Paintball

[Drum]

Just a quick note, before the same old debate cycle starts again;

For what it is worth, I really think these tests are remarkably similar. When you consider the vagaries of different guns, round, fluid-filled projectiles and statistical analysis, the two tests are probably near identical for all practical purposes.

The fact that both tests are being conducted on the same batch of paintballs would also explain a lot of the similarities, I would imagine.

So.... where does this leave us?

I say it leaves us with some righteous and practical feedback and usable data for those making .50 cal products that will hopefully assist them in making their product better.

It also leaves us with an object lesson about taking sides too soon, arguing over minutia and, hopefully, it will provide the paintball consumer with some food for thought when it comes to evaluating their next paintball purchases.

Keep up the good work all.

Now, y'all can begin arguing about the best way to measure the vector of the airspeed/weight ratio of an unladen swallow of European descent.

[brycelarson]

Originally Posted by Harbinger[TG]

Didn't Carter remove the 3 worst "outliers" for smoothing already?

yes, and even if you do that - the 68 is still a bigger group at 50 feet.

Originally Posted by Drum

Now, y'all can begin arguing about the best way to measure the vector of the airspeed/weight ratio of an unladen swallow of European descent.

garlic and butter?

[Cockerpunk]

she is clearly a witch

[Meph]

Originally Posted by brycelarson

yes, and even if you do that - the 68 is still a bigger group at 50 feet.

If porn has taught me anything it's that women love it when it's bigger. Like a fiend craving for it.

So .68 wins.

[Cunha]

So how about using that ".50 cal" barrel for our smaller "68" caliber paint? ; ) haha

[Horizon]

Any chance we could do these tests again with intermittent, variable crosswinds?

[brycelarson]

I don't have data - but we shot the stuff off the loading dock behind Air Assault. slight crosswind - 4-5mph. the balls hooked noticably on the way to our target at 80-90 feet.

[Shane-O]

Originally Posted by Cockerpunk

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.

nice post CP. I understand exactly what your saying. Thank you!

[DFSniper]

i second the motion for skin tests! hey, if someone wants to fly me out to wherever, i'll be the personal guinea pig!


edit: hell, i'll drive the 3.5 hours out there!

[Steed]

Nice work fellas, thurough as always and I like the impact section of the video and the time to target. One thing that you might have wanted to include was angle of inclination of the barrel. It doesn't affect the math at all (ball balistics don't benifit from pointed projected properties) but it would be kind of a nice bit of information for the end user, I think someone would like to see if they're aiming 4" above a guys head at 125' or 4'.