Drawback to having the RTP (X)...

[Wc Keep]

hey rr..............come to aone.

[RRfireblade]

I would like too but it's quite a ways from Florida.....not sure if I can pull it off.

I've got a lot going on right now at work and all.......I'll think about it,it's not out of the question.

Thanks for asking. :)

[Wc Keep]

its a garanteed good time if you come.

[RRfireblade]

I believe you, I'm a NewYorker.....lost in the south. I know how the N.E. parties.

[Wc Keep]

lol.

[Z-man]

Coming in on this at page 2 I will say this. I have a hard time seeing how the reactivity of the RT valve with or without a ULT mod should be scrutinized or regulated any more than different trigger pull lengths, different pull pressures or hinge vs sliding triggers.

I mean to a certain level, everything is a mechanical advantage.

Consider the '98 autococker sliding style trigger as compared to say a mech Spyder trigger as compared to the hair trigger. Though none of these have any bounce that is noticeable they have VERY different pull lengths and I am just willing to bet that you cannot pull the autococker trigger nearly as fast as the hair trigger or the spyder. Why? the Autococker trigger has nearly an inch to pull vs. the 1mm the hair does. Now does that seem like an equal playing field?

Then we could go an look at it from a different angle. How about trigger pressure required to fire the marker? The rugged Tippmann 98 stock trigger has a bit more pull and weight to it than say... the hair ULT trigger. Does it seem fair to allow for different pressures? Surely the person with the trigger that you can tap can shoot faster than someone who must use 2 fingers to pull.

If the marker will NOT fire unless you, the user pulls the trigger, and then resets requiring you to pull the trigger again, I don't see how you can say anyeven if it is set were no matter how hard you try IT WILL NOT RAPID-FIRE or double fire is an unfair mechanical advantage then you must also consider variables like those I have listed above as unfair. Quite frankly, It sounds like the level of equality that you are looking for calls for a separate class for each mech marker. I mean honestly that is the only 100% fair way. If we all use the same markers, we all will have the same weight, balance, size, trigger behavior (including any "unfair" mechanical advantage) and ergonomics. Of course then you might have to consider the tanks used. High flow tanks vs Presets? CO2 only? Different types of oil? different viscosity levels might influence the speed at which the parts reset.


Overkill? I dunno you tell me. Where do you draw the line? At what point am I splitting hairs and at what point is there actually some egregious unfair advantage that allows one person to win and the other loose. Are you simply trying to limit ROF or is there something else?

[Wc Keep]

zman hit up aone

[athomas]

The RT or retro mag, if properly setup could do it and since it was one of the first and the valve was able to actually maintain the rate of fire, was subsequently used as an example of an illegal gun. This scared many field owners away from allowing them.

Just about any mechanical gun can be made to rapid fire. Tippmans have an RT kit that actually promotes the use of reactivity. Any blowback gun can be made to do it by rounding the sears.

If I show the field owner that my Spyder can be made to go into a rapid fire state, then maybe all spyders should be banned because it is possible that they can all be made to do this. Right? No. Not at all. One bad gun does not make a bad line of guns. Therefore, any retro valve mag should also be chacked on an individual basis. I'll bet only a very few would be overly reactive to be considered illegal. And that would only be by user design or by having a part that is worn out and needs replacing.

[RRfireblade]

Quite frankly, It sounds like the level of equality that you are looking for calls for a separate class for each mech marker. I mean honestly that is the only 100% fair way. If we all use the same markers, we all will have the same weight, balance, size, trigger behavior (including any "unfair" mechanical advantage) and ergonomics. Of course then you might have to consider the tanks used. High flow tanks vs Presets? CO2 only? Different types of oil? different viscosity levels might influence the speed at which the parts reset.


Overkill? I dunno you tell me. Where do you draw the line? At what point am I splitting hairs and at what point is there actually some egregious unfair advantage that allows one person to win and the other loose. Are you simply trying to limit ROF or is there something else?

:)

Mmm, I pretty much addressed that all stuff already......this is the last time I promise.

