So Now Apparently We Hate Pat Traps Too, huh? What Else?

OK, I knew it was mandatory to hate NW. After all, he argues politely and constantly shows off by using complete sentences and stuff. But I was shocked to see that now we apparently hate Pat Traps too? Really? Probably the most prevalent, reliable and consistent trap machine ever devised for our sport and yet we hate it? Or is that WHY we hate it? Anyway, that's fine but I'm just a young whippersnapper in my 50s so help me understand what else we hate and why.

Do we hate all the Grand Slammers who shot 2-hole targets? ...even though their 3-hole predecessors read the traps? One of the big shots on here shamelessly disparaged Tom Strunk so apparently that's the case.

Do we hate women? If so, Nora too? Same big shot posted "You just need Balls to shoot good, sorry ladies." Nobody objected but me. Yeah, I know -- he didn't mean it literally (even though he apologized to the ladies). Yeah right.

Do we hate plastic wads? Clearly they made shells much better, so was everyone who broke good scores in the past 50 years a chump because they were shooting "p#ssy shells"? By the way, active ATA membership is a fraction of what it was when felt wads ruled so couldn't grandpa argue that it was obviously 1-to-1 cause-and-effect just like the big shots on here say about "p#ssy targets" causing the demise? Maybe all we geniuses should write letters to the ATA demanding that they bring back the felt.

Do we hate ATA shooters? The two big shots on here proudly brag that they are boycotting the ATA. One of them actually compared promoting the ATA to being a French train conductor delivering Jews to their deaths during WWII. That melodramatic analogy hurt because I always respected that particular big shot, plus I have personally introduced several new shooters to trap and suggested that they join ATA. Apparently I'm akin to Nazi murderers. I have greatly enjoyed talking to George Snellenberger and Dave Berlet, two old-school greats who continue shooting ATA and the current "p#ssy targets." Are they traitors? Nazis? Must I hate their guts?

Shouldn't we hate adjustable combs and ribs and ALL technological advancements since side-by-side field guns with external hammers ruled the traps? Wouldn't the great shooters of the late 19th and early 20th centuries consider all of us to be p#ssies if they saw us roll up in our air-conditioned RVs, pull out our customized K80s and receive targets launched by an electronic voice release? Actually they probably wouldn't. Because, unlike some of us, they had the class to let younger shooters enjoy the game of their era without trying to make them feel like crap when they shot a good score or got some recognition.

Think about it. Be honest -- If you were a young person trying to choose a shooting sport and you stumbled upon some of the hatred and relentless, repetitive whining posted here, would you choose trap? And yet we arrogantly consider ourselves to be the noble defenders of the sacred sport. Is everyone completely oblivious to the ridiculous hypocrisy of all this egotistical, self-aggrandizing garbage? Some people on here really need to climb down from their high horse and take a hard look in the mirror. It's shameful. Well, at least if they actually had any shame it would be shameful.

-Gary

 

OK do away with Pat traps. What do use in place of them? I don't believe there is anything on the market that's as dependable, easy to work on and basically simple. Yes there are other machines out there but they don't compare.

As GW said your hate list is growing end eventually it may consume you.

Lefty

 

Now boys, it's not the Pat traps fault. Its those damn voice calls! How dare they throw consistent targets making them to easy to shoot

 

You guys have it wrong this all started in George W. Bushs time. I believe Longshot has documents that Chenny and Haliburton own the Pat trap co. and thus convinced the ATA along with substantial kickbacks to only due business with Pat Traps

 

GW...
As to hate. The biggest hate you forgot to mention and I hate to say it but it was when you jumped on LS in the previous thread about the Pat trap issue. Then you backed off when Hap implied he may have the same information.

And not only did you back off you tried erasing posts as did NW. I hate to mention it. You were the person caught creating the hate again.

Fortunately the mods put the posts back up. How many other posts have you had to erase. A bunch?

I have to wonder if your hate post above will stand the test of time.

The statement above shows a bit of your own hypocrisy don't you think....considering the hate you spewed on the other thread that was wrong. Maybe you should put the apology for your last hate speech next to Neil's as doc was proven right about the Pat trap and you of course (hate to mention it) were proven wrong.

Erase away GW.

 

GW,
Do you remember this hateful, wrongful rant that was proven wrong?

 

And then there was this post, one you tried to have deleted.

 

Another hateful post. A major dodge of yours. The hateful bet about an argument you were not a party to.

And of course I doubt the admin of the site will see any of that money.

How many posts will you and Neil erase together? I hate to wonder.

Bonjour

 

C'mon fellas, take a pill!

 

.

 

There's nothing at all wrong with a Pat trap!! Unlike the old traps once used, with a longer throwing arm, Pat traps can throw a great target if not for the low velocity speed limits its harnessed with! On a bluebird day, the Pat trap throws a good breakable target! When mother nature gets involved, (wind) there's not enough velocity on the target to give enough rotations (RPMs) to stabilize it in winds out far enough for the average joe to break a possible better score? Top shooters will break any target presentation thrown!!

