Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Countermeasure Testing & Related Videos' started by OBeerWANKenobi, Nov 5, 2018.
This is exactly it...the closure rate is faster thus less time of gun on target.
yep, i thought there was another thread
I have to disagree from my testing, watch my vids. I can creep 10 mph and get PT's at -400ft. Once i break 35+ mph,zero Pt's all the way on the next run. This is from hundreds of hours of testing on 3 heads. Every gun and placement is different. I sent the videos to Ming. They also suggested doing over 30 mph and saw similar results.
Yeah results will vary. This is why we need more testing. More data points will help us understand it better. Just with my testing I saw an improvement, but mathematically the improvements corresponded with the distance the vehicle covered extra due to the higher speed.
Thanks for the testing!
Superb tracking ability at higher speeds is an acquired talent...
I have watched some of your videos & still disagree w/ your perceived premise of improved JTG performance of TMG A-15 when above 30mph. Here's 2 of them that demonstrate why your perception is misguided:
Anecdotally, I can vouch for the over 30mph thing as we saw that ourselves with DETC when testing my setup. @darkpenguin was the shooter though so I can't say what he saw from his perspective. Maybe he could chime in and share observations that might help. I do know that at one point he was getting instant punch through on mine at closer distances until I sped it up to over 30, but I'm not sure how far out, distance wise, that it was the case because we proceeded to do the rest of the testing at 30mph plus. In other words, we were seeing the same thing but my mind is open as to WHY we were seeing this.
I understand the point that closing with the gun faster allows less opportunity for punch through due to the faster time you reach the gun. There are other conceivable reasons that this could be the case though too. I guess more testing is required. Some time when the weather is nice and both of us have time, maybe I can talk Mr. Penguin into shooting my car and I can have him drive and shoot myself to see what he was seeing.
Shooting traffic through a viewfinder or shooting traffic while looking at your phone screen while trying to record are 2 very different things. I've tried myself this week to record some of my testing and I can tell you right now that my shooting abilities cannot be judged by what you see on my videos.
Cannot or should not ? lol
Groan, grammar Nazi...
Thanks for sharing. You tempting me to get TMG for wife car lol
Distance of punch throughs didn't seem to matter so long as speed was <30mph. I think I got him once at 900ft+, but can't recall if that was front or rear. Most were <400ft, due to him slowing down as he approached to talk to me about the run.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Any time you test an install, it is important to take notes so you can easily compare and see if there are any differences when testing again in the same or different locations, different shooter, etc
It was once on a taillight at around 900 while I started around a corner, I do believe.
This testing was not done for the sake of testing and documenting but only to make sure my car was solid. Since it was solid against all the non VPR guns around here I was happy with it. I didn't have to change the install so there was not a need for detailed notes. It's now gotten more scrutiny than we ever expected. All that being said, I do have all the testing on dashcam, including when I stopped and chatted with darkpenguin so I can go back through and get actual results if I were so inclined.
If we get time to get back together and shoot my car again anytime soon, I'll focus on the discrepancies that we have with other testers and document them.
Good testing practices include documentation (we wouldnt have it any other way here at RDF!). As some say "picture or it didnt happen", Here is a link to a lidar testing template that MANY here use: www.rdforum.org: LIDAR Testing Template
There may be a newer version somewhere, but you get the idea....