I've decided to do a sort of analysis of the new stuff at SS.com and as is follows. Mostly it's questions and observations about the new info provided by ss.com.
Not really much to say here, except a comment on the Monster hose-charger device. It's different than the SC charger, bulkier and sturdier looking, which leads me to wonder if the nozzles on the Monsters and SC are compatible with each others' QFD's. This brings me to three possibilities. One, they are different and incompatible. Two, they are different and compatible, and three, they are the same, but for some reason, SS.com used the old QFD pic for the SC pages. Now, SS.com, despite the 85 and 90, isn't generally likely to do something as silly as making the QFD's different and incompatible, so I don't think it should really be an issue.
Also, the bipod on the XL raises questions. I assume it folds up, because if it didn't, that would just be silly. But does it fold back, and get in the way of pumping, or does it fold forward, and stick out in front? I suppose it's also possible for it to telescope in and get shorter or something, but it's hard to tell with the picture provided.
I'd like to take this opportunity to point out the silliness of quantifying an increase in a number by 200 just by changing the colors of the gun, as is the case with the 1500, excuse me, 1700.
Also, the 2700 looks to me like some kind of alien gun out of Half-Life more than a Super Soaker. It also looks a great deal smaller than the 2500, which I consider a shame because intimidation was, in my opinion, one of the most entertaining aspects of the 2500. Another change that isn't immediately noticed is the change in pressure tank design. The 2500 had a cylindrical pressure tank, which is a significant difference from the 2700, which seems to have a spherical pressure tank, a la the 1000, 1200, 1500, and 1700. Anyone who has opened up a cylindrical pressure tank and a spherical one will note the significant structural difference. Keep this in mind, because I will be discussing pressure tank geometries later on.
The 3200 doesn't seem to be significantly different from the 3000. The only real difference is the shape of the backpack, which really doesn't seem warranted. Larami apparently decided not to listen to us on the count that the backpack was fine, it just needed more reinforced loops for the straps. Ah, well.
I'm not exactly sure what Larami was thinking when they decided to scrap the 500 and 600 entirely and leave the 400 untouched. first of all, the 400 is a reservoir compression contraption, it's been known to have problems with the tank seal cause simply by removing the tank, and is really, in my opinion, not very powerful. I'm not trying to say that the 500 and 600 were perfect, because they weren't. But they could have been modified. They could have been improved upon. They shouldn't have been scrapped.
The Triple Charge is a nice concept, kind of a spare clip system for super soakers. The shape of the gun is a bit weird, looking almost like some freaky kind of plant bulb or something. The two extra tanks fit on to a "harness," and it remains to be seen what, exactly, "harness" entails. Hopefully it won't be a small, can't-possibly-fit-anyone-over-the-age-of-six belt like with the old SS 25.
The Super Charge Big Trouble is quite obviously a remodel of the Power Pak. The thing that confuses me is, once again, the tank. Remember when I told you to keep tank geometry in mind? Well, here we go. As you all know, the Power Pak consisted essentially, of a backpack pressure tank and a hand-held gun, which served, basically, as trigger and nozzle. The Power Pak's backpack consisted of three cylindrical CPS tanks linked by a central tube running along the bottom of the backpack. The Big Trouble, on the other hand, is unlike any other pressure tank I have ever seen. It obviously is a pressure tank, as the hand-held gun is far to small to house and kind of pressure tank, but beyond that, I have no idea. Whether it be a combination of spherical and cylindrical pressure tanks, or one cylindrical tank with a lot of wasted space, or some product of alien technology, I have no idea.
Call me crazy, but the new XP 15 looks startlingly like an XP 15 I saw in my hometown of Huron S. Dak. in Lewis last summer. I remember this occasion because said XP 15 looked so different from any other 15 I had seen. It looks like a good design though, despite the tube intake in the tank, as opposed to the sloping tank of the XP 220.
Speaking of the 220, the sloping tank is a nice touch. One of the greatest peeves I had with the 20 was the tube intake, which left a lot of water still in the tank. I just hope it has the same power of the 20. The 240, on the other hand, still has the tube intake, despite the sloping tank, which leads me to wonder if they simply edited the tube out of the picture of the 220. Also, I'm not sure what to think about the trigger built into the handle. That really seems like it would decrease the stability when squeezing. With a normal trigger, you have three fingers braced against the handle of the gun and one on the trigger. that way, three fingers are keeping the gun steady relative to the rest of your hand. with the new triggers, you only have your thumb bracing the gun. That doesn't appeal to me.
On to the 270. The biggest noticeable change with the 270 is the shape of the pump handle. It's hard to tell if it will be a comfortable change, since there really is no way to establish a sense of scale with the pictures provided. It doesn't look particularly comfortable to me, possibly having been design for smaller hands. I think it would appear more comfortable if it weren't sloped back so far, giving more space for the heel of you hand.
The 310, still sporting a pressure gauge on the side, has undergone some radical changes. One could hardly recognize it from the 105, its ancient ancestor, or the 150, the weapon it allegedly evolved from. It now sport four nozzles, though it remains to be seen how many of hem will actually be useful, and not sprays or "saturators." It, too, sports the new pump handle, and its handle appears to be more comfortable, although, once again, it's hard to establish a scale with the provided pictures.
Well, I won't get into how much I hate wrestling here. I'm going to make my best effort to analyze just the weapons. Please keep two things in mind while reading this section, the first being that I know exactly squat about wrestling and the second being that there is, of course, no way of knowing whether these will be legitimate weapons, or just worthless brand name crap like the Star Wars weapons were.
The weapon that bears the name of Stone Cold Steve Austin (herewith referred to as the WWF-SA) seems to have potential as a camouflaged weapon. This is the first case I can recall of a Super Soaker actually being produced in non-neon colors. Also the angle at which the handle meets the gun is very acute and leads me to wonder if this is meant to be a sniper rifle of some kind. Other than that, there is nothing else to point out, since nozzle size, capacity, weights or any other raw data was left out of the page.
Judging by the only scale available, trigger size, the WWF-UT
(Undertaker) looks to be midway between the size of the 1500 and the 2500,
possibly about the same size as what the 2700 looks to be. It, much like
the SA, is not neon. It is a dark purple and black combination, which could
possibly make it useful for night operations.
In conclusion, I hope the speculations put forward here can and will be of use in the coming year. It will be interesting to see how many (if any) hold true and how many are ridiculously wrong.