Accuracy Bench Test Results: GZ Timmy vs. M98RT vs. Automag Retro (pics)

[boomerfoxtrot]

well, looks like the GZ won this test.... but not by much... the RT right behind in a close second and then the model98 lagging behind...

about the comment above... at 65' you might not notice that much, but what about 100' ? if at 60' the spread is 6" on two guns and 10" on another .. then at 100' wouldn't the spread be more noticable?


your next test should be three-five shot burst... test the "true nature" of the gun... cause how often do you fire 1 ball every 4 seconds... most shots come in burst...


very nice test though.....

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by boomerfoxtrot
well, looks like the GZ won this test.... but not by much... the RT right behind in a close second and then the model98 lagging behind...

IMHO, I think the electronic hair trigger + low kick of the GZ helps to keep it on target. The Automag had the lowest kick, however the trigger is tad more "stiff".

YES... I understand that the guns are clamped into the vise! The sucker is rock solid. However, any slight movement or vibration (i.e. M98!!), would be amplified when anyalizing the results at a distance.

The best solution is to fix a laser pointer to the tip of the barrel to ensure that you are aiming at the same location for each shot. I tried this, but my laser point was not powerful enough (low batteries?) and I could not see the dot on the wall.

I will try this test again when I get my XMAG (hopefully within the next year) to see if the electro trigger does help.

Originally posted by boomerfoxtrot
your next test should be three-five shot burst... test the "true nature" of the gun... cause how often do you fire 1 ball every 4 seconds... most shots come in burst...

YES! I will next time!

thanks for the feedback:)

[nippinout]

Nice test!

One suggestion though...

For the retro, you want to be pulling the trigger like it should be pulled.

Maybe you did. But if you didn't: between shots, keep the trigger pulled back and when you are ready to pull, release and pull very quickly.

[Severe]

Very nice test.

If you do it again, I would suggest two things.
1. Map where each round lands and the velocity for that shot. That way you can see if/how spikes impact accuracy.
2. After the first round is fired, consider that the center mass for the sstring of fire. Give a Top to bottom and a left to right measurement. I've seen one site do this and it gives a nice indication of drift and such.

I guess I would also include other variables.
Temperature, Wind, Dew Point, Air Tank type/fill, etc.

Lastly, the different ranges would be nice.

Again. Nice test.

[battlegroup]

First off Nice test!

suggestion for the next test. Use a level and gun laser that can be fixed to the gun and will not move with vibrations. Fire some rounds to make sure the laser is in the center of the group. Clean the wall. Next place an X on the wall where the laser is pointing with the gun level. Fire one shot and record the FPS and distance from the laser dot on wall. Clean wall. Keep doing this for about 10-20 shots. This way we can find out what velocity fluctuations really have an effect on the accuracy. you can also compare just the shots that were fired at exactly the same fps. you use the distance from center and average it to find a single number for that marker that you can compare to other markers.

I liked the fact that you used the same freak insert and tip for each gun. Do you have any other barrels you can do the test with?

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by nippinout
Nice test!

One suggestion though...

For the retro, you want to be pulling the trigger like it should be pulled.

Maybe you did. But if you didn't: between shots, keep the trigger pulled back and when you are ready to pull, release and pull very quickly.

I'll try that...

I thought that the procedure for pulling the trigger, that you described above, was to produce the highest velocity - hence proper chronographing...? Does this procedure also yield more "consistant" air regulation?

As far as barrels go, one of the reasons I selected the freak was because I had 3 different types of guns. The Equation was not available at the time. The CP Kit, Sceptor, Pipe, JT kit, JJ, etc. would have been toooooo expensive to get 3 x 5 => 15 different backs.

Since a lot of people have been dissing the freak, I'll probably get a new barrel set when I pick up an XMAG sometime next year (*crosses fingers and hopes AGD can deliver*) for comparison.

My next test, will compare a Cocker vs. Mag vs. GZ Timmy vs. Tippy regarding the myths of "open bolt vs. closed bolt", "accuracy", "flatter trajectory", and "distance". However, that won't be for a while... I don't own a cocker, and I made one hell of a day-glow green mess in my parents backyard!

[Evil Bob]

Jack... I did a similar test between an angel and an Emag for shootdown. 10 rounds fired as fast as possible always shows some interesting results.

Overall good test, only one problem that sticks out in my mind... you need a different target medium. Grab yourself a 2" x 12" x 5' board for the target, it'll lean up nicely against the brick wall you used.

The reason why the bricks are a poor medium is the surface is not uniform, there are bricks sticking out that are getting splattered when the paintballs impact on the surface. It's leaving a deceptively larger impact area and throwing the results off visually.

-Evil Bob

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by Evil Bob
Jack...

Good test, only one problem that sticks out in my mind... you need a different target medium. Grab yourself a 2" x 12" x 5' board for the target, it'll lean up nicely against the brick wall you used.

