What 200 compressor owners said...

Jump to latest Follow Reply
mcoulter

mcoulter

Member
Dec 16, 2015
1,190
124
Syracuse, NY, USA
Below is a table cross-referencing reports of compressor failures to the compressor model.

I tried to break it apart some here:
https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/compressor-survey-results/#post-406827

If the below image does not zoom for you try this link:

https://photos.app.goo.gl/rF2kZYXHgGFtgMXC8

1545267216_12256447905c1ae8108f56d1.47028407_cross tab compressors and failures.png



If you own a compressor and haven't submitted your experiences with it, please do so here!

http://bit.ly/hpa-compressor-survey

 
  • Like
Reactions: mmahoney, Ziabeam and 2D1C
This is great. Thank you for all the effort you put into this. It would be good to see the data from next year and maybe get more participation.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting point about data from the next year. I guess my hope is to keep this survey open and collecting data for as long as I can. Once a survey like this is launched, it's not a good practice to change it substantially, but if there are other questions that people want answered about compressor use (or really any other item) spinning up another survey is not terribly hard.
 
Upvote 0
Right now its alphabetically ordered, which is fine, but I think it should be ordered by quantifiable participants, where 0-3 participants doesn't really add any discernible data, the compressors with 5+ reported owners likely give a more accurate expected failure rate. JMO! Great data regardless
Click to expand...

Ric,

Spot on, good comment and just to expand; in statistics the least sample size considered valid for analysis is N=3 with a small sample size correction of 1, which of course means you’re then looking at only two (2) datum for analysis. If one considers only two values basically it’s a flip of the coin as to which value is going to come up next. On a side note I’d comment that small sample size and subsequent size correction is the primary reason why one should take 5 or more shots over a chronograph or at a given distance to evaluate a tuning or a establish a group. BB Pelletier has commented he feels that ten (10) is the minimum shots to look at shot groupings. Everyone has their own opinion but hell most folks here at AGN simply go shoot and leave the esoterica of statistical analysis to nerds like me (Ha!) who are just learning to shoot!

This is a great compilation that needs to be kept up over time as a dynamic aging data set. I am particularly interested as I’m budgeting for a good compressor next summer. So far a Coltri is my number one choice and I was particularly interested in those data. Most everybody will immediatey recognize that the largest contributions to the data set were the Chinese compressors. Obviously one could infer that’s because they are far more affordable to the base of airgun enthusiasts. If one wanted to really get number nerdy you could go so far as to think through a frequency distribution based on the economics, but as I said that’s number nerdy and I pretty much left that behind when I retired. Lol, although I could be probably a lot more enthusiastic about reviving that skill set when it comes to airgunning. Again a good comment!

George
 
Upvote 0
Thanks for the feedback guys. I do realize, and hope that other people realize, that with some compressors the sample size is quite small and that should be kept in mind when interpreting the results.

And if any self professed geeks want to play with analysis, I would be glad to export sanitized data and email it to you. Just shoot me an email at [email protected].

Merry Christmas everyone!
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu