I don't get it...I really dont.

[going_home]

This thread has swerved off the road, into the ditch, thru the field, thru the barn, and off the cliff.

[cockerpunk]

Reported for what?

Call it stupidity if you like, but if you think the merit of a marker is found solely in its weight and efficiency, then you have very little understanding of what is important in a paintball gun. I acutally have been saying the EXACT opposite. that the merit of a marker is NOT in its weight and effienecy. You can tout the alleged "user friendliness" (I'm guessing thats what you mean when you say "plug and play" and refer to "control") but when you compare the process of tuning, say, an Etek and tuning a Level10 ULE, you'll see that the methods are completely different but they take about the same amount of time. not even close to true. tunin a level 10 and ULT can be a long process if you want to dial it in right. both of those things (anti-chop and trigger feel) are pretty much already taken care of in a modern gun and one merely needs to adjust velocoty with 1 screw (which one must do on a mg too) to get the gun working right. Durability and extremely low maintenance are the reason that relic Tippmanns and Classic mags are on the field while 4+ year old midrange electros lay forgotten in closets. yup, so what? It's the same reason you'll see DM4s and 5PEED Angels, for that matter.yup

I'm not saying that Automags are the best marker made, or that they're necessarily superior to newer markers, but merely that you're not at ANY sort of disadvantage playing with an Xmag versus an Ego10 unless you plan to shoot 8+ pods in one game or don't have the stamina to carry something that weighs mere ounces more. sure you are. heavier gun, bigger gun, bigger tank, worse grips, worse triggers, higher feedneck ... im not saying these things are game breakers, but to ignore them is ignorant. Were not all rabid fanboys here, certainly not what you've made us out to be... We all own other markers and shoot them regularly. I've got plenty of markers that I prefer to my mags.

Different markers have different merits. You can talk about one being more ergonomic than another, but that's completely in the eye of the beholder... Some people like heavier, some lighter. Some like a 90* frame, others a 45. Plenty of guys hate Minis for have a cramped foregrip... Does that make it a better or worse marker? Does it really matter?yeah, those are all subjective traites, unlike lighter, faster, more efficient easier to shoot fast, easier to setup ... all are objective or very close to objective.

I'll meet you half way and say that, yes, a classic mag is less likely to keep up with a modern midrange electro in a competitive situation, but that's as far as I'll go. I just can't understand why you can't point to anything other than weight and air efficiency with your superiority argument. you mean besides the easily half a dozen things i have listed? The tuning, ease on paint, and "plug 'n play" arguments are bunk when you compare an Ego and a similarly outfitted R/T ULE.read the above post

i think you guys are lacking a knowledge in objective vs subjective aspects.

objectivly we can compare kick, consistency, efficiency, sound, pull length and weight, fedneck hieght, weight, size, theoretically we could do relaiably, but that invloves how a player interacts with the gun such as maintinace, cleaning, general treatment .... litterally dozens of factors in a gun. and in most the mag is either on par, or behind a modern gun. objectivly the gun is worse.

subjectivly, there are intagible factors. like "cool" and there is a subjective ranking of the objective things with statements like "well, i like loud guns" well, i love loud guns, and the price i pay for that is that i have a hard time picking off more then one guy in a sneaky peaky game of woodsball. another example, i don't really care that poopits kick more then spools, it doesn't make a difference to me. but that doesn't change the fact that smoother is better, and that spools are in general smoother.

but the objective assement remains true no matter how you want to think about it. mags are obectivly worse guns. i embrace that. you guys try to cover that up. be it with apologetic arguments or playing style or whatnot ... but that doesn't change the objective assement of the gun. pump guns are worse guns then semis. doesn't mean i am not effective with a pump gun, or that with playign well and gun fighting well i can't overcome that ... but its a worse gun for the purpose of shooting other guys out, all else being equal.

[Frizzle Fry]

Tuning a Level 10 is NOT a long process or a difficult one. It's also not something you need to do with any frequency, unless you're constantly changing bolts, tanks or bodies for some reason. The time level 10 tuning takes could be compared to the tuning of an LPR and adjustment of dwell in a modern electro, except it needs to be done very rarely by comparison. Again, not saying it's better, but it's not by any means worse. As for ULT and trigger rod tuning, the trigger rod is almost the same as adjusting the grub screws found on the triggers of most electros, and the ULT isn't necessary for speed and a snappy trigger.

