set down and go into FA? I know i never have strictly due to the fact thay they already have a rather heavy pull. I understand the saftey issues with the old Shockers and so forth and completly agree it is good to write the rules to not allow them. I also think that the hybrid mode under these rules should be dissallowed. However, i don't think that the mechanicle bounce should be banned. I don't see the need for it. There are way to many electros that can still achive as fast ROF if not faster than their mechanicle counterparts, and i don't see them being witch hunted.

If roller triggers catch on, i wonder how they are going to try and ban those?

tobz

03-20-2003, 11:22 AM

no, i haven't seen an RT do it..

but eBlade cockers is mainly what I was referring to, and some people that sweetspot the gun, when their sitting around the staging areas and such, if their finger actuates the trigger, and it goes runaway, it's just a safety thing. I agree, we don't need to ban all bounce, but there should be some way to do it safely, that's the main thing.

T.J.

Cyberious

03-20-2003, 11:46 AM

I don't know about you guys but I'm getting a little tired of the NPPL's selective enforcement of the rules in general. Maybe they should consider paying more attention to enforcing the no-wipe rule instead. Seem like that is a much larger problem than trigger bounce. I would suspect that if they really enforced the rules on not wiping with some harsh penalties (i.e DQ'ing the player from the rest of the tourney)that there would a surprising number of Pros who are riding the bench. Cheating is one of the biggest issue holding back the sport not trigger bounce. I'm getting a little tired of going to play, seeing someone hit, and then watching them try and wipe the hit some how. They really need to focus on more important issues like wiping. It seems like the game is turning from a game of angles and inches into a game of angles, inches, and wiping. My two cents anyway.

Kevmag

03-20-2003, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Reactive triggers are illegal for NPPL.

So no E-Mags or RT's in the NPPL? Is this regardless of input pressure or "reactiveness". What about an E-Mag in Electric mode - where the trigger is not reactive?

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 12:30 PM

The NPPL has gone completely through all of the rules and amended, altered, added, and removed their contents.

If anyone attended the Huntington Beach event, you will know that the NPPL is strictly enforcing EVERYTHING in the rule book.

No trigger bounces. No reactive triggers of any kind are allowed. You are not allowed on to the field with a marker that bounces. Was there any on-field bouncing at the event? Nope! They were EXTREMELY strict about this, as well as other things new to the NPPL. Such as... you swear, you're gone. You argue, you're gone. You argue again, its a one for one. You argue again, its a one for one. You argue a 3rd time, and you forfit the match. You wipe, its a three for one. You argue about being pulled for a penalty, you might as well take someone with you (one for one). You flip off the crowd, that's a one for one too. You shoot hot (hand held check) you're gone. Over 310 and its a one for one.

ALL of these things happened at the Huntington Beach event, and ALL were enforced. This was the best reffed (and ruled) event I have ever witnessed. Guess what? With more than 50,000 people watching this event, and it being televised by the local media, we didn't need the normal crap we see in tournaments. I think the NPPL is doing an absolutely outstanding job. I expect the next Super-7 event in Las Vegas to be even more strict since the padded Dye jerseys (and other padded clothing) will no longer be alowed.

Webmaster

03-20-2003, 12:47 PM

I said this once - and I will say it again...

Lets just be done with it and allow full auto?

The WHOLE evolution of this sport stems from the thinking "Argh, if i could have just shot faster I would have gotten that guy. I almost had him,just a few more shots!"

This goes from a Nel-spot to todays angels. Accuracy by volume is the only sure fire way to become more accurate!

I know there are some hesitations, but with full auto guns, our triggers can be set heavier and longer. No more hair triggers would be needed. The guns would be safer with those changes.

I know people fear over shooting or double eye injuries - but we already have over shooting (intentional and unintentional). I say develop a strap to secure goggles to the head and lets play.

Just my thoughts - I dont see how the NPPL will have the manpower to police this to be honest.

and never fear - as Tom said, they are all ready on it to remove the trigger bounce. In the mean time one can just reduce thier input pressure on some guns to get in the limits.

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 12:58 PM

Overshooting is a one for one to a three for one, at the ref's discretion (depending on how deliberate it was).

At the Huntington Beach event, there were 8-10 refs on every field. They have the manpower to run it.

magman007

03-20-2003, 12:59 PM

Jeez Jim, now come on.

First off, shouldnt the NPPL have notified tom to say you know, your markers are illegal now? or shouldnt they give agd a shot to prove that the Retro valve (which, if you all remember, back when the RT came out, it was top dog, used all over the nppl and became a "nppl favorite") isnt illegal?

Tell me jim, why cant the retrovalve kick your finger back? you still have to loosen force for the trigger to return foreward.

Jim is there a contact e-mail that i can get so that i may inquire straight to Chuck about this?

also, the post kev is reffering to is my post about e-mags bouncing in hybrid. Tom said for e-mags they need to make a thinner on off pin. It shouldnt be too hard, and we should see it soon

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 01:11 PM

Anything that pushes your finger and trigger forward (or backward for that matter) is illegal. Guys with Tipmann reactive triggers had to remove them. There was only one mag in the entire Huntington Beach event, so I don't think that was an issue for AGD markers.

A trigger pull and release is required. The reactive unit pushes the trigger forward and does not really need a true "release". If you hold this with just the right amount of force, the trigger will bounce and act like it is in full auto. It's illegal, for every company that has them.

You can contact the NPPL directly via their website.

hitech

03-20-2003, 01:37 PM

I have one for Bill Cookston.

It's bill@cookston.org

I don't know if that will help or not. But there it is anyway.

Miscue

03-20-2003, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by magman007
Jeez Jim, now come on.

First off, shouldnt the NPPL have notified tom to say you know, your markers are illegal now? or shouldnt they give agd a shot to prove that the Retro valve (which, if you all remember, back when the RT came out, it was top dog, used all over the nppl and became a "nppl favorite") isnt illegal?

Tell me jim, why cant the retrovalve kick your finger back? you still have to loosen force for the trigger to return foreward.

Agreed. The new rule specifically hurts the RT Pro/retromags. I don't care if they say electro's cannot bounce at all, fine by me... since an electro trigger is fast enough as it is. However... What the heck is the point of disallowing a reactive trigger in a MECHANICAL gun that CANNOT shoot as fast as an ELECTRO anyway? With or without a reactive trigger?

There is NO ROF issue.
There is NO safety issue.

So what the heck is the reason for this except a vested interest in other companies to HURT AirGun Designs' RTP. DISALLOW "Runaway" triggers, don't disallow "Reactive" triggers that are not reactive enough to go into Runaway... specifically on mechanical triggers, specifically on the RT Pro.

This is outright stupidity. And you guys know FULL well that this specifically hurts the RT Pro which has been around in the NPPL for a long time. Simple precise wording of the rule could eliminate the "bounce" issue in electro guns, but allow the mechanical RTP to stay (which can easily be checked for a questionable runaway trigger... WAY obvious... subjective testing suffices)

This "Oversight" is intentional, unless you guys are just that stupid... which I do not believe is the case. I think it's more likely that you just don't care so long as it doesn't effect you... perhaps a chuckle at who this rule adversely effects... a competitor.

This is what you guys should have done: Defined an illegal trigger return to trigger pull ratio... and adjust this ratio depending on the number of ounces required for a trigger pull. Maybe something along these lines...

If the RTP has roughly a 2:1 ratio with a trigger that needs a pound or so... Why throw this into the same group as electros with a trigger measured in ounces and not pounds? The problem you are trying to correct with bouncing electros DOES NOT exist with the RT Pro, so why include it? Nonsense, that's why!

/me calls for written protest against the rule... requesting revision to not include mech guns that do not demonstrate the problems that they are trying to prevent.

Doc Nickel

03-20-2003, 01:42 PM

Tell me jim, why cant the retrovalve kick your finger back? you still have to loosen force for the trigger to return foreward.

-Not necessarily. The pad of your finger, being somewhat squishy, acts as a spring. You apply just enough force to cause the trigger to "break", and either the pneumatic/mechanical RT effect pushes back slightly against your finger, or the recoil of the gun "shakes" it enough to cause the same thing.

That's why any "sweet spotting" requires you to put just enough pressure on the trigger- you typically can't just yank it and let the RT/recoil do the rest to get the "bouncing" full-auto emulation.

Doc.

Miscue

03-20-2003, 01:45 PM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
There was only one mag in the entire Huntington Beach event, so I don't think that was an issue for AGD markers.

Humm... only one blue eyed kid on the playground, so that's ok that we discount him completely.

A trigger pull and release is required. The reactive unit pushes the trigger forward and does not really need a true "release". If you hold this with just the right amount of force, the trigger will bounce and act like it is in full auto. It's illegal, for every company that has them.

Subjective idiocy. Here is the problem: A runaway trigger, not a reactive trigger. Declaw the cat. Don't kill the cat... to protect your furniture.

I think this rule is dirty pool.

thecavemankevin

03-20-2003, 02:18 PM

It wouldn't be hard to amend the NPPL rules to say "any electronic trigger bounce is illegal"

demonguy8

03-20-2003, 02:34 PM

I am quite happy to see that the Nppl is finally getting better rule enforcement, but disallowing markers that are NOT DESIGNED TO GO INTO RUNAWAY WHEN FUNCTIONING PROPERLY is not only rediculus but is downright hippocritical when ANY adjustable triggered ELECTRO is capable of the same thing (goin into runaway when improperly set) yet are allowed!!

IMHO if you want to do something that actually helps SAFETY... BAN the use of force-fed loaders such as the halos, the evo2, and the warp feed. Gravity fed loaders are limited to a MAXIMUM of 12.5 bps which is SLOWER than MANY PEOPLE who play paintball are capable of shooting anyway. IT IS THE NUMBER BALLS PER SECOND THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THIS SPORT! (not that it will ever be changed with VENDORS making the decisions regarding the league since more paint= more money)

By effictivly limiting the Balls per second that the markers are capable of you have not only effectivly limited the potential for overshooting (which I think it would be safe in assuming the saftey implications of overshooting are the underlying basis for the RTban issue), but you would have also made it easier to set a CLEAR DEFINITION on what exactly overshooting is, since you know the maximum rate at which players are able to fire (12.5 bps).

