2013 "Marks" Convention

[DX]

I have several proposals for standardizing "marks" among water guns. Every site has a slightly different set and some have stricter criteria than others, resulting in confusion. I know that iSoaker is going to post the same thing as usual, about how marks are a bad way to differentiate soakers. This topic isn't about whether it's a good system or not, but how to to standardize it and end the confusion. The proposals I have do swing his way, though, with many of the differences we call "marks" no longer being used - either because they are not reliable or because they just plain don't matter.

Proposed split of the current concept of "marks" into marks and versions, where:

Mark = Significant, consistent difference(s) in performance and/or ease of opening/modding

Version = Color variation, sticker or screw placement variation, Name changes, Different rez cap styles/colors, different series release, etc. More informal and minor than a mark.

Under this system, things like the CPS 2000 mk1 and mk2 would remain marks, but the XP 150 two peg, 150 quarter twist, and 150 classic would just be versions and referred to as plain old 150s.

Blaster-by-blaster proposals:

CPS 1-3-5: Currently 2 marks
MK1: "Labeled CPS Wipeout" or "Super Soaker Wipeout"
MK2: Labeled "CPS 1-3-5"

CPS 1-3-5: Proposed no marks and 2 versions
^ The Wipeout should be called a version until more data on its performance is available.

CPS 1000: Currently 3-4 marks
MK1?: Nozzle not glued, Easiest to mod, mid-high HPL, best performance (in theory)
MK2?: (Is the nozzle glued?) Trigger harder to pull, hard to mod, bad performance
MK3?: Nozzle glued, hardest to mod, low HPL, (how is the stock performance?)
MK4: "Super Shooter CPS 2000", Nozzle can be unscrewed, many cosmetic differences, worst performance

CPS 1000: Proposed 2 main marks, 3 overall
MK1: Nozzle not glued, Easiest to mod, proven high HPL
MK2: Nozzle glued, hardest to mod, suspected low HPL
MK3: "Super Shooter CPS 2000", Nozzle can be unscrewed, many cosmetic differences, worst performance

^ Lots of conflicting information exists on 1000 marks or they are being applied in different orders. After reviewing all the data I can find, I don't think the existing MK2 should stand alone as a mark. The Super Shooter 2000 should remain a mark of the 1000 because what if you find one without the sticker? It's still going to differ in both performance and internals from a real 1000, yet not enough to say it's another gun entirely.

CPS 1200: Currently 4 marks
MK1: Yellow, nozzle cover not glued, high HPL, good performance
MK2: Yellow, nozzle cover glued, hard to mod, low HPL, bad performance, sometimes a hidden screw under trigger grip
MK3: Silver, nozzle cover not glued, (high HPL?), good performance, 2 notches on a thick (>4mm) trigger
MK4: Yellow, nozzle cover glued, (low HPL?), bad performance, 1 notch on a thin (<4mm) trigger

CPS 1200: Proposed 2 marks and 2 versions
MK1: Yellow or silver, nozzle cover not glued, high HPL, good performance, may have 2 notches on a thick trigger
MK2: Yellow or silver, nozzle cover glued, hard to mod, low HPL, bad performance, sometimes a hidden screw under trigger grip, may have 1 notch on a thin trigger

^ Since the MK1/3 and 2/4 are identical other than color, why bother maintaining these differences? This is one model where it makes sense to divorce the mark from the version.

CPS 1500: Currently 4 marks?
MK1?: Worst performance?
MK2?: Bad performance?
MK3?: Pump cap glued, Good performance?
MK4?: Sticker reversed?, no air shots? Best performance?

CPS 1500: Proposed 2 marks
MK1: Nozzle cover glued, type 1 nozzle selector plate
MK2: Nozzle cover not glued, type 2 nozzle selector plate

^1500 marks need a LOT of work. After studying mine, I came to the conclusion that the only consistent, reliable differences are whether the nozzle cover is glued and what size the nozzle selector plate is. The plates are not compatible and cannot be swapped between 2 of the marks. The pump caps vary between screw-off and pry-off at random, but since neither involve glue, it doesn't matter. The new MK2 is the current MK4, but air shots and sticker placement cannot be trusted. Performance does not seem to vary much between 1500s. The proposed 1 and 2 have labeled/not labeled nozzle cover differences, but this also cannot be trusted, as people swap out parts.

CPS 2000: Currently 2 marks:
MK1: Better performance, shorter bladder stretches more, pressure gauge passes all 5 nubs
MK2: Worse performance, longer bladder stretches less, pressure gauge goes to 4th nub

CPS 2000: Proposed no changes other than making the Euro 2000 a version

^ Stickers cannot be trusted! MK2s can have either Constant or Air Pressure stickers (I have the picture to prove this). Whether the reservoir cap has a tether can't be trusted. The performance also can't be trusted. MK1s are more consistent, while MK2s are more variable. The average MK1 is more powerful than the average MK2, but an above average MK2 is more powerful than any MK1. MK2s exhibit huge variation in range from as bad as nearly 46ft to as good as nearly 55ft.

