GOL 2009 Recommendation

[BlinderGuy]

Every other testing group does through the HUD shooting when testing products. This is because everyone says it is solid proof of fair testing by seeing the aiming points. I would like to see GOL do the same thing. This is not to discount there prior tests but would be neat to see and would add a little something new to the testing.

[jrock23]

i agree blinder guy i would also like to good to there testing and join there group

[djrams80]

I disagree wholeheartedly. Shooting through a HUD takes away from the shooters stability and concentration. No one is as good of a shot when filming as they are when not filming. When I do serious testing, I'm never filming through the HUD. HUD shots are for Youtube purposes only.

I don't think the next testing event has any laser jammer testing planned anyhow.

[happya$$]

I disagree wholeheartedly. Shooting through a HUD takes away from the shooters stability and concentration. No one is as good of a shot when filming as they are when not filming. When I do serious testing, I'm never filming through the HUD. HUD shots are for Youtube purposes only.

I don't think the next testing event has any laser jammer testing planned anyhow.

I agree. We can sleep at night with our methods of testing and that is all that matters. When I do hud shots I worry more about the quality of the video than I do the quality of the laser shot. This has no place at a GOL event. There are plenty of others that provide gorgeous hud shots. Remember we use worst case testing methods and hud does not provide that. Besides you do not see LEOs doing hud shots that is not "real world"

[BlinderGuy]

It was just a suggestion as I have seen other well respected mbrs on the forum comment that if it isn't shot through the HUD it didn't really happen....I can understand your way of thinking though!

[Stealth Stalker]

Obviously, it would be ideal if HUD shots could be done. There's no doubt about that. But I just don't see how it can be done without compromising the quality of the testing itself. And if quality is compromised, then the videos, and the testing itself, become irrelevant.

[happya$$]

It was just a suggestion as I have seen other well respected mbrs on the forum comment that if it isn't shot through the HUD it didn't really happen....I can understand your way of thinking though!

I understand and it does add spunk and flavor but compromises testing quality. If it was a marketing campaign then hell yeah HUD rules

[rsatmans]

It was just a suggestion as I have seen other well respected mbrs on the forum comment that if it isn't shot through the HUD it didn't really happen....I can understand your way of thinking though!

I understand and it does add spunk and flavor but compromises testing quality. If it was a marketing campaign then hell yeah HUD rules

I definitely agree that is compromises the testing quality. It makes it much harder for the shooter to hold the gun steady and attain PT. No matter what people are either set on believing GOL or not. I personally hold there testing as the benchmark.

[djrams80]

I definitely agree that is compromises the testing quality. It makes it much harder for the shooter to hold the gun steady and attain PT. No matter what people are either set on believing GOL or not. I personally hold there testing as the benchmark.

A huge X2 to all of that!

[noTe]

It would be pointless. You would need one camera looking through the HUD and another camera watching the person shooting the gun to make sure no one had their hand on the outside of the gun.

Just let GOL do their thing.