Now my question is didnt the NPPL have a rule against force fed loaders to begin with? If so, It is either not being enforced, or it was removed by industry leaders eager to try and line their pockets with more money while they themselves seem to be the ones carrying on about safety..
And wasnt the NPPL split about making the league better as a whole WITHOUT having to rely purely on input from vendors? Any way you look at it this shows the hippocracy of the industry.
I very agree with Miscue.. someone dropped the ball here..

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 02:47 PM

The bottom line is very simple. Any trigger can be setup so that it bounces. These are not allowed on the field... period.

A trigger pull and release are required under the rules. If you just hold a trigger lightly and the marker goes into full auto, it is illegal.

The only way to make the Tipmann markers legal during the Huntington Beach event was to remove the reactive trigger. If the chrono judge grabs your marker (holding it lightly), and gently pulls on the trigger, and sees it shoots two or more times it is going to be illegal. We came up with several methods to check this, and they were all being used.

This ruling affects all brands of all markers. There were no special cases or considerations.

Anything that aids the return of the trigger (other than a spring) is going to be illegal, and that was brought up at the meeting agreed upon. It is simply too easy to make a reactive trigger bounce by applying a certain amount of pressure, and never actually releasing the trigger.

Jack & Coke

03-20-2003, 02:54 PM

"RUN-AWAY"
"SWEET-SPOTTING"
"TRIGGER BOUNCE"

FYI regarding "RUN-AWAY"

From:http://www.airsoftretreat.com/

http://www.airsoftretreat.com/videos/small/Realsteal/blooper-walter-m11-runaway.jpg

Here's what happens when your gun (real) goes "RUN-AWAY".

Also, watch his trigger finger...

Click here to download the clip! (http://airsoft.3dretreat.com/videos/files/blooper-walter-m11-runaway.mpg)

(2.6 MB MPEG)

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 03:08 PM

Sweet spotting as you have defined it above is illegal. The ref could grab the marker and find this pretty easily, and not be allowed on the field.

The idea here people is safety. If someone can pull the trigger 18bps, that is one thing and obviously not real common. It's another thing to sweet spot with a Halo-B and shoot 20+bps into someone's face. Imagine going over to bunker someone and hit them 15 times point blank because you now the sweet spot on your trigger so well you can unleash that kind of fire power on demand. This is a safety hazard... period.

The NPPL rules are all about safety. We get enough welts just playing the game... we don't need to have the element of possible permanent injury or death.

Miscue

03-20-2003, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
The bottom line is very simple. Any trigger can be setup so that it bounces. These are not allowed on the field... period.

A trigger pull and release are required under the rules. If you just hold a trigger lightly and the marker goes into full auto, it is illegal.

The only way to make the Tipmann markers legal during the Huntington Beach event was to remove the reactive trigger. If the chrono judge grabs your marker (holding it lightly), and gently pulls on the trigger, and sees it shoots two or more times it is going to be illegal. We came up with several methods to check this, and they were all being used.

This ruling affects all brands of all markers. There were no special cases or considerations.

Anything that aids the return of the trigger (other than a spring) is going to be illegal, and that was brought up at the meeting agreed upon. It is simply too easy to make a reactive trigger bounce by applying a certain amount of pressure, and never actually releasing the trigger.

What? Anything other than a "spring?" What about a return magnet? This ruling has just made the entire line of AGD products except for the classic mag... against the rules!

"The bottom line is very simple. Any trigger can be setup so that it bounces. These are not allowed on the field... period."

Keyword: "can"

What is the purpose of this rule?

Safety? Fairness?

DEMONSTRATE that a properly setup RTP/EMag is NOT safe. DEMONSTRATE that a properly setup RTP/EMag is NOT fair.

Mind you, ANY gun that is not properly setup can be either unsafe, or unfair... I'm not singling out the RTP.

Setup the rules that a gun must be DEMONSTRATED to be unsafe or unfair. What the heck is the point of making a gun illegal if it CANNOT be DEMONSTRATED to be unsafe or unfair. Isn't that the WHOLE POINT of the rule? Let's throw some guy in prison because we FEEL like it, not because we have a demonstratable reason! Sure, why not!

If I hand a ref my RTP or EMag... he will NOT be able to get it to fire uncontrollably in an unsafe, or unfair manner. So why the heck should I not be able to use these?

JEDI

03-20-2003, 03:10 PM

Come on guys! You're all playing dumb and innocent. Do you honestly believe the NPPL is gonna test the ratio of pull to release, compared to the pounds per mass angle-of-the-dangle? This is a tournament, not an experiment in the Deep Blue forum. They need to come with rules that blanket all possibilities. Their not going to check the input pressure, and trigger pull of EVERY retro mag user. Stop being babies.

I've played SEVERAL games against fellow mag shooters that "shot very fast" *wink wink*. I can't tell you how many conversations I've over heard about "hybrid" mode, and how it "practically shoots for me". Its not some crusade against AGD, its a way to standardise safety. If you some how feel wronged here, maybe you're a little guilty, or need to "lower your input pressure."

Miscue

03-20-2003, 03:12 PM

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 03:14 PM

Miscue,

Spring, magnet, or any thing that does not apply enough force to PUSH your finger forward.

Come one guys, quit playing dumb here. If the trigger is not MANUALLY being released and repulled, its not going to be allowed on the field. You can't have an apparatus of any kind pushing your finger/trigger forward. You have to release the trigger yourself, under your own power.

Miscue

03-20-2003, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by JEDI
Come on guys! You're all playing dumb and innocent. Do you honestly believe the NPPL is gonna test the ratio of pull to release, compared to the pounds per mass angle-of-the-dangle?

No, they will not... it's too much work. That is the WHOLE point. It is left to subjectivity.

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 03:19 PM

If I hand a ref my RTP or EMag... he will NOT be able to get it to fire uncontrollably in an unsafe, or unfair manner. So why the heck should I not be able to use these?

Can the refs make it shoot more than one time when holding pressure on the trigger and not releasing it? If so, its illegal. This same thing applies to electros too. There are guys with hair triggers where you don't release the trigger and it fires like it's in full auto. That is illegal.

Think safety here people.

As far as a rate of fire cap goes, that will have to be looked into. I can tell you from a political point of view, the only way to inforce this would be through limiting the hopper. That of course would upset the hopper manufacturers... and if you think the paint manufacturers are going to back a rate of fire limit, you're nuts. :)

Miscue

03-20-2003, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Miscue,

Spring, magnet, or any thing that does not apply enough force to PUSH your finger forward.

Ok, that's great then.

Come one guys, quit playing dumb here. If the trigger is not MANUALLY being released and repulled, its not going to be allowed on the field. You can't have an apparatus of any kind pushing your finger/trigger forward. You have to release the trigger yourself, under your own power.

Ok... I see what the rule details. I understand that the PURPOSE of the rule is fairness and safety. But I do not understand the rule's lack of precision... and how it sloppily extends to a mechanical gun like an unmodified RTP that is NOT unfair (There's no way you can hit electro ROF even with retro trigger) and is NOT unsafe (Every shot is deliberate).

A reactive trigger is unsafe and unfair only in some situations. NPPL needs to make the distinction.

Dubstar112

03-20-2003, 03:32 PM

Jim you say there was only one mag at that event so it shouldnt be a problem for AGD.

It is a problem. Everyone wants a tournament marker. Whether they play rec ball, or actual tournaments is irrellevant now. They want that "Tournament marker" seal of aproval. Now that you are basically outlawing the flagship tournament marker of a companys fleet.. its like saying a mustang is illeagal because it has the ability to break the speed limit. Thats how I see it.

Miscue

03-20-2003, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz

Can the refs make it shoot more than one time when holding pressure on the trigger and not releasing it? If so, its illegal. This same thing applies to electros too. There are guys with hair triggers where you don't release the trigger and it fires like it's in full auto. That is illegal.

Think safety here people.

As far as a rate of fire cap goes, that will have to be looked into. I can tell you from a political point of view, the only way to inforce this would be through limiting the hopper. That of course would upset the hopper manufacturers... and if you think the paint manufacturers are going to back a rate of fire limit, you're nuts. :)

Make it shoot more than once? No. Can it simulate FA even for a moment? Nope. Can anybody shoot over 15bps with it? Maybe some freak of nature with hypertensile tendons. But, my trigger is still reactive. What's unsafe about this? It's perfectly safe.

My take from this ruling is that... even if the ref cannot demonstrate unsafe/unfair qualities by test firing... it is immediately illegal because of a reactive trigger. Cod swallop.

Since when does rule making have anything to do with the approval of manufacturers? This is EXACTLY why we need the industry OUT of NPPL rule making.

Dubstar112

03-20-2003, 03:39 PM

Originally posted by Miscue

Make it shoot more than once? No. Can it simulate FA even for a moment? Nope. Can anybody shoot over 15bps with it? Maybe some freak of nature with hypertensile tendons. But, my trigger is still reactive. What's unsafe about this? It's perfectly safe.

My take from this ruling is that... even if the ref cannot demonstrate unsafe/unfair qualities by test firing... it is immediately illegal because of a reactive trigger. Cod swallop.

Since when does rule making have anything to do with the approval of manufacturers? This is EXACTLY why we need the industry OUT of NPPL rule making.

Miscue, I agree with the industry needs to be out of the rule making statement. You have to deliberatley pull the trigger to make the reactiveness effective. You might as well ban all blowbacks from tournaments, because when they sputter, they fire more than one ball, and even that is more uncontrollable.

cphilip

03-20-2003, 03:43 PM

Yes but we all know that that "Just enough" is easy enough to create on the side lines or at the Crono station but almost impossible to do in the heat of the game.

