Proof that an autococker shoots further?

[strongboy2005]

I found this site http://www.geocities.com/cockermongol/ and if you go on there and go to the functions (on the side bar) and scroll down to the bottom of the page it has a theory on why autococker shoot further than automags. Made a believer out of me. Check it out.

[ffcocker]

smells like bs to me ill follow his logic say both guns chrono 280 out the barrel drag is taking place from normal variables such as wind resistance and of course our good ol friend gravity as it accelerates its also decelerating but since the mag accelerates quicker then itll travel farther cuz it starts to decelerate at a much higher velocity
but guess what this is that i just typed bull crap thats what it is. All markers have the same range except for a zbody mag and a flatline tippy/cocker

[strongboy2005]

But you gotta admit that is interesting though, i'm thinking about testing the "mongol" theory myself. If you read into it, it's fairly logical.

[Dayspring]

I thought we had gone over this...

Physics is Physics. You can't change it. Not even Einstein.

Oy vey... :rolleyes:

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by ffcocker
say both guns chrono 280 out the barrel drag is taking place from normal variables such as wind resistance and of course our good ol friend gravity as it accelerates its also decelerating but since the mag accelerates quicker then itll travel farther cuz it starts to decelerate at a much higher velocity
Well what it is saying is that the mag ceases to accelerate at the end of the barrel while the cocker accelerates further after the ejaculation.

[Dayspring]

Can't happen... Once the ball leaves that barrel, it begins to decelerate. Just the way it is. Again, it goes back to physics.

Oh, and I'd check out this guy's site, but apparently, we've overloaded his bandwidth.


Originally posted by strongboy2005

Well what it is saying is that the mag ceases to accelerate at the end of the barrel while the cocker accelerates further after the ejaculation.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Dayspring
I thought we had gone over this...

Physics is Physics. You can't change it. Not even Einstein.

Oy vey... :rolleyes:
rules were made to be broken. in the 16th century the entire world KNEW that the world was the center of the universe, and if you thought otherwise then you were a heretic and you were burned at the stake. Sir Isaac Newton (and some others) changed that at the beginning of the Renaissance. I'm saying that no one has PROVEN that an autococker doesn't shoot furthur.

[halB]

this is physics we're talking about, things that govern how our airplanes fly and our cars drive. if you change it for paintball, then our airplanes couldnt fly, tornadoes couldnt form, and you couldnt live.

btw, i bet you dont even know why the church was pissed off that he said the earth wasnt in the center of the universe.

[strongboy2005]

What about in space? If you think about it there is no friction in space, but the ball would reach it's maximum acceleration and hold it perfectly forever. If the mag accelerates the ball faster than the autococker then, in theory, it would reach maximum velocity sooner and level off. The autococker would have a higher maximum velocity due to the slower acceleration rate.

[yeahthatsme]

Well what it is saying is that the mag ceases to accelerate at the end of the barrel while the cocker accelerates further after the ejaculation

i think ejaculation isnt the right word...lol


anyways, as was stated, physics is physics.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by halB
this is physics we're talking about, things that govern how our airplanes fly and our cars drive. if you change it for paintball, then our airplanes couldnt fly, tornadoes couldnt form, and you couldnt live.

btw, i bet you dont even know why the church was pissed off that he said the earth wasnt in the center of the universe.
yes i know, it's because it said so in the bible. And it's with physics that I am trying to prove this guys point, not with some different type of logic.

[Dayspring]

Using your rationale, we can ridicule you and make disparaging remarks about your parentage until somebody DOES prove it. (Don't hold your breath) :D


Originally posted by strongboy2005

rules were made to be broken. in the 16th century the entire world KNEW that the world was the center of the universe, and if you thought otherwise then you were a heretic and you were burned at the stake. Sir Isaac Newton (and some others) changed that at the beginning of the Renaissance. I'm saying that no one has PROVEN that an autococker doesn't shoot furthur.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by yeahthatsme


i think ejaculation isnt the right word...lol


anyways, as was stated, physics is physics.
But, using Physics, one can not state this theory right or wrong, it would take many tests to prove/disprove this.

[BeerCitySk8brds]

I can't get on that site. But, if it leaves at the same speed it will go the same distance unless it has back spin.

But, didnt AGD say that the Flatline didn't do anything? Cause it isn't like balls have that much friction or anything.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Dayspring
Using your rationale, we can ridicule you and make disparaging remarks about your parentage until somebody DOES prove it. (Don't hold your breath) :D


I will prove it. I know it will work.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by BeerCitySk8brds
I can't get on that site. But, if it leaves at the same speed it will go the same distance unless it has back spin.

