Mega link versus suis electronic targets
Moderators: pilkguns, Marcus, m1963, David Levene, Spencer
Mega link versus suis electronic targets
The cost of the Suis targets has seemed to be lower in the past and sell for 1500.00. How do they compare with mega link?
Suis v. Megalink
I know nothing about the technical advanages of one over the other but I think that the megalink's paper roll is just one more thing to go wrong.
Re: Mega link versus suis electronic targets
Very much depends on which models your talking about and whether you're looking for a single target or for a range.topper12 wrote:The cost of the Suis targets has seemed to be lower in the past and sell for 1500.00. How do they compare with mega link?
Rob.
Re: Suis v. Megalink
Don't the Suis use a roll too? I thought all the ISSF approved target systems used either a rubber or paper roll.mobarron wrote:I know nothing about the technical advanages of one over the other but I think that the megalink's paper roll is just one more thing to go wrong.
Alan
Suis/ megalink targets
The Suis targets I saw at Montgomery Bell Academy in Nashville did not have a paper roll or backer. The pellet/bullet went directly into a trap.
-
David Levene
- Posts: 5617
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
- Location: Ruislip, UK
Re: Suis v. Megalink
They need the paper roll to be used in ISSF Championships but some Sius systems can be used with or without it.BigAl wrote:Don't the Suis use a roll too? I thought all the ISSF approved target systems used either a rubber or paper roll.
There's fundamentally two types of electronic target.
Acoustics use microphones to determine the position of the shot - standard Suis, Megalink, etc.
This requires a sacrificial strip (usually rubber) because for .22lr (subsonic) and air pellets, the mics hear the projectile hitting the strip, not the passage of the bullet or pellet. The strip is essential to the operation of the unit.
Laser systems such as Meyton or Suis Laserscore and Hybridscore use a light grid to detect the passing bullet/pellet.
Rio will be the first Olympics to use such a system and they have no "functional consumables" (apart from electricity!), although for the Olympics they will of course have the optional paper proof strips fitted.
In the case of either acoustic or laser shooting, paper strips can be used to prove the calibration of the unit if a shot is contested, but it is not technically required for the operation of the unit - merely as a backup for competition juries. Not every model would neccesarily have them - it's something you would consider if you were using them for an event of sufficient calibre to justify them.
As RobStubbs says, you need to weigh up what you're actually using it for -
- One or a few independent lanes for training in a club;
- A range system with a control station that you can run competitions from;
- A range system with the appropriate software to output scores for a spectator TV?
The first one you can just look at the price of a lane. The second two involve additional range networking gear and appropriate software.
If you know exactly what you need you can weigh the relative merits of the systems and what software packages each manufacturer offers (and what quotes they'll give you!).
In a club environment I'd certainly be considering the laser systems - solid state lasers mean no mechanical rollers to go wrong with the rubber strip (because there isn't one), and as far as running them goes, no consumables to buy either, so maintenance and running costs (and effort) should be minimal because unless the electronics fritz out, there's no motors or winders to wear out.
But there's a hefty capital expenditure part of the equation. Acoustics have been around for ages and are cheaper (though still not cheap) than laser units. And if you're buying a range then you need to consider the relative costs of the associated network equipment, not just the target/monitor hardware for each lane.
Acoustics use microphones to determine the position of the shot - standard Suis, Megalink, etc.
This requires a sacrificial strip (usually rubber) because for .22lr (subsonic) and air pellets, the mics hear the projectile hitting the strip, not the passage of the bullet or pellet. The strip is essential to the operation of the unit.
Laser systems such as Meyton or Suis Laserscore and Hybridscore use a light grid to detect the passing bullet/pellet.
Rio will be the first Olympics to use such a system and they have no "functional consumables" (apart from electricity!), although for the Olympics they will of course have the optional paper proof strips fitted.
In the case of either acoustic or laser shooting, paper strips can be used to prove the calibration of the unit if a shot is contested, but it is not technically required for the operation of the unit - merely as a backup for competition juries. Not every model would neccesarily have them - it's something you would consider if you were using them for an event of sufficient calibre to justify them.
As RobStubbs says, you need to weigh up what you're actually using it for -
- One or a few independent lanes for training in a club;
- A range system with a control station that you can run competitions from;
- A range system with the appropriate software to output scores for a spectator TV?
The first one you can just look at the price of a lane. The second two involve additional range networking gear and appropriate software.
If you know exactly what you need you can weigh the relative merits of the systems and what software packages each manufacturer offers (and what quotes they'll give you!).
