OK, forgive me for what must seem like the eight-hundredth "what's the best" electronic trainer question, but I have read all of the prior posts on this subject, both current and archived, and have read all the other info on the web that I could find, and couldn't really find the info I am looking for.
That being said, is there a particular trainer that stands out as being the most beneficial for training in rapid fire? I know that for traditional stationary aiming/shooting practice they're all pretty similar, but for incorporating an electronic trainer with dry-fire practice of the rapid fire course, including bringing the pistol on target from 45 degrees and moving through each target, do any stand out above the others? My concern is that analyzing shots and timing (especially on the first shot rising from the 45 deg. point) using anything other than an official-style RF target is not going to be that beneficial. I saw that Noptel has sensors designed for RF targets, and that you can actually live fire at 25m with the Noptel. Anyone have any experience with this, or with using a Noptel (dry fire or live fire) at ranges beyond 10m?
Thanks,
Ted
Electronic Trainers and Rapid Fire
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
Forum rules
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
All any electronic timer is going to be able to tell you is:
1. Your reaction time from an audible start signal to the first shot.
2. Your reaction time from the first shot to the time your next shot is fired, for each subsequent shot (i.e., your split times).
3. Whether you fired a late shot after an audible ending signal.
That's it.
Every shot timer I've seen can do all of the above except provide an ending signal (but most will allow you to set an audible ending signal). Some will also have an input jack to allow you to use a visual start/end signal. IIRC, some have memory to allow you to store previous strings. At least one (PACT Mk. IV) will also work as a chronograph if you buy the additional sensors and screens. Given that Rapid Fire will now have a minimum velocity requirement, the PACT might be the best timer to get.
If you don't care about a chronograph function, a good and relatively cheap timer to get is the CED 6000 (it's what I currently use). There's currently one up for auction on ebay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... eName=WDVW
I don't know the seller, so I can't vouch for it, but you can go ask about it.
1. Your reaction time from an audible start signal to the first shot.
2. Your reaction time from the first shot to the time your next shot is fired, for each subsequent shot (i.e., your split times).
3. Whether you fired a late shot after an audible ending signal.
That's it.
Every shot timer I've seen can do all of the above except provide an ending signal (but most will allow you to set an audible ending signal). Some will also have an input jack to allow you to use a visual start/end signal. IIRC, some have memory to allow you to store previous strings. At least one (PACT Mk. IV) will also work as a chronograph if you buy the additional sensors and screens. Given that Rapid Fire will now have a minimum velocity requirement, the PACT might be the best timer to get.
If you don't care about a chronograph function, a good and relatively cheap timer to get is the CED 6000 (it's what I currently use). There's currently one up for auction on ebay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... eName=WDVW
I don't know the seller, so I can't vouch for it, but you can go ask about it.
-
David Levene
- Posts: 5617
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
- Location: Ruislip, UK
I think Ted was actually asking about electronic trainers rather than electronic timers.sparky wrote:All any electronic timer is going to be able to tell you is........
To answer the original question, I don't know of any of the normal electronic trainers that are suitable for training the Rapid Fire match.
Most will allow you to analyze your first shot but that's where it ends. OK, the follow through tracking may allow you a brief look at your transition from vertical movement to horizontal but that is more by luck than design.
I have live fired on Noptel with the Free pistol (at 50m) and all I would say about it is that what appears on the target was 9 times out of 10 different to what was on the screen.
Spending too time on any of these training machines will result in you becoming good at shooting on a training machine.. I think that they are best used occasionally to identify and rectify specific problems that you might be having.
Spending too time on any of these training machines will result in you becoming good at shooting on a training machine.. I think that they are best used occasionally to identify and rectify specific problems that you might be having.
-
Steve Swartz
J-Team:
Honest, sincere questions and a point to make:
What does the correlation between the actual shot hole have to do with the functions of an electronic trainer?
No, really- the trainer cannot compensate for the random imprecision of an actual firearm/ammo combination. The actual shot hole will always be "off" by the inherent INaccuracy of your gun. The trainer records where the muzzle was pointed- no more, no less (in terms of shot fall)- are the actual shot holes somehow "better" for training?
Think about it- is the unfiltered information about how well you are shooting better or worse than the same information after adding in wind, skirt deformation, cosmic rays, shadows, woodchuck farts, etc????