But, didnt AGD say that the Flatline didn't do anything? Cause it isn't like balls have that much friction or anything.
That is beside the fact. What this theory states is that the ball continues to accelerate after leaving the gun on an autococker but in an automag it decelerates immediately afterwards. Thus, giving the autococker an edge on distance. (simple logic really)

[Dayspring]

If the ball exits the barrel of a Mag and is chronoed at 290, and the 'cocker's ball exits at 290, then that's as fast as they'll go. Their acceleration rate has nothing to do with it. Once they both leave the barrel, they are going as fast as they will go. 290... Your physics need work...



Originally posted by strongboy2005
What about in space? If you think about it there is no friction in space, but the ball would reach it's maximum acceleration and hold it perfectly forever. If the mag accelerates the ball faster than the autococker then, in theory, it would reach maximum velocity sooner and level off. The autococker would have a higher maximum velocity due to the slower acceleration rate.

[ffcocker]

hey guys read my entire post i replied with that bs to prove that u can make anything sound true with the right amount of bs skills lol

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Dayspring
If the ball exits the barrel of a Mag and is chronoed at 290, and the 'cocker's ball exits at 290, then that's as fast as they'll go. Their acceleration rate has nothing to do with it. Once they both leave the barrel, they are going as fast as they will go. 290... Your physics need work...



No that's as fast as they go in a foot. Who's to say that they won't continue to accelerate another foot?

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by BeerCitySk8brds
if it leaves at the same speed it will go the same distance
not necesarily. if one continues to accelerate even a millisecond longer it could affect the distance by up to 20 feet.

[Dayspring]

Modern physics. Once they exit the barrel, there is no force moving the ball forward, other than the momentum gained inside the barrel.


Originally posted by strongboy2005

No that's as fast as they go in a foot. Who's to say that they won't continue to accelerate another foot?

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Dayspring
Modern physics. Once they exit the barrel, there is no force moving the ball forward, other than the momentum gained inside the barrel.


so you're saying that a paintball will reach maximum acceleration at the tip of the barrel? I would say otherwise. Inside the barrel the ball is under constant friction, and it is actually limited on acceleration, but after leaving the end of the barrel the laws of aerodynamics kick in and the round shape of the ball, along with the spin of the ball, will continue to accelerate the ball, probably at a slower rate, but by any means the ball will still be accelerating. Wind resistance ceases to become a factor after the trajectory of the ball is set.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

so you're saying that a paintball will reach maximum acceleration at the tip of the barrel? I would say otherwise. Inside the barrel the ball is under constant friction, and it is actually limited on acceleration, but after leaving the end of the barrel the laws of aerodynamics kick in and the round shape of the ball, along with the spin of the ball, will continue to accelerate the ball, probably at a slower rate, but by any means the ball will still be accelerating. Wind resistance ceases to become a factor after the trajectory of the ball is set.
again, this would explain why backspin improves distance. The acceleration through the barrel would be the same, but after leaving the barrel the ball would hold its acceleration more firmly because of the backspin. The backspin aerodynamically promotes less wind resistance, and improves distance by continuing the acceleration of the ball just a split second longer than a regular ball would begin to decellerate.

[Dayspring]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

so you're saying that a paintball will reach maximum acceleration at the tip of the barrel?

Yup. Once the force of the air is removed from behind the ball, it will continue in the direction fired, but will not continue to accelerate.

[Dayspring]

Um, you can't quote yourself as a resource.

[BeerCitySk8brds]

it can't gain speed after it leaves the barrel. If someone can prove this I would crap my pants.

[strongboy2005]

my bad. but the point still stands. a ball, once it leaves the barrel, MAY still accelerate some. I'm saying for a fraction of a second the autococker might still be accelertating while the automag would have already begun decelerating.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by BeerCitySk8brds
If someone can prove this I would crap my pants. LOL

[Dayspring]

Yes. Alot of things MAY happen. Lightning MAY strike me dead. Or I MAY win the Bronze Medal in Female Gymnastics (FYI- I'm male). But it's NOT happening. Why would the ball be decelerating in the Mag and not the Autococker? What's doing it? Don't say friction. That's a barrel issue.



Originally posted by strongboy2005
my bad. but the point still stands. a ball, once it leaves the barrel, MAY still accelerate some. I'm saying for a fraction of a second the autococker might still be accelertating while the automag would have already begun decelerating.

[spantol]

Once the ball leaves the barrel, for a fraction of a second, I become the queen of England.

