|Paintball News The latest in paintball news brought to you by the oldest independent publication in paintball and the best paintball site on the web - The Paintball News and MCB|
| ||Thread Tools|
|09-21-2012, 12:37 PM||#31 (permalink)|
Join Date: May 2009
Those clear feed necks arent too bad from what I've seen. As mentioned the only real problem I've seen with those is that they are infact too thick to fit in alot of the older style non clamping feed necks without sanding them down... Sanding them down too much is probably one of the factor's that actually leads to the failure of them in the first place. Is it a Rotor quality feed neck, no... but it does the job at the low end price point just fine.
|09-21-2012, 01:44 PM||#32 (permalink)|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New York City
What's the problem of using the same plastic as the Rotor, except a few extra cents for material costs?
The problem is that they are trying to include lifetime into the product's design - and that time cannot exceed 2-3 years.
Plastic can be made to not age (vs. sunlight), and not break from self-weight falling. Without intentional smashing, or landing on top of it on a dive, a good piece of plastic can surpass it's owner.
The makers of most low-mid level loaders clearly don't want their products to be passed down from generation to generation. Before the Rotor, that wasn't even a selling point for high-end.
The part about sanding it down? It's not accidental. They are not "n00bs" they are insiders, they know this stuff - they know you do it and void warranty and break it earlier.
They want you to buy one each season and feel good about yourself.
Filling up landfills with disposable products is obviously a "small" and acceptable price to pay for steady profits.
Why bother making reliable and reasonable products, like, for example 100 and 150 round 10bps loaders for rentals and limited paint players - and why simplify designs to keep price and maintenance low?
Why try to grow the market when you can just milk all the fat-cat wallet warriors and drop the third-rate leftovers on the budget baller?
It worked well so far - carry on!
Last edited by Tenet; 09-21-2012 at 01:48 PM.
|09-21-2012, 02:49 PM||#33 (permalink)|
Paintball Ballistician :P
Join Date: Mar 2008
I've owned eVLution 2s, a 3, and now I own a 4. The problems with the 1-3s were that they were using polycarbonate bodiesand it was simply ill suited for the designs used of the battery door, the loading door, and the body (if I remember correctly, they didn't thread bolts into nuts (like on a halo) but rather screws into polycarbonate-yuck).
The eVLution 4 is a great little loader: The shell has a durability at least as good as a rotor, if not as good as an original revvy (I have both). The feedneck is very robust, combine that with the pushpin teardown, and no battery door. Interestingly enough, unlike all of my previous Evlutions, this door hasn't started cracking apart, on it's own, on the shelf (like the other ones did). I can't say for certain but, it feels like it might be a different plastic than what they were using before (slightly softer?). It is the same design though.
Looking at the pics, I'd say this could be a real good loader. A super-robust feedneck, a body with a shell material similar to, or the same as the revvy/rotor, possible speedfeed options (rather than the homebrew stuff for the earlier models), a decent speed (I dunno about '18BPS' but, it's at least enough for any rec baller) breakbeam eyes and pushpin teardown. Aside from Aesthetics, what's not to like?
Personally what I find most appealing of the Evlution 4 is not going to be in the newest: the rear slung body. The older body style works amazing for Warp Feeds.
As for the feedneck, I don't think Viewloader made them to force us to sand them down (they fit fine in the 98C feednecks and even my warp feed, and I think (I'd have to check to be sure) that it fits in my Deadlywind no-rise feedneck. Viewloader/Kee probably did it for durability given that in generations 1-4, having the body of the loader offset to the rear allows for much more leverage to be applied against the neck of the loader. I'd blame the lack of fitment on some marker / feedneck designers making feednecks only capable of holding skinny little feednecks not much bigger than what was used in the halo (tell me those weren't designed to fail).
FN303SD Totmacher 13 | SP 'Woodstalker' Ion | 1989 Line SI Bushmaster SI Deluxe
First Strike Round Field Listing | External Ballistics, FSRs and PBs | My Feedback
|09-21-2012, 03:29 PM||#34 (permalink)|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Brandon, FL
I like it. I'll probably end up buying one.
|09-22-2012, 05:40 PM||#36 (permalink)|
Join Date: Aug 2008
It will be interesting to see how well this product is really made. At the $60 price point it will fill a huge marketing hole that has existed in the loader market for some time. You have the Tippmann loader at $50....and the Empire Halo Too at $73.95. Honestly the Tippmann loader is really about a $40 loader, but they raised the price this year for no real reason other than to get $10 more in market spot where no other loader was.
I'll be interested to see how it works and lasts. If it's rated well they will sell a bunch.
|09-23-2012, 11:28 AM||#38 (permalink)|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston, Tejas
After looking about, the only Revvies I've seen were the C.A.T. models, or the ones that just don't shut off. No bueno. Can anyone confirm/deny that ACTUAL Revvies are back? I'd love one.
King Kong rules.
|09-23-2012, 06:34 PM||#39 (permalink)|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Oh, and you know how you can often get the blind version for $15 or less sometimes?
It's pretty easy to retrofit one of these with a VL Revolution/Reloader sound-activated board. Makes for a very capable 18+ bps loader Running a VL Force off a Reloader II board.
|09-24-2012, 08:34 AM||#40 (permalink)|
Join Date: Apr 2011
I'm a mag-fed guy myself and not too familiar with all the hoppers out there.
If there's a desire, I could make a cheap little circuit to mod a sound activated feature... think there would be a demand?