What qualifies as "worse" grips and "worse" triggers? Is a 68/45 magically heavier because it's on an Xmag rather than an Ego? Why would an Xmag have a higher feedneck than an Ego? Mine certainly isn't; I'd say it's a few millimeters shorter than what came stock on my Ego. Yeah, it's heavier. So what? That doesn't make it "worse for shooting people out".

Also, we've been over this. Modern markers are NOT "faster" or "easier to shoot faster" so again you're left with your argument boiled down to weight and air efficiency, which are NEGLIGIBLE. Weight does not make or break a marker when it's a difference of a handful of ounces; if it was a difference of a few pounds (think PMI-3 versus Spyder Compact), you're right, it would be an issue, but unless you're a toddler a few ounces really don't matter.


We're not "covering anything up" and you're not being objective. You've got an opinion and that's fine, but you claim to be Mr. 100% Objective Science Guy rather than owning the fact that you're merely stating preferences. When asked for specifics you use words like "worse" or "better" or "easier" rather than concrete examples of what it is you're talking about. What is

[Spider-TW]

This thread has swerved off the road, into the ditch, thru the field, thru the barn, and off the cliff.

It's a good ride though.

[cockerpunk]

Tuning a Level 10 is NOT a long process or a difficult one. It's also not something you need to do with any frequency, unless you're constantly changing bolts, tanks or bodies for some reason. The time level 10 tuning takes could be compared to the tuning of an LPR and adjustment of dwell in a modern electro, except it needs to be done very rarely by comparison. Again, not saying it's better, but it's not by any means worse. As for ULT and trigger rod tuning, the trigger rod is almost the same as adjusting the grub screws found on the triggers of most electros, and the ULT isn't necessary for speed and a snappy trigger.

but you dont need to tune the dwell or LPR on modern electros. they are set from teh factory, and there is no reason to have to change them unless you feel like you can do better then a factory tech. a lvl 10 and ULT must be tuned on install and even then they wear out of tune (yes, i have worn out lvl 10 carrier o rings). the only thing you need to do to have a super nice trigger, anti-chop and a legal shootign gun with an electro is make sure its chronoed, which is the HPR. unlike an automag where you have to install and tune 2 parts (that arn't terribly simple), plus chrono.

What qualifies as "worse" grips and "worse" triggers? Is a 68/45 magically heavier because it's on an Xmag rather than an Ego? Why would an Xmag have a higher feedneck than an Ego? Mine certainly isn't; I'd say it's a few millimeters shorter than what came stock on my Ego. Yeah, it's heavier. So what? That doesn't make it "worse for shooting people out".

on an ego you can shoot a 45/45 and get the same shots as a 68/45 on a mag, so yeah, its a bigger and heavier tank. and yes, the feedneck is higher becuase the feedneck on many modern guns are lower, and machined into the body of the gun, making them even lower. plus an Xmag doesn't even come with a clamping feedneck to start with! of course heavier is worse for shooting poeple out. you tire faster, you can't snap shoot as fast, its bigger so you present a larger, harder (!!!) target to the opponent ...

Also, we've been over this. Modern markers are NOT "faster" or "easier to shoot faster" so again you're left with your argument boiled down to weight and air efficiency, which are NEGLIGIBLE. Weight does not make or break a marker when it's a difference of a handful of ounces; if it was a difference of a few pounds (think PMI-3 versus Spyder Compact), you're right, it would be an issue, but unless you're a toddler a few ounces really don't matter.

yeah they are. lets see someone sustain 13+ BPS for 5 seconds on a ULTed mag. with about 15-20 mintues of practice, a kid can do that on a sub 200 dollar electro, lets see the automag pros do the same. then i will grant you that shooting fast is just as easy on a mag as on an electro.

We're not "covering anything up" and you're not being objective. You've got an opinion and that's fine, but you claim to be Mr. 100% Objective Science Guy rather than owning the fact that you're merely stating preferences. When asked for specifics you use words like "worse" or "better" or "easier" rather than concrete examples of what it is you're talking about. What is
im not claiming to be 100% objective. again, the EXACT opposite. its becuase of my subjectivness that i love automags. you guys are attempting to present your subjective opinion of a performance aspect (like "heavy guns arn't worse") as objective. when really, heavier is worse. in your opinion heavier guns arn't worse, but in the ideal world, a gun that weighed nothing at all would be ideal. sure wouldn't be much fun, but that is subjective again!

^^^

[Spider-TW]

Tuning a Level 10 is NOT a long process or a difficult one.