[halB]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

yes i know, it's because it said so in the bible. And it's with physics that I am trying to prove this guys point, not with some different type of logic.


hmmmmmmmm not quite actually. the bible doesnt really specify that the earth was at the center of the universe, however, what the church believed was that all the waste of the universe drained into the center of the universe, us. so making the earth the non center kinda elevated teh earths position, out of the cess pool. thats what pissed em off. dont ask me though, just ask discover magazine.
That is beside the fact. What this theory states is that the ball continues to accelerate after leaving the gun on an autococker but in an automag it decelerates immediately afterwards. Thus, giving the autococker an edge on distance. (simple logic really)


cant happen. once ANY porting is encountered or when the barrel ends the ball sloooooooooooooooooooows down. nothing can accelerate it, the air is gone and there is no more force. you cant accelerate it once its main source of power (the air) is gone. therefore, a ball leaving a barrel at 300 fps will continue to slooooooooooow down from there. i mean, if the ball continued to accelerate (which cant happen) then wouldnt the nppl require cocker owners to chrono with their marker held several feet back?

[spantol]

Originally posted by spantol
Once the ball leaves the barrel, for a fraction of a second, I become the queen of England.

See? Told you.

[Dayspring]

Originally posted by halB
I mean, if the ball continued to accelerate (which cant happen) then wouldnt the nppl require cocker owners to chrono with their marker held several feet back?

And there, gentlemen, is checkmate.

[Army]

This silly ignorance is on AO? How can that be? How many times must this be shown to be WRONG?

Once the force that accelerates the projectile no longer influences it, it will immediatly begin to DECELERATE. That force is the push of the gas against the ball. After 10" of movement down the barrel, the gas can no longer expand fast enough to fill the growing void behind the ball. Thus, acceleration has ended, and deceleration has begun.

All chronographing is done outside the barrel, away from ANY AND ALL acceleration value. NOTHING at this point will make the ball go faster. ALL air friction is the same no matter what speed the ball is going, it's expotential.

Final word, and believe it, when two alike objects (paintballs) are going the same speed and traveling at the same angle, they will go the same distance...period.

[Dayspring]

I tried Army... I REALLY did... He just never learns.

But, here's a site that may show that it MAY happen one day. Check it out.

Click here (http://jeff.acky.net/fp/)


Originally posted by Army
This silly ignorance is on AO? How can that be? How many times must this be shown to be WRONG?

Once the force that accelerates the projectile no longer influences it, it will immediatly begin to DECELERATE. That force is the push of the gas against the ball. After 10" of movement down the barrel, the gas can no longer expand fast enough to fill the growing void behind the ball. Thus, acceleration has ended, and deceleration has begun.

All chronographing is done outside the barrel, away from ANY AND ALL acceleration value. NOTHING at this point will make the ball go faster. ALL air friction is the same no matter what speed the ball is going, it's expotential.

Final word, and believe it, when two alike objects (paintballs) are going the same speed and traveling at the same angle, they will go the same distance...period.

[spantol]

*IF* acceleration continues after the ball leaves the autococker barrel, *THEN* the autococker would have an edge in distance. This does follow, though I'd say it follows deductively rather than strictly logically.

For that statement to have any relevance, though, you're going to have to show the former, rather than assume the latter (this is called affirming the consequent, and is a no-no). Proof by Repeated Assertion will get you nowhere, as will the oft-used Reductio ad Galileo.



Originally posted by strongboy2005

That is beside the fact. What this theory states is that the ball continues to accelerate after leaving the gun on an autococker but in an automag it decelerates immediately afterwards. Thus, giving the autococker an edge on distance. (simple logic really)

[pbzmag]

Did anyone read his note?

straight from the page:

Note: The following is an untested theory thought up by me, it contains no factual evidence of any source of data with true factual measurments confirming the theory.


He can't backup his theory. He doesn't even explain why the Cocker 25% percent more.


pbzmag

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Army
This silly ignorance is on AO? How can that be? How many times must this be shown to be WRONG?

Once the force that accelerates the projectile no longer influences it, it will immediatly begin to DECELERATE. That force is the push of the gas against the ball. After 10" of movement down the barrel, the gas can no longer expand fast enough to fill the growing void behind the ball. Thus, acceleration has ended, and deceleration has begun.

All chronographing is done outside the barrel, away from ANY AND ALL acceleration value. NOTHING at this point will make the ball go faster. ALL air friction is the same no matter what speed the ball is going, it's expotential.

Final word, and believe it, when two alike objects (paintballs) are going the same speed and traveling at the same angle, they will go the same distance...period.
But if the ball is accelerating slower will it not decelerate at that same speed? If you throw a ball up 10 feet and measure the acceleration from the peak of the throw until you catch it, it will be less time than if you throw the ball up 100 feet and measure the acceleration. The ball, after being thrown, would come down at the same speed. Therefore the ball with the faster acceleration would decelerate more quickly.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by pbzmag
Did anyone read his note?

straight from the page:

Note: The following is an untested theory thought up by me, it contains no factual evidence of any source of data with true factual measurments confirming the theory.


He can't backup his theory.


pbzmag
well, no one can back up a theory. LOL.

[Cypres0099]

Even If this was true, it wouldn't mean that an Autococker has more range, it would just mean that it shoots faster...