In a club environment I'd certainly be considering the laser systems - solid state lasers mean no mechanical rollers to go wrong with the rubber strip (because there isn't one), and as far as running them goes, no consumables to buy either, so maintenance and running costs (and effort) should be minimal because unless the electronics fritz out, there's no motors or winders to wear out.
But there's a hefty capital expenditure part of the equation. Acoustics have been around for ages and are cheaper (though still not cheap) than laser units. And if you're buying a range then you need to consider the relative costs of the associated network equipment, not just the target/monitor hardware for each lane.
-
redschietti
- Posts: 386
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 4:31 pm
I deliberately left those out as I haven't actually seen a review of one anywhere that confirms it's robustness, accuracy or functionality on a realworld range.
They're not in the ISSF approval pathway either (as Disag, Megalink and Meyton are). Whilst certification for use in the Olympics is not particularly important for club usage, you have some confidence with other manufacturers that a Phase I certification at least means they've passed some basic scrutiny, and Megalink are past Phase II now as well. Especially if you're running regional or county matches from your club/range.
Additionally, their website is pretty cagey about the mechanism of how they actually score targets. They talk about machine vision but also about paper strips - from the photos it seems like they've built a card scanner into the frame, which has the potential to be very accurate, provided it doesn't jam and the paper remains perfectly aligned and doesn't precess side to side during the shoot (which will give you windage errors!), unless they've got control points printed onto the paper like they use in motion capture studios. In which case how much do the proprietary paper rolls cost?
I'm just naturally wary of anything that comes in and massively undercuts the existing product. And although they are patent pending, it's worth noting that they could afford to be a bit open about it because:
(a) They're already cheaper than everyone else, so noone is going to undercut them.
(b) They're using a different technique to what everyone else is invested in, so people will stick to the existing technologies, either because that's what they've spent a lot of R&D investment on, or because they tried this 10 years ago and decided it wasn't as good as the technology they actually have in production.
Maybe I'd take a punt on one for home usage but I wouldn't be rushing out to buy 75 for a major range installation any time soon! I know it's a bit chicken and egg waiting for someone else to move first but equally even at their cut prices it's a serious investment.
And when prices are cut I like to know which corners have been correspondingly cut!
I dunno, maybe because it's India they save on labour and it's a genuinely disruptive product to fight the established players.
But I'd still be wary of blowing a lot of my club's money on them without a bit more data and seeing a few small installations run for a couple of years without too many problems.
The other thing is, whatever their quote, add $300 - because it's a PC/WiFi based system. Their price (as far as I can tell) is purely for the frames, not frames plus firing point hardware, so that's a laptop for every point. If it's a club range where everyone brings their own then that's no biggie. If it's for a competition range then 30/40/50 NUC boxes+monitors or laptops are a major expense.
On the plus side you're into commodity network hardware, not specialist boxes and proprietary cables as per the main players.
They're not in the ISSF approval pathway either (as Disag, Megalink and Meyton are). Whilst certification for use in the Olympics is not particularly important for club usage, you have some confidence with other manufacturers that a Phase I certification at least means they've passed some basic scrutiny, and Megalink are past Phase II now as well. Especially if you're running regional or county matches from your club/range.
Additionally, their website is pretty cagey about the mechanism of how they actually score targets. They talk about machine vision but also about paper strips - from the photos it seems like they've built a card scanner into the frame, which has the potential to be very accurate, provided it doesn't jam and the paper remains perfectly aligned and doesn't precess side to side during the shoot (which will give you windage errors!), unless they've got control points printed onto the paper like they use in motion capture studios. In which case how much do the proprietary paper rolls cost?
I'm just naturally wary of anything that comes in and massively undercuts the existing product. And although they are patent pending, it's worth noting that they could afford to be a bit open about it because:
(a) They're already cheaper than everyone else, so noone is going to undercut them.
(b) They're using a different technique to what everyone else is invested in, so people will stick to the existing technologies, either because that's what they've spent a lot of R&D investment on, or because they tried this 10 years ago and decided it wasn't as good as the technology they actually have in production.
Maybe I'd take a punt on one for home usage but I wouldn't be rushing out to buy 75 for a major range installation any time soon! I know it's a bit chicken and egg waiting for someone else to move first but equally even at their cut prices it's a serious investment.
And when prices are cut I like to know which corners have been correspondingly cut!
I dunno, maybe because it's India they save on labour and it's a genuinely disruptive product to fight the established players.
