About/PR/Contact/Disclaimers

What is Outback Nerf?
Outback Nerf (formerly Nerf Blasters and Accessories, formerly Nerf Reviews, Usage Tips and Custom Accessories) is an Australian based Nerf blog that was made to provide Nerfers with additional reviews from which they can gather information regarding Nerf and Nerf related blasters and products. All reviews are done in a relatively non-biased manner (there is of course bias introduced by our physical stature, and us being humans) in which all blasters (and accessories) are reviewed equally.
Outback Nerf's secondary purposes are as follows (in no particular order):

1. To inform the Australian Nerfing community on where and how much blasters are available in Australia
2. To show off the customisability of Nerf blasters
3. To spread the love of Nerf throughout the community and the world
4. To show that Nerf blasters aren't *just* kids toys

This is an important point, Outback Nerf IS NOT a news blog. Occasionally we post major news, but only on rare occasions. Because of the number of blogs around that post news nowadays, we don't bother and we leave it to the other guys. After all, there's no point posting news when it's already been posted about several times, especially when we have nothing to say.

Note that Outback Nerf is not affiliated with Nerf or any other company or group or whatever in any way. The word 'Nerf' features in all of the blog names because of Nerf being the biggest and most popular foam dart (and related ammo) firing blaster manufacturer/company. Use of the word "Nerf" in this context indicates the hobby of "Nerf" and "Nerfing", rather than affiliation with Nerf itself.
We're fine with just about any *safe* firing toy blaster regardless of maker, Nerf is just the most prominent company/brand and also a colloquialism for toy blasters that fire foam.

When was Outback Nerf created?
Outback Nerf was founded by P13c30fch33s3 on the 18th of January, 2011, getting nearly 60,000 views in its first year. From there views increased exponentially, passing 300,000 total views in 2013 and passing 500k in 2014.

What's wrong with all the other Nerf blogs and sites around?
Nothing. We just want to provide a unique perspective on Nerf blasters, specifically that of relatively stock blasters in a Nerf war scenario, with a small amount of opinion. Since at the time of founding the only major (as in very large/popular) Nerf blogs we paid attention to were Urban Taggers (who has now stopped, and who reviewed them based on stock casual indoor CQC experiences), Nerf Mods and Reviews (at the time still run by Jerm, who reviewed things from a modder's perspective) and SGNerf (who does completely factual reviews), no major blog filled in the niche of 'both stock and modded blasters in Nerf wars, both indoors and outdoors'. Outback Nerf has strived to help fill that gap.
In fact, we like quite a lot of blogs out there, and show this by our affiliation with them.

Anyway, Outback Nerf's primary viewpoints are that of the casual Nerfer (buys and plays with Nerf blasters just for fun, not necessarily in Nerf combat), the stock to basic mods Nerfer (uses blasters in stock or lightly modded form, usually consisting of lock removal and basic power upgrades), up to the superstock Nerfer (has a muzzle velocity cap around 130FPS, depending on group).

How are the blasters scored?
Everything is scored purely on what is included in box. As such, blasters are scored based on what ammo they include, so if you look at the ratings and think something is off, consider first that maybe you're using a different ammo type to what I've reviewed. Ideally I would like to test ever blaster with the same ammo type(s), but in practice that's not necessarily possible as some blasters won't accept certain ammo types, and is also not necessarily fair as not all blasters are optimised for all dart types.

Power is typically measured by ranges. Ranges are measured at comfortable firing angle, ie around 10-15 degrees or so above horizontal, the angle at which I feel most comfortable aiming and firing. For ease of typing this will be referenced as 'roughly flat' or "combat flat".
For pistol sized blasters comfortable firing angle is actually very close to true flat, so those ranges will be quoted as 'flat' or "true flat".
As of 24/5/14, I have constructed a tac rail mounted level, so all future ranges will be measured at true flat, or at least as close to true flat as possible with a bubble level. Past ranges may be altered to represent their true flat ranges, and this will be indicated with "true flat" or similar, but this is unlikely given how many of them have been modded or sold since.
Blasters that fire a larger ammo type or fire multiple darts get a much higher score than a blaster that fires a single dart the same range. This is because such blasters naturally need a lot more power to fire more/larger ammo.
Originally power was scored out of 5, but was increased to 7 in lieu of the Elites and Vortex blasters. A score of 7 typically indicates a range of 15m+ flat if firing Streamline/Elite style darts.

