Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 52

Thread: smaller always better? , .684 vs. .688

  1. #1

    smaller always better? , .684 vs. .688

    I've always used .688 Titanium Dye back with Evil, but noticed at lot of guys using .684 bore size for the same Evil paint at our field.

    So I bought a .684 Dye digi cam, and used it all day, and never broke one ball.

    But, I don't feel like the .684 is more accurate, in fact, it seems less accurate than my Titanium .688 Dye back.

    Could this be?

  2. #2
    The bore size will effect your consistency and efficiency, not your accuracy. Granted, greater consistency makes it easier to predict the flight path of your paint.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,491
    Quote Originally Posted by pgop2.0 View Post
    The bore size will effect your consistency and efficiency, not your accuracy. Granted, greater consistency makes it easier to predict the flight path of your paint.
    Yep. I use a Freak or J&J kit depending on the marker I am playing with and use the best bore to barrel match I can. I know there is the great debate on underboring, but I don't get into that much honestly.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Halifax, N.S., Canada
    Posts
    7,350
    Ideally, you want the bore size that causes the balls to lightly touch the barrel in two spots on opposite sides of the ball, usually at the seam. This will give you maximum consistency. Ultimately, consistency depends on having paintballs that are consistent. A larger bore is more forgiving than a smaller bore when it comes to paint that is not perfectly round. A larger bore also prevents barrel breaks due to weak seamed paintballs. The guys that are underboring for their paintball size, are depending on having good quality, consistent paintballs.
    Except for the Automag in front, its usually the man behind the equipment that counts.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Gatineau, Que. Canada
    Posts
    829
    I exclusively underbore if I am playing pump with quality paint, such as Marbs. Usually works great efficiency-wise

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by athomas View Post
    Ideally, you want the bore size that causes the balls to lightly touch the barrel in two spots on opposite sides of the ball, usually at the seam. This will give you maximum consistency. Ultimately, consistency depends on having paintballs that are consistent. A larger bore is more forgiving than a smaller bore when it comes to paint that is not perfectly round. A larger bore also prevents barrel breaks due to weak seamed paintballs. The guys that are underboring for their paintball size, are depending on having good quality, consistent paintballs.
    that is actually the worst for consistency. and its because of inconsistently sized paintballs. we underbore exactly because paint is not consistent.

    you see, at paint to barrel match, the barrel is a fixed size. meanwhile, every paintball is a different size (even good paint). so each ball is at a different place on the over to undebrore scale ... which means the drag to seal ratio is different for each ball, which means each one will come out a different speed. meanwhile, at a large overbore, every ball will not touch, so the drag to seal ratio will be very close on the balls. conversely, at a reasonable underbore, every ball will seal tight, so the drag/seal will be consistent, providing consistent velocity.

    a large over or underbore will give you good consistency, with underboring .003-.005 being a bit more consistent. underboring is also much more efficient (up to 30 fps). paint to barrel match will be the worst consistency.

    the answer to your question though OP is another one "what size is your paint" without knowing what size paint you are shooting, its impossible to tell you what bore size to use. my general rule of thumb is to aim for .003" to .005" underbore. i select this by blow testing the paint, and then when i find a match, use teh barrel 3 to 5 under it. we have not found underboring, even with extremely brittle paint, to break more paint until .007" - 009" underbore. so smaller is not always better, the reason underboring caught that bug was because before it was popular, getting barrels in the sizes to make a .003 to .005 underbore to work was nearly impossible due to shrinking paint. so we all cheered when the return of .679 and smaller barrels came out, as paint is consistently below .683 here.

    using high speed videos from jack wood, and simon, and our own work, we have determined most "barrel breaks" are really minor damage to the ball during the loading cycle which later fail completely when subjected to the power pulse. a true "barrel break" where a perfectly normal, undamaged ball, breaks int he barrel is extremely rare, and has a distinctly different symptom to most "barrel breaks"
    loose cars and fast women

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Charleston SC
    Posts
    1,185
    Quote Originally Posted by pgop2.0 View Post
    The bore size will effect your consistency and efficiency, not your accuracy.
    How could you possibly believe this? Efficiency and consistency is directly tied to accuracy. Muzzle speed helps to dictate accuracy and you can even go so far to show that if improperly sized the paint will wobble in the barrel further decreasing accuracy.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Halifax, N.S., Canada
    Posts
    7,350
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    that is actually the worst for consistency. and its because of inconsistently sized paintballs. we underbore exactly because paint is not consistent.
    No, I mentioned that the best consistency is if the ball touches on both sides of the ball but it depends on consistent paint. That is paramount. It takes much less energy to pop that cork as well, which makes it very efficient.