But I'd still be wary of blowing a lot of my club's money on them without a bit more data and seeing a few small installations run for a couple of years without too many problems.
The other thing is, whatever their quote, add $300 - because it's a PC/WiFi based system. Their price (as far as I can tell) is purely for the frames, not frames plus firing point hardware, so that's a laptop for every point. If it's a club range where everyone brings their own then that's no biggie. If it's for a competition range then 30/40/50 NUC boxes+monitors or laptops are a major expense.
On the plus side you're into commodity network hardware, not specialist boxes and proprietary cables as per the main players.
-
Metookevin
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:27 pm
- Location: Sydney Australia
Elite use machine vision? I have experience with industrial machine vision systems such as Allen Bradley, Omron & Neurocheck. The concerns I would want answered relates to stability of the whole package for long term reliability. Machine vision is sensitive to light variations, scanner or camera lens dust/dirt and not to mention camera being bumped. In addition the program would have to use sophisticated pattern matching algorithms to deal with every day usage. Possible but will the package be reliable over the long term?
Cheers
Kevin
Cheers
Kevin
We have 4 of the Megalink individual targets. We use them for 10m air, 50' and 50m smallbore. One target works for all three, oh, air pistol too!
We have had the targets for several months. They get used every day and have proven to be simple & reliable. As for paper.... I always hear about the cost of consumables. A roll of paper is $16. At the standard advance rate for air rifle you get 3500 shots. We set ours at half the normal rate. 7000 shots for $16 is not bad! Takes about a minute to change.
All that said.... sure it would be nice to not have paper to mess with. But, it's not that big of a deal.
We have had the targets for several months. They get used every day and have proven to be simple & reliable. As for paper.... I always hear about the cost of consumables. A roll of paper is $16. At the standard advance rate for air rifle you get 3500 shots. We set ours at half the normal rate. 7000 shots for $16 is not bad! Takes about a minute to change.
All that said.... sure it would be nice to not have paper to mess with. But, it's not that big of a deal.
-
Huey-pilot
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 8:22 am
- Location: Southeast
Sius Hybridscore
I have been using my Sius Hybridscore for about 2 months in my home range and I love it. The price was $1995 and I had to provide my own computer for the display. It's still not compatable with Windows 8 at this time.
@ pdeal-
You can use the same Megalink for 10m and 50m. Since the "black dot" is actual a hole, you just need to cut the overlay to the size of the 50m target, which simply shows you more of the black paper...the program does not care what size dot you aim at, the microphones place the shot based on its position to center. You simply tell the MLShoot software what distance and course of fire you are shooting. You will need a long cable though.
You can use the same Megalink for 10m and 50m. Since the "black dot" is actual a hole, you just need to cut the overlay to the size of the 50m target, which simply shows you more of the black paper...the program does not care what size dot you aim at, the microphones place the shot based on its position to center. You simply tell the MLShoot software what distance and course of fire you are shooting. You will need a long cable though.
-
proneshooter
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 12:09 pm
- Location: Charleston, S.C.
-
redschietti
- Posts: 386
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 4:31 pm
Our testing shows Elite scorer to be very accurate. I have been unable to find any difference between the computer score and the score on a paper backer. Also, so far seems reliable, we have been through a roll of paper. Twice it jammed with a spent pellet. At the end of the roll there were two uncalled nines then a six, because the paper wasn't feeding through easily.
At this point I think it is an excellent option for home or club use. Probably not the best option for major match use, if you have to buy a computer for every firing point. Most homes, these days, have a computer, so why buy one as part of the cost of other systems?
At this point I think it is an excellent option for home or club use. Probably not the best option for major match use, if you have to buy a computer for every firing point. Most homes, these days, have a computer, so why buy one as part of the cost of other systems?
Multi Platform & other Advantages
Interesting comparisons, All good for shooting sport.
I am a shooter and invented Elite Scorer and wish to add my bit in favor of Elite Scorer.
- Wireless, (Uses conventional Wi-Fi, no internet required)
- Portable with built in Pellet trap, (Can be moved around to make shift range)
- Multi Platform Support (Works on MAC OSX, Windows XP, VISTA, 8, & Android!!)
- 10.1" Android Touchscreen Tablets for Club Models
- Low cost by a margin.
Low cost is achieved by using cheaper technology to build Electronic Target Systems (other than low cost labor in India). Machine Vision technology has been around since ages and is used in industrial inspection systems for gauging and identification applications. ISSF certification also adds to the final cost which at the moment is not the case.