Most you you are getting defensive about the AGD products. I was at WC and saw several other marker manufacturers markers "Bounce" by one method or the other. I do not believe it is directed at AGD. And in fact all of the AGD markers I saw where the Crono judge questioned the bounce happening were adjusted right there and made legal. One other marker of another manufacturer that was bouncing could not be and was disallowed. I do not understand these other markers enough to know how they get them to do it but they do. I believe WAS can shed some light on that as he makes a product that indeed allows people to do this! I know he doesn't make it for that reason but it does and its common knowledge among them on how to get it to happen using his board. Its not an AGD marker only issue. Even though its well known they can be made to do this it is equally well known they can be easily made to not do this. Simply using an emag in emode will eliminate it as a matter of fact.

hitech

03-20-2003, 03:44 PM

Does anyone have the exact wording of the new proposed rule?

JEDI

03-20-2003, 03:45 PM

Originally posted by Miscue

No, they will not... it's too much work. That is the WHOLE point. It is left to subjectivity.
Its not subjectivity. They're very clear. They dont want to bother with grey areas. It either is or it isnt. The RT valve was made with one thing in mind: Speed, and ajustibility of bounce. No other marker besides the tippmann RT does this. Spring tension, return, or trigger pull is not the same.

Electros with bounce can achieve similar "bounces" but they're not directly designed to do so as blatantly as a Retro. I love my Emag to the death, but if it came down to it, I'd rip that stupid selector switch off in a heart beat. I dont need manual, and I certainly dont need Hybrid. Two guns in one was cool only for so long. If the Mag goes down, out comes gun Number two.

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 03:47 PM

A reactive trigger is unsafe and unfair only in some situations. NPPL needs to make the distinction.

A reactive trigger is one that pressure is applied to move the trigger forward. This amount of pressure will move your finger along with it. You are not releasing the trigger, your finger is being forced forward.

If you can lock out the capability of doing this, and the refs can not make it bounce, then it would be 100% legal. I saw Tipmann owners that had to remove the pin that pushes the trigger forward at Huntington Beach in order for their markers to be legal.

The NPPL is a very tight knit group that needs the manufacturers and sponsors. You are not going to eliminate manufacturers from the rules committee, or you would have a much bigger mess than you can possibly imagine.

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 03:53 PM

Jim you say there was only one mag at that event so it shouldnt be a problem for AGD.

Let me clarify that. It was not a problem for AGD because this person's marker was not illegal.

The only reason I know this person was the only one with a mag is that Bill and Dawn Mills commented that myself and this guy were the two loners of the entire event. I was the only one using a Warpfeed, and he was the only one using a mag. We played against each other, and Dawn got some good pictures of us battling against each other (one on one). His Ricochet didn't deflect my paintballs. :)

hitech

03-20-2003, 03:54 PM

WAS,

Do you know what the exact wording of the proposed rule(s) are?

If so, will you post it?

cledford

03-20-2003, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Sweet spotting as you have defined it above is illegal. The ref could grab the marker and find this pretty easily, and not be allowed on the field.

The idea here people is safety. If someone can pull the trigger 18bps, that is one thing and obviously not real common. It's another thing to sweet spot with a Halo-B and shoot 20+bps into someone's face. Imagine going over to bunker someone and hit them 15 times point blank because you now the sweet spot on your trigger so well you can unleash that kind of fire power on demand. This is a safety hazard... period.

The NPPL rules are all about safety. We get enough welts just playing the game... we don't need to have the element of possible permanent injury or death.

Doesn't anyone else see the irony here? Jim Drew, the biggest hype artist *POOF* I know of in the paintball industry, the guy who single-handedly has done more to advance the issue of *electronic* bounce then EVERY OTHER COMPANY OUT THERE is sitting on a committee making determinations about rules with regard to triggers and bounce?

FACT: The Equalizer MORE THEN any other electronic product has led to the issue of bounce becoming the hot ticket that it is.

FACT: Jim produces a board that allows you to "dial in bounce" under the excuse and guise of allowing a user to eliminate it. Wonder why no other manufacturer ever had to include this "feature" - yet additionally their triggers also don't bounce. (Smart Parts, WDP, AGD, AKA, Original Timmy) This "feature" (along with the Racegun and E-Blade guys) has led to all of the hub-bub over electronically bouncing triggers. (The Tippmann discredits the mechanical side of the house)

FACT: Jim Drew is new to paintball - only having gotten into the area a little over a year ago was the most junior guy sitting on that panel - BY FAR. What were his credentials to be involved in such a high level forum in the first place? The guy produces a single upgrade to a SINGLE marker (currently) and he's all of the sudden propelled to the highest councils in the sport? Does anyone notice that there are a lot of guys who have contributed far more to the technology of the sport not on that panel?

FACT: Jim Drew knows very little about other markers, air systems, or products other then the Timmy. He has specifically admitted this time and again in thread after thread when challenged on matters he couldn't speak to. He has also, specifically, on a number of occasions STATED he did not know or care to know ANYTHING about AGD markers as they were (in his opinion) rec-ball guns and he was not "into" that market. (Direct quotes can be provided) So how does he contribute anything relevant with regard to mechanical triggers?

FACT: Like any gun (or board) - the RTP or Emag can and MUST be SETUP to malfunction - before bounce is present.

This is a big joke. Jim Drew quoting safety to people who've been playing since before he was geeking out on Apples. Jim why don't you share your credentials with us since you seem to speak from such a position of authority? I thought your alarmist story of the "15 bps into someone's face" was quaint - and how did you even determine that was how many BPS are fired when "sweet-spotting?" Have you ever even sweet-spotted a gun before? I have - it is incredibly difficult , even when setup to do it. It most certainly can't be done during a bunker move. I'm wondering where you even got your information - since you seem incapable of obtaining any statistics on ANYTHING if you can't use an oscilloscope to do so.

I'm just shocked that mechanical markers THAT HAVE BEEN LEGAL FOR YEARS NOW are all of the sudden are "banned" when electros with 1-3mm trigger pulls and pull weights in the sub-grams are being pulled at 20+bps and that happens to be fine. It is even more incredible to me that a hack like Jim could insert himself in to a situation where he could be involved in driving policy about a problem he helped to create, yet REAL GUN MANUFACTURERS weren't included.

I am MORE then ready to support MANDATORY trigger-pull lengths and weights - and I'll promise you one thing, the Equalizers of the world will be the markers/boards affected.

-Calvin

Warning: *No Flames* -Miscue

JEDI

03-20-2003, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by hitech
WAS,

Do you know what the exact wording of the proposed rule(s) are?

If so, will you post it?
Sure, it clearly states, "Throw away your roller trigger mods, turn down your input pressure, and quit whining".....KIDDING!!!:D

WickedAirSportz

03-20-2003, 04:04 PM

I believe the wording was posted at the beginning of this thread. The wording didn't change, it's just now the NPPL is deadly serious about inforcement. The NPPL has gone to the next level, one that will bring paintball international attention. The only way to get to that level is to clean up the game. Get rid of the cheating in every possible way - from trigger bounce to padded clothing to sideline coaching. There were many aspects covered in the meeting that I attended, and the ONLY thing that was not going to be inforced at the Huntington Beach event was the padded jersey rule. However, it was clearly stated that these jerseys would no longer be legal in future events. That was an unforunate thing for the clothing manufacturers, but they seem to have adpated just fine... afterall, they're selling more stuff to replace what is illegal.

I think the NPPL is headed on a course for greatness. I believe that players all over the world will come to respect the monumental task that the NPPL has taken up themselves to tackle. The game will get better, and the world will come to know paintball for what it is, and not correlate it with a bunch of hillbillies shooting each other in the back yard, or para-military nuts practicing for war. It's an extreme sport... simple as that.

JEDI

03-20-2003, 04:08 PM

Why dont you just go away. *POOF*

*Warning: No Flaming* -Miscue

magman007

03-20-2003, 04:22 PM

So jim, are you saying this will be settled on case to case basis?

And why was it dissalowed now? why not earlier? I mean, the tippman rt's have been illegal for so long any ways. Also, the RT mag was at one time the most popular out there, how is this fair to dissalow something chuck probabally used him self once uppon a time?

Jack & Coke

03-20-2003, 04:36 PM

Originally posted by Webmaster

...Lets just be done with it and allow full auto?

...I know there are some hesitations, but with full auto guns, our triggers can be set heavier and longer.

No more hair triggers would be needed. The guns would be safer with those changes.

I know people fear over shooting or double eye injuries - but we already have over shooting (intentional and unintentional)...

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz

...the only way to inforce this would be through limiting the hopper...

These are the BEST comments and ideas I've heard in a long time! http://www.automags.org/forums/images/icons/icon14.gifhttp://www.automags.org/forums/images/icons/icon14.gifhttp://www.automags.org/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif

I like the idea suggested by these guys!http://www.automags.org/forums/images/icons/icon3.gif

*** Allow Full-Auto

*** Minimum trigger force = 4-5 lbs. (same as a stock Glock)How to check? Do it like this (http://www.automags.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68168&highlight=trigger+and+pull+and+light), but use weights instead of coins.

http://www.automags.org/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=647248

*** Maximum hopper capacity = 50-100 (you can still carry as many pods as you want)

:) :) :)

I also like this idea:

Originally posted by Miscue

Then set a freakin BPS cap!!!
Then set a freakin BPS cap!!!
Then set a freakin BPS cap!!!
Then set a freakin BPS cap!!!
Then set a freakin BPS cap!!!
Then set a freakin BPS cap!!!

Are you guys retarded or something?

*** Minimum trigger force = 4-5 lbs.

*** Max ROF = 8-10

FutureMagOwner

03-20-2003, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Imagine going over to bunker someone and hit them 15 times point blank because you now the sweet spot on your trigger so well you can unleash that kind of fire power on demand. This is a safety hazard... period.

funny how chris lasoya did just that with an intimidator of all things with a was board that he says he only pulled the trigger 6 times?

Cyberious

03-20-2003, 05:05 PM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
it's just now the NPPL is deadly serious about inforcement. The NPPL has gone to the next level, one that will bring paintball international attention. The only way to get to that level is to clean up the game. Get rid of the cheating in every possible way - from trigger bounce to padded clothing to sideline coaching.

