SpudFiles

SpudFiles Official Innovative Design Contest Results

The votes have been cast by the users, and the results are in!

First Place Winner goes to Cannon #1, the Tatical Interballistic Tennisball System built by SpudFiles user Chenslee. Chenslee has won a $300 UltimateSpudGun.com giftcard!

Second Place Winner goes to Cannon #4, the Cobra Striker built by SpudFiles user Moonbogg. Moonboog has won a $100 UltimateSpudGun.com giftcard along with a $30 cash prize from SpudFiles!

Thank you to all who entered! There were some great ideas used in all entries but there can only be so many winners! Lets check out all of the entries...

1st Place Winner - Cannon #1 built by SpudFiles user Chenslee
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/cannon- ... 19142.html

2nd Place Winner - Cannon #4 built by SpudFiles user Moonbogg
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/cannon- ... 19146.html

Runner Up Cannon #2 built by SpudFiles user refuzit
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/cannon- ... 19144.html

Runner Up Cannon #3 built by SpudFiles user al-xg
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/cannon- ... 19145.html

Runner Up Cannon #5 built by ramses
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/cannon- ... 19147.html

As commented elsewhere, shame there were so few cannons to choose from, but brilliant effort from those who rose to the challenge, good luck to all

So can the judges cast a vote? Or is that being greedy?

This is a full public vote, everyone can vote including myself 8) however I typically reserve my vote as a tie breaker in the off chance one should occur.

do i get a sticker that says i voted today? but seriously it was a good effort on all the canons.

I must say it is a pity that design 3 didn't get built as well as the other ones. I am fairly certain that if built well enough it could of won the contest, then again there is always next year.
On a related note i now regret not entering, the competition was small, however entering isn't possible at the moment for my anyway as I don't have the drill press essential to build my design.

Overall a great effort and a congratulate all the builders. It's interesting to see how an award can encourage so much effort. And even though only one builder will eventually take the prize for them selves, i think all designers deserve a tap on the back.

I hope that next year we get more submissions.

Also, its funny how most the submissions are either hybrids or combustions...I would like to see a few more BBMG's and pneu's...

Alright happy spudding, and good luck to all!

all u guys that enter pat on the back great job to all but i think the two best not to hurt any of your fealings is the are 1 and 3 .

but best of luckto every one


now who gets the trophy

[/url]http://www.fototime.com/97F2A7B1F3DE081/orig.jpg[url][/url]

I am truely impressed by the build quality of most of these contestants. The rifle in particular was my personal favorite, mostly because it is the first launcher to ever get the 'rifle' look right. The stock was a tad off, but all else it was beautiful.


Wish I had the time to enter the damage contest. Just last week I found out my physics department has these 1kg weights that look like the perfect projectiles after you unscrew the hook from the top. I can see it now... An otherwise ordinary big-bore pneumatic, with a 2" piston valve and gigantic tanks, sending a bullet-shaped kilo of steel downrange at 500 fps. =) If only....


I envy those with a work ethic (or a machine shop). Converting my failed 25mm smoothbore rifle to a .50-cal nerf gun is taking longer than it should. (But it ejects its cartridges beautifully!)

Anyhow, congrats to ALL contestants. Completing a project at all, let alone entering a contest, is a prize all its own.

Number 1 I'd say. Number 3 was good, but unfortunately not implemented extremely neatly, which is a great shame. Cannon 4 was very nice but not extremely new. I liked 2 and 5; however 5 seemed a little 'run of the mill', 2 was built extremely nicely but it was still not hugely innovative. My vote goes to TITS.

Oh how I wish I could have had mine finished in time. Good work everyone!

both number 4 and 2 look cool, have some nice features added but they aren't that innovative...
I really like the way 2 is built... it looks like a real rifle and seems to have decent accuracy... but the chronograph on it seems to be added just for the purpose of making this gun more creative before entering the innovative design contest

I don't know why but no 4 seems to be a slightly upgraded version of cobra venom... nice and well made but is as innovative as no 5

no 1 seems to be quite innovative... I don't like combustion guns but this one is different... it's quite compact and makes the best use of materials

I have to agree with inonickname and admit that no 3 would get my vote if it was as well built as no 1,2 and 4 (but its ghettoness wouldn't matter if it worked flawlessly)

Man If I look at all five entries same time,
My pressure will rise to the point my lady will wonder about my computer usage!!!
Got 2 favorites Hmmm... wish we could vote on a scale.
How much longer to vote? 8)
EDIT: Oh, got till 9-20-09. I have 3 favorites really.

Man, this was a hard choice I love them all!

Dang, I'd have been in with a good shot if I'd got round to it sooner. No matter, I'll have a cannon to post in the near future

Nice to see the tennisball launcher I was watching the build log of got in on time.

Dang, I'd have been in with a good shot if I'd got round to it sooner. No matter, I'll have a cannon to post in the near future ...

Still time to enter the "most power" contest.
I feel the same about a design of mine that's been sluggishly coming along.
Not to mention I'm getting sidetracked on a (faster build) BBMG that I could possibly $ell to a select few (d*mn economy/work situation).

Most power should be interesting and since it seems dependant on ammo design (?) to get moar power, it will be easier for good ammo designers (?). 8)

I would be interested in comparing these highly competitive entries in terms of achieved projectile range. Do we have information to allow that comparison? If not, then what figures do we have?