Of course precision indexing of paper is critical to measurements, again such indexing systems are in use in printers and scanners since ages and are RELIABLE. So in that sense this is nothing new. Putting together all of this and building some complex image processing algorithms is what makes Elite Scorer new and yet Reliable.
If there is one factor that decides the accuracy of the system, it is the quality of paper itself. This is the same in other systems that uses paper rolls. One cannot use any paper and expect results. Manufacturers prescribe the quality of paper to be used. Kruger paper is found to be the best quality for Elite Scorer. Kruger paper is easily available in US/Europe and they are currently best preferred for other ISSF certified targets as well.
Not to forget, Elite Scorer comes with the best software package and with PRO Software, its more than just a scoring system. It can be tried for free here: http://www.elitescorer.com/Shooting-software.aspx
I am a shooter and invented Elite Scorer and wish to add my bit in favor of Elite Scorer.
- Wireless, (Uses conventional Wi-Fi, no internet required)
- Portable with built in Pellet trap, (Can be moved around to make shift range)
- Multi Platform Support (Works on MAC OSX, Windows XP, VISTA, 8, & Android!!)
- 10.1" Android Touchscreen Tablets for Club Models
- Low cost by a margin.
Low cost is achieved by using cheaper technology to build Electronic Target Systems (other than low cost labor in India). Machine Vision technology has been around since ages and is used in industrial inspection systems for gauging and identification applications. ISSF certification also adds to the final cost which at the moment is not the case.
Of course precision indexing of paper is critical to measurements, again such indexing systems are in use in printers and scanners since ages and are RELIABLE. So in that sense this is nothing new. Putting together all of this and building some complex image processing algorithms is what makes Elite Scorer new and yet Reliable.
If there is one factor that decides the accuracy of the system, it is the quality of paper itself. This is the same in other systems that uses paper rolls. One cannot use any paper and expect results. Manufacturers prescribe the quality of paper to be used. Kruger paper is found to be the best quality for Elite Scorer. Kruger paper is easily available in US/Europe and they are currently best preferred for other ISSF certified targets as well.
Not to forget, Elite Scorer comes with the best software package and with PRO Software, its more than just a scoring system. It can be tried for free here: http://www.elitescorer.com/Shooting-software.aspx
Re: Mega link versus suis electronic targets
We have been shooting on the SIUS HS-10 Hybridscore since May. We choose this device over the Megalink because of the cost of the paper rolls. Also, we chose this device over the Elite scorer due to the fact that, in the US, the Elite Scorer had a temporary lower price for rifle shooters but not for pistol shooters, and it does require feeding: paper rolls.
With the SIUS there are no paper rolls to deal with/purchase for volume shooting. However, they can easily be added as needed, for scoring records. From a cost standpoint, the SIUS Hybridsocre is a great value when compared to the available options. The SIUS HS-10 Hybridsocre 'lights up' nicely in a dark basement, as well.
As of August, 2014, we have also updated our device with cabling and Windows 8 software and it has become even easier to use.
Contact with SIUS US (phone, email, etc.) has been easy, as well.
With the SIUS there are no paper rolls to deal with/purchase for volume shooting. However, they can easily be added as needed, for scoring records. From a cost standpoint, the SIUS Hybridsocre is a great value when compared to the available options. The SIUS HS-10 Hybridsocre 'lights up' nicely in a dark basement, as well.
As of August, 2014, we have also updated our device with cabling and Windows 8 software and it has become even easier to use.
Contact with SIUS US (phone, email, etc.) has been easy, as well.
- Attachments
-
Re: Mega link versus suis electronic targets
I was curious about hybridscore as it doesn't use a rubber roll.
Am I right in thinking the lasers cover the black, so if you're shooting in the black, they pick up those shots, and that the acoustic sensors detect shots on the white mask, on the basis if you're shooting into the white it's probably an odd bad shot and two probably won't go in the same place (through the same hole), so it's okay to have a static sheet, unlike in the black where you are expecting lots of shots to go in the same area and you needed a moving rubber strip to constantly present fresh rubber to the shooter.
Am I right in thinking the lasers cover the black, so if you're shooting in the black, they pick up those shots, and that the acoustic sensors detect shots on the white mask, on the basis if you're shooting into the white it's probably an odd bad shot and two probably won't go in the same place (through the same hole), so it's okay to have a static sheet, unlike in the black where you are expecting lots of shots to go in the same area and you needed a moving rubber strip to constantly present fresh rubber to the shooter.