mcarterbrown.com
 

The Dead Zone Paintball Related Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-15-2009, 11:53 AM   #21 (permalink)
MCB Member
 
sniper97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006

CCM Fan
Hey, I have a question for Bryce/Cockerpunk. Why do you think your test results were different than Carters? I guess this could also be asked to Carter, why were your test results different than Bryce/Cockerpunk's? It appears that Carter's test showed .68 cal was more accurate. Bryce/Cockerpunk's test show that accuracy is more or less equal.

Both test show the .50 cal bouncing while the .68 cal broke.

I am not questioning either one's test results. And I want to say thanks to Carter, Bryce, and Cockerpunk for all your work.

With an experiment, the results should be repeatable.

Cockerpunk, did you match paint on the .68 cal? Also, if you are playing paintball, you have the choice of .50 cal & .68 cal, which do you choose?
sniper97 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 12:07 PM   #22 (permalink)
Post Whore
 
craltal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dover, FL

I think the guns used probably made some difference. Carter used the GI Milsim gun with it's stock barrel and an old school shocker while the Punkworks guys used essentially the same gun with the Planet Eclipse conversion kit.

I know, in theory with all other things being equal, the only thing that matters it supposed to be the initial speed of the rounds, but I would say that Punkworks .50 cal gun was not the same production quality as the GI Milsim (we are talking about a brand new entry level SP gun after all)
craltal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 12:13 PM   #23 (permalink)
MCB Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Alabama

I don't have a sound card in this box, and haven't seen it posted. What type of paint was the .68 caliber?
__________________
Feedback.

Nothing beats a good day at Mount Doom.
Daze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 12:17 PM   #24 (permalink)
I Am The Admin
 
Painthappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New Boston, NH
Send a message via AIM to Painthappy

Fan of EMR
CCM Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper97 View Post
Hey, I have a question for Bryce/Cockerpunk. Why do you think your test results were different than Carters?
My guess is the paint to barrel match.

We did not have that.

The paint is .491 to .496

And the barrel we only had was a .510 (The stock barrel on the gun)

So the balls would just roll right on out. Horrible match. We tried to even the score by using an overbored barrel for the .68 caliber test too, by using a J&J barrel that the .68 would just roll right out of too.

Not to mention we were using their most "low" end gun with who knows what as an internal regulator for velocity spikes and lows....

Scientific? Not really... but it was the best we had at the time. If the .50 was THAT much more accurate, I have a feeling we would have seen it.

What Bryce and those guys did was as ideal as possible, with a well matched barrel and a top of the line gun.

In the most ideal conditions with an identical gun, they saw no real difference... aside from the obvious height difference so they had to aim the gun higher to make it shoot as far, the bounce at 125 feet off a solid piece of board, etc.

The paint they are using is the same paint we used.

We compared with the Ultra Evil paint too, which is one of the highest grades of paint, and has basically the same fill, if not the same fill as the .50 caliber paint.

So in the end, there are far too many variables to consider, but trying to be as fair as possible, neither one of us came up with the same touted results of a huge and noticable accuracy that we've been told we would see.
__________________
Vids- http://www.youtube.com/painthappy
Pics- http://www.flickr.com/photos/paintballphotos/
Follow me on G+ For Non-Paintball Banter
google.com/+CarterBrown75
Painthappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 12:27 PM   #25 (permalink)
Post Whore
 
craltal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dover, FL

Aside from a tournament, you are going to see a wide range of guns during a game, from low end up through the high end and taken together it shows that for the everyday player .50 is not the magic we are being told. Even in a very high end gun there is not an appreciable accuracy difference and in fact the effective range is decreased, possibly dramatically.
craltal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 12:53 PM   #26 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper97 View Post
Hey, I have a question for Bryce/Cockerpunk. Why do you think your test results were different than Carters? I guess this could also be asked to Carter, why were your test results different than Bryce/Cockerpunk's? It appears that Carter's test showed .68 cal was more accurate. Bryce/Cockerpunk's test show that accuracy is more or less equal.

Both test show the .50 cal bouncing while the .68 cal broke.

I am not questioning either one's test results. And I want to say thanks to Carter, Bryce, and Cockerpunk for all your work.

With an experiment, the results should be repeatable.

Cockerpunk, did you match paint on the .68 cal? Also, if you are playing paintball, you have the choice of .50 cal & .68 cal, which do you choose?

good questions all round. i figured i would answer a couple of these.