CPS 2100: Currently 3 marks
MK1: Sanded down seam on reservoir back, pump cap not glued, largest bladder, best performance
MK2: Intact seam on reservoir back, pump cap glued, fake nozzle cover, hard to mod, low HPL, worst performance
MK3: Rectangular/square ridges on reservoir back, pump cap not glued, moderate to mid-high HPL, good performance

CPS 2100: Proposed no changes

^ The existing SSCentral descriptions are good. Screw position, sticker position, and height cannot be trusted. There is no MK4, any "mixed mark MK4s" were really MK2s.

CPS 2500: Currently 2 marks
MK1: Plain nozzle selector
MK2: Nozzle sizes labeled on selector

CPS 2500: Proposed no marks

^ Because the nozzle selector cannot be trusted. They break and people swap out parts. Also, there are no other verified differences.

CPS 2700: Currently 3 marks
MK1: Orange
MK2: Silver
MK3: Ask iSoaker

CPS 2700: Proposed no marks, 2-3 versions

^ No performance or modding differences have been found to suggest that they aren't more than color versions.

CPS 4100: Currently 2 marks
MK1: 2002 release, Easy trigger valve, seam on reservoir back
MK2: 2003 release, Tougher trigger valve, rectangular/square ridges on reservoir back

CPS 4100: Proposed no marks

^ The MK1 trigger is not what's strong, it's the valve that makes you not have to pull it as hard. I would not trust this any longer, especially since the actual triggers are not different. An MK1 with a tough valve will have its trigger snap just as easily as a 2 (Like Nibordude's!) I haven't been able to find a verifiable performance or modding difficulty difference between marks.

It's like 3:30 AM so I'm going to stop here for now.

[soakinader]

If there is something that I can absolutely agree with, it's A: Sticker placement, and B: ability to air shoot that should have nothing to do with what version or mark a gun is. Performance is also a mixed bag and should be used to describe different marks very carefully.
Also, there is at least one more CPS 1500[/1700] mark, mine had the nozzle cap SCREWED on as opposed to glue or whatnot. I have never seen that before.
While we're at it, I have seen CPS 2100 with yellow and with orange/red reservoirs. Is there an actual colour variation or is this just fading?
And furthermore... I want to see a picture of the "CPS Wipeout".

[HBWW]

Here's all I know:

There are 3 versions of the 1200 I've worked with:

- Yellow/purple, smaller screw heads, back of pistol grip textured/painted, nozzle cap made of slightly thinner, more flexible plastic.
- Same/similar as above, but silver/purple/black instead. Same kind of nozzle cap. Pump is a bit stiffer but it may just be normal variations throughout the same thing.
- Yellow/purple, larger diameter screw heads, back of pistol grip detatches, nozzle cap made of slightly thicker, but slightly more brittle plastic.

All nozzle caps are glued and snapped on, from my experience. Pump caps snap and may be accompanied by glue, not sure. Also unsure on performance differences. All seem to have pretty high HPL, quite higher than any 1000.

That leaves two 1000's I've worked with: The one I have, and the one I used from you at MOAB. Only difference I noticed was colors and how likely the pump would cause the PRV to squeak a little. The PRV doesn't squeak on mine if pumping slowly, whereas on yours it squeaks no matter what. May have to do with different balloon quantities or different HPL's, but the difference seems very slight and may be insignificant.

For 1500: Not sure what you mean by "no air shots", because mechanically, that's impossible. Maybe it has to do with the pump seal being defective? I've had two Max-I FF's and the former's pump seal got shifted around and couldn't pump any air, but this had nothing to do with the mark. Anyway, the two I've worked with were from you. The broken one had snapped pump cap and snapped/glued nozzle cap (I had to split the nozzle cap in half to get it to open), and the second one had a threaded pump cap and easy-snap nozzle cap that detached quite easily. You already knew this, but it's all I have on them that I've picked up on. (Didn't have the second 1500 open long enough to tell the difference between the nozzle selector plate.)

4100: I thought the re-release was in 2004? Odd. Anyway, the only 4100's I've worked with had triggers already broken and missing completely when I got them. It's pretty pathetic that they'd waste so much worth of good parts and materials by specifically designing the triggers to break, just so they can force people to buy the shitty blasters they'd release later on. The valves don't seem that stiff, but there's nothing to compare it to.

If only those who actually made these things could help us out and clear things up.

[the oncoming storm]

Most of the Lanarmi designers now work for buzz bee toys, but I'm not at all sure how they would take being asked questions about them.

[marauder]

I mean, this seems like it makes a lot of sense, except it's going to take some time referring to 150s as 2 peg or quarter twist or whatever. There's no way I'm going to remember that. But this is about notable differences in performance, so that makes sense. I also think that it's good to nix the 2 marks of the 1-3-5 since we really know nothing about the original "Wipeout" version other than from pictures.

Here's more marks:

SC 600 mk1 tan body, black detailing, inferior power as attested to by both SSC and myself. I've tested 3 orange/black with max range equaling 33 feet. FWIW, I'm not exactly sure why we call this the first mark. Is there any evidence that the tan and black model came out first? The WWF guns have a stock range of 32 feet (I've tested 4) and came out a year later in 2000. I'm not sure if this suggests that the Stone Cold and Undertaker are using some of the same parts as the tan/black 600 or if it's just coincidence.