    If you are talking inconsistent paint, then that is where we either underbore or overbore for increased consistency. I think we are talking the same language but you are interpreting my writing a bit differently. I suspect we are interpreting the amount of touch differently. What I interpret as the right amount of ball touching, you might be interpreting as a couple of thousands of underbore, in which case we are on the same page.

    I remember back in 1990 when we were using PMI premium and were shooting barrels that were 0.690". The paint was popping like a cork and flying all over the place with no predicability. I was one of the only ones that had a barrel with known id sizes, and changed to a near perfect match at 0.6925". The balls flew perfect and consistent every shot. We checked the paint and found it to be consistent from ball to ball, so underboring by even 0.0025" was not working for us at that time.

    As a personal preference, I like to overbore because I have less barrel breaks. This is even when I have sized the barrel for my paint. It is the one or two odd shaped balls in a bag of 500, that could cause a problem. I prefer not to take a chance when in a tournament environment and goo in my barrel could be the difference between winning and losing due to a missed shot.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Side View Post
    How could you possibly believe this? Efficiency and consistency is directly tied to accuracy. Muzzle speed helps to dictate accuracy and you can even go so far to show that if improperly sized the paint will wobble in the barrel further decreasing accuracy.
    up to about a 15 fps spread, consistency does not effect accuracy.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by athomas View Post
    No, I mentioned that the best consistency is if the ball touches on both sides of the ball but it depends on consistent paint. That is paramount. It takes much less energy to pop that cork as well, which makes it very efficient.

    If you are talking inconsistent paint, then that is where we either underbore or overbore for increased consistency. I think we are talking the same language but you are interpreting my writing a bit differently. I suspect we are interpreting the amount of touch differently. What I interpret as the right amount of ball touching, you might be interpreting as a couple of thousands of underbore, in which case we are on the same page.

    I remember back in 1990 when we were using PMI premium and were shooting barrels that were 0.690". The paint was popping like a cork and flying all over the place with no predicability. I was one of the only ones that had a barrel with known id sizes, and changed to a near perfect match at 0.6925". The balls flew perfect and consistent every shot. We checked the paint and found it to be consistent from ball to ball, so underboring by even 0.0025" was not working for us at that time.

    As a personal preference, I like to overbore because I have less barrel breaks. This is even when I have sized the barrel for my paint. It is the one or two odd shaped balls in a bag of 500, that could cause a problem. I prefer not to take a chance when in a tournament environment and goo in my barrel could be the difference between winning and losing due to a missed shot.
    ALL paint is inconsistent. not only in its size, but also in how it is loaded, the orientation of that ball matters greatly to drag. paint to barrel is always going to be the worst for consistency because of this.

    paint to barrel match has less friction, yes, but it also has a lot of leakage. this is why under-boring is much more efficient, yes there is more friction, but it makes a much better seal.

    we describe paint to barrel match as the same thing, the blow test match ... so we are not talking about the same thing.

    underboring, or paint to barrel match does not increase the frequency of barrel breaks until you get down to extreme underbores. that is old thinking, long been overturned. if you are getting barrel breaks, look at your loader, and look at your bolt.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 07-30-2013 at 08:36 AM.

  11. #11
    Something being accurate is not the same thing as being precise.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by dboggs79 View Post
    Something being accurate is not the same thing as being precise.
    someone ALWAYS brings this up ... haha

    for the purposes of paintball, accuracy and precision are interchangeable. this is because the aim point is easily changed.

    this is not like a measuring system or device where there is a true value we are trying to hit, that "true value" is the aim point of the gun, and easily movable.

    to bring up an example, if i had a target out at 30 feet, i could take the exact same setup and shoot it, and get zero hits (0% accuracy) and i could shoot it and get every one to hit (100% accuracy). only by moving the aim point. this doesn't mean in paintball terms that the setup has multiple accuracies, it means i have bad aim.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Side View Post
    How could you possibly believe this? Efficiency and consistency is directly tied to accuracy. Muzzle speed helps to dictate accuracy and you can even go so far to show that if improperly sized the paint will wobble in the barrel further decreasing accuracy.
    Lol. Way to quote only the part of my statement that supported this. You missed "Granted, greater consistency makes it easier to predict the flight path of your paint."

