spyder vs2/3

[rridgeway]

I was thinking that the spyder should be moved into the high end electric markers category. The only reason i say this is because the ion is in there, and i really believe that the vs2/3 is on the same level. just wondering if you guys thought the same now thats its came out. my personal take on it after actually using it is that its worthy.

[Lopez17]

I doubt that will happen. We really should create a mid range electro forum for it, the rail, etc. however, the Spyders will stay at the lower end electro range.

[Uziel Gal]

The marker classifications are based more on how the marker operates than how it performs. So while Kingman have made strides in improving the performance of these markers, and have made genuine changes to the internals with the pressure balanced valve, the VS series retain the basic operation of the previous electronic Spyder markers, being sear tripping blowbacks. As the decision was made that sear tripping blowbacks would be classified as low end electronic markers, the VS series have been classified in the same way.

In the same way, while an Ion or PMR may not share the same quality and features as the more recognisable high end markers, they do none the less have the same operating principles, being true electro-pneumatic markers, and so have been classed as high end markers.

[rridgeway]

what about the diablo wrath? are emags blowbacks?

i was thinking that they should be sorted by their performance though, despite them being blowbacks. the vs is pretty consistent and very reliable and runs at a decent pressure (300 psi isn't too high isn't, maybe i'm wrong there).

I think Lopez is right about creating a mid range, there really has become a fine line between what is high end and what is low end with the introduction of markers like the ion and its competitors. i think some of the cockers (trilogies) and the wrath and the impulse, are really almost misleading being in high end. when i think of high end, i really think of the markers like the angel 1 and ego and such.

i'm not going to argue w/ either of you guys about the vs going into the high end part, tho. you guys know too much more than me lol. i think it really should be considered making a mid range section, even if just for the electros. it really would have helped me out when i got back into the sport and was looking for something just above average.

[Lopez17]

Well the impulse is truly a high end marker. It utilizes regs, a solenoid and may/may not have vision. It was one of the original generations of high end markers. It's outdated today due to the miniturizing of electronic components and the ability of companies to reduce the size of the body, but performance wise it's still a high end marker. Trilogy cockers, other than being overly mechanical, aren't high end. They'd fall into the lower end of a mid-range gun. IMHO they're pieces of junk. The Wrath's design is a bit better than some of it's competitors but that's nto really saying much. I should do a matrix at some point of high, mid, low end markers. The thing is though, regardless of how we categorize markers, there's still a bit of discussion that will always be had about the proper place for some markers that I call "tweeners".

Incidentally, e-mags are not "blow backs" in the sense that you're likely to equate them with.

[rridgeway]

i wasn't sure about including the impulse as a mid range or what. i have one and i love it to death, but as a stock marker, i don't think they are that great.

oh well though, i just wanted to do something to help make pbreview a better place for paintball :)

[Uziel Gal]

The Impulse was one of the first of the low cost, true electro-pneumatic markers, so not surprisingly, it's a little dated now. At the time that the Impulse first arrived, the only other marker in the "budget high-end" category was the Bushmaster. Other than that, you were going to be paying out for an Angel or closed bolt Shocker, which were both considerably more expensive.

I can see that a mid range section would help to clarify quality levels within the groups, but equally, I can understand why the review section has tried to keep to a bare minimum number of sections - too many categories might confuse some people. There would also no doubt continue to be arguments of exactly which markers qualified as middle end. I don't think that there will ever be a clear cut definition that everyone will agree on, only the definition that we choose to enforce.

The Emag, like other versions of the Automag, is a marker with the "gas forward, spring back" or "blow-forward" mechanism, as it is more commonly known. It does use a sear to release the bolt in order to initiate the shot, and so is a "sear tripper" in that respect, but not a blow back. I would have to assume that the Emag was considered high end due to the fact that it was a version of a mechanical marker that was already considered high-end, and as much as anything else, due to it's cost.

The Wrath is another slightly different approach to marker design, in that it uses a mechanical solenoid, but rather than using it to lower a sear, it uses it to open and close a valve. This valve controls the flow of gas to a ram that is then used to strike the main valve that releases the main burst of gas to fire the marker. Rather than using a pneumatic solenoid to control the ram, as the true high-end markers do, it achieves the same thing by using a mechanical solenoid to open and close a separate valve.