SC 600 mk2 tan body, grey detailing, superior power as attested to by both SSC and myself. I've tested 4 of these, 3 quite recently. Max range was 37 feet for all tan and grey models tested. Again, I'm not sure if this was really the second mark released or if it was first or if they were released both at the same time and came from different plants. It's just tradition to call this mk2. The only hint we have is that the Super Soaker booklets featured the tan/black version which would suggest that that was the original (mk1).

SC 600 mk3 blue body. I would LOVE to get my hands on this. I've never tested it. SSC says that performance matches the mk2. I think mk3 is the correct designation. There is some confusion out there over whether or not this is a European version. I think it's just a version that was released in 2000 but saw limited release in the US and Canada. My reason for that is that in 2000 the SC 400 was also rereleased in new, brighter colors (yellow and blue) and that I don't remember anything about a blue 600 until 2001.

SS 100 mk1 the original

SS 100 mk2 larger PC and some other internal differences that I don't remember. This was primarily released in orange with a green reservoir but also saw some limited release in blue and yellow. The mk2 was released from 1997-1999. I don't remember the blue and yellow mk2 until 1999. It may have come out in 97 and 98 also, but I can't vouch for it. It is structurally identical to the orange and green version.

SC 500 mk1 labeled air pressure, with black detailing.
SC 500 mk2 labeled constant pressure, with blue detailing
SC 500 mk3 labeled constant pressure, purple and lime with blue detailing
More testing needs to be done on 500s. According to SSC the tan/black detailing was released first and has inferior power. The 500 (mk1) that I tested shot only 32 feet, which is the same range I got on the WWF guns, and pretty close to the 33 ft range I got on the tan/black 600s. However, iSoaker got only 23 ft on the tan/blue (mk2) version, which is reallly low. There will be some variance from gun to gun, but that's a major difference. We don't have any stats on the purple and lime version, which I believe to be a 2000 release. Much more testing needs to be done on 500s.

[Drenchenator]

This is really needed.

When I made the SSC marks guide a few years ago, it was basically an aggregate of a lot of other guides. Ben and I didn't have too many guns, so it was difficult to make content, so I concentrated on some of the more superficial aspects (like paintjobs and detailing). This means that I split up what would amount to the same gun into many different marks, even if the only changes were the coloring (see the Max-D 2000 as an example).

We really need to concentrate more on the structural differences between the different marks. These are the differences that that affect performance make a difference when somebody is trying to identify a mark. What I would like to see (but I couldn't do myself) when be a whole bunch of pictures comparing difference structural parts that help distinguish marks. I tried to do this with some of the CPS guns, but we didn't have enough content to do it for all the guns.

[SEAL]

The way I look at it, if a certain blaster is different than another with the same name, then it's a mark, but if it's the same exact blaster only colored differently, then it's a version. I don't think performance is a very good way to differentiate marks, because it varies individually. Additionally, if a different mark/version of X blaster has a different name, then it should be referred to as such, and not a mark/version of X blaster. For example, isn't the real name of the SS 100 "MK2", the "SS 100 New and Improved"? I guess the only downside to that is that it takes a little longer to type, but I think it's a little less confusing.

Can't really give much input on individual blasters though. I do have multiples of several blasters, but I haven't noticed any significant differences between them.

[marauder]

In theory, calling something by what it was released sounds like a good idea, but in practice I think it's best to be more flexible.

For instance, the Monster X was originally released as the Monster. They changed the name to Monster X when they released the next Monster (later to be changed around and rereleased as the 4100). However if you were to make a post about your monster or wanting to get a monster all of us would think you were referring to the smallest gun of the Monster series. It's so much less confusing to call it a "Monster X," than to write "original monster" or "Monster 2000" or "Monster but not the 4100 one."

In regards to the second release of the SS 100, yes, it did say "New and improved" on the sticker and on the box, but was that even an official name? I thought it was just released as the Super Soaker 100, but with "New and Improved" written on the box so people would be more likely to buy it. If we went by everything that was written on the box we'd also be calling the SC 500 (black pump) the "Air Pressure SC 500," when in fact, it's not even air pressure.

I prefer Monster X mk1 for the original release of the Monster X, which at the time was called the Monster (see how annoying it is to write that?) and SS 100 mk2 for "SS 100 New and Improved."

[isoaker]

Never liked marks, but I understand why others do. IMO, Marks should be strictly based on structural differences and not on performance or colours. Blasters like the CPS2000 and XP95 have easily identifiable differences. Other like the CPS1500s and differences between glued and non-glued caps make sense as well.

[marauder]

Also, FWIW I feel like marks are very good for just every day forum talk. It's not like we are saying these are official editions. I for one believe that there's a lot of differences out there that we do not know of, but marks help us sort out the big differences that we do know about and make it easier for us to more accurately convey what we are talking about when we speak.

[soakinader]

Other like the CPS1500s and differences between glued and non-glued caps make sense as well.

AND screwed on caps.