No, the fall of the actual shot on paper downrage is a combination of things you CAN control and things you CAN'T control.
Ignore the things you CAN'T control (ie, don't even look at the holes on paper) and you will develop more quickly, into a better shooter, than if you paid attention to all the distracting NOISE introduced by things totally outside your control.
The END RESULT of your training is that you execute the proper BEHAVIORS. Holes in paper are a side effect. The electronic trainer focuses you on the BEHAVIORS.
For Rifle- all of the above is still true, but the list of things you CAN and CAN'T control (or need to "manage") is different . . .
Steve Swartz
Honest, sincere questions and a point to make:
What does the correlation between the actual shot hole have to do with the functions of an electronic trainer?
No, really- the trainer cannot compensate for the random imprecision of an actual firearm/ammo combination. The actual shot hole will always be "off" by the inherent INaccuracy of your gun. The trainer records where the muzzle was pointed- no more, no less (in terms of shot fall)- are the actual shot holes somehow "better" for training?
Think about it- is the unfiltered information about how well you are shooting better or worse than the same information after adding in wind, skirt deformation, cosmic rays, shadows, woodchuck farts, etc????
No, the fall of the actual shot on paper downrage is a combination of things you CAN control and things you CAN'T control.
Ignore the things you CAN'T control (ie, don't even look at the holes on paper) and you will develop more quickly, into a better shooter, than if you paid attention to all the distracting NOISE introduced by things totally outside your control.
The END RESULT of your training is that you execute the proper BEHAVIORS. Holes in paper are a side effect. The electronic trainer focuses you on the BEHAVIORS.
For Rifle- all of the above is still true, but the list of things you CAN and CAN'T control (or need to "manage") is different . . .
Steve Swartz
C'mon folks- shooters usually aren't a group not to throw their two-cents in. ;)
In all seriousness, I understand if it's just that know one knows, but I'd really like to hear from folks who have used the Noptel or any of the other trainers as to your best guess whether you think using it in the specific way that I'm thinking of would be worthwhile. (i.e. if nothing else, on the first target to monitor my positioning during the first rise and fire, and then the move to the second target.) Has anyone tried this for duell? I just don't want to spend that amount of money only to realize that it just doesn't provide much of a training benefit in this particular situation.
Thanks,
Ted
In all seriousness, I understand if it's just that know one knows, but I'd really like to hear from folks who have used the Noptel or any of the other trainers as to your best guess whether you think using it in the specific way that I'm thinking of would be worthwhile. (i.e. if nothing else, on the first target to monitor my positioning during the first rise and fire, and then the move to the second target.) Has anyone tried this for duell? I just don't want to spend that amount of money only to realize that it just doesn't provide much of a training benefit in this particular situation.
Thanks,
Ted
Last edited by Ted Bell on Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
metermatch
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 4:30 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
Rapid Fire Training.
I understand why you would like a trainer for rapid fire, as I had the same idea. But after spending a week at the OTC in Colorado and talking with Sergey Luzov, a trainer is a limited usefulness/waste of time for rapid fire, except maybe for the first shot to see your rise. The reason is because much of the challenge of shots 2 through 5 is managing the recoil, which you won't get dry fire/electronic trainer. Perhaps a dry fire gun can be created that simulates recoil? Use the trainer to improve trigger technique and perhaps rise to the first shot. After that, get a bunch of cases of ammo. Jeff
Scatt for dueling
I have a Scatt system and use it occasionally for what was refered to as the dueling phase. It is good for seeing the lift and trigger squeeze. The Scatt has the voice commands and the red and green light to simulate the electronic targets.
What that could possibly do for shots two to five, and even exactly how well the dueling phase compares to shot #1 in RF, well...
What that could possibly do for shots two to five, and even exactly how well the dueling phase compares to shot #1 in RF, well...
-
Ed Hall
A far-fetched Idea, Perhaps, and a Little About the Noptel
I've been known for coming up with strange ideas and I also train with my Rika for NRA Conventional Rapid Fire strings which are five shots in ten seconds on a single target. To perform this with the Rika and my .22, I have to adjust many things in the software so that it will register each shot as separate. I also use a string to cycle the slide on my .22 between shots.