Really? Deadly Serious? OK, so what about the Jeremy Salm issue? How did that bring international attention? How did the ruling the NPPL handed down show just how serious an offense that was? It reminds me of an incident that happened in the NFL several years ago. A defensive back would write on his hand towel a list of players he was going to "take out" during a game. So one game when he was playing against the Chicago Bears he hadn't been able to get to the QB who was on his list. So what does he do? He waited until the play had been dead for 20 seconds and then tackled the QB from behind taking him out of the game. It was the worst example of bad sportsmanship and cheating the league had ever seen. The NFL suspended him for life and rightfully so. Salm received a year's suspension for one of the worst examples of cheating I've ever seen. So what is the NPPL going to do to those individuals who wipe? Probably be stern on the Amateurs and Novices, and be lax on the Pros the way it currently is. The NPPL has little credibility in my mind because it has done little in the past to show itself as anything other that a group of special interest individuals who hand down their "holy" ruling to us insignificant players without us ever having a say. If each member had a vote then they would be a little more credible.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
I think the NPPL is headed on a course for greatness.

Not likely unless the NPPL Board of Directors truly becomes a governing body of players from all levels and types of play that does not allow manufacturers or their employees as members of the board.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
I believe that players all over the world will come to respect the monumental task that the NPPL has taken up themselves to tackle. The game will get better, and the world will ome to know paintball for what it is, and not correlate it with a bunch of hillbillies shooting each other in the back yard, or para-military nuts practicing for war. It's an extreme sport... simple as that.

No, it will continue to be known as a game played by a bunch of foul-mouthed, argumentative, unsportsman like cheaters.

Jerhew

03-20-2003, 05:44 PM

isn't it strange how atleast 2 people connected with electo markers were present at the meeting and yet i didn't see names like Budd Orr or Tom Kaye on that list...
did they decline the invite?
or weren't they invited?
I WONDER:confused: :rolleyes:

and so we are worried about the paint manufacturers and hopper manufacturers getting upset about rules but don't give a hoot about other marker manufacturers?

it's already been beaten to death but come on
this decision makes it impossible for a mechanical mag user to even come close to keeping up with those electros
it's absurd
that'd be a neat trick to sweetspot an rt while on the run trying to bunker someone
gimme a break Jim

this insults our intelligence as much as the "marijuana impairs your judgement" commercials where the teenagers are playing with a loaded gun...
ya sure marijuana will always make you accidentally shoot your friends....:rolleyes:

comparing a properly setup rt with any electro is just stupid...plain and simple
it takes much more skill to fire quickly and is atleast as safe if not safer to have around than an electro

other than that i think it's good that the nppl is clamping down with the rules
although i completely disagree with how much pull certain manufacturers have in making rules...
definitely seems like someone is getting screwed

Warning: No Cussing -Miscue

Doc Nickel

03-20-2003, 05:45 PM

FACT: The Equalizer MORE THEN any other electronic product has led to the issue of bounce becoming the hot ticket that it is.

-Actually, as I noted earlier, Smart Parts took willful and deliberate advantage of the loophole in NPPL rules and fielded their teams with "Turbo" Shockers as early as '98.

In those Shocker controllers, "turbo" mode simply disabled the triggerswitch debounce. This allowed "switch noise"- which is what a debounce feature is designed to limit or remove- to make the controller think that the trigger was being pulled far faster than it physically was.

This led to a great deal of arguing between NPPL cofficials, SP crew and family, and a heavy, heated debate online and at tourneys about "trigger events", switch nouse, what actually constituted a 'trigger pull' (was it the physical trigger or the contacts in the switch?) and so on.

The NPPL even legally allowed "turbo" modes, if the ROF was kept under 8.2 bps- a nice, round number that just happened to correspond to the second-highest ROF the Turbo Shockers were capable of. This in turn led to WDP installing their eight-shot/8 bps "Zip" mode on their boards, though this was a fullauto feature, not a "turbo" mode.

The whole mess eventually led to official NPPL regs on what is and what isn't a trigger, and what does and what doesn't constitute a trigger pull.

I can't speak for the Equalizer board, having never tried one, but don't lay this all at Jim's feet just because he's working with similar features.

Doc.

Jack & Coke

03-20-2003, 06:20 PM

Originally posted by Jerhew
isn't it strange how atleast 2 people connected with electo markers were present at the meeting and yet i didn't see names like Budd Orr or Tom Kaye on that list...
did they decline the invite?
or weren't they invited?
I WONDER:confused: :rolleyes:

Maybe, because the markers most directly responsible for cheating issues ARE electronic and not mechanical...

Also, who knows what bridges may have been burned in the past...:eek:

thecavemankevin

03-20-2003, 06:39 PM

Originally posted by FutureMagOwner

funny how chris lasoya did just that with an intimidator of all things with a was board that he says he only pulled the trigger 6 times?

thats because he had bounce occur...and that is why NPPL is out lawing this and attempting to enforce this. However, if he had an RTP this wouldn't have happened to this severity.

Is the RTP/Tip reactive unsafe? No more unsafe than any other marker, mech or electro. As long as it is not capable of bounce.
Are they cappable of unsafe rates of fire? Only if you can pull the trigger itself at an unsafe rate....the trigger reactiveness is NOT capable of makeing this happen by sweetspotting. At it's most reactiveness and sweetspotting an RTP is capable of fireing about 13bps.

Are there electros that can fire faster than that? We all know there are.

Now can everyone pull a trigger at an unsafe rate of fire? No, not everyone can...but there are some that can. So what are we going to do about those people? Is the NPPL going to ban an individual just because they are cappable of unsafe rates of fire?

So why get rid of a marker that is capable of less shots than certain people are capable of with an electro and a light trigger pull (not even bouncing).

cledford

03-20-2003, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by Doc Nickel

-Actually, as I noted earlier, Smart Parts took willful and deliberate advantage of the loophole in NPPL rules and fielded their teams with "Turbo" Shockers as early as '98.
Doc.

Doc,

Thanks for the input. I am aware of the Smart Parts issue and didn't mention it because "turbo mode" is matter that has been dealt with for a number of years now. IMHO, the CURRENT issues with regard to electronic trigger bounce is rightfully laid at the feet of WAS/Jim Drew - since he saw fit to produce the most widely distributed and abused (due his programming decisions) product of the current crop. I've seen bounce issues with the Racegun (it allows you to bypass trigger filter) and the Eblade (not sure how they do it) - but the BL Timmy with the WAS board is far and away the most widely available and easiest to use (from the respect of enabling bounce) of the three. I see 2 different issues. Smart Parts found a loophole and exploited it while it existed. The "debounce" setting programmed into WAS board is to supposedly allow a user to AVOID trigger bounce – yet is ripe for and frequently abused by allowing the owner to set the "debounce" level to as little as 1ms - in effect allowing all switch “bounces” to be used as "trigger events." That it is even available is questionable in the same respect that the ram valve on the Tippmann RT is so conveniently located and easily adjustable. Someone can claim that they put a “feature” in for safeties sake – but amusingly enough there are plenty of other markers out there that don’t have “debounce” and don’t seem to have a need for such a thing. So why is it really there to begin with? How responsible is it to add a “feature” that is ripe for abuse under the guise of safety when no one else has put it on their marker and there has never been a problem?

Furthermore, (in addition to the "debounce" setting on the Equalizer) IMHO WAS is using a different and more questionable practice to increase the ROF of his board - queuing trigger events. The rational is that is you can physically pull the trigger 18 times a second - but the marker isn't quite ready to fire (say due to an ongoing ball feed determined to not to be finished by a break beam eye) then you just take that pull and "tack" it onto the end of the string - hey it's still 18 pulls, 18 shots right?

What irritates me about Jim is that he'll bend any argument, rule, or policy to support his product - yet leverage the same control (applying it in reverse) to negatively impact another’s product. His post regarding "safety" is one of those infuriating examples. It shows his real lack of understanding of the need for the rules - and illustrates why he is still to "green" with regard to the industry and has his hands to dirty to even be involved. I know from numerous conversations with Tom that the these rules aren't necessarily about more then one shot per pull - they are about the possibility of unintended balls being in the air when they shouldn't be. To be more specific - the marker need to stop firing immediately when the user intends it to - not when it'd done running through a series of "stored" events. (Doesn’t matter how they get there – bounce or “pulls”) This is to allow for the shooter to stop the stream of projectiles at any point they determine that there is a dangerous situation – like a mask that has come off. Jim seems to feel it is OK for a marker to continue to shoot for up to 3/4s of a second (at today’s BPS how many unintended balls might that add up to) after the user stops pulling.

Here is a quote from the release notes of v.2.0 of his product:

“v2.0 - 10/14/02
Increased the rate of fire by checking for the trigger pull during
the firing cycle of the marker. If the trigger was legitimately
released and re-pulled during the middle of the cycle (which is entirely
possible), that trigger event was previously ignored. The event is now
processed at the end of the cycle. In testing, we could release and
re-pull the trigger about 30% of the time while "walking" the trigger.
This change is still tournament legal. Every pull fires only a single shot.”

Here is a quote from a recent Drew thread about the trigger queuing and as you will see - he is a proponent for the more liberal crowd with regard for queuing:

"Queuing is not illegal according to the rules of NPPL, PSP, and PanAm... and anywhere else I would assume. It is still one pull = one shot. A single trigger event can be held off for a period time, afterwhich the event is ignored. There were discussions at the NPPL rules committee meeting in regards to how long this hold off period should be. John Rice from WDP believes that it should be no more than 100ms. I believe it should be no more than 750ms.”

The thread can be found here:

http://www.pbnation.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=193686&perpage=21&pagenumber=4

I'm just pointing out the irony of a guy who helped the problem resurface to begin with being involved in a rules committee that in effect has banned other manufacturers products. To me that's the same as having convicted drunk drivers help set the penalties - since they know so much about them – then applying those penalties to someone who hasn’t, but just might drive drunk sometime in the future.

-Calvin

rdb123

03-20-2003, 09:22 PM

Well said cledford.

