|
|||||||||
|
Home | Forums | Register | Gallery | FAQ | Calendar |
Retailers | Community | News/Info | International Retailers | IRC | Today's Posts |
|
Thread Tools |
August 11th, 2009, 21:23 | #16 |
What little I have heard about the ARES rifle has only been positive. Not quite at the level of a tuned Maruzen L96, but
Groupings at 90 feet (linked from Arnies) - As for the Well G96(d) clone, I haven't been able to dredge up ANYTHING other than some useless initial impressions. Like you, I want to know more about the ARES/STAR version and its newer Well clone. I too have been hearing a lot of "I heard <from my cousin> that a lot of the STAR AW 338's are failing", but I'm also having trouble finding any source for the claim. I don't know what to think.
__________________
Nabisco Lobstrosity -------------------- Last edited by Nabisco_Lobstrosity; August 11th, 2009 at 21:45.. |
|
November 15th, 2009, 09:24 | #17 |
when i first saw this gun i made a big mess in my pants i love L96's and have been looking for a cheaper gas version for a while it looks amazing
|
|
November 15th, 2009, 12:25 | #18 |
Le Roi des poissons d'avril
|
Acuracy is CRAP.
The G96 acuracy test at 8m suck. 8m is 26 feets. Any stock AEG is more acurate than that. For comparison, my M24 hit consistently a gatorate bottle at 100fts, that's smaller than a 8.5x11 sheet of paper. That mean I can hit a human head boyond 150fts pretty easely. But the rifle look pretty sweet. I wish my Maruzen L96 would have better details in it.
__________________
Vérificateur d'âge: Terrebonne |
November 15th, 2009, 14:18 | #19 |
i agree the accuacy is pretty poor my warrior L96 could hit a metal pole from 20 meters and the pole which was about 3 cm thick that had great accuacy
|
|
November 15th, 2009, 14:48 | #20 | |
Quote:
|
||
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|