1. the difference in resualts between carter's and our testing -

my thoughts are that the resualts from carters testing were highy dependent on the number of "wingers" or shots that land on the outside of the pattern. 1 or 2 shots that were on the outside of the pattern could skew the resualts several inches. while dropping a fixed number of outliers out tends to normalize it a bit, your still bascially measuring the "worst" shots fired from the gun.

in any sample you have wingers, and using the circle method, your resualts are highly dependent on the number of those wingers, and not on the population distubution of the sample.

so my thoughts are that carters and our testing samples show the same thing, however the metric for determining or evailuating the samples was different, which lead to a different "conclusion." in other words, i think carters 50 cal shot the same as our 50 cal, just the methods to measure and evaluate were different.

2. was it paint to barrel match

short answer - no.

long answer - no becuase paint to barrel match only deals with the initial conditons of the paintball when it is introduced to the air. we have seen time and time again that these inital conditions are much more consistent and thus much smaller effect then the airflow around the paintball durring its flight. TK and our research points to the same thing - that LP vortexes that shedd from the back of the paintball durring flight are far and away the largest hindrence to paintball accuracy.

3. the oberservation that a round bouced of the target was pretty wild. however, its not terribly scientific. we have a paintball brittleness test that we have tested many difference kinds of paint on, and when bryce performed that test on 50 cal, it showed that it was very tough paint.

4. which will i choose?

i wont answer that one quite yet. i do have about 2 grand in guns pushing me one direction though.




NOTE: this post contains no offense intended, not demeaning anyone, not mocking anyone, not imporving my position with large words, and what not. if you have questions about my post, please ask in a respectful mannner and i will anwser in a respectful manner.
Cockerpunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 12:55 PM   #27 (permalink)
I Am The Admin
 
Painthappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New Boston, NH
Send a message via AIM to Painthappy

Fan of EMR
CCM Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cockerpunk View Post
gNOTE: this post contains no offense intended, not demeaning anyone, not mocking anyone, not imporving my position with large words, and what not. if you have questions about my post, please ask in a respectful mannner and i will anwser in a respectful manner.
Dude.. Note not needed... Best post I've seen you write in a long time. Thank you.
__________________
Vids- http://www.youtube.com/painthappy
Pics- http://www.flickr.com/photos/paintballphotos/
Follow me on G+ For Non-Paintball Banter
google.com/+CarterBrown75
Painthappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 12:55 PM   #28 (permalink)
MCB Member
 
brycelarson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Minnesota

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper97 View Post
Hey, I have a question for Bryce/Cockerpunk. Why do you think your test results were different than Carters?

Cockerpunk, did you match paint on the .68 cal? Also, if you are playing paintball, you have the choice of .50 cal & .68 cal, which do you choose?
here's my theory - and I've got pictures!
here's the 50 cal at 50 feet:


and here's the 68 cal at 50 feet:


and here's a big picture of them overlayed:



now, if you use the circle method - based on these impact sets you would actually decide that the 50 cal was superior.

If you look at our vector calculation - 50 cal accuracy test

you will see that the 50 cal was only slightly better. Why is this? - well, it's because if you simply circle the group you're giving all the credit to the balls that landed on the edge of the pattern - when in fact, the 68 caliber had a nice dense set of balls that landed right in the middle. Those ouliers around the edges make the overall pattern significnatly bigger - but the tight pattern in the middle is revealed in the math - meaning that the vector difference between the 68 and 50 cal at 50 feet is only .6 inches - which is less than the measuring error we assume our system has - meaning there is no statistical difference between 68 and 50 at 50 feet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Painthappy View Post
And the barrel we only had was a .510 (The stock barrel on the gun)
the barrel we had from Planet was labeled .500 - and I trust them.
__________________
-Bryce Larson
brycecollinlarson@gmail.com
Feedback
brycelarson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 12:55 PM   #29 (permalink)
MCB FF CHAMPION
 
Harbinger[TG]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Earth
Send a message via MSN to Harbinger[TG]

Fan of EMR
Didn't Carter remove the 3 worst "outliers" for smoothing already?
__________________
TRAILGUNNERS SCENARIO | RULES and FAQs
Harbinger[TG] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 01:21 PM   #30 (permalink)
Thrillin' Heroics
 
Marauder_Pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Whitehorse, Yukon

So...what I get from these tests is that the best you can hope for with .50 is more bounces and less range.

Yeah...gonna pass on this one.
__________________


Glory, glory, what a hell of a way to die,
With a rifle in your hands and you're falling through the sky,
Glory, glory, what a hell of a way to die,
He ain't gonna jump no more!

Quote:
Originally Posted by usagi_tetsu View Post
Nothing says "violent and insane" like sharpening a shotgun.
Marauder_Pilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  mcarterbrown.com » Paintball » The Dead Zone

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO
© MCB Network LLC