SpudFiles

The challenge is now open you can post a thread of your entry now, then reply with a link to that thread and a brief description on the contest thread

several of us came up with this idea in this thread
the thread started out pointing out various mods frequently made by nerf gunners that seamed more detrimental than helpful. We went on to point out our general dissatisfaction with the current online nerf gun community, and so we decided to declare a challenge to the users of this site for a contest to build nerf guns, however a full blown official site contest was decided against by the site mods, so the challenge will be an unofficial contest without prizes just bragging rights and respect, we'll be expecting advance nerf guns like semi-automatics and repeaters, not just a basic spudguns with a barrels for nerf darts because any one can do that and they're useless for nerf games

if you only want to add your thoughts on the Nerf modding communities please post in the other thread


Guidelines
Nerf contest/challenge

This challenge is simple: to build the best Nerf gun you can.

we are not defining the best nerf gun as one most preferred for use in a real nerf gun based game and not the most destructive one.
Whether it's powered by a spring plunger or pneumatically, shoots micro darts or big foam missiles, it is game.



Requirements:
all submissions should not take any longer than 6 seconds to reload between shots (remember you'll be going against semi-auto nerf guns)

the submission must be built by you, it must either be entirely homemade, or an extreme modification of existing components, the extent of the modification involved can be challenged by others

All submissions should have a reasonable degree of safety, any member can challenge the saftey of an entry. It is recommended that you be prepared to provide a case to defend the practical safety of your entry, you can use numbers and data or compare existing example.

It is highly recommended that you provide a video of your entry functioning if possible, especially if the entry has "hard-to-believe" advance functions or abilities.


Judging (unofficial)

1) Effectiveness. consistent shots, flat trajectory, fast rate of fire, compact size, any factors that make the gun effective for use. A working semi-automatic gun will earn high marks in this category.

2) Reliability. Although this really goes under effectiveness, we will keep it separate in it's own category. After all it's importance will separate the mere novelties from the actually effective. A semi-automatic gun (as I suspect most here are looking to make) is worthless unless it is reliable. we will accept imperfect prototypes but they probably wont get you full points in this category however you can still argue for the design's potential

3) Aesthetics. Doing all of the above in style never hurts.

4) Innovation. like many of our competitions innovative ideas (including new affordable solution) will earn you extra points in the contest

I will be joining.

some guidelines i thought of.

SAFETY-Thanks to btrettel for the great guidelines. A dart must have a soft tip, NO hard tips allowed. It cannot exceed a KED of 0.015 J/mm^2. That is equal to a 1.1g, .53” dart fired at a speed of 62 m/s. Please see here for more detail. http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/rant-on ... rt,45.html

Able to fire at least 1 dart/1.5 seconds, and shoot at least 50'

"JUDGING" in a sense, i guess just kind of a set of comparisons.

1) Accuracy

2) Reliability

3) Aesthetics

4) Uniqueness.



Just a quick $.02

Could we also do one for grenade launchers- the larger nerf (intended to be hand thrown) darts? I don't nerf much so I don't know if they're really used though it could be fun.

I might join, maybe not.

well nerf people typically don't use larger nerf projectiles exept for maybe pretend grenads but must people don't so, toy companies that make alot foam dart guns ocationally make gun with larger projectile guns for the purpose of extending ranges while keeping guns safe, however typically since a safe Nerf rocket tends to travel slow and makes it dodgable

I don't think a pocket football has to right softness to it to make it safe for a long range gun, and it's too hard to make an effective gun for direct hits.

If you have no use for a nerf gun effective for nerf games then consider building a general purpose 1/2"pvc revolver or cartridge gun with adjustable power (i.e. chamber detachable chamber or adjustable pressure) so when your not using it as a safe nerf gun you can tune up the power and use sharp darts, marbles, AA batteries and other destructive goodies


edit:
also I'd suggest against acuracy, first off by definition you're looking for precision or consistency, and second for something that shoots under 120ft at 45 degrees I don't think it's a huge deal

I'd probably look at something like a bolt action rifle with super darts for high accuracy (spin stabilized or something)..while still being safe.

