Breech Turbulance and how it relates to "ACCURACY" AGD et al opinions please...

[cphilip]

All those that think J&C thinks too much and needs to get out and get laid or plastered more raise their hands.


I just kiddin ya Jack! Keep the thought valves hummin.

[GT]

Originally posted by Miscue
I find it annoying when people say you don't accept what they have to say because you are not being open-minded... especially when what information they have to present would not meet minimum requirements for the entry of a grade school science fair project.

Just say your post on pbn. I don't think the guy that posted before you is going to get it.

[Miscue]

Well... no matter how right I am... all it would do is annoy the morons. And... the rest of us already realize that they are wrong. So... moot.

[Mango]

I love AO!!!1





Lets have one o' dem ol' fashioned hole diggies!

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by cphilip
All those that think J&C thinks too much and needs to get out and get laid or plastered more raise their hands.


I just kiddin ya Jack! Keep the thought valves hummin.

Great idea! You should email my wife j/k

Gawd I miss college!

Now I'm reduced to hunting down paintball fallacies over the internet...

Oh woe is me... woe is me...

[cphilip]

hehe...send me her email!

[QUINCYMASSGUY]

JACK

Jack, you definitely need some side action or more play with the wifey, you think too much... lol, jk, we need to keep the thinkers here.

I think the accuracy thing is pointless it's just like the venturi/closed bolt deal, but there has got to be something involved in kick and efficiency being affected by air flow. If air is pushing against something (airlines, etc) including friction then an equal force is pushing back hence providing resistance. Even if the air gets to its destination eventually, any air being pushed back slows down the flow. This has got to affect efficiency and kick.

So I don't know much about the new trix, but Jack Rice is either an idiot or a liar. Comes down to if he knows what he's saying is right or not. I like the Trix but this kind of marketing is lame.

...now I'm waiting to have people respond saying we think nothing is as good as a mag, we're AO zombies, yadda yadda, yadda, which we're not. I love the trix and I'm just comparing the old to the new, this has nothing to do with mags specifically. Though a more open-face mag bolt would be interesting, having the three parts that branch out from the power stem to the outside of the bolt be thinner, but go deeper for support. Would have less impeding the air flow. Interesting...

[AGD]

Well if you want to get more into air flow dynamics read on.....

In fact flow has nothing to do with anything in the firing chamber (assuming the holes are reasonably large enough which most are). Follow me through here.

Whatever gun you have releases the air from the holding chamber into the air passages that lead to the back of the ball. During this initial burst yes turns and such may affect flow to some extent but here is the problem. THE BALL IS STUCK LIKE A CORK IN THE BARREL.

The ball has INERTIA which means it doesnt want to move when you push it. As the air flows in behind the ball, it just sits there and PRESSURE BUILDS UP. Now make this leap, as the pressure builds up..... flow slows down. There is enough delay caused by the "cork" that any flow problems catch up with themselves befor e the ball launches down the barrel. As the ball is moving down the barrel it is being propelled by the pressure already in the firing chamber NOT by air flowing out of the storage chamber. Hammer valves close before the ball leaves the barrel.

FYI

AGD

[QUINCYMASSGUY]

AGD

Well there is little if any chance that I plan on opposing AGD on physics principles, if he says it's a certain way, it is that way most likely.

I guess my question would then be, what affects efficiency and kick in similar markers like trixes and vikings which may operate at different pressures but all fire at 300fps, so the force being applied to the ball must be the same? And this excludes paint-to-barrel match. Something must make them different outside the weight of the guns too (heavier=kicks less excluded then as well). I saw an interesting post on PBN regarding spool valves compared to poppet valves, that spools result in less kick. What in the principles we are addressing results in the trixes kicking less or whatever Jack Rice said and markers like a viking or mag kicking more?

[Jack & Coke]

Originally posted by Jack Rice on http://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...03#post3305203


...All you have to do is take an extra bolt and block part of it off, not the top or the bottom -one side- and you'll see real results. You really do it, and then you see real results. Nothing better than that! It's not that every ball is less accutrate, just more wingers, less tight of a pattern. Then you try to figure out why. More air slips down the side sometimes, or maybe sometime it hits the seam. I can't tell you why, I can tell you it happens and it will happen for you...

Has anyone tried this already? If not, I have a spare timmy bolt (check it) that I'll experiment with...