Accuracy is pretty much how straight and/or consistently the projectiles fly at medium range. Any deviation in the average flight path naturally detracts from the accuracy mark. Shot consistency also affects accuracy. For instance, the Nitefinder EX-3 gets full marks because it fires its Suction darts in a very straight path every single time. The Pyragon also gets full marks because all of its discs curve around the same path.
Technically this section should probably be called Precision.
Score is out of 5.

Usability (formerly Usefulness) is a rough measure of how user friendly and useful the blaster and its various accessories and features are. Jam free, easy to use and comfortable blasters with useful accessories score pretty high. Jam prone, clumsy, uncomfortable and annoying blasters score low.
Score is out of 5.

Rate of fire (ROF) is obviously a measure of how fast the blaster can fire projectiles. At the moment the blaster with the highest score is the Nerf Magstrike AS-10, and is the blaster to which all others are compared to for their ROF rating. At the moment a ROF of about 8dps or more gives full marks, though usually a score of 2+ is already quite usable depending on the role you're using the blaster in.
Score is out of 5.
For pistol blasters, ROF is perhaps a little less relevant as very few of them will get even just a decent score.

Capacity is obviously how many projectiles the blaster holds at full capacity with its included parts (ie clips, mags, whatever). A blaster requires more than 18 projectiles per clip/mag/etc for maximum score. For example the Alpha Trooper CS-18 gets just under full marks, while a Nitron with its 20 disc mag would get full marks.
Capacity is no longer used to score blasters, as particularly in the case of clip/mag blasters the capacity score is meaningless because of the interchangeable clips/mags.
It also meant that pistol blasters cannot get a high score regardless of their performance.

Value for money is a rating based on what you get for how much you pay for. Cheap, effective blasters like the Nerf Jolt EX-1 or Nerf Alpha Trooper CS-18 score highly, as well as the more expensive but full-of-stuff blasters like the Nerf Stampede ECS. Meanwhile, a poor performing expensive blaster like the Longstrike CS-6 would receive quite a low value score. This section is a little bit subjective, and also depends on where you live as the scores are also based on relative prices.
An easy way to think of value for money is (performance + stuff included)/(price).
Score is out of 5.

Overall is simply adding up each of the categories' scores, and is thus out of 5.
An Overall score of 0 to ~3 is typically a significantly flawed stock blaster, that is perhaps only good once modified or in a specific situation. An excellent example of a blaster in this range is the Rapidstrike, as a stock blaster it's pretty bad but as a modded blaster it's ridiculously good.
An Overall score of ~3 to ~3.7 is a usually a decent but flawed blaster, and depending on the exact blaster it may or may not be worth a second look. Most single shots score in this range. The Crossbolt is a perfect example of a blaster in this range, it performs quite well but has shockingly bad ergonomics.
An Overall score of ~3.7 to ~4.3 is a pretty solid blaster, certainly worth a look and probably a purchase. A lot of popular "good" blasters fall in this range, such as the Sweet Revenge (and by extension Hammershot) and Strongarm.
An Overall score of ~4.3 to ~5 is an excellent blaster, and is very much worth the buy, perhaps worth buying multiples even. Blasters like the Pyragon get a rating this high.


