|
|
Post by trinity on Jun 16, 2012 20:13:41 GMT -5
Just a note to say that my Tango Down Sniper's Blog is back up and running. Thanks to all of those who have inquired about where it went. If you run across any glaring errors please don't hesitate to let me know. The address should be in my signature.
|
|
|
|
Post by chicago on Jun 22, 2012 19:00:25 GMT -5
Please, please, visit Trinity's blog. There is more knowledge and experience in his head and on his blog than many other sights combined. The man knows. Enough said.
Now, as I type this the four polls unite (in the what's new section of this forum). This marks the end of days or a new beginning. Follow Trinity's blog and you'll find out which.
Chicago out.
|
|
|
|
Post by trinity on Jun 22, 2012 22:16:38 GMT -5
Now there you go doing that. How in the world do I live up to those words, especially coming from you? As memory serves, it was Chicago that came up with the route to getting consistent consistency out of a T9.1 It was also Chicago that led the leap to crossbow scopes.
I love the game and I like to think that I am a capable trigger puller. Obviously having a gun with consistent velocity and good optics are the starting point for accuracy. After that, the keys are practice shooting and refining your ability to estimate distance on the field.
I am still working on the consistency part because I now know my gun is capable of more than I thought it was. Burning up rounds is something I have always done a lot of. I was trained that way. As for estimating target distance, I have been working with a laser range finder so long that, out to about 100 yards, I can generally accurately eyeball target distances to within a 2-5 yards.
I work hard at practicing distance estimation because the inability to do that is, in my opinion, the single most important reason players miss shots on the field. The truth is that most players are terrible at doing it. I know because I constantly test players' ability to guess range and they are usually way, way off (and they invariably overestimate). Last year one player told me he had shot a player who was on the second floor of a platform from a position in the nearby treeline. He said that the opposing player was at least 300 feet away. As it happened, I had been in exactly that same position earlier in the day and I had lased the distances to the second floor while I was shooting there. The distance was actually just over 150 feet. He was convinced it was farther than that and I won $20 on that one.
I do want to thank Chicago for his kind words. Whether my stuff measures up to the praise he gives it is for the rest of you to decide. I try to bring to the Blog the stuff I have learned based on my experience, but the truth is that I borrow (with appropriate credit where it's due) as much, if not more, than I personally contribute. There are a lot of really experienced shooters out there and they are constantly coming up with new ideas, new tactics, and new equipment. My goal is to just put all the sniper stuff in one place so it is easy to find. If I am getting that much done then I am happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wolfen on Jun 23, 2012 10:43:01 GMT -5
Not to try and diminish any praise to Chicago (he does deserve alot of praise for his recent testings and data collecting) but he did neither of those things. Accuracy and Consistency has neither been any problem ever since i picked up my t9.1 over a about 1½ year ago (3 inch pattern at 60m and +-2 fps standard) and i also know alot of others that has the same results. Also crossbow scopes has been used in paintball for over 20 years (my dad had one on his air power Vector in the 90-ties). What Chicago has done though is amazing comparisons and testings with different barrels and to use a multi-reticle scope with first strikes to get rid of the need for a APR.
Also i am really really happy to see the blog up again Trinity, i really enjoy reading all of your posts and contents, Welcome back!
|
|
|
|
Post by trinity on Jun 23, 2012 14:51:23 GMT -5
Actually Wolfen this is one we will have to agree to disagree on. In my eyes, and unless I miss my guess, many other Tiberius users will see Chicago as having done what I described. Any misunderstanding here is probably due to the imprecision of the wording of my original post.
Certainly Chicago was not the first to test for consistency nor was he was the first to use a crossbow scope on a paintball gun. I never meant to imply that. What sets his stuff apart is testing. We all know how much stuff gets said in paintball that bears no resemblance to reality. A major part of trying to decide what equipment might work for you is trying to figure out who you can trust when they tell you something. I have a shelf of useless paintball gear that I have accumulated over the past 15 years that never actually lived up to the user's (not manufacturer's who I know not to trust) claims of how it worked on the field. I no longer place much weight on any assertions until I know the player and I know how he tests his gear.
For me, claims aren't real until I see it tested by someone. How precise and careful was his testing. How experienced is he with the product and will he admit he is wrong when the testing proves out a contrary result from what he expected. After all, no one likes laying out money for a new piece of gear and then having to say, after testing, that what he bought was junk.
We all know how long Chicago has been playing with the T9.1. I am confident in his level of experience. When Chicago is wrong, he says so. Witness his comments on the suppressor's potential to interfere with accuracy. He initially advocated for suppressors and has now reversed his position after testing. He may not be the first person to figure that out either, but he was the first person who did testing that demonstrated a conclusion I can trust and he posted it up for all to read.
Testing makes the difference. You may have posted the kind of exhaustive, expensive testing that Chicago did using a variety of barrels and carefully measuring consistency and I simply missed it. If so, I apologize. The same goes for any testing you or your father may have done with a crossbow scope. Didn't see it.
In the end, you and I aren't that far apart in what we are saying, but my bet is that there will a lot of users or potential users who will read Chicago's words and who, like me, will read, and reread his posts for guidance as to how to do what he did. As far as they, and I, are concerned he led the way on those things.
I do have one final clarification I want to make on your post though and that's about the idea that Chicago's posts lead to the idea of getting rid of an APR.
The Hawke XB30 probably does obviate the need for an APR for a player who is more of a marksman than a sniper and shoots out to 180 feet. The reticles will take you out that far and the fixed magnification of about 2.5 is enough for that distance. Chicago specified that his APR was in the flat (level) position during his testing and for the marksman style of play that may very well end the need for an APR
How about for targets at 250 feet? Or 300 feet? An APR under a Hawke optic could be made to work, but I believe some kind of APR is going to be a necessity for snipers to shoot with precision at targets beyond 60 yards. For me, 60 yards is where the real magic of the first strike round begins. On top of that, for shooting at distances over 200 feet I like a bit more magnification than 2.5x to help me see where my rounds are going.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wolfen on Jun 23, 2012 16:58:40 GMT -5
Actually we don't disagree at all. And i do agree about everything regarding Chicagos testing as i said. I definitely take it into account when i consider new stuff (especially since ordering stuff here is kind of a ***** more often then not). AS for the APR i do know that he has the scope on a killjoy APR in flat position, but he did say that he uses that APR as a raiser and does not adjust it anything. I definitely agree that a APR is needed for long range shots, and it would be absolutely awesome (and my next buy) if you could get the Hawke optic adjusted with a APR so that the all the aimpoints would land on good ranges (i.e instead of getting 40,50,60m you'd get 60,70,80m). Now you wouldn't get the same jump at other distances obviously but if they were easy enough to remember... god that would be sweet. In short though, your right and i was clumsy in my previous post, didn't really mean that APR wouldn't be needed, rather that for Chicago, at the ranges he seems to do his shooting the need for adjustment ain't needed because of the Hawke optic.
|
|
|
|
Post by chicago on Jun 23, 2012 19:25:14 GMT -5
Finally some lively but respectful conversations have returned to this forum. We have Trinity and the ACE OF COOKIES to thank for this! Now, if only archangel can get his school to allow him access to this, his own forum! I guess I'll have to dampen my enthusiasms and ramblings for a time.
Plus if there is real substance here, it might help me with the madness! And, my posse always looks forward to hearing from Wolfen. Hairy things seem to turn them on. Oops, sorry Archangel, I hope they don't use this post to decide if there should be access to this forum.
|
|
