SPYDER = bad/poor design?

[Jack & Coke]

We've heard it all before...

"...[insert gun here] is just an electro-spyder..."

This seems to be the en vogue marker "put down"...
especially with the Intimidator. In it's context,
it's used as a "put down" or belittling statement. As
if, Spyder sucks or something.

For those who frequently participate in "your gun
sucks, cuz I bought a different one" posts, the
comment:

"it's just an electro-spyder" is always a favorite.

It's like the orange chicken insult of paintball forum
adolescence.

First, I'd like to ask:

What's so bad about a Spyder?

What's so bad about it's stacked-tube design?

Is it all that "bad", that the Intimidator originally
started off life as the spawn of a spyder clone body
(Millenium), and some electro-pneumatic internals
(Defiant/Bushmaster)?

After all, this "spyder body" design is the
original body for another gun enjoying current
popularity... the Viking (via Black Widow developement).

I know... the new Viking bodies now are different (3
tubes), however, just like the original
Intimidator bodies, the Viking started out life as a
"spyder body" marker.

Original Timmy started with a spyder clone body...

Original Viking started with a spyder clone body...

Doesn't that mean the spyder body is good for
something?

I mean, why develop a gun based on a body that
supposedly "sucks"?

[SpongeBobSquarePants]

You are a smart man jack, a smart man.

[Joni]

I guess it's because you can buy them for less than $200, so people automatically asume they are bad =)

[Crighton]

The first few series of spyders had such a tight tolerance between the body and the bolt. If a ball broke in the chamber or you chopped a ball the bolt would sieze up with a tinny sliver of shell between the bolt and the body.

Only solution for that was soak it in water for a while till the shell disolved, OR wack the cocking knob really hard against a tree or table.

So as you can imagine more than one spyder was wacked one to many times against hard things and went to junk gun heaven.

Oh yeah, almost forgot about the screws that regularly stripped out or snapped off on the trigger frames.

[68magOwner]

i had to use a spyder for a few rounds in my last tourney (long story) anyway, it was a mech one, and even with the long trigger, it was still decent. it was very light, great for snap shooting, and had a very comfortable feel to it. I am now searching to pick up a cheap electro spyder/spyder clone as a backup. off teh field, shooting at something the spyder may feel "worse" than some other markers, but on the field it performs quite well, (i actually liked it better than the 2 cockers ive owned, but my mags are my babies )
anyway, long story short, i like spyders.

[athomas]

Most spyders have poor tolerences in their contruction. It doesn't make the design bad though. If any high end gun was constructed as out of tolerence as a spyder, then I bet they wouldn't work at all. At least a spyder will funtion, although it does have velocity fluctuation issues.

You can upgrade and tighten the tolerences of a spyder and make it a very consistent gun. It will never have the smoothness of a ram type operation, but the consistency will be nearly as good.

Many use the same body design because it works. The internals are what differentiate the guns from each other.

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by athomas
Most spyders have poor tolerences in their contruction. It doesn't make the design bad though. If any high end gun was constructed as out of tolerence as a spyder, then I bet they wouldn't work at all. At least a spyder will funtion, although it does have velocity fluctuation issues.

You can upgrade and tighten the tolerences of a spyder and make it a very consistent gun. It will never have the smoothness of a ram type operation, but the consistency will be nearly as good.

Many use the same body design because it works. The internals are what differentiate the guns from each other.

Hi athomas,

Great post!

Sometimes loose tolerances are good.. no?

Reminds me of the differing design theories between the AK-47 and the original M16.

Kalashnikov designed the AK-47 with lose tolerances so that it would:

a) be more reliable in the field (Kalashnikov said in a History Channel interview that he wanted to design a gun where you could open the breech, pour in a handful of sand, shake it all around, and the gun would still work...)

b) easier to manufacture (stamped metal guns do not require high skilled labor technique, processess, or high precision assembly).

...on the other hand, the original M16 was a superior precision weapon. It had better tolerances and craftsmanship. However, with all the running and crawling in the bush (Vietnam), it was increadibly suseptable to jamming and malfunction due to it's tight design. They had to go back and redesign the m16 in the middle of the war for more reliability.

[wobbles82]

Nope. Not a dang thing wrong with using the Spyder design at first.

If the development of the original Timmy was based off of a Spyder (which it was) and another super marker, the Viking has Spyder bloodlines, then what is wrong here? If you have parts laying around and an idea in your head, use what you have on hand and what is simple, and heck...now your making millions of dollars selling some idea to National Paintball Supply. I actually dont mind Spyders, they have some problems, but the E-Spyders can be made to rip. Would I take my Timmy over an E-Spyder? MAH, MAHAHAH, Yes, of course, but point is we shouldnt diss some peoples roots, and some peoples current setups.

OH Yeh, Jack, do you mean three tube because of the Dual reg design or what for the original Timmy? I cant think of how it used three tubes, enlighten me!

[Steelrat]

Right, but paintball is more of a controlled environment. People who own guns tend to maintain them regularly, therefore negating any advantage given by sloppy tolerances.

And stating that the M16 had issues because of tight tolerances is an oversimplification of the situation:

http://www.jouster.com/articles30m1/M16part2.html

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by wobbles82


OH Yeh, Jack, do you mean three tube because of the Dual reg design or what for the original Timmy? I cant think of how it used three tubes, enlighten me!