SyntaxError

03-20-2003, 09:29 PM

Considering that I can pull my angel's trigger about twice as fast as my RT's with a input of 950, I think the rule is pretty lame, especially if its only concerning safety from high rates of fire. An electronic trigger, in my opinion, IS JUST AS MUCH AN ADVANTAGE AS REACTIVITY. This rule should definately be amended, and considering the NPPL isn't even an official governing body of the sport, we at AO should push to have the rule amended.

thecavemankevin

03-20-2003, 09:58 PM

well shoot....since certain people (WAS) seem to think that it is ok to store trigger events, then whats stopping someone from creating a board/software program that you could store even more.

For instance, i could sit and pull my trigger in a store mode for 3 or 4 days and in that time pull the trigger 30k plus times and then when i want to play just hit start and let it rip out 30k shots as fast as it can make the marker cycle.

Never the less....this has nothing to do with a mech trigger since this is obviously impossible to do with them...it was just a good old fashion witch hunt. Since they were on the subject they said...hey lets make sure we include Reactive trigger markers because those are a HUGE saftey hazard.

HOGWASH!

Jack & Coke

03-20-2003, 10:03 PM

FYI:

Not to take up any side of the arguement regarding Jim Drew... but you do know that before Jim Drew created the Equalizer, the Timmy's original board already had a 3/4 second shot queue with the eyes on and no ball present?

Jim didn't create the 750 ms queue... it was already there.

Jack & Coke

03-20-2003, 10:10 PM

I just thought about what I said, and must admit, I am incorrect.

there was a DELAY not a QUEUE.

(i.e. DELAY = Only 1 shot QUEUE)

Sorry about that... ma bad......;)

CpSuPeRkId

03-20-2003, 10:40 PM

wow u guys have to be the sorriest bunch of whiners i have ever seen. you guys should be ashamed for all the flaming you guys are doing. jim was invited to the meeting because HE IS ONE OF THE BEST PAINTBALL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS out there!!!! give the guy a break for gods sake!!! all he did is invent a board for a timmy and it can take advantage of trigger boucne. well did u morons ever come to think that it also has a trigger debounce feature????? you guys act like hes hypocritical and not worthy of being part of the nppl rules meeting. well guess what you crybabies, his product has ADJUSTABLE trigger bounce so do u really think he would come here and tell you guys this new rule when his cant be adjusted. of course not. and do u think its all up to him whether trigger bounce should be allowed??? NO. god i used to think that AO was the most respectable online forum. not anymore. you guys really should be ashamed of yourselves for claming jim that bad just cuz you guys cant handle the fact that the nppl is finally stepping up and trying to become a better organization.

now onto what i think should be allowed and not allowed. you guys keep whining about how your rt mags wont be allowed and that theres no definite ruling on this cituation. this is, in fact, a black and white cituation. if the ref can take your gun and shoot more than 1 shot with 1 trigger pull then its not allowed. they arent going to ban all mags with rts if they have been supporting them for all these years. they will ban certain markers however if the ref can pick it up and it goes reactive or into run away mode. for example, i cant get an rt mag to go reactive but i can get my brothers impy to get insane trigger bounce. its soo annoying. i pull the trigger 1 time and 4 or 5 shots rattle off and ill chop, reguardless of what hopper im using. whats really bad is that the trigger pull is longer, like a quarter inch pull. thank god for the guy that u guys think is the devil. hes making an equalizer for the impy that has a trigger DEbounce feature. so i honestly think that this is a no grey zone rule. if the ref can pick up your gun and shoot more than 1 shot per pull reguardless, then its illegal. so why do u guys keep on crying, i have no idea. they cant ban a gun that they cant make go reactive themselves so chill for a little bit and see what happens. thank god for me i will never shoot anything besides a wdp product and my ir3 has an opto trigger that CANNOT possibly get trigger bounce. while u guys are all gettin pulled for your timmys, impys, and mags ill be playing. lol jj

cphilip

03-20-2003, 10:53 PM

CpSuPeRkId, the point that some are trying to make is that the rule itself is fine but that WAS's explanation seemed to concentrate on pressurized return as the thing they were targeting. And not other methods to get multiple shots. And that in itself would be wrong. And I suspect is an incorrect interpretation on his part. And I suspect there will be some phone calls going on about that tomorrow! But still I agree that one shot per pull has always been the rule and should stay. But there are other methods to get muliple balls per pull that do not include pressure return of the trigger. And some would argue your interpretation of who is the best and who should have been consulted in this whole decission making process of these things. I see a lot of very qualified people that were not invited to that meeting and it looks like a lynching even if it is not. Looks are important and input should be broad. And it wasn't. So I would caution you to not lecture to the members over that. Its not your place nor is it very welcome.

And I hate to inform you of this but both your markers in the right configuration could be made to bounce or at least shoot more than one ball per pull.

magking1971

03-20-2003, 11:23 PM

What is wrong with hillbillys in the woods shooting each other?
The answer to this trigger bounce issue is easy,ready for it?.......Don't go to NPPL events.:D

Webmaster

03-21-2003, 12:51 AM

Doc,

I remember playing in the Autococker open in springfield mo and played an SP factory team. They had prototypes with the turbo board. It was cool at the time - but later we were like - hey - thats cheating! I was one of the first people shot out by a turbo shocker!

I still think screw this - make it full auto - no bps limit.

People that constant air or semi auto would turn this game into a bunch of one eyed player - but it didnt. Put a strap on the goggles and go. More playing, less worring about what turbo/bounce crap is doing. Just pull the trigger and shoot your guy out. 10,15,20 bps - how ever fast your gun and loader can spit paint.

Jack & Coke

03-21-2003, 01:33 AM

:eek:

Just make sure I'm on YOUR team...:p

Jerhew

03-21-2003, 01:37 AM

hehe im with webby on this one
i mean is this a game of angles or a game of bps?

either have a bps limit or allow full auto...simple as that
in for a penny, in for a pound
all these supposed safety issues with full auto seem to me to be unjustified
of course you don't want your trigger to go off when you don't touch it...but when's the last time you seen someone manage to get a full auto to "just go off" while setting it down...

M-a-s-sDriver

03-21-2003, 02:18 AM

My Opinion:
No BPS limits, full auto if you want it, 235 fps limit.
Wear a "paintball" helmet. Don't say it can't be done,it just becomes standard issue, like goggles. Like the NFL. Like F1, NASCAR, whatever.
Setting a BPS limit artificially low will make electros obsolete, as there is no limit to how fast a mechanical marker can CONCIEVABLY go. (Actually, maybe not: there are still boats of 'cockers in a sea of electros).
BPS can only be controlled by a HALO type loader, feeding at a predetermined rate. Maybe rated loaders are issued at tournaments, rather than bringing your own.
Otherwise, screw all this crap and do what I do: SHOOT STOCK CLASS BABY!!

Turn it up to 300, and bunker away. If you can overshoot someone, then yer a BAD MOFO, and nobody is going to argue with you anyway.
Brent Jackson, ACE-PFB.

P.S. Remember this: If you bunker me with your Shocker, WAS board,RT...whatever, with 15 balls on my back, while I'm plugging away with my VSC Phantom...just be prepared to defend yourself. I am not a pacifist.

Jack & Coke

03-21-2003, 02:49 AM

I like the idea of lowering the ball speed...

FULL-AUTO

240 fps
5 pound trigger - easy to check
100 round hopper - unlimited pods

ROF - unlimited

:)

ghideon

03-21-2003, 04:00 AM

I think this just illustrates that some in the industry know squat about Mags. Yes, it is entirely possible to have the gun go psuedo-full auto with trigger bounce. When I play, I don't fear hopped up Mags and Tippys, I fear idiots with electro hair triggers. Like the one dude at my field who had just moved from a cocker to a matrix. Not only did he shoot himself in the hand, he managed to shoot me twice in the arse, twice in the back and once in the head. In one game. When I was on HIS team. You really wanna make the sport safer? Get rid of triggers with pulls measured in ounces or less.

Knee-jerk banning all reactive triggers seems ignorant if your goal is to enforce a one intentional trigger pull = one round fired rule. This can be accomplished on a Mag by turning down your input pressure. On Tippy RTs (I own one of those and an EMag) there is an adjustment as well for the amount of reactiveness. Only problem here is that it can be done without tools (a fingernail will work, for exmaple).

I also have doubts for the committee involved in this, since it is not exactly a microcosm of paintball mfrs or players. And some of them may have a conflict of interest (WAS and his boards, for example). While we can sit here and wax poetic about full auto, BPS caps, loader caps, do any of you seriously think that the major mfrs of paintball guns and loaders will back something like that?

In the end, it is only the NPPL. Life for us rec-ball players will go on, like it always has. We already have a dim view of tournament players and events, and this isn't helping any.

If I had my way, we would all be back to playing with pumps. The game was so much better back in the day...

Cyberious

03-21-2003, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by ghideon

I also have doubts for the committee involved in this, since it is not exactly a microcosm of paintball mfrs or players. And some of them may have a conflict of interest (WAS and his boards, for example). While we can sit here and wax poetic about full auto, BPS caps, loader caps, do any of you seriously think that the major mfrs of paintball guns and loaders will back something like that?

Exactly, we need to have players from all levels with no manufacturers or their employees. The NPPL as it currently is, is nothing more than a special interest group

Originally posted by ghideon

In the end, it is only the NPPL. Life for us rec-ball players will go on, like it always has. We already have a dim view of tournament players and events, and this isn't helping any.

I play both but am increasingly becoming more and more disillusioned with the tourney scene. Rec-ball is alot more fun these days because people are jus there to play. The problem with tournament players that I keep running into is that some (not all) are whining, wiping, foulmouthed cheats. There are very few videos of tournaments that you can't find at least one person wiping. It appears that this doesn't bother the NPPL as they would rather ban equipment rather than cheaters. Markers don't cheat, unscrupulous players do. Imagine if the NPPL started enforcing strong rules consistently (which they don't) and a player was caught blatantly wiping. Now, the referee not only disqualifies the player but the entire team who forfeits their entry fee and any points they have earned to that point. That would send a message that we are ready to be taken seriously as a real sport because we don't tolerate cheating. Will the NPPL ever do this? Probably not because they have let the nonsense go on for too long.