HAP

 

Why is it mandatory to hate NW, shouldn't we have the option, and who hates PAT Traps?

I have said, "

Which corresponds with,

Shoot well.

John

 

The last two quotes don't make any sense without elaboration. As I asked before, does something prevent the Pat Trap from having the switches far enough apart to throw a 44 degree target?

 

Maybe, hydraulic cylinder travel.

Shoot well.

John

 

Maybe? Or sarcasm, hard to tell in type. Can you get the switches far enough apart or not?

 

Maybe, I wondered if you would take it that way. No sarcasm meant.

 

OK. I have little in-house experience with Pats, and I'm just trying to figure out why you say that they can't, and never will be able to, throw a straight from 1 and 5? Maybe that's true, but I find that very, very surprising... so I'm trying to find out what you base that statement upon.

My issue with a Pat is that I'm not sure I really trust clubs to get the trap installed squarely, and the resulting difficulty in testing to make sure the field is square. I can't imagine they were marketed without the ability to throw a 44 degree target though.

 

Bat,

At our little 2 trap club one trap is a Pat trap. We have both traps set on straight aways from posts 1 and 5. We moved the magnets one Sunday all the way to the outside and our trap threw targets that you had to swing to the left from post 5 and to the right from post 1 . The name of our other trap is G P Trap made in Atlanta , Kansas but that brand does't make a trap that throws doubles so that is why we have the Pat trap.

 

Leonidas,

That is what I thought the case was too. I'm just trying to figure out if there was something I wasn't aware of, or if the quote above is at best misleading about the Pat trap's ability to throw straights from 1 and 5?

 

I thought the Pats won out because of the ease in switching to throw doubles.

 

I thought Pat won out because they were American made and compared to the other traps available they were as good or better.

 

The Pat's won out because the ATA made a large purchase of them. This officially Made them the machine of choice. The only reason we know of for this choice was a letter telling all other manfacturers no to quote on the machines as (WE HAD AN OFFER WE COULD NOT TURN DOWN) No exlpanation of what the offer was.
Wishbone, I wish that was the reason also, but I am not sure. I was upset when receiving that letter as I had many hours in the quote that we had to scrap. Roger

 

Bat,

Thank you for you continued questioning of my statement. When you wrote "misleading", well, that is not what I want to do for anything, if I can help it. Unless it is telling the kids, "I have no money", though at times this is also true. This is what I found out.

The PAT Trap can throw adequate target angles. I went out to a field where I am at. Luckily the field manager was in a good mood and allowed me to do whatever I wanted.

My testing showed that the stroke of the piston or rod is about 10" bottom to bottom using MAN mode. The stroke of the piston with switches set at maximum width was about 9 3/4 inches, slightly less then bottom to bottom. Using bottom to bottom the field I achieved by eyeball was slightly over 60 degrees or about 30 either side of center. When the switches were placed in the most spread position it looked about 56 degrees or 28 degrees either side of center.

Of course the above was done with a tape measure and eyeballing to the highest degree that can be or thereabout.

So, yes the statement I made about the PAT Trap could not do 3 hole angles was in error and misleading. For that I apologize.

Here is what the hole settings using the WW trap gave in degrees, as per Vic Reinders
#1 hole – 13 ½ degrees
#2 hole – 17 degrees
#3 hole – 22 degrees
#4 hole – 27 degrees
#5 hole – 30 ½ degrees

So utilizing what I tested and what was/is known about the WW it appears as far as angles are concerned the PAT Trap is comparable.

I had been trying to get an email to PAT Trap for a simple conclusion, but for whatever reason my email was not received. So instead of waiting until this week, I was able to test on my own Sunday morning. I did get a hold of PAT Trap today. What I found out is apparently pretty close to what the PAT Trap can do. The person I talked to said it is a 10" cylinder and at 10" travel the field is 60 degrees, 8" travel is 50 degrees 7" is 40, though the spacer bar at 5.25" is set for cylinder travel of 6 7/8inches.

The reason for 40 degrees is set with a 6 7/8" travel is the solenoids are a soft shift type and the is a slight "coast" when commanded to change direction. So with a 1/16" coast on either end of the stroke with the switches set for 6 7/8in stroke plus coast equal 7" or 40 degrees. Why not a straight away from 1 and 5? I did not ask?

Humbly, thanks for questioning.

Shoot well

John

 

Thanks for clearing that up John.

 

We have one Pat trap and one GMV Superstar. The GMV throws way better doubles targets ... they don't have the curl on them.

 

My opinion is the GVM throws a better target and easy to work on too!

 

Oleo,
The GMV is a far superior machine to anything we can get on todays market. They had the best machine and the worst management team I ever encountered. They are still made, but the owner will not ship into the USA.
If I were 20 yrs. younger I would be making them in this country. I would change the elevator to delete the problem with the patent. Roger