WHAT?!?!
- Monsoon
- Posts: 832
- Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 2:14 pm
The CPS 2000 is the epitome of all soakers. The Helix is almost the opposite. I also read the Helix review multiple times and never found it saying that the gun is equal to the CPS 2000. If you know how to make a link, show us the page that says this.
EDIT-content (as usual)
EDIT-content (as usual)
Do not underestimate the power of stupidity in large groups
- RacerSoaker445
- Posts: 951
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 2:27 pm
-
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 9:46 am
Here is where the confusion is.
I'm not quite sure how he does his ratings exactly, but you should probably pay attention to the fine print, like anything in life. Here is what it says underneath each of those. Note: Ratings based on relative blaster size. This means they are both B rating soakers for their size class.Originally posted by "isoaker review index"
CPS 2000
iSoaker.com Ratings:
Power: 100 | Weight: 100 | Capacity: 70 | Overall: 80
Helix
iSoaker.com Ratings:
Power: 80 | Weight: 50 | Capacity: 70 | Overall: 80
- Jadefalcon09
- Posts: 409
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 12:00 pm
-
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 9:46 am
For the averages of the scores (which doesn't always mean what the final score is) I got:Originally posted by DoomSoaker@May 2 2004, 07:23 AM
CPS 2000's average is 90 and the Helix's is 66.67. That's a big difference.
CPS 2000: 87.5
Helix: 70
I agree that it might be more helpful if the scores were all compatible, but unfortunately he decided to do it by size class. It would seem that he did it to be fair to each blaster, which is commendable. I still don't understand how the weight rating is given... is heavier better or worse? Because the CPS2000 got a 100 weight rating and the Helix got a 50, while the CPS2000 is much more cumbersome.
-
- Posts: 328
- Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:00 pm
- SSCBen
- Posts: 6449
- Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2003 1:00 pm
-
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 1:42 pm
Well, its not your opinion is it? It's iSoakers'. [/b][/quote]Originally posted by superstormer+May 2 2004, 04:38 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(superstormer @ May 2 2004, 04:38 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'> <!--QuoteBegin-Mdriver@May 2 2004, 02:55 PM
Still, it doesn't deserve even that.(In my opinion...) <_<
I was going to say just that
я люблю воду!
-
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 7:10 pm
I had been looking at isoaker for ahwile, reading the reviews and just checking it out for ahwile... but then I came across their/his 2004 soaker reviews... every review there is good! Just for that I dislike iSoaker, it made me feel as if he/she is getting paid by hasbro. You don't just give a review to praise a soaker, you give a review to tell others how it stacks up against other items on the market.
I can't find one bad thing said about any of the soakers reviewed on there - I mean, give me a break, not all the SS products are a marvelous toys! marvelous - thats what I get out of each & every iSoaker review...
90% of the 2004 line is garbage, I mean they Don't even have triggers for *omit word* sake! Yet they all get good reviews from iSoaker im going to email them about that.
-blake
I can't find one bad thing said about any of the soakers reviewed on there - I mean, give me a break, not all the SS products are a marvelous toys! marvelous - thats what I get out of each & every iSoaker review...
90% of the 2004 line is garbage, I mean they Don't even have triggers for *omit word* sake! Yet they all get good reviews from iSoaker im going to email them about that.
-blake