Originally posted by ghideon

If I had my way, we would all be back to playing with pumps. The game was so much better back in the day...

Amen to that brother. I have literally thousands of dollars of paintball markers and I still prefer to play with the pumps over most of the semi-autos. It'd be interesting to see how some of today's top tourney players did in a stock tournament.

Timmee

03-21-2003, 11:50 AM

Hmm, if we had to have an electronics manufacturer on the NPPL rules commitee, I think Curt from KM2 would have been a better choice. He manufactures boards for multiple markers, from the Angel to the Rainmaker. He even makes a board that is customizeable so that it will work in almost any custom marker setup.

magman007

03-21-2003, 01:29 PM

Well were all forgeting, if you dont like the nppl rules, dont play it. There is still the psp.

Altho these rules are utter bull crap, im wondering, is milenium standing by this as well?

LaW

03-21-2003, 01:43 PM

I think for me the main thing is I would rather play super7 than PSP... I just don't like this whole issue.

dre1919

03-21-2003, 01:56 PM

I think this rule is a bunch of crap, and I know from personal experience. First of all, I own a classic RT and before I got my Hyperframe on there (which I would assume would make it legal now under the new NPPL rules), I had a Benchmark two finger trigger on there. That trigger handle really illustrated the "reactive" effect much better than the stock single trigger could because you could actually watch it reset the trigger from the return pressure a lot better. Did this make a huge difference, giving me an unfair advantage? Hell no. I hated that trigger! The RT was, and still is, a very fast marker but set up stock or even with the two finger on there is in NO WAY as fast as an electro is or could be. PERIOD. I'm sorry, but I don't care what people say about "sweet spotting" a reactive trigger (which can't be done running and bunkering), it will never be as dangerous as the 1-3mm trigger pulls we get on Angels and Hyperframes and the like.

I've got two other team members who fire stock RT's, and they are WAY, WAY less "dangerous ROF's" than any Angel or Timmy we've come across. The RT trigger, IMO, was designed to lighten your trigger pull and increase your rate of fire. It's designed to be a mechanical marker that can somewhat keep up with electros when mastered, but as we all know this is not that easy. All this crap about "what bps is allowed" is just that too... 18 or 20 bps? What is the point in engineering guns and loaders that do this (other than to sell a lot more paint=$$$)? I've been playing for ten years and I've never once met a player who could fire that fast. 18-20 a second? If you have them stand stationary, in perfect conditions, with the marker set to maximum sensitivity, and with a 1-3mm trigger pull and a permanant body twitch maybe...but I highly doubt it. Call me sheltered or what, but the whole bps pissing contest is just ignorant to me. Do we really need the ability to launch 20 paintballs through the air when if your first shot hits, you've got 19 right behind it heading for the player just now standing up?

I think some of the NPPL's rules suck and always have. They get created by a bunch of special interest people who don't care about the common player. That's just an opinion, not a fact I can back up, but there has to have been some decisions that they made to form my opinion that way. Why wasn't Tom Kaye or Budd Orr invited to sit in on this meeting? Why are Tippmann RT's and RTP's for example being banned when any sane normal person I would face in a tourny wouldn't give them a single second glance or concern? Now, you play a team sporting Adrenalin Angels or Cobra Angels and suddenly people get nervous about ROF's...but when was the last time you and your team went to a tourny and said "Oh no! They got Tippmann RT's!" Phuleeze. :rolleyes:

The biggest problem with this isn't just the NPPL, I wish it was that easy. Then, I could just say "Ok, I won't play in the NPPL" and I'm not affected. Unfortunately, a lot of the local tourneys my team plays in just use the NPPL rules for the tournament instead of making their own. They figure "Well, they're the pros, so if it's good enough for them it's good enough for us too." So now it becomes my problem. I agree with Miscue, somebody dropped the ball here...and worse yet, I doubt they care about the fact they did. Sorry, had to vent guys. ;)

Mook564

03-21-2003, 02:13 PM

Well the way I see it, there is a few wways to slove the problem. Get a adjustable tank and turn the pressure down so the reactive trigger is less reactive. Or if you have a e-mag or x-mag remove the rod on the sear assemble and just use the marker in the electronic mode.

hitech

03-21-2003, 02:20 PM

What do you think of my change to the NPPL rules?

6.31 The definition of a trigger is the moveable lever or button that comes in contact with
the finger. The contacts of a switch are not a trigger. A trigger pull requires an exertion of
force by the finger on the trigger and a release of force by the finger on the trigger during
every firing cycle. Markers may fire at any rate of fire, and may shoot any number of
paintballs, provided that it fires in semi auto or pump mode only, which means that no
more than one paintball is discharged during each firing cycle at the time the trigger was pulled. The firing cycle must start when the trigger is pulled or released. Any trigger pulls that occur during the firing cycle must not initiate another firing cycle after the current firing cycle completes. In addition, any marker that can reasonably be made to fire without pulling the trigger is not allowed. This includes, but is not limited to, bumping the marker, blowing on the trigger and marker recoil.

LaW

03-21-2003, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by Mook564
Well the way I see it, there is a few wways to slove the problem. Get a adjustable tank and turn the pressure down so the reactive trigger is less reactive. Or if you have a e-mag or x-mag remove the rod on the sear assemble and just use the marker in the electronic mode.

Although less reactive, it is still reactive so that doesn't change anything. The 2nd point you make defeats one of the main selling points of the marker....

I think if reactive triggers are banned then a shot queue should not be allowed either. If you are firing a string out, and once you stop pulling the trigger the shot queue unloads a couple more... you are not in control of those shots coming out, hwo could you be? You don't know for sure how many shots were queued..... ah well

magman007

03-21-2003, 03:24 PM

your also forgetting, that you cannot i repeat cannot chrono correctly in e-mode on an e-mag, there fore you may have a much higher velocity then you think you are using, again, giving some one an un fair advantage...

or agd could stick classic valves on the e-mags, since the noromal ones are cappeda t 16, which is the classic valves limit.....

but no one would want that now would they?

Matt Crawford

03-21-2003, 07:50 PM

I was planning on playing NPPL this year..but since My whole team is using emags.....I guess we cant huh? Screw NPPL, I'll go elsewhere

hitech

03-21-2003, 07:58 PM

Originally posted by Matt Crawford
I was planning on playing NPPL this year..but since My whole team is using emags.....I guess we cant huh? Screw NPPL, I'll go elsewhere

I think you will be okay. First of all, what Jim (WAS) posted was his PERSONAL interpretation of the rule and how it will be applied in the future. The rule itself has not changed. The NPPL is just enforcing their rules now. Also, if it becomes an issue Tom is working on a no bounce on/off.

AGD

03-21-2003, 08:01 PM

Guys,

Don't get all worked up over this right now. Remember, we are not the cause of the problem we are just getting caught in the fallout.

I have been in touch with Chuck Hensch today and will be talking to the Scrutenizer probably this weekend. The official rules are not written yet and the intention is to ban triggers that run away. Runaway triggers have ALWAYS been illegal in NPPL thats why our markers are tested at the cronos. We have traditionally been let in if they didn't bounce on their own.

In 1996 this same thing happened with Turbo Mode and we were caught up in that too. For ONE torunament our guns were banned along with the Shocker until a ruling could be forumulated. Unfortunately the idea that our guns are illegal haunts us to this day.

The best thing you all can do is not say "they made it illegal that sucks". We need to promote the fact that the NPPL is still forumulating the rule and we are not the problem. I am quite confident that all of this will get worked out to everyone satisfaction.

Stand by for more info. Chuck promised me they will publish an official ruling specifically on our guns when the time comes.

AGD

LaW

03-21-2003, 08:30 PM

Originally posted by AGD
Guys,

Don't get all worked up over this right now. Remember, we are not the cause of the problem we are just getting caught in the fallout.

I have been in touch with Chuck Hensch today and will be talking to the Scrutenizer probably this weekend. The official rules are not written yet and the intention is to ban triggers that run away. Runaway triggers have ALWAYS been illegal in NPPL thats why our markers are tested at the cronos. We have traditionally been let in if they didn't bounce on their own.

In 1996 this same thing happened with Turbo Mode and we were caught up in that too. For ONE torunament our guns were banned along with the Shocker until a ruling could be forumulated. Unfortunately the idea that our guns are illegal haunts us to this day.

The best thing you all can do is not say "they made it illegal that sucks". We need to promote the fact that the NPPL is still forumulating the rule and we are not the problem. I am quite confident that all of this will get worked out to everyone satisfaction.

Stand by for more info. Chuck promised me they will publish an official ruling specifically on our guns when the time comes.

AGD

Thanks Tom for the info!