The level 10 is a good example of something relatively worse or better.

Between a working level 10 and a working set of eyes, the eyes are better.

Between a non-functioning level 10 and a non-functioning set of eyes, I like the level 10 more than enough to make up the difference.

"All things being equal" is not a good criteria for apples and oranges, even if (or especially if) the apple is considerably older.

[OPBN]

i think you guys are lacking a knowledge in objective vs subjective aspects. .

Faster, lighter, smaller are objective as they are measurable.

objectivly the gun is worse

Better and worse are subjective as they are interpretations.

[cockerpunk]

Faster, lighter, smaller are objective as they are measurable.



Better and worse are subjective as they are interpretations.

better or worse is not subjective.

better or worse merely requires a criteria or metric to compare the numbers too. for example, a slower moving bolt is "better" for being gentle on paint. a short dwell time is "better" for being a fast gun. for the criteria for a tool to put paintball on the enemy, a gun that weighed nothing at all, took up no space, didn't kick, could shoot inifintly fast, on no air at all that is the "best" paintball gun. that objective gives a list of what is better. as an engineer designing a gun, that is is objective to achieve the best paintball gun for competetive play. this means that there is an objective better or worse, for any given metric. in this case i was using "tool for putting paintballs on the enemy faster" as my metric




however, what is "better" for you or i ... thats a whole different thing (and that is subjective). i like loud guns, don't mind carrying some weight, free all day air ... and whatnot. there is also the fun aspect. a gun like the one listed above would make playing paintball bascially no fun at all. my subjective assement of a gun is typically from the fun standpoint. loud is fun. clunky moving parts is fun. being different is fun.

[Ando]

Everyone answer me this or shut up...Who are you going to worry about more. The old man with the pump or the 14yr with the DM10?

You guys can boaster about new tech all you want.

I don't care about weight, I'm a man.

I don't care about fancy anno. It's going to get screwed up.

I don't care about air efficiency. I can walk the 100 yards to get all the free air I can handle.

I don't care about new technology, it's being made by the lowest bidder.

Who cares about ROF when your marker shoots "lazers" (as the kool kids say) and most mech markers can reach or surpass field caps....


@ Gordon

Shame on you you know better then to coming on a specific board and call their markers inferior.

The playing field is even as fare as I'm concerned. It's the man that makes the marker great not the doohickeys and gizmo's in it...

...and if you want to get into doohickeys and gizmo's, I know for a fact cause of your statements that you've never shot a finely tuned pneumatic mag or one of the new E90 or V.E.R frames.

There is nothing that the new DM10,000 has over a AC, Mag or any other customizable marker out there. Every DM bla..bla..bla..is exactly the same as the next. Besides the weight, the newer markers have zip. All you need to do too "stay competitive" in your way of thinking is install a better firing mechanism (E-Grip for a cocker or E/EP/P-Grip for a mag).

I've had my E-Mag at stupid speeds at full auto, I had it set at 22bps but for some reason both mine and the field chrono was reading 26 so I don't know which one is right but anyways, I even tuned a ULT in it, took countless hours and about 8 tanks of air due to the tuning of the sear and plunger to the ULT but I'll put it up against any marker out there. I won't be behind it cause at my age, I'm mediocre at best as a speedballer now but it does everything I need it to. Shoot straight, reliable, never goes down, no worries about batteries if they die.

What more could you ask out of a marker...besides cook, pick up girls and clean itself

Lastly, I'd like to see where these Aggie markers today are going to be in 10 years.

Are they going to be on the field or is there going to be some other Aggie marker taking their place that have ABSOLUTELY ZERO INNOVATION OR UPGRADES in them besides they weigh .2 grams less with a +$500 price tag and a new S.O.S. feature that rains hell fire upon your opponent.

Damn I rambled ><

[cockerpunk]

Everyone answer me this or shut up...Who are you going to worry about more. The old man with the pump or the 14yr with the DM10?

You guys can boaster about new tech all you want.

I don't care about weight, I'm a man.

I don't care about fancy anno. It's going to get screwed up.

I don't care about air efficiency. I can walk the 100 yards to get all the free air I can handle.

I don't care about new technology, it's being made by the lowest bidder.

Who cares about ROF when your marker shoots "lazers" (as the kool kids say) and most mech markers can reach or surpass field caps....


@ Gordon

Shame on you you know better then to coming on a specific board and call their markers inferior.

The playing field is even as fare as I'm concerned. It's the man that makes the marker great not the doohickeys and gizmo's in it...