I don't really nerf, so practicality isn't the biggest factor for me. The idea of an underbarrel grenade launcher on an AR style platform is tempting..but perhaps the rifle is the way to go.

I think it is time to set some design rules in stone, such as max velocity, use of stock unmodified darts, etc. and then contest metrics, such as points for rate of fire >5 per sec, >2 per sec, > 1 per sec, greater then .75 per sec. Less than 1 per 2 sec, no points.

Accuracy in 10 rounds fired 1 pt for each within 5 feet, 2 points for each within 2.5 feet 5 points for each within 1 foot at 50 feet range, etc..

These are just suggestions. Who wants to write up an offical safety and scoreing sheet?

I'm playing with an indexed magazine design that fires rapid fire like a springer slingshot. No compressor used.

i would like to join this. i think that accuracy should give equal points as rate of fire

inonickname wrote:I'd probably look at something like a bolt action rifle with super darts for high accuracy (spin stabilized or something)

blackhawk13 wrote: i think that accuracy should give equal points as rate of fire

did anyone read what I said about accuracy by definition?
for accurate word usage please use the terms precision or consistency

spin stabilizing darts is unessesary because darts are designed to be stable in flight note unlike other projectiles they do not tumble in flight and therefore do not need spin, the effects would be small a more significant factor would be making the power consistent for consistency.

and black hawk certainly not the true challenge and usefulness lies in ROF, nerf gun ranges are so short theirs not even much use for sights, the trajectory just isn't flat enough, extreme precision is unnecessary as long as there is consistency it's fine

it will be too complicated to have a point system especially for reliability and ergonomics, however we could consider making an variable rating system rather than a vote system for the best one in case one gun becomes a clear winner that way other decent entries will still gain recognition. also I would like to set a standard that all entries manual or automatic must be able to shoot at a rate of 1dart every 2 seconds, I think this is fair since nearly all store bought nerf guns can fire that fast in skilled hands

Does the no hard tips rule mean no stefans? because stefans are the only Nerf darts I use. other ones are too expensive and not accurate enough.

Just make stefans with soft tips. There's a video on YouTube making them with small felt pads- like the ones on chairs

alright. I'm in then (I have a few suction-tip stefans, I will use those)

seems as if my semi-auto nerf rifle design will finally have to get put to the test

however a full blown site contest was decided against by the site admins

Who said that? I'm the only admin around here and I was asked but had not answered yet

Since I just finished running some official contests, an unofficial contest would be just fine. Just figure out who is going to be running it so there is some organization. If someone would like a thread stickied for it, you can let me/an active moderator know about it.

Count me in. Maybe this will be the motivation I need to finish my TFS-Semi. Now where the hell did I put that sheet of Lexan...

iknowmy3tables wrote:Darts unlike other projectiles they do not tumble in flight and therefore do not need spin

I'll point out that while spin stabilisation isn't necessary, that doesn't mean there are no reasons why you might want them spinning.

However, at these ranges and velocities, such concerns are near moot. If people want to try it, then I won't stop them... but I don't think it's going to yield anything of much worth.

...and second for something that shoots under 120ft at 45 degrees I don't think it's a huge deal

I'd argue otherwise. I've got Nerf guns which don't have the repeatability for the shooter to be all that sure of hitting a stationary target within "acceptable range" (i.e not having to "lob" it skywards).

I think that shot repeatability needs to have some value in this, else there are too few criteria to help separate entries.

That said, I think it would be best done as "Effective range" - something like the longest distance at which the gun can reasonably be expected to hit 5 out of 10 shots on a stationary man-sized target - without using a mortar's trajectory.

As a criteria, that covers quite a few things. It would call for honesty, but if people feel they have to twist the facts for an unofficial challenge, they're jolly sad people to be taking it that seriously.

I agree with what rag said- the one I own is extremely unreliable.. In fact I have some ideas spin wise..

I think reliability/ repetibility whatever you want to call it should be a part of it. It ain't much use if you're not sure you'll hit your target.

Deadline forp deciding if your in the competition December 1?
Deadline for submission of march 1 ??