CpSuPeRkId

03-21-2003, 10:12 PM

sheesh, tom just said what i meant to say in my last post. im sure all the rt mags will be let in if they dont go into run away mode and the ref himself cant bounce the trigger. you guys just automatically think that its an attack towards AGD or something if TK wasnt invited to attend that meeting. everything will be fine guys!!! chill!!!! its 100% obvious to everyone out there that any electro is more dangerous and alot faster than a rt mag. they arent going to make a move so stupid. jim might have made it sound like they are specifically banning pressurized return triggers but im sure he didnt mean it like that. like i said, give the guy a break. he hasnt been in paintball that long but he is making boards for timmys and soon to be impys, vikings, and excals. i think since he is making lots of the new age electronics for the popular markers of today, he sure does deserve to be part of that meeting. its also obvious that the nppl will be targeting guns that shoot more than 1 shot per trigger pull. so if the ref cant do that to your rt than you are good. if your rt mag does do this then it is a problem and it doesnt deserve to be on the field. but for the most part they should be fine. so my point to all of this is to chill out, and like tom said, let the rules get worked out and dont flame the nppl for something that isnt even set. can u guys make a huge paintbal organization that would be a bigger success than the nppl??? probably not. so dont flame just yet.

as for this whole bps limit, hopper limit,full auto. are u guys kidding me??? let the game be how it is. if somebody wants to waste paint like a mad man at 18bps then let him be. it only takes 1 shot to get someone out. full auto at a capped 13 bps would do ALOT more on the field than 18bps semi so i would never want that. with full auto its super easy to keep paint straighter. you know how easy it would be to snap shoot??? any skill thats in paintball would just disappear. it would all be whoever has more guts to make moves.as for a semi only but bps cap. its already been tried but no companies stuck to it. thats why aka markers were capped at 13bps for awhile. they were the only ones that stuck to their word only to find out that nobody else did, so they raised their boards up. fps limits are just as bad of an idea IMO. who wnats to play paintball at 230 fps??? it wouldnt even be fun shooting a paintball gun at that speed when u can practically catch the paintball, not to mention the paintballs would never break on your opponent. and lastly the hopper restriction. thats the worst idea of all. we have been bragging forever how fast our markers can cycle but until now we havent been able to shoot paint through them. now u guys say to get rid of fast hoppers?? just cuz u want your rt mags on the fields before fast hoppers???? im not meaning to flame here, just trying to express what i feel on this topic.

magman007

03-22-2003, 12:51 AM

OK, thanks alot tom! Also, if you re read, hows the new on off going? im still interested in gettin one for my sfl e-mag... Thanks for your time to respond to this, i think we were all a little worried

Jerhew

03-22-2003, 02:29 AM

ya sorry
i think we get a little reactionary when someone flat out says rt's are all illegal
:rolleyes:

RT pRo AuToMaG

03-22-2003, 02:31 AM

referring to a post by WAS earlier; You said something like being able to hit 18bps in runaway on an rt pro. Are you kidding me?? Unless you specially mod your gun (like Butterfingers did for that video of the ReTro valve at 21bps) you aren't gettin over 14bps in runaway. When i had my rt pro, i could hit runaway with the input at 900 psi, never hit that in a game, and never got over 13 bps with it. Now, I've seen people pull 18-20 on ir3's, seen 15bps on a cocker with a dye slider frame (not elecro!), seen 20+ on a race cocker, seen 17 on an eblade cocker, so what's the big deal about a mag that can hit 10-15 in runaway, and 6-14 regulary? I guarentee you when i had my matrix or adrenalin angel i could outshoot ALMOST any rt pro. At one time, i was playing around with the angel's trigger, i got it to shoot in full auto by pulling the trigger and quickly letting it go, that hit 19 bps according to the lcd, and you could let go of the gun and it woluld still go! Show me an rt pro that can do what i described with the angel, and i'll throw away my micro emag and buy a timmy with an equalizer board!

sneakyhacker420

03-22-2003, 02:34 AM

Originally posted by PzYcO
is there anyway to get rid of trigger bounce on a xvalve?
go buy a .765 RTP on/off pin... the longer the on/off pin, the less reactive, the shorter, the more reactive

i personally use the .745 custom pin that i have, it is just reactive enough, and it doesnt go into runaway easily... for me atleast

Cyberious

03-22-2003, 08:43 AM

Originally posted by sneakyhacker420

go buy a .765 RTP on/off pin... the longer the on/off pin, the less reactive, the shorter, the less reactive

Huh?

Jack & Coke

03-22-2003, 12:39 PM

He wrote "less reactive" twice.

He obviously meant:

"...the longer the on/off pin, the less reactive, the shorter, the more reactive..."

sneakyhacker420

03-22-2003, 12:52 PM

sorry, it was 1:00 AM here and i was really tired and this was the last post of the day... but a longer on/off pin does make it harder to go into runaway

SyntaxError

03-22-2003, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by RT pRo AuToMaG
Now, I've seen people pull 18-20 on ir3's, seen 15bps on a cocker with a dye slider frame (not elecro!), seen 20+ on a race cocker, seen 17 on an eblade cocker

No way, I'm sorry. MAYBE the 17 on an Eblade, they're fast an easy to shoot, but there is no way anyone is pulling anywhere near 18 to 20+ BPS. By the way, Angel boards lie, there is no WAY I'm hitting the ROF that it says on the LCD, it only measures the time between your two fastest shots, so if someone managed to pull two shots quickly it might read 16-17. And I highly doubt anyone hit 15 on a cocker, thats pretty near impossible. More likely it was about 10, people exaggerate their rates of fire, and underestimate the speed of 10-11 BPS, which is more likely what was hit.

thegear

03-22-2003, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by Cyberious
I don't know about you guys but I'm getting a little tired of the NPPL's selective enforcement of the rules in general. Maybe they should consider paying more attention to enforcing the no-wipe rule instead. Seem like that is a much larger problem than trigger bounce. I would suspect that if they really enforced the rules on not wiping with some harsh penalties (i.e DQ'ing the player from the rest of the tourney)that there would a surprising number of Pros who are riding the bench. Cheating is one of the biggest issue holding back the sport not trigger bounce. I'm getting a little tired of going to play, seeing someone hit, and then watching them try and wipe the hit some how. They really need to focus on more important issues like wiping. It seems like the game is turning from a game of angles and inches into a game of angles, inches, and wiping. My two cents anyway.

How true, get with the fricking program NPPL.
I would like to see some of the "PRO" play fair for a change and see how well they do.

The Gear out

Whitt_travis

03-22-2003, 09:00 PM

Alright, this is how I see it. I'm not too worried about all this, because you can always look at other guns on the market. Heck, NPPL may just be a stock class tournament with how picky and choosey they are becoming...

Most angels, besides opta-boards fire on a microswitch system, and trigger bounce off the microswitch is definately noticeable. Trigger bounce is such a vague area, and to single out Airgun Design products is definately someone's marketing technique at discouraging users to buy AGD products. A cowardly approach in my mind...

But, whatever, if it goes through? We'll just start a Automags.Org Militia. Who's with me? :-)

WickedAirSportz

03-26-2003, 11:26 PM

jim might have made it sound like they are specifically banning pressurized return triggers but im sure he didnt mean it like that.

Yes, I did. By the current definition of a firing cycle a trigger is manually pulled and released.

During the course of this discussion, auto response (reactive) triggers were brought up and immediately were determined to not fit into the definition of a trigger pull because the release is not manual (there is substantial force applied directly to the trigger). Which I agree is the case. I was just reporting what was discussed and ruled upon at the meeting. Don't shoot the messenger. :)

Personally, I don't care what the definition of a firing cycle is as long as only one shot is fired with every pull and release. I don't think that the reactive triggers help you shoot faster unless they are setup like most do (damn near full auto when you lightly pull the trigger). Let's be real here... reactive was not invented because people have lazy fingers, it was invented to allow multiple shot bursts by squeezing it lightly. Go back through magazines and internet data - you will find the main selling feature to be just that!

cledford

03-26-2003, 11:41 PM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz

Let's be real here... reactive was not invented because people have lazy fingers, it was invented to allow multiple shot bursts by squeezing it lightly. Go back through magazines and internet data - you will find the main selling feature to be just that!

I doubt Tom Kaye would agree with this - but then again he's a guy who "walks the walk" not "talks the talk." I think his commitment to safety is bar none in the industry - and his actions are well known to those who've been involved in paintball for a while.

Jim you still have no concept of the AGD reactive trigger - your statement shows that. There is no way to make a RT/RTP to "shoot bursts by squeezing lightly" unless you *break* the marker - and then it is a one way process that does not provide "select fire,' the marker either runs away or it doesn't. Anyone would be able to tell and the user would have a blender. Here you are again speaking from a position of "authority" about something you have no knowledge of.

Why don't you provide some of the information you suggested is out there in the "magazines and Internet data" - I think you're making it up.

-Calvin

Miscue

03-26-2003, 11:58 PM

BTW, autoresponse is not the same thing as a reactive trigger.

WickedAirSportz

03-27-2003, 12:07 AM

Answer this: does the RT push the trigger forward or not?

If so, then by definition of the current trigger rule, anything that is not a manual pull and release is illegal.

I personally don't care if RT's and Tippmans reactives are allowed or not... as long as they don't shoot multiple shots when gently squeezing the trigger.

I am just reporting what was decided at the rules meeting prior to Huntington Beach. Obviously, as more information is presented to the NPPL, the rules will be a bit more clear about what is allowed and what isn't.

My concern is not for manually operated triggers anyways, I was there to help the NPPL come up with the testing methods for detecting trigger bounce.

Jerhew

03-27-2003, 12:10 AM

with all due respect Mr Drew
have you ever learned to use or seen a properly functioning rt valve being fired by someone who knows how to use it?
it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with making the trigger bounce or runnaway
it has a lot to do with getting into a rhythm
a rhythm that involves definite pulling of the trigger each and every time
yes it does help increase the functional bps of the marker(although still beneath the range of an electro's bps)
but it does so in a fashion that in no way relates to anything you have just said

if you like, ill let you try mine

ps we wouldn't want to shoot the messenger if he didn't keep adding his own foolish uninformed opinions

cledford

03-27-2003, 12:10 AM

Originally posted by Miscue
BTW, autoresponse is not the same thing as a reactive trigger.

Someone with a little more *experience* might know this... ;)

-Calvin

Jerhew

03-27-2003, 12:20 AM

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Answer this: does the RT push the trigger forward or not?

If so, then by definition of the current trigger rule, anything that is not a manual pull and release is illegal.

I personally don't care if RT's and Tippmans reactives are allowed or not... as long as they don't shoot multiple shots when gently squeezing the trigger.

I am just reporting what was decided at the rules meeting prior to Huntington Beach. Obviously, as more information is presented to the NPPL, the rules will be a bit more clear about what is allowed and what isn't.

My concern is not for manually operated triggers anyways, I was there to help the NPPL come up with the testing methods for detecting trigger bounce.

and by the way i think we all understand this point completely...and according to Tom Kaye...the rules will be clarified so that rt's will be legal as long as they fire one ball per pull
what i take exception to is this

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz

I don't think that the reactive triggers help you shoot faster unless they are setup like most do (damn near full auto when you lightly pull the trigger). Let's be real here... reactive was not invented because people have lazy fingers, it was invented to allow multiple shot bursts by squeezing it lightly. Go back through magazines and internet data - you will find the main selling feature to be just that!

to put it as kindly as possible...
you've proved your ignorance on the subject

Jack & Coke

03-27-2003, 01:05 AM

*** This is not a rip into Jim. His questions are very good and bring to light many valid issues.

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz
Answer this: does the RT push the trigger forward or not?