    Question for those who do underbore? Do you use digital calipers? The only time I tried underboring the first ball only made it past the detent, The next ball engaged my LV.10 so I was fully jammed up. I've always used the paint to barrel matching technique outlined above by athomas and had (empirically) good results.

  14. #14
    I had to...lol

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by pgop2.0 View Post
    Lol. Way to quote only the part of my statement that supported this. You missed "Granted, greater consistency makes it easier to predict the flight path of your paint."

    Question for those who do underbore? Do you use digital calipers? The only time I tried underboring the first ball only made it past the detent, The next ball engaged my LV.10 so I was fully jammed up. I've always used the paint to barrel matching technique outlined above by athomas and had (empirically) good results.
    i undebrore on my cocker threaded mags, but i also don't tune my level 10 that hot. i already explained how i select my bore size.

    works great, i can squeeze 1350 out of a 68/45 on a soft fill with a nice underbore. thats almost reasonable efficiency!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Halifax, N.S., Canada
    Posts
    7,350
    Quote Originally Posted by pgop2.0 View Post
    Question for those who do underbore? Do you use digital calipers? The only time I tried underboring the first ball only made it past the detent, The next ball engaged my LV.10 so I was fully jammed up. I've always used the paint to barrel matching technique outlined above by athomas and had (empirically) good results.
    Once the bolt gets past its level 10 small stem part, it will smash a ball into the breach regardless of if it wants to go or not, and then fire the contents of the ball out the front. If the ball only made it past the first detent, it is more likely a result of the level 10 bolt spring being too strong for your velocity setting than it is that the extra friction from the underboring is halting things. It is possible that the level 10 bump is just enough to push the ball forward and allow the next one to drop into the breach.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by athomas View Post
    Once the bolt gets past its level 10 small stem part, it will smash a ball into the breach regardless of if it wants to go or not, and then fire the contents of the ball out the front. If the ball only made it past the first detent, it is more likely a result of the level 10 bolt spring being too strong for your velocity setting than it is that the extra friction from the underboring is halting things. It is possible that the level 10 bump is just enough to push the ball forward and allow the next one to drop into the breach.
    That all makes perfect sense, but when I swapped out the freak insert for a larger (big enough to drop the paint through) one the problem went away. I came to the conclusion that the air blast escaped via the powerfeed tube.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    399
    What I'm struggling with is one underbores to remedy inconsistencies in paint, but one must use that same inconsistent paint to determine which bore size to use. This can be applied to overboring as well.

    If the blow-by is inconsistent if attempting to overbore, and the drag is inconsistent when attempting to underbore, does it truly make a difference?

    What about coefficient of friction between a constant barrel and inconsistent paint? What about the ball deforming when the air blast hits it? Would that increase the seal of an inconsistent paintball within the barrel similar to an oring deforming into a seal when pressure is applied? Should we therefore aim for a -.001" underbore to +.001 overbore to get maximum seal, but minimum drag?

    So many variables (especially when measuring to thousandths of an inch on gel capsules), but the only constant is the inconsistent paint.

    Given all these and many other variables, get the paint to barrel match relatively close, and continue on the premise that paintball continues to be an accuracy by volume game.

    Only exception would be for closed bolts, where the barrel is your detent, but that's a design influence not really relevant to the question at hand.

    -Nathan
    Last edited by nak81783; 07-30-2013 at 11:13 AM.
    XT00380
    Last of the Salzburg Clan

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by nak81783 View Post
    What I'm struggling with is one underbores to remedy inconsistencies in paint, but one must use that same inconsistent paint to determine which bore size to use. This can be applied to overboring as well.

    If the blow-by is inconsistent if attempting to overbore, and the drag is inconsistent when attempting to underbore, does it truly make a difference?

    What about coefficient of friction between a constant barrel and inconsistent paint? What about the ball deforming when the air blast hits it? Would that increase the seal of an inconsistent paintball within the barrel similar to an oring deforming into a seal when pressure is applied? Should we therefore aim for a -.001" underbore to +.001 overbore to get maximum seal, but minimum drag?

