Quote:

Originally Posted by **uv_halo** As far as accuracy goes, Vortex shedding has been shown to jack up the trajectory of a perfectly smooth sphere- see any number of aerodynamics studies. A paintball with it's randomly oriented seam, and slightly ellipsoidal shape (again in random orientations) will certainly not do any better, especially with random spin (in magnitude and orientation).
...
In regards to their accuracy statements- to be clear, their vector and Standard deviation values reflect projectile spread and not probability of impact.. |

I'm well aware of all accuracy data collected by Punkworks and most other places on the interwebs. I was contributing before the forum went public.

Their accuracy statements reflect probability of impacting a circular object and have nothing to do with evenness of the spread. The probability is held constant by adjusting the circular target size to fit a fixed SD/CI. The assumption is that we are shooting at a target which is comparatively large. As the target size decreases, the probability depends more and more on the spread being '

even'**.

Imagine shooting at a 1" x 12" gap in bunker wall with two markers that have a 6" vector at that range. A marker with an uneven spread (high concentration near the center but with a larger overall diameter) would be more accurate in this scenario. i.e. More probable to hit the target. Also, if the pattern was more oblong. Attempts to discuss evenness of spread and shape were brought up several times.

** An '

even' spread for their purposes does not mean equidistant impact spots. It actually means there is a linear relationship between individual ball vector and number of shots. This would be a pattern that is very dense at the center and get less dense by the square. Not seen in paintball.

Quote:

Originally Posted by **uv_halo** I can't be bothered to crunch the data now but, I suspect that if one were to examine this data they wouldn't even be able to correlate shot velocities with impact deviation in the Y-axis. |

I was the first to highlight that after Punkwork's first accuracy tests. There appeared, at that time and since, to be no correlation which I still feel is very important. Your graph resolutions are a little too low, but it would be nice to compare the

__expected__ drop delta to the results. I think this was brought up when I sent you a PM about your graphs being on a log scale.