• Welcome to the DeeperBlue.com Forums, the largest online community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing. To gain full access to the DeeperBlue.com Forums you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:

    • Join over 44,280+ fellow diving enthusiasts from around the world on this forum
    • Participate in and browse from over 516,210+ posts.
    • Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
    • Post your own photos or view from 7,441+ user submitted images.
    • All this and much more...

    You can gain access to all this absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!

target practice

Thread Status: Hello , There was no answer in this thread for more than 60 days.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.

andrsn

Just visiting...
Aug 26, 2001
1,213
75
138
52
just a note on some of the posts regarding gun accuracy...

i think that if we all found a standard target, we could shed some light on some truly relative accuracy tests with different guns. i know IYA has been adamantly pursuing this.

i know in the states, we have this "orange safety fencing" all over construction sites. i think it was sven that suggested this as something to be used, quite a while ago. well, i've been thinking about it and wanted to state my reasons for using something like it...

first off, i think the squares or diamonds, are 1.5 inches accross. if a standard target (say, 10x10 squares/diamonds) was used, everyone could easily report data w/o much confusion when comparing other data taken by other shooters. the 1.5 inches would serve as the tolerance factor needed to filter out erroneous shots for variables not considered such as waves, water density (fresh/salt), visibility, etc.

i think if people were to shoot at the target several times, we could get an average, since what we're REALLY looking for is consistency. because, there's always the chance that the innaccuracy could be from the hand of the said shooter. anyways, this would give us a good idea of the guns "true" accuracy. once the shooter was comfortable hitting the target w/ a consistent grouping of hits, the distance could be increased until the deviation from center became noticeably different. then, the target could be moved back to that last distance mark of noticed accuracy and could then record a series of shots.

i think IYA might point out the argument of "punch". i think that as long as you're not "lobbing" shots at the target, a straight path of the spear to the target should prove some evidence of momentum. if everyone's noting the band power and spearshaft length and diameter, then it should all be relative. being that everyone gives truthful info.

anyways, i just wanted to get this started and let everyone put in their 2 cents, and let IYA put in his 2 pages.


anderson
 
my 2 cents

We should use square fencing just for the uniformity of distance and ease of analyzing data. Also much easier to plot charts

I have several guns I can test out & a community pool to test it out in
 
Last edited:
PAGE 1
Anyway you want it............


PAGE 2
I go along..........


he he he, that's 2 pages already


But be warned, it is not easy to shoot accurately on fix target and when viz is bad. A clean swimming pool is the way to go, no current, no surge....no fish to distract too...

I AM IN, I AM IN !!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I have made some calculation, in order to maintain decent punch at a given range I have come up with a simple formula which might work for many guns. Might...might....might.... ( how come there is an echo ??? he he he )



All distance measurement is to be made from speartip to target.


Euro Guns and RA :

20mm rubber on 6.35mm or 7mm shaft. Shooting distance should be 3 times the total length of the shaft.

Twin 16mm or twin 20mm on whatever shaft up to 7mm. Distance should be 4 x shaft length.

Single 16mm, 2 times shaft length.


JBL ( non-XHD )& AB Miller
3 bands of original configuration. Shooting distance should be 2.5 times shaft length.

JBL XHDs only
3 bands of original config. Shooting distance is 3 x shaft length.


Pneumatic, all kinds
3 times shaft length.


Riffe & Wongs & Custom guns
If bands are 9/16" ( 14mm ) and shaft 5/16 (8mm) quantity of bands ( say "x" value ) dictates the shooting distance "x" times shaft length with a maximum of 5 times shaft length.

If bands are any sizes but shaft 3/8" (9.5mm ) the same calculation as above but maximum distance is 4 times shaft length.


I read the post from an RA dealer in a forum ( Aussie ) that ShadowKiller linked us to, and the dealer mentioned effective being 5 times spearlength can be done from an RA if you use the new super slippery Spectra. I guess 4 times spearlength is not too much to ask from the powerful RA.

Any powerband setting that will cause ANY guns to misfire or its trigger on the verge of self destruction should not be done. It will mislead readers and cause accident.

All we need to do is provide info what band size, what brand of bands, estimated band energy, shaft diameter and spearhead config, shooting line material, poundage & length. This is important for us to compare and learn possible modifications for our benefits.

This is "for-fun" test if it materialize, not a contest. Some people may shoot lousy at targets but deadly on fishes. Since we all can't hunt together, at least we can shoot targets....together...1000s miles a part.