    So many variables (especially when measuring to thousandths of an inch on gel capsules), but the only constant is the inconsistent paint.

    Given all these and many other variables, get the paint to barrel match relatively close, and continue on the premise that paintball continues to be an accuracy by volume game.

    Only exception would be for closed bolts, where the barrel is your detent, but that's a design influence not really relevant to the question at hand.

    -Nathan
    oldest test we did: https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?...sMngwmAygIkHfQ

  20. #20
    There is a possible trend going on in those tests, but unfortunately the sample size per run is too small to be conclusive.
    "Accuracy by aiming."


    Definitely not on the A-Team.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by GoatBoy View Post
    There is a possible trend going on in those tests, but unfortunately the sample size per run is too small to be conclusive.
    same sizes are 20+ shots each, more then large enough.

    we have tons of data, as we also collect velocity on every shot we shoot in every test, so there is more then enough data. the control bore tests we later did show the exact same trend.

    link to all the data: http://punkworkspaintball.com/index.php?p=2

  22. #22
    I haven't sifted through all of your data, but have you ever done a run of 100 and chrono'd every shot?

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by GoatBoy View Post
    I haven't sifted through all of your data, but have you ever done a run of 100 and chrono'd every shot?
    we did in the break in test, yes.

    n=20 is more then enough samples to establish a mean and standard deviation of a paintball setup. if n=20 isnt enough ... then every time you chrono, and you dont fire more then 20 balls over the chrono without adjusting, then you are being terribly irresponsible!

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    we did in the break in test, yes.

    n=20 is more then enough samples to establish a mean and standard deviation of a paintball setup. if n=20 isnt enough ... then every time you chrono, and you dont fire more then 20 balls over the chrono, then you are being terribly irresponsible!
    OK, let me take a quick look at your break-in test.

    People aren't looking for standard deviation when they do a safety chrono.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    399
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    First, let me apologize if my post came off directed at any single individual or if it came off less tactful than intended.

    Concerning the data, may I ask for the measurement sampling of the paintballs used in this test?


    -Nathan

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by GoatBoy View Post
    OK, let me take a quick look at your break-in test.

    People aren't looking for standard deviation when they do a safety chrono.
    they should be.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by nak81783 View Post
    First, let me apologize if my post came off directed at any single individual or if it came off less tactful than intended.

    Concerning the data, may I ask for the measurement sampling of the paintballs used in this test?


    -Nathan
    measurement sampling? how do you mean? of what?

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    DeWitt, MI
    Posts
    399
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    measurement sampling? how do you mean? of what?
    I believe we have all mentioned paintball inconsistency. I assume the conclusions this data is expected to show are higher velocities and lower standard deviations for underbored barrels for a constant regulator setting. If so, I would want to see the diameters of the paintballs used - perhaps min/max diameter of each paintball fired - to see the paint/barrel match.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,157
    Quote Originally Posted by nak81783 View Post
    I believe we have all mentioned paintball inconsistency. I assume the conclusions this data is expected to show are higher velocities and lower standard deviations for underbored barrels for a constant regulator setting. If so, I would want to see the diameters of the paintballs used - perhaps min/max diameter of each paintball fired - to see the paint/barrel match.
    yes, we did not re-chrono the gun.

    the size of the paintballs was established by blow test. min/max is not a very good measurement for paintball size in relationship to barrels. blowtest is actually ideal, because it measures directly the friction vs seal that defines the relationship between a ball and the barrel.

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    they should be.
    Yes and no. For the safety check they just do a quick check.

    People should be maintaining their equipment and doing the longer run testing on their own time, not when there are 30 other people waiting behind them at the chrono station. Completely side issue.



    If I'm reading your data correctly, that 7th column is a sliding window of standard deviation per the last 25 shots right?

    Because if so, your data actually proves that 25 is not enough. Thanks for doing that. It's better to show you with your own data than with mine.

    Let's just consider the last 100 shots as your earlier data is just too crazy to consider.

    For the last 100 shots, the standard deviation is about 9.63.

    If your sliding window standard deviation of 25 varies from 7 to nearly 12, that is way, way, way too much variance for these purposes.

    If you redo that sliding window to 40 or 50, you'll see that the variance in standard deviation per window is way less; small enough to be useful.
    Last edited by GoatBoy; 07-30-2013 at 01:40 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •