Jump to content


Member Since 06 Oct 2009
Offline Last Active Dec 20 2011 11:20 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Alien Customer service

25 October 2011 - 10:57 PM

I was very satisfied with my CS experiences with them. One must understand that they are a small company, relative to other manufacturers. Hopefully they will get caught up soon.


10 December 2010 - 01:01 PM

Apparently ppl in the firearm community should start using the term precise instead of accurate....

That kind of scares me....Posted Image

haha, generally, with any kind of open sight, accuracy is used to describe consistent grouping which, more often than not, is off the zero-point.


10 December 2010 - 12:25 PM

When one area is 2,000 and one is 4,000 and "you can watch the shots" yea, to me it's that simple.
Here's the gig! Looking at these results - however you do the math - If you come to me with "results" that say the sweep doesn't work! I'm going to say you are a liar.
I will never agree that you can go from looking at the video the (graph just matches what you see in the video) to the sweep doesn't work.

1) How did you calculate the total area for the shots that missed the board? How did they fit into your total area calculation? Also, please address my earlier image explaining why total area is not a measurement of accuracy.
2) What math? Where's the data? How did you record the left/right variation in where the shots landed? Where did I lie to you? Please quote me where I lied.
3) I never said that the "sweep doesn't work." I said that if your system works then it will stand up to scrutiny. What part of my points do you take issue with?

I think you're confusing accuracy with precision.

Well, no not really. The point I'm disputing is Jack's claim that "total area is a measurement of accuracy". For the purposes of these tests, "accuracy" is the closeness of the break to the zero-point/center of where you aim. If you have all of your shots land in a circle around the center of your target, it's neither accurate, nor precise. At the very least a large circular grouping is going to be less accurate and less precise than a small grouping with outliers.

Even if you were to interchange the terms, the point would be the same, "total area does not indicate accuracy".

Excuse me, I looked at the definitions and I had the two confused. Apparently ppl in the firearm community should start using the term precise instead of accurate....


10 December 2010 - 11:36 AM

2) "total area" is not a measurement of accuracy. Not with any statistical significance. If every shot lay on the outside edge of a circle, its total area could still be smaller and yet LESS ACCURATE than a small grouping + two outliers. Just because some portion of your audience is dumb enough to accept your gross oversimplification does not give you license to insult the intelligence of everyone else who takes issue with your methods.

I think you're confusing accuracy with precision.

In Topic: Alien Indy 2011 vs. Geo2 vs. Ego11 vs. Dm11 vs. NT

24 November 2010 - 01:24 PM

go with the ego the alien to new to tell if there good/the nt very kicky/dm same as nt/geo good if you want spool/Ego because ive owned them for awhie and there just so nice and comfort is up to you just go to your local proshop and feel them

Just wanted to point out that the OP is talking about the Indy, not the Invasion. This is the 4th year the Indy has been out.

They are all excellent "speedball" options IMO. I prefer poppets so, for me, the egos, aliens, anything from Bob Long, are my favorites. Really, they will all be pretty smooth, EGO11 moreso, the rest is kind of subjective. A person has to shoot the different markers to find what they like.
If "smoothness" is a primary concern, then, of course, go with a spool or ego11. I don't have enough experience with the spool valve guns you have listed so I don't have anything productive to add between them.