General

[drg]

In my area it's rare to find a ball quite that small. Short axes in the .650-660 range are not uncommon though. I was able to test this level of underbore because I had paint measuring .694-.698 large axis.

For reference, a .685 large/.653 short average ball will feel loose in a .682 bore.

[Spitlebug]

First one I pulled out of the bag:

[drg]

Cool. That's why I express my findings in terms of relative underbore.

[Spitlebug]

It's easier to reference the axial pole as that will have the largest acting area.

[drg]

Originally Posted by Spitlebug

It's easier to reference the axial pole as that will have the largest acting area.

You may reference any axis you wish, as long as it is consistent with what other people are referencing, so you can apply their results to your situation. Like I said, I have not really come to a conclusion on how best to express a ball's actual size. What I did was measure largest and smallest axes of several balls and get SD to get a rough take on roundness and quality/consistency.

How to convert that into one number that is useful for determining the best bore to run with a specific paint? ... shrug

[DFSniper]

Originally Posted by philosophia

Oh boy... What will that be used for? Small is good, but too small is counterproductive.

shoot .50 and .68 from the same gun?

[T-MAC]

Originally Posted by Dirty Deuce

Getting a bit ridiculous IMO...

Seriously man. I can pretty much throw any barrel on my gun and go out and its shoots the same and I don't get any more shots out of my gun. People are bitching about consistency and all that jazz, please.

[Spitlebug]

Originally Posted by T-MAC

Seriously man. I can pretty much throw any barrel on my gun and go out and its shoots the same and I don't get any more shots out of my gun. People are bitching about consistency and all that jazz, please.

Dollars to doughnuts, if I can put the stock barrel on my marker for first chrono and have it shoot 320fps and then drop in an underbore barrel to end up with 340fps before turning it down, you are losing efficiency.

[wrongbloke]

Originally Posted by ITSPB-Rogue

Hey, I had some marbs at West Point last year that just barely stopped rolling in a .679 Freak insert...

I used some JT paint this fall that didnt even catch in a .679 freak insert, rolled right through so that I had to turn the velocity up on my mini so much that I got some of the worst efficiency Ive ever seen since shooting a tippy.

this Idea sounds great, its just an insert so it wont cost too much and it would be great for woodsballers like me to throw in their gearbag for those times when we pick up some cheap paint only to find it too small. just wish they made one for freaks...

[xluben]

Originally Posted by Spitlebug

First one I pulled out of the bag:

http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/100_0918.JPG

http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/100_09191.JPG

I measured a few dozen balls the other day and found the exact same thing, except most of mine were closer to 0.688-0.690" along the seam and 0.660-0.665" off axis from the seam. Not round at all.

In fact some of mine were 0.690" at the widest point on the seam and 90 deg off-axis (still on the seam) they were 0.680". I saw this consistently on my Marbs. The All Star I had was more circular around the seam.