Yes, perhaps differrent classes........like they do in pump play to accomodate various mechanisms and set ups. Been doing it pretty much since the advent of CA,bulk loaders and auto triggers..not a new concept. Maybe it's time Paintball got with the program that is used by pretty much every other sport in existance.....or maybe not....IDK, not my call.

Yes,a trigger system that actively and greatly changes the force of it's pull during the process of a shot.....done so by using and active part of the markers system, (not variable spring rate or other methods that remain a constant and have more or less linearity on both halves of the pull) done so with the sole intent of increassing ROF over what can be achieve with out that assistance or system functioning......should not be legal. Not a simple lightening of the pull weight that can pretty much by done on any,leverage based trigger. (which all are) Not a simple shorting of the pull length that can pretty much be done on every other trigger as well.

I mean......I've explained I don't know how many times in various ways to make it clear........I don't know how else to say it. But I'm not going to try anymore.

This is also the last time I'm going to say that it's YOUR OPINION () on whether or not an RT trigger unfairly adds to ROF.......opinion.......opinion......one more time.For some maybe it doesn't for those that know how to use it......it sure in the heck does,I promise you. My single finger (arm,wrist,how ever you want to do it) doesn't move any faster on an RT than it does on a classic or any other marker,even those with shorter lighter pulls but I can sure as heck smoke them all on an RT valved mag....no question.Only 2 markers out there that will do that.And no.....there really is no difference between a Mag,IMO and an RT Tippmann.Both are equally adjustable (simpler on the Tippy, agreed) in RT effect and both capable of producing that effect just as easy. The Mag is probably worse,not matter what you do you 'aint' gettting a Tippy upto 32bps. :)

Zman,your whole sight is based on that premises in all the varying degrees.I noticed you don't have vid of you doing 16+bps on a Classic valved Mag.(which we all know a Classic valve is capable of and beyond that if you factor some lack of recharge) Or are you going to say that there is no advantage to the RT trigger?(besides a recharge rate that no one can reach anyway)

As for Rogue......

I'm sure he's just goofing around now.
I know he's aware of the difference between a 'pull' and a return or release.
I know he understands the difference between the static and linear weight of a trigger pull and one that is acted on mechanically by an outside force.
I know he's not seriously going to say that the reativity and sweetspot potential of an RT is the same between 800psi input and 1000psi input.
I know he's not serious that a Classic valve will sweepspot just like an RT when fed 800psi.(in stock form)

I figure he's just having fun now.....me too...... :) < see?

Anyway.....

I really don't care....it's not my Tourny.....I don't write the rules for any governing bodies.....I don't care if anyone wants to use an RT in a mech Tourny,if considered legal by them,I would use one of mine.....

I figured it would create controversy to state my agreeement with this Tourny promoter and I wasn't let down. No biggie.....I still feel the same way and if asked will say the same thing.

Anyone who feels different, I'm fine with that too. Cool?

Jay.

[slade]

Z-man, i think what RRfireblade was arguing was that the markers that utilize pneumatics to create a quicker pull are an unfair advantage over other markers. essentially, if the sear is moved only by mechanical action, then the marker is legal, if pneumatic pressure is applied to the trigger or sear to make the pull lighter, shorter, or have bounce, than it is illegal. i dont necessarily agree with him on this, i think that it should be at the discresion of whoever is holding the tournament, and they should have to test each marker. there of course has to be a line drawn somewhere, i think enough bounce to sweetspot and exceedingly light trigger pulls (like the hair, but not the ult or non-bouncing rt) should be illegal in mech tournaments.

[Phil]

Just tell the field owner that the rod that kicks the trigger back creating the reactivity is removable and offer to remove it for the tourney. It just screws out of its little holder. Any reasonable person should agree to this.

[slade]

Just tell the field owner that the rod that kicks the trigger back creating the reactivity is removable and offer to remove it for the tourney. It just screws out of its little holder. Any reasonable person should agree to this.

i think youre thinking of an e-mag. with a mech mag, you need the trigger rod, since it is what the trigger pushes against to rotate the sear. it can be removed on an e-mag, since the electronics rotates the sear instead of the trigger rod.