Now for my "strange thought" about working with multiple targets:
I have my Rika set up in less than optimal space and therefore use a mirror against the far wall with the target/transmitter mounted on a shelf beside me. Again, I use a single target for my type of training. But, what if five mirrors were used in the manner I'm using one? I can envision a single target/transmitter located beside me and five mirrors placed appropriately to display five separate images of the single target/transmitter. This should produce the same effect as the single mirror does for me. The five shot string could advance to each image from each mirror and each should produce results on the Rika system. You should be able to come away with five single shots registered on the Rika from the five shots of the string. The first should show the trace coming up from below the bull with the recovery moving to the left edge. Then each subsequent shot should show the start coming in from the edge and the finish heading off the other edge.
Now, the areas that may need some work:
The latest software has a rather wide pickup area for the signal. A shade may be needed on the receiver to obstruct the signal from adjacent mirrors. Perhaps a cardboard tube placed onto the front like a sunshade for a spotting scope could be used.
The software would need to have the replay function turned off and probably the times would need to be adjusted to minimal so a shot can be considered finished by the system. Otherwise it may not move on to (and catch) the next shot.
Interpretation would need to be based on each individual shot. There would be no way to track (via the present software) data about the strings or certain shots, like the fourth shot in all the strings, etc. But, this could be accessed and manually compiled.
All-in-all, I think this could be a workable solution to dry fire Rapid Fire training, but would take a bit of effort. Whether the gain is worth the work would be hard to say. My Rika has never been good for any live fire training other than AP for me.
Now that I've aired my "strange idea" with the Rika for dry fire, let me hit on my memory of the Noptel system. This is from years ago and may no longer be accurate, but IIRC, the Noptel uses an integral transceiver at the gun and a reflector at the target. It also is usable to at least 50 meters (I think it goes out much further), and can be used with live fire to include .45 caliber handguns. If my memory is valid, it should be easy to set up reflectors on each target and go. The only consideration would again be ensuring signals from adjacent targets are obstructed. The cost difference is considerable, but the Noptel may very well be the answer to live Rapid Fire training.
Take Care,
Ed Hall
http://www.airforceshooting.org/
http://www.geocities.com/ed_ka2fwj/
Now for my "strange thought" about working with multiple targets:
I have my Rika set up in less than optimal space and therefore use a mirror against the far wall with the target/transmitter mounted on a shelf beside me. Again, I use a single target for my type of training. But, what if five mirrors were used in the manner I'm using one? I can envision a single target/transmitter located beside me and five mirrors placed appropriately to display five separate images of the single target/transmitter. This should produce the same effect as the single mirror does for me. The five shot string could advance to each image from each mirror and each should produce results on the Rika system. You should be able to come away with five single shots registered on the Rika from the five shots of the string. The first should show the trace coming up from below the bull with the recovery moving to the left edge. Then each subsequent shot should show the start coming in from the edge and the finish heading off the other edge.
Now, the areas that may need some work:
The latest software has a rather wide pickup area for the signal. A shade may be needed on the receiver to obstruct the signal from adjacent mirrors. Perhaps a cardboard tube placed onto the front like a sunshade for a spotting scope could be used.
The software would need to have the replay function turned off and probably the times would need to be adjusted to minimal so a shot can be considered finished by the system. Otherwise it may not move on to (and catch) the next shot.
Interpretation would need to be based on each individual shot. There would be no way to track (via the present software) data about the strings or certain shots, like the fourth shot in all the strings, etc. But, this could be accessed and manually compiled.
All-in-all, I think this could be a workable solution to dry fire Rapid Fire training, but would take a bit of effort. Whether the gain is worth the work would be hard to say. My Rika has never been good for any live fire training other than AP for me.
Now that I've aired my "strange idea" with the Rika for dry fire, let me hit on my memory of the Noptel system. This is from years ago and may no longer be accurate, but IIRC, the Noptel uses an integral transceiver at the gun and a reflector at the target. It also is usable to at least 50 meters (I think it goes out much further), and can be used with live fire to include .45 caliber handguns. If my memory is valid, it should be easy to set up reflectors on each target and go. The only consideration would again be ensuring signals from adjacent targets are obstructed. The cost difference is considerable, but the Noptel may very well be the answer to live Rapid Fire training.
Take Care,
Ed Hall
http://www.airforceshooting.org/
http://www.geocities.com/ed_ka2fwj/