View Single Post
Old 06-01-2013, 10:27 PM   #122 (permalink)
Active Member
Trinity's Avatar
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Eureka, California

Originally Posted by uv_halo View Post
I agree. You did sizer (/short control bore) testing didn't you? If so, how did it influence consistency when compared to single bore (non-underbore)?
I know there are a lot of people who don't like the idea of using a single-shot bolt action rifle. I love it because of the rifle's build and its reliability. I don't break paint and or the complications that a magazine can bring to a paintball gun. Those advantages are what drew me to the gun in the first place. Over time, however, I have discovered another big advantage to breach loading first strikes.

Over the past months I have put thousands of first strikes through the SR1. Every single one has passed from my hand into the breach. I can feel how tight or lose that round is in the breach. Magazines serve to hide the differences in round-size variations of the rounds from shooters. I know because I also have and use a T9.1. It took me awhile to begin to see that the round size itself was having an impact on my shooting. Once that dawned on me, I really began paying attention. I have the advantage of feeling the tightness of each and every round and then getting immediate accuracy feedback when I pull the trigger. With rounds in a magazine all you really know is that for some reason you had a flier. The round is already downrange and it can hard to figure out exactly what happened. Usually the consistency of the gun or the shooter that gets blamed but that's not always what is going on.

Bill, from CCM, always told me that he thought sizing rounds was important which was why he he went to all of the effort of creating the shells for the SR1. I have to admit that I may not have paid enough attention to his words at the very beginning. Initially, I didn't use sizers on the field because I didn't want to have to keep track of them in the middle of a firefight. When I transitioned over to a Hammerhead barrel and began using the fins I began to notice something. If the round was too tight in the breach, that round tended to impact in a way that opened up my pattern a bit. The tighter it was, the more it had a propensity to be a bit off target.

Some posters feel that the fins are a design flaw. I love them. I use the .686 fin to size every single first strike. I want to know exactly what each round will feel like when I put it in the breach. That's why I don't use a separate sizer. If the round slides easily into the .686 breach then it goes in one box. If it doesn't then it goes in the .688 box. About 75%-80% of the paint goes through a .686 just fine. With experience you just know what the round should feel like. Over time, when I have accumulated enough of the larger paint, I switch fins and use it.

The smaller rounds shot through the .688 don't result in as tight a groups as when they are shot through the .686, but most players might not really see a difference so for those not sorting by size I usually suggest the larger fin. Players who don't sort their paint and shoot through the .686 fin will get really good results 75-80% of the time, but the tighter the round in the breach the more the chance for variance. How big is the difference? It's small at 50-60 yards. At 80-90 yards the differences get bigger.

Remember too, all these results are strictly tied the SR1. Your mileage may vary.
Trinity is offline   Reply With Quote