Board Thread:General Nerf discussion/@comment-26431461-20171103015139/@comment-27058814-20171108030235

Elliottw wrote: Nope, nope, nope. Not buying any of that. Having just been inside a FalconFire, Flat has a perfectly valid point. There's no reason for the "stick" to protrude from the attachment point. However, I think there's a perfectly valid explanation for it.

Let me start by addressing the title of the post. Are plunger rods necessary ? No, they aren't. There are nearly a dozen springer designs I've seen that don't utilize plunger rods. Are they simpler, more efficient, or inherently better ? Well, no. The "plunger rod, spring, and catch" system is the simplest most elegant way to accomplish the task from an engineering and manufacturing perspective. Remember, these are toys they're trying to get on the shelf for less than a hundred bucks that need to work 98% of the time for several years.

That being said, the body of any blaster could easily be extended so that the space needed for the plunger rod is internal to the shell of the blaster. No brainer, make the Retaliator longer. But to what end ? More plastic, more packaging, more difficult to handle for younger Nerfers ??? There's no upside.

The inch and three quarters protruding from the stock attachment point means the blaster can be smaller, lighter, cheaper, and more easily managed by a wider range of Nerfers. Win-win-win-win.

(psssst - follow the money Flat, follow the money) The thing is, they are useful in some blasters, hammer-action blasters use a rod to guide the spring since the plunger head is fixed in position. Blasters like the FireStrike are primed by plunger rods, and the SledgeFire has multiple points of catching in it's plunger rod.