[AGD]

If you blast air at one corner of the ball yes it can get things screwed up. Production bolts all have a symetrical hole pattern so its not an issue.

Marker kick is due to the weight and speed of the bolt. Its also increased by shooting paint becaus the gun "pushes" off the ball. Try it.

AGD

[QUINCYMASSGUY]

so...

I'd love to try it but my totally custom merlin is in pieces here in Eastern Mass and in Western Mass (Destructive Customs doing their thing). I do agree with the well-tested ideas of Tom Kaye but I am curious what your bolt test does J+C. Not saying it will be beneficial, but it will either proves or disprove Rice's idea. I frankly trust the experience of seasoned techs like AGD, Bill Mills, Doc Nickel, Bud Orr, Bob Long, and such over rookie product developers like Rice who release products that, by their statements, apparently defy laws of physics and pneumatics tested by scientists for ages.

But on the topic of old product myths, who was the first person to say closed bolt was more accurate, hence the autococker was more accurate? Was it Bud Orr?

[cledford]

Off topic, but with regard to the closed-bolt shoots further/flatter myth:

Just taking a guess here - but I've always wondered if the "closed-bolt" myth started back in the early days as a bleed over from the firearms world where closed-bolt and bolt action guns are considered (and typically are) more accurate then semi-auto and open bolt guns. I figure that just like with paintball rifling (Hey if it works on real guns so it'll work on paintguns also, right?!) early product manufacturers in a rush to market assumed that since there is more then a passing similarity (at least in appearance) between real guns and paintball - that they just "decided" if something was true in one area that it was in the other as well.

My theory then assumes that as technology began to creep into paintball and owners began to realize that there was a world of difference between the two (guns and markers), the manufacturers, still needing a "marketing edge" to set themselves apart from the rest of the pack, just began to find other explanations for one product over another. My guess is that it didn't take long to move past accuracy (since in general all paintball markers shot side by side will exhibit roughly the same accuracy with no particular marker standing out exceptionally) so the vendors and fans (who are quite obsessive about defending their choice in equipment) then moved onto more subjective areas like trajectory. I.E. Ten people can all stand around and see (count) that a mag hits a pie plate x number of times and then and angel hits it Y and the cocker Z. The numbers won't be to far apart, but no one can convince someone of what they "see" trajectory to be when viewing it through their own eyes from their singular perspective. Add in that all markers have different profiles, that you can see the projectiles in flight and you have a situation where things are being even further mis-viewed. For example, first cockers and then later in the game Shockers are b much taller and flatter on the side than a powerfeed automag. My Shocker "looks" like it shoots straighter then my mag - because I'm viewing things differently. With the Shocker the plane of the barrel is actually about 3/4" to an inch higher then the eye I'm sighting down the left side of the marker with. On the mag I look right along the side of the barrel - and therefore see the path of the ball differently. I believe that differences in perspective along with brand bias led to the rest of it.

Anyhow, this is all conjecture, but what I believe.

-Calvin

[cphilip]

Very well could be Calvin...

I often wondered how much of it was just gun kick and all the little human factors that go into responding to getting back on target. Wasn't too long ago that people raved about Brass barrels. When in a sense they realy were "Bull Barrels" much to counter kick up and keep one on target. Often used in firearms shooting for that very reason. But yet people attibute the percieved accuracy increase as something magical in the metal. And in this day and age with less weight being so in style they now feel the kicks more and adjust more to them. Almost automaticaly at some point after practice. Often why myths are blown out the window when markers are clamped in a vice. None of this stuff proves out when you take the human factor out of it.

I often think certain people just find the rythm of a certain marker more natural for them to come back on target with and so they assume its the marker itself is more accurate. When in fact its mostly them and their natural instincts. And its something that could be learned with any marker with practice. But yet they come to the conclusion its the marker. And so a myth is born...

[QUINCYMASSGUY]

topic

Back on topic of the trix, I was just wondering how heavy the DM4 is? Someone's remark about milling makes sense. If the DM4 is lighter than the stock, big-and-heavy matrix, that would definitely explain a little more kick to it and it wouldn't be the theory of how the air moves.

J+C, if you're bored, strap some weights on your DM4 so it equals a regular Trix and compare them, just make sure the center of gravity is the same or the balance will be off. If you can get that to fire the same, you can really prove your point.