Answer - YES... as do ALL MARKERS.

- Level 7 mags also push back. Although at a much lower force than the RT. Without it, the marker can not reset.

Ask your question again, but with a different gun...

Answer this: does the Timmy push the trigger forward or not?

Answer - YES... via spring force. (trigger return spring or micro switch spring)

If you don't have anything pushing the trigger forward, your gun will not work. Duh!

The real question should be:

"Does the -insert marker here- push the trigger forward, resetting the trigger firing cycle, with a greater force than was required to fire the marker ?"

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz

I personally don't care if RT's and Tippmans reactives are allowed or not... as long as they don't shoot multiple shots when gently squeezing the trigger.

Amen! It took me sometime adjusting my GZ so that it would not bounce.

Answer this: Where there more incidents and concerns regarding trigger bounce on electros which use a micro-switch triggering design (Timmy, Impy, Angel, Matrix, etc.), than a RT style valve (AutoMAG, Tippy)?

Of ALL of the markers caught with trigger bounce, how many had firing designs based on:

micro-switch
HE sensor
Magno-Optical
Laser beam tripping
RT valve
Reactive piston

Originally posted by WickedAirSportz

My concern is not for manually operated triggers anyways, I was there to help the NPPL come up with the testing methods for detecting trigger bounce.

That great to hear! I hope you guys came up with some good methods.

What are some examples of how you think the refs should test for trigger bounce?

I think we can make some good progress in this line of discussion.

Thanks for your time! :)

WickedAirSportz

03-27-2003, 01:16 AM

I think you're right... there has to be some definition about the trigger pull and release force.

The NPPL sees "reactive" trigger as those that have some mechanical aide to push the trigger back. I don't mean a simple spring, I mean a piston, plunger, or some other type of pneumatic assistance. Perhaps that should be the wording "pneumatic assisted". What the NPPL is trying to eliminate are those guys that do setup their marker illegally and are trying to get away with it.

I don't claim to be an expert on the Mag (quite the opposite), so I have no clue how much force is applied. In reality, there are very few mags used in any tournament that I have attended. There are more Tippman Model 98s with reactive trigger, and those were the marker brought up in the rules committee meeting.

Do ANY of the mags have a pneumatic assisted trigger return mechanism? That is what is in quesiton, as that would be where the trigger pull/release rule would need to be changed (or abided by if left as-is).

WickedAirSportz

03-27-2003, 01:18 AM

P.S. The testing procedures are suppose to be relatively secret. There are several of them, and I believe that the time frame that Dave has given (one minute rule) is fair for everyone.

Dayspring

03-27-2003, 01:22 AM

Just remember though- with the RT Mags, you DO get a full and complete trigger cycle. The sear will lock after each pull. (on a correctly working RT Mag)

So in theory- that's one ball per pull, b/c the valve pushes the trigger back to full locked and firing position.

Miscue

03-27-2003, 01:23 AM

The on/off pin in all AGD markers pushes the sear/trigger rod back into position.

The difference with the Retro is that the gun's input pressure is the force applied on the on/off pin (which is why you can adjust this force by adjusting HPA)... pushing the sear back with much greater force than the classic valve. The tapered pin is what allows for the trigger pull force to be about half of what the air puts on the untapered end.

Also, when the sear latches... the bolt puts pressure against the sear... which puts resistance against trigger pull...

An AGD retro trigger is not similar to the Tippmann... the Tippmann has a wild trigger, and understandably is not allowed.

The AGD trigger is completely controlled, unless the gun is malfunctioning...

Timmee

03-27-2003, 01:29 AM

One of the big differences between the M98 RT and the Automag RT systems is the fact that the M98 RT's trigger has a spring AND the pneumatic cylinder pushing on the trigger (fitting the term pneumatic assisted). The Automag RT does not. That pneumatic force is the ONLY thing pushing on the sear/trigger rod to reset the trigger.

WickedAirSportz

03-27-2003, 01:30 AM

Well, that is good to know.

Dave needs to know this. As I stated, the term "reactive" was immediately equated to the Tippman trigger. There are very few mags being used in the PanAm, PSP, and NPPL events. Because of this, there really is not much known about the mag (at least by the rules committee members that were in attendance, many of which are old school players). I think the mag could have been singled out if it were not for discussions like these. This is why we have discussions and rules committees meet... and God knows if there is a problem, you can count of the AO group to set you straight! LOL! ;)

Miscue

03-27-2003, 01:49 AM

Another thing... an issue with the classic valve is that it is easy to short stroke when trying to pull the trigger quickly.

I'd say... the RetroValve aids in a complete trigger return first and foremost. Faster trigger speeds is a side-effect in that the user doesn't have to make nearly as much effort in completely releasing it. And if you've ever shot a classic mag... you'll see what I mean. Takes a skilled hand to shoot that thing at 8bps or so... I personally cannot do it, the trigger is too difficult for me.

So, in this case... the goal of this reactive trigger system is not, and never was to create a bouncing trigger that can shoot multiple times. The goal was to significantly reduce the amount of work needed to fire the thing.

You have to jack up the input pressure and/or screw with the on/off pin and take it outta spec to make it shoot in runaway. And, runaway is highly undesireable in a mag... it is not predictable, it cannot be induced purposely with consistency.... it can eat up bolts and sears... and the valve might not recharge correctly because the parts aren't making their full motions like they're supposed to. And, before L10... you'd chop paint like mad.

The only way a mag can purposely do FA for sustained periods is to have a spring loaded trigger appropriately balanced against the trigger return pressure. Otherwise... a reactive mech agd trigger WILL NOT fire more than once in any circumstances besides user-induced malfunction.

Jack & Coke

03-27-2003, 02:28 AM

Miscue,

I respectfully disagree with your opinion on the M98RT.

The M98RT is not "wild". :rolleyes:

I have a M98RT and a RetroMAG.

When setup to shoot as fast as possible (i.e. Sweet-spotting), the M98RT is actually easier and safter to CONTROL than a RT MAG setup for SWEET-SPOTTING.

You can actually control the BPS on the M98RT by the amount of pressure you put on the trigger. When I mean control, I mean faster, slower, etc. Of course to a certain degree.

However, with the RT MAG on SWEET-SPOTTING, you only get UBER FAST BPS.

SWEET-SPOT the trigger on a RT MAG, and it's instant 18-20 BPS.

SWEET-SPOT the trigger on a M98RT, and the rate of fire depends on how hard you hold the pressure on the trigger.

I know this because I play with my M98RT and RetroMAG like this ALL the time. (only with friends of course :))

Of course you have you're opinion against the M98RT. I can't change it. I'm just sharing MY view since I play a lot with them both.

(I trust you won't take this as a flame :D)

Jim,

M98RT: the marker is STILL OPERATIONAL if you remove the forward pushing force. It is NOT VITAL for proper marker operation. The RT piston ONLY enhances the operation of the marker.

RT MAG: the marker is NOT OPERATIONAL if you remove the forward pushing force. It is VITAL for proper marker operation.

Cheers!

Miscue

03-27-2003, 02:32 AM

Whoops. I stand corrected... seeing that I've never used an RT Tippy. I'm trying to remember where I got that idea... Now I'm really irritated with myself. ;)

Jack & Coke

03-27-2003, 02:40 AM

No worries mate! You're a cool dude and I like you! :) I just may disagree sometimes... that's all :D

Mr.Emag

03-27-2003, 02:48 AM

would this or could this possibly affect my hybrid mode?

ghideon

03-27-2003, 02:59 AM

This would effect hybrid mode. Basically, if these rules are true, you'd be in trouble two times. You would have to check the bounce of the magnetic trigger, and then you'd have to check the bounce of the trigger rod (make sure you couldn't sweet spot it).

On my EMag my input is a tad high (900-950ish). Still I can't get it to sweet spot off of the trigger rod. I do, however, get a bounce from the recoil and the lightness of the trigger.

It's entirely possible to have a retro mag that when you pull the trigger gently, only fires one shot.

Mr.Emag

03-28-2003, 02:32 AM

well does this count for the world cup 'cuz that is the only place we are going this year that is anything large. Also i can shoot it quite fast on just E, but i run it off the break would the rules put a stop to that also? Hybrid mode is just easier to throw some mad paint when moving my guys up when we are on a 2 v.3, 4 v.5

thanks-
sittig

cgrieves

03-30-2003, 06:30 PM

I know I'm coming to this thread late but: is it just me or does this seem unfair?

An electronic marker can be set to "bounce" but electronic markers are not banned, unless they are proven to bounce.

An RT/Retro/whatever mag, can be set to "bounce" but such markers are banned outright.

I can see that such things are difficult to police, but it would seem sensible to me to adopt a "innocent until proven guilty" policy.

Also, effects that assist the forward motion of the trigger after a shot is fired are also banned. So in the case of electro markers, which can be set to "bounce" by using the recoil of the gun, by the NPPL rationale, shouldn't recoil be banned?

My Mag has a reactive trigger, but I can't sweetspot it, and it's nowhere near as easy to shoot as the X-Mag I've used. I can get maybe 10 balls per second out of it on a good day. The only way to make it more reactive and bounce could be to up the input pressure or shorten the on/off pin, neither of which I'm likely to achieve in the middle of a game. Can't this bounce issue be policed at the chrono station like anything else?

With the X-Mag I could slap my palm on the back of the grip frame and the gun would fire. I could tap four fingers on the trigger and achieve insane fire rates simply because the trigger was so light and with such a short stroke. Hell, with the right software it would be easy to program the marker so a 5 second trigger pull would engage a full auto or burst mode, and another five second pull as the game ends would bring it back to semi. Which marker is potentially safer? Which marker has the potential for more abuse?

Don't crystallise a reluctance to invest time and resource in policing a known problem down to a "safety" issue. It's laziness and ill-informedness.