In Comparisons, there 8 rounds, one of which is unscored:
Aesthetics - how the blasters look. As aesthetics are subjective depending on the viewer (one person may like the blue/white/grey/orange of Elite, while another may prefer the yellow/orange/grey or N-Strike), I don't score in aesthetics.
Accessories - how much stuff the blasters come with. The blaster with more things (which can be subjective) will win.
Range/Power - how the blasters compare range/power wise. The blaster with a longer range will win. Naturally blasters that fire non-standard ammo will be accounted for.
Accuracy - how the blasters compare accuracy wise. The blaster that gets smaller groups/more consistent shots (so technically precision) will win.
Usability - how the blasters compare in actual use and reliability. The more user friendly and jam free blaster will win.
Rate of Fire - the blaster that fires faster will win.
Capacity - the blaster that holds more ammo will win. Note that for clip/mag/etc fed blasters this category is rather redundant, feel free to ignore it for such blasters.
Value for Money - the blaster that gives more for what you pay will win. This section usually considers both non-sale and sale prices, as well as whether or not blasters are exclusive to certain retailers.
The winning blaster is the blaster that wins more rounds. In the case of a draw, I will state which blaster is better for what sort of role.

Post 16/11/15 comparisons will have a slightly changed Accessories round. Instead of just overall including everything out of the box, the Accessories round will consider everything that is NOT related to ammo or capacity. In the case of multi-blasters like the Demolisher, everything pertaining to the main ammo type is ignored (in the Demolisher's case Elite darts and clip), however everything else is included (in the Demo's case the missile launcher and missiles). This is because blasters that have a higher capacity generally won two rounds instead of one, which is unfair to the rest of the categories.

My blaster doesn't do as well as/does better than how you described on your blog. What is going on?
As with everything, there are differences between individual blasters. I've seen/used over 7 different N-Strike Alpha Troopers and each one has performed and felt slightly different. One was very inconsistent and inaccurate, yet could get near 15m on lucky shots. Most others were 'average' and got the regular 10-11m ranges. Since we review based on our experiences with the blaster in question, the only way we can tell whether our blaster (or your blaster) is an anomaly is by comparing it to other multiple units side by side. Since we don't usually get multiples of the same blaster, it's hard to say whose blaster is the anomaly. If I do discover an anomaly, I will alter the review to reflect the "ordinary" blaster. This has so far only been done for the Firestrike.
Do also remember that environmental factors can cause changes in a blaster's performance, and also that down here in Australia we get downtuned (weaker) Elite-era blasters. If you're a reader in (say) the US, your Elite blaster will fire further than our Elite blaster because you get a stronger spring/better motors/less power sapping components. If you fire a blaster in summer and compare it to its performance in winter, you will likely find some slight differences because physics.

You said this blaster is bad, but I love it. You suck.
We review and describe blasters objectively, except where explicitely stated typically using words such as "I personally" and "In my opinion (IMO/IMHO)". As much as you love a certain blaster, that love will not make it suddenly become better than it already is/isn't. For instance, while you may love the Recon and think it is simply the best, the fact remains that the Retaliator is statistically a far superior blaster.

What is Outback Nerf's official stance on modding?
Outback Nerf does not *explicitly* endorse the modification of Nerf blasters as it can be dangerous (note the words "can be"), especially to the uninformed/badly informed/foolish/clumsy/etc. A large number of modifications require certain tools, materials and skills that may not be available to the average reader. Modding is in a way an art, but can also be a trade, and takes quite a while to become proficient at, much like any other trade or skill. If you are to perform a mod seen on Outback Nerf or recommended by either of us, do so in the knowledge that you cannot hold us accountable if something goes wrong. Please also do research on the mod you intend to perform, as there are likely a number of other, superior sources of information on said mod.

Some of the Loadouts you post sound silly, what's with that?
The Loadouts posts are more of a thinking exercise for fun than actual competitive usage. The blaster choices are fairly relevant, though naturally there are far more choices out there, and actual blaster choice is down more to personal preference. The talk about performance is still accurate for stock blasters (except where specified for modded blasters).
The Personal Loadouts for the most part are ones we've actually used, or used some variant of. They may sound silly, but if we've posted them, chances are they work.