No.

I think you may have misread me...

3 tubes is in reference to the Viking.

The Viking started out as a sear-tripping Hyperframed spyder clone with AKA high performance aftermarket internals.

After a while, when they decided to go with electro-pneumatic operation (similar to timmy or Angel in that regulated air is used to drive the hammer and not springs), they switched to their Excalibur style bodies which were 3 tubes (a copy of the Angel). 1 tube stacked on top of 2 tubes, instead of 1 tube stacked on top of another.

Whereas the Timmy used dual regs in front of the gun (LPR and HPR), the Viking used one of the exta tubes for it's LPR.

[Arawn]

I don't feel there's anything wrong with the Spyder/Piranha markers, or their design.

These guns are:

a)simple and easy to maintain (although Spyder compacts have screws holding the upper tube assembly in place rather than the easierpin and clip design).

b)exceedingly easy to tech. I've taught MANY of our refs to be competant spyder/piranha techs in very little time.

c) available in a multitude of levels of trim. From the base models, to the e-gripped version, there's practically a spyder or piranha to fit anyone's tastes.

Are they my favorite brand/design? No.
Have I confidently suggested their purchase? Yes, in fact, a friend (who only plays a few times/year but really wanted an electro) just bought an EForce Piranha on my recommendation and is very happy with it.

And why shouldn't he be? It works consistantly. He's able to use it with CO2 until he feels like committing to an HPA tank. If it breaks down, it's easy to troubleshoot. And for a $250 electro, it has a remarkably nice trigger.


Later,
B.

[hardr0ck68]

spyders are based off a very good design, Kingman sure knew what it was doing when it ripped off the AFT, F1 and F2 design....but thats another story.

The problem with spyders is tolerances, i have worked on some that fire without hammer o-rings, and others that wont fire correctly with any hammer o-ring i put on the bugger...I also love the way the bolts tend gring in to the wall of the upper tube. But the design is so good that it can be machined put togeather by a blind man and still cycle more than half the time.

As for a timmy, well they rawk for poll vaulting. People rag on them because they are full of cheater software, overprices, FUGLY (some more so than others, and some are sexxy), and yeah i guess if i bought a $1,400 gun, i would not want it be based of of a $80 guns body.

[tyrion2323]

I, myself, love Spyders and the sort. I shoot a Dragun TES, which, in my opinion, is THE BEST electronic marker for the price.

My guess as to why people bash Spyders is because they are generally (this is decreasing) viewed as a novice marker. I, like probably most of you, began with a good ol' Spyder TL Plus. At that time, I thought I could take on the world with it. Heck, sometimes I'm tempted to buy a Spyder just to have one - they are reliable and fun to modify!

Anyways, performance-wise, Spyders *can* perform as well as any other marker, if treated correctly. Obviously, a stock Spyder couldn't hold a candle to a stock Viking; however, if properly maintained, regulated and upgraded (delrin bolt, ram-kit, etc) a Spyder could perform just as well as any Timmy out there.

Take, for example, Dragun's "The One" kit, which replaces the bottom tube's striker combination with an air-ram. Once this is installed, the Spyder operates exactly the same as an intimidator; however, you'll be hard pressed to find a timmy fan who will admit this...who wants their $1000 marker to be equalled in performance by a $450 Spyder?!?

There ya go. I love Spyders. I love Mags more.

Jacob

[QUINCYMASSGUY]

spyder

I think what makes the spyder the name for low quality is three things:

1.) Kingman went wicked low-budget on its material and spent more money making it look shiny than to make it to better quality and tolerance, so it's known as a gun for someone who wants to look cool but doesn't care about performance.

2.) It is probably the most affordable and easiest gun to mass-produce, making it the ideal for 32 Degrees, PMI, and other high quantity/low quality companies to crank out and make money off of, plus with the cost of upper end markers, it's an opportunity to capture the entry level market, but to do that costs have to be cut somewhere. So all these companies cranked out mediocre products that were expected to have a much shorter life than AGD and such did with the Mag. Makes people buy another one if the first breaks in a year and a half, so they're fine with it.

3.) The average paintball player is a lemming. Look at what happened with the mag, one bad batch of bodies and they've got a chopping rep. Something new comes out, everyone wants it though they have no idea why. It's the customer base here. The E-spyder gave these people a way to get an electro marker and not have to invest much.

I have definitely been looking at the actual inherent weaknesses in a blowback: does using a spring to push forward make it impossibly tough on paint or ROF, does it kill consistency of shot speed, etc. In doing so, I might make one using a quality Cocker body and quality internals like AKA stuff. Finally, I'd probably use a Morlock board and make it electro. If SP hadn't pulled their BS, I guarantee you an open bolt blowback would have already come out with eyes and a quality board.

So there's my question for you J+C.... outside of poor manufacturing and the fact it's 95% noobs packing spyders.... what do YOU see as the weaknesses of an open bolt blowback and how do they stack up (no pun intended, dual tube stack, get it?) to other designs? How useful is using nitro with them?

[*captain_cox*37]

I had one for a while. Ran awesome on CO2 while I had it. Back in the days when I was a "sniper". lol jk. I was never a dumb newb sniper... I was "the sniper"