...and if you want to get into doohickeys and gizmo's, I know for a fact cause of your statements that you've never shot a finely tuned pneumatic mag or one of the new E90 or V.E.R frames.

There is nothing that the new DM10,000 has over a AC, Mag or any other customizable marker out there. Every DM bla..bla..bla..is exactly the same as the next. Besides the weight, the newer markers have zip. All you need to do too "stay competitive" in your way of thinking is install a better firing mechanism (E-Grip for a cocker or E/EP/P-Grip for a mag).

I've had my E-Mag at stupid speeds at full auto, I had it set at 22bps but for some reason both my and the field chrono was reading 26 so I don't know which one is right. I even tuned a ULT in it, took countless hours and about 8 tanks of air due to the tuning of the sear and plunger to the ULT but I'll put it up against any marker out there. I won't be behind it cause at my age, I'm mediocre at best as a speedballer now but it does everything I need it to. Shoot straight, reliable, never goes down, no worries about batteries if they die.

What more could you ask out of a marker...besides cook, pick up girls and clean itself

Lastly, I'd like to see where these Aggie markers today are going to be in 10 years.

Are they going to be on the field or is there going to be some other Aggie marker taking their place that have ABSOLUTELY ZERO INNOVATION OR UPGRADES in them besides they weigh .2 grams less with a +$500 price tag and a new S.O.S. feature that rains hell fire upon your opponent.

Damn I rambled ><

did i ever say you couldn't be competetive with the latest and greatest with a mag?

nope.

next.

EDIT - is anyone even reading my posts? really guys, yous should all know by now that i am not an agglet, or think you need the best to compete ... or anything that has been brought up in the last half a dozen posts.

im not attacking the automag, i love them, i own many and i play with them regularly. i am only praising the automag for what it is - awesome! i am not however under the impression that they are the best even after nearly 10 yaers of other gun devolpments. it just isn't ... there isn't really any way around that fact guys. paintball has pass beyond mags like the automotive world has passed beyond carbs.

[OPBN]

better or worse is not subjective.

better or worse merely requires a criteria or metric to compare the numbers too. for example, a slower moving bolt is "better" for being gentle on paint. a short dwell time is "better" for being a fast gun. for the criteria for a tool to put paintball on the enemy, a gun that weighed nothing at all, took up no space, didn't kick, could shoot inifintly fast, on no air at all that is the "best" paintball gun. that objective gives a list of what is better. as an engineer designing a gun, that is is objective to achieve the best paintball gun for competetive play. this means that there is an objective better or worse, for any given metric. in this case i was using "tool for putting paintballs on the enemy faster" as my metric




however, what is "better" for you or i ... thats a whole different thing (and that is subjective). i like loud guns, don't mind carrying some weight, free all day air ... and whatnot. there is also the fun aspect. a gun like the one listed above would make playing paintball bascially no fun at all. my subjective assement of a gun is typically from the fun standpoint. loud is fun. clunky moving parts is fun. being different is fun.

Some of your examples are correct, some are not. You can say that a Mini is smaller and lighter. If these are criteria important to you, Than the marker can be better for you. That is subjective. To say that a lighter, faster marker is better for everyone is subjective. So stating your facts and interpreting them as a whole is subjective.

I have a friend that purchased a Mini. It was smaller and lighter than the previous marker that he owned. By your subjective opinion, this would make the Mini better. However, in his subjective opinion, it was worse. So who's subjective is objective? Neither.

[Frizzle Fry]

^^^

And Automags are tuned from the factory. ANY marker will go out of tune if given time and play... By the way "outdoing the techs" is not the only reason to adjust your LPR or dwell; new bolts, regulators, and entirely new boards (extremely common upgrades) are usually the motivation behind adjustments. In the same vein, a new body will require you to retune your mag. It's really not that different a story there.

And I've got to ask, how would a gun that weighed nothing be a good thing? I'm not saying that lighter is worse, I'm not saying that lighter is better, I'm just saying that the weight difference you're talking about is negligible. The difference of a pound or two is one thing, but a few ounces is nearly meaningless. Without hoppers or tanks, an Xmag weighs 2.61b and an Ego10 weighs 2.14lb. Do you REALLY believe your snap-shooting is significantly effected by +/-7.52oz? Is an extra 7.52oz that big a test of stamina?



The fact of the matter is that there is a minor weight difference and significant difference in air efficiency...