Any more comments on how this should be done will be appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Does we allowed to use scope or laser pointer????:t :head :head
 
Any aiming sight may be used, except you can not use the steering control from Inter Continetal Ballistic Missile unit.....:head
 
A scope or laser sight would actually be very useful in this testing because it would take a lot of "human error" in aiming out of the picture and the results would be a little more purely based on the gun.

Of course there will always be some user error(flinching, unsteady hands, drunk IYA, etc...), but if a laser pointer is mounted and placed center-target every shot, it would provide a much better gun-based plot of results.

Unfortunately no one I know even has a laser :head , so it's not really conceivable
 
what would be more useful is an idea of the precision of the gun - as your site mechanism can always be adjusted

also if the gun could be anchored to the bottom in a shallow pool - say with a concrete block with some sort of attachment on top - this would get rid of your human error - also the effects of recoil though.

- is maybe asking a bit much but i think the results would be a bit unreliable (virtually useless) without some mechanism ensure the gun fires from the same position each time.

- maybe if the gun was able to pivot at the rear (so that the barrel moves vertically only) and the front was held by horizontal rubbers - say 16mm at 100% elongation - then the front of the gun could still kick a little - differentiating guns with bad recoil from those without by the vertical grouping of shots.

im planning to build my own frankengun soon so ive though about this a bit - wont have a testing mech up and running till christmas.
 
Hey if we use this construction netting, can I feed it to make it stay in one place??rofl And I hear that the East Coast nets are really stupid, so do we all shoot West Coast :king nets? And use tanks!??


sven
 
Ideally, this sounds like a really good idea, but realistically......... way too many factors to interfere with accuracy of results.

We have inconsistency of aiming, different water conditions(fresh vs. salt, good vs. bad vis., pool vs. surge), egos, etc.

Benchmounting is a nice idea, but very very unlikely without great cost. I used to benchmount paintball guns to test since there were 2 screw holes on the bottom - a simple matter to mount it to a bench-mounted steel plate. Spearguns.... not so easy or feasible for people around the world to create identical setups - no to mention every gun has different physical characteristics.

Sorry to sound like such a downer, but I think it's a great idea and we should just re-work it to be something fun - not count on it as a contest(previous IYA idea) or as even a semi-accurate means of collecting data.

Knowing how many guns you Key Krazers have, why don't you organize a shooting contest there(with diff. people trying different guns in addition to their own)! That way some of you can satisfy your egos while humiliating sven :hmm and we'd be able to get a pretty large selection of guns tested It'd also provide consistency in the fact that everybody would be shooting on the stupid East Coast nets rofl

Or we could always go to plan 2 - just find a way to smuggle all our guns to IYA to test & write a book about
 
alright, guys....

anyone take any statistics classes? how about random probabilities? stochastic signals?

c'mon... you have a target w/ 1.5 inch squares. you have YOUR gun that YOU'RE happy w/ and used to shooting. if you shoot a series of 5 test runs w/ 10 or so shots in each run at 10-18 feet (depending on the gun), you'll get a pretty good idea of how YOUR gun is shooting. :blackeye

if you can consistently group a series of shots on the target from a certain (lengthy) distance, then i think it would be safe to assume that that specific gun CAN operate w/ that sort of consistency.

i think what we're looking for is results from people w/ experience w/ their favorite guns. in the article from HSD, the same person shot all the guns tested. they admitted, many guns shot differently, but in reality, it didn't necessarily deem them "poor quality" guns, right?

personally, i know i could post some amazing results w/ my c1 riffe. i know others might dissagree w/ it's accuracy, but if i could consistently hit the target at so many feet, it's certainly evident that it IS possible to have such accuracy, no? granted, i've been shooting that gun for 3 years now, but it just goes to show the potential these guns have. do you see how IYA might be able to post the best results w/ the MT0? but, i might not be able to hit the broad side of a barn w/ an MT0! :blackeye so, that's why i think the results should come from guns that you have quite a bit of experience w/.

if everyone wants, i'd be willing to send you a target to shoot at. that way everyone would be shooting at the same thing. although it might take half a year to get one to IYA.

anderson
 
very kind offer but what about just a piece of plastic or something with concentric circles drawn on with a permanent pen - marked in metric measurements of course (anything else would just be silly wouldnt it ) - is easy to make your own if you dont have a compass.
basically an underwater archery target marked in cm.
seems logical to me
 
ok having rethought that i suppose any target the spear has to puncture is going to be ripped to shreds pretty quick
so im starting to agree with your target type - for now
would be nice to have smaller holes though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…