The reason why the bricks are a poor medium is the surface is not uniform, there are bricks sticking out that are getting splattered when the paintballs impact on the surface. It's leaving a deceptively larger impact area and throwing the results off visually.

-Evil Bob

Yeah... I thought about that. I just found it much easier to hose off the paint after each trial. :)

"...always shows some interesting results..." What were your results?

[veteranmag]

That was great. I just wish that the range was 100 ft or more, at 65 ft most guns are pretty effective. It's the long range accuracy that sets some above the rest.

The "this gun has a flatter trajectory" question is one of the great unanswered questions of our time. The idea of using a level and a laser sight are good suggestsions.

Another question that I've always wondered in the whether different guns have different mid-flight velocity characteristics. That is if gun A and gun B both have 300 feet per second muzzle velocity (crono located right by the barrel), do they paintballs shot from the respective guns have the same speed downrange? I would think so, but if somehow that was not the case (ie different valve design, low pressure, expansion properties of co2 vs. nitro, barrel design - see some of Palmer Pursuit Shop's theories), that might explain why some people insist that some guns have better long range performance than others.

One way to possibly investigate this is to put a crono by the barrel and another crono 10 feet or so further down and see if some guns lose less speed over distance.

[dre1919]

Nice job! I liked how you set up the test, and I definitely liked the presentation format. I think the Mag did very well for not being electric. That was one of the first things I noticed when I put my Hyperframe on my RT making it electric...the lessened recoil. I started getting even tighter shot placement with the Hyper on there.

[BeerCitySk8brds]

What did you do with RT? Because of shootup and all. It wouldn't really effect it in this to much though.

Good test.

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by veteranmag
That was great. I just wish that the range was 100 ft or more, at 65 ft most guns are pretty effective. It's the long range accuracy that sets some above the rest.

Yeah... I'll have to find another location... or tell my parents that they need a bigger backyard.:)

Originally posted by veteranmag
Another question that I've always wondered in the whether different guns have different mid-flight velocity characteristics. That is if gun A and gun B both have 300 feet per second muzzle velocity (crono located right by the barrel), do they paintballs shot from the respective guns have the same speed downrange? I would think so, but if somehow that was not the case (ie different valve design, low pressure, expansion properties of co2 vs. nitro, barrel design - see some of Palmer Pursuit Shop's theories), that might explain why some people insist that some guns have better long range performance than others.

One way to possibly investigate this is to put a crono by the barrel and another crono 10 feet or so further down and see if some guns lose less speed over distance.

Interesting. I would think that as soon as the ball exits the barrel, it is no longer accelerating. Thus it's velocity can only decrease.

I have a handheld chrono as well and can check it next time for you.

[Evil Bob]

Another thing that needs to be done is the camera needs to be in a fixed location for taking the pictures of the shot groups so that the aspect ratio is not off, which will throw of a visual comparison. I cut and pasted the pictures of the timmy and mag and put them side by side for further comparison and the results are seen in the attached pic, the bricks don't match up.

Unfortunately, you did not shoot at the same brick for proper size reference, the white brick in the timmy pics is not seen in the mag pics. Also, comparing the top and bottom picts on the left (the first mag pic and the first timmy pic), the bricks are larger in the mag pic, meaning the camera was closer to the bricks when the picture was taken, which again throws off the visual comparison. Need to use the same fixed target location to keep the comparison uniform. From the picts it is not possible to declare which marker was the winner since the visual reference is all off and there is alot of collateral splatter making the shot groups artificially larger.

-Evil Bob

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by BeerCitySk8brds
What did you do with RT? Because of shootup and all. It wouldn't really effect it in this to much though.

Good test.

I also noticed this... My first guess regarding the mag's numbers are that I forgot to oil up the valve. I have not shot the mag in a few weeks. I'm guessing the valve/bolt could have performed better with proper lubrication. It was my bad. I was trying to wrap things up, and since the MAG was last to be tested, I just plain forgot to add a few drops into the line... next time!

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by Evil Bob
...Unfortunately, you did not shoot at the same brick for proper size reference, the white brick in the timmy pics is not seen in the mag pics. Also, in the first mag pict, the bricks are larger, meaning the camera was closer to the bricks when the picture was taken, which again throws off the visual comparison. Need to use the same fixed target location to keep the comparison uniform. From the picts it is not possible to declare which marker was the winner since the visual reference is all off and there is alot of collateral splatter making the shot groups artificially larger.

-Evil Bob

That's why I gave the brick scale. Each brick in about 6.75" long (longside). You can deduce the approximate group sizing by referencing the bricks.

Remeber, these are only two trials for each gun. I was up against the clock (xmas party). I think next time, I'll do 5 trials...

Thanks for the comments and suggestions!