My question is this; if you get a team full of guys with Xmags and a team full of guys with Egos, is one at a disadvantage in an Xball game? The most common tank size is 68/45. The most common packs these days are 4+3, and both teams could empty them with a full tank. Both markers are capable of EASILY meeting and sustaining the max ROF, and have the necesary modes/settings. Would a 7.5oz weight difference, slightly larger marker size, and possible "feedneck height variation" give a significant advantage to one team or the other?

Some of your examples are correct, some are not. You can say that a Mini is smaller and lighter. If these are criteria important to you, Than the marker can be better for you. That is subjective. To say that a lighter, faster marker is better for everyone is subjective. So stating your facts and interpreting them as a whole is subjective.

My point exactly.

[cockerpunk]

Some of your examples are correct, some are not. You can say that a Mini is smaller and lighter. If these are criteria important to you, Than the marker can be better for you. That is subjective. To say that a lighter, faster marker is better for everyone is subjective. So stating your facts and interpreting them as a whole is subjective.

I have a friend that purchased a Mini. It was smaller and lighter than the previous marker that he owned. By your subjective opinion, this would make the Mini better. However, in his subjective opinion, it was worse. So who's subjective is objective? Neither.

no, that is a subjective issue. if you made the gun even smaller, iniftinly small, then there would be no issue. the issue of the mini's size is becuase of our form, our way of holding the gun, our way of controlling the gun ... change that, and you can have guns that are as small as you can be. it would be easy to invent a new form of a gun that only used one hand, that could be smaller, lighter, just as accurate, feed by hoses ... and that would totally solve the problem.

it wouldn't sell for ****, but that is becuase of the paradigm in paintball today, but it would be smaller and better.

so that is conflict with our subjective form (which is a response to the current methods we use for controlling the size and wieght in our guns). but the objective "smaller is better" is still true. the mini is a problem becuase you need to hands to control a paintball gun, and it doesn't have enough room for that. take the second hand out of the mix by taking the loader and air off ....



a less dramatic example -

most guns these days are smaller and lighter then ever before, but you notice they are getting longer. more and more guns are pushing to forgrip out in front farther to facilitate a much hunched over and longer shooting stance. so they can get smaller and lighter, as long as the ergonomics of a bit larger gun are present.

[Ando]

did i ever say you couldn't be competetive with the latest and greatest with a mag?

Saying and implying are same same.

[cockerpunk]

And Automags are tuned from the factory. ANY marker will go out of tune if given time and play... By the way "outdoing the techs" is not the only reason to adjust your LPR or dwell; new bolts, regulators, and entirely new boards (extremely common upgrades) are usually the motivation behind adjustments. In the same vein, a new body will require you to retune your mag. It's really not that different a story there.

And I've got to ask, how would a gun that weighed nothing be a good thing? I'm not saying that lighter is worse, I'm not saying that lighter is better, I'm just saying that the weight difference you're talking about is negligible. The difference of a pound or two is one thing, but a few ounces is nearly meaningless. Without hoppers or tanks, an Xmag weighs 2.61b and an Ego10 weighs 2.14lb. Do you REALLY believe your snap-shooting is significantly effected by +/-7.52oz? Is an extra 7.52oz that big a test of stamina?



The fact of the matter is that there is a minor weight difference and significant difference in air efficiency...

My question is this; if you get a team full of guys with Xmags and a team full of guys with Egos, is one at a disadvantage in an Xball game? The most common tank size is 68/45. The most common packs these days are 4+3, and both teams could empty them with a full tank. Both markers are capable of EASILY meeting and sustaining the max ROF, and have the necesary modes/settings. Would a 7.5oz weight difference, slightly larger marker size, and possible "feedneck height variation" give a significant advantage to one team or the other?





My point exactly.

belief is subjective.

lighter is faster. F=mA less mass is faster. this is a mathmatical truth in the universe. coservation of energy, less mass requires less work to move ... this is a mathmatical constant in the universe. smaller means less size means smaller to hit ...


the classic example of this argument my thread about "why did we still have vert feed guns?" well, we have vert feed guns because we used to have gravity feeds. well, now most people don't use gravity feeds on there high end guns ... so why are high end guns still vert feed? well, because we have a shooting form that makes vert feed work good enough. ok, but that shooting form is based on the requirement for gravity feed, which we don't have anymore.

instead, paradigm shift. a gun that doesn't have the air and paint on the the gun ... it would require a different form, it would be smaller, lighter, easier to point and aim, faster to get on target ...