Just get a consistant cocker and keep backing away from a chronograph as you fire. I think you will see the velocity dropping, not going up.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by halB

cant happen. once ANY porting is encountered or when the barrel ends the ball sloooooooooooooooooooows down. nothing can accelerate it, the air is gone and there is no more force. you cant accelerate it once its main source of power (the air) is gone. therefore, a ball leaving a barrel at 300 fps will continue to slooooooooooow down from there. i mean, if the ball continued to accelerate (which cant happen) then wouldnt the nppl require cocker owners to chrono with their marker held several feet back?
well first of all the ball would decelerate slower if it was accelerated slower. If there was no more force then the ball would immediately stop after it leaves the barrel (and we all know this doesn't happen). And on the NPPL thing, they should make all the gun owners stand 40 feet back and shoot into the chono IMO. Then there would be no question (except at close ranges). the thing is, the chonos are great for testing the velocity at close ranges. but hardly ever do you point blank someone so why chrono at that point?

[spantol]

Yup, Sir Isaac Newton was an amazing guy. Accomplished quite a bit in his lifetime, including enumerating three laws of motion. The second one is quite relevant here: Force equals mass times acceleration. F=MA.

Or, stated differently, Acceleration equals Force divided by mass. Apply this to the horizontal motion of a paintball leaving a barrel, any barrel. Once it has left the barrel, Force equals zero.

Solving for Acceleration is left as an exercise for the reader.


Originally posted by strongboy2005

rules were made to be broken. in the 16th century the entire world KNEW that the world was the center of the universe, and if you thought otherwise then you were a heretic and you were burned at the stake. Sir Isaac Newton (and some others) changed that at the beginning of the Renaissance. I'm saying that no one has PROVEN that an autococker doesn't shoot furthur.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Cypres0099
Even If this was true, it wouldn't mean that an Autococker has more range, it would just mean that it shoots faster...

Just get a consistant cocker and keep backing away from a chronograph as you fire. I think you will see the velocity dropping, not going up.
well, it would shoot farthur, if it were shooting faster, which is what i'm trying to prove is the case.

sure, it will lose velocity but do the same with a mag and I'll bet you the mag will lose velocity faster. I think that's a great idea for an experiment. If it can be proven that a cocker decelerated slower then a mag then it could be said that it would shoot furthur because of the velocity influence. Again, back to the backspin thing, the backspin allows the ball to continue travel without a lot of deceleration, therefore the velocity of a backspun ball would be greater at a longer distance.

[spantol]

I don't believe that this is correct. Once the ball leaves one set of conditions (the confines of the barrel, and the associated friction and whatnot) and moves into another (open air), this no longer holds. This is a much more complicated situation than simply tossing a ball up in the air.

Consider what happens when a ball leaves a barrel after accelerating at rate A and immediately encounters a brick wall. Clearly, the rate of deceleration in this case is far, far greater than the original rate of acceleration. Different conditions exist inside and outside of the barrel, leading to this discrepency.


Originally posted by strongboy2005

But if the ball is accelerating slower will it not decelerate at that same speed? If you throw a ball up 10 feet and measure the acceleration from the peak of the throw until you catch it, it will be less time than if you throw the ball up 100 feet and measure the acceleration. The ball, after being thrown, would come down at the same speed. Therefore the ball with the faster acceleration would decelerate more quickly.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
Yup, Sir Isaac Newton was an amazing guy. Accomplished quite a bit in his lifetime, including enumerating three laws of motion. The second one is quite relevant here: Force equals mass times acceleration. F=MA.

Or, stated differently, Acceleration equals Force divided by mass. Apply this to the horizontal motion of a paintball leaving a barrel, any barrel. Once it has left the barrel, Force equals zero.

Solving for Acceleration is left as an exercise for the reader.


So A=F/M ? If the F = 0 then the A = 0. This actually proves an entirely different point. This proves that once a paintball is fired the ball continues the same velocity that it left the barrel. Essentially this shows that once a paintball is fired it will never stop. EVER. OK so now we can all dispell this argument and move on to the next.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
I don't believe that this is correct. Once the ball leaves one set of conditions (the confines of the barrel, and the associated friction and whatnot) and moves into another (open air), this no longer holds. This is a much more complicated situation than simply tossing a ball up in the air.

Consider what happens when a ball leaves a barrel after accelerating at rate A and immediately encounters a brick wall. Clearly, the rate of deceleration in this case is far, far greater than the original rate of acceleration. Different conditions exist inside and outside of the barrel, leading to this discrepency.


Ultimately the atmoshopere in the barrel and outside the barrel are the same. Wind factors are the only difference. Atmospheric pressure applies to anything that is directly exposed to the air. In your brick wall example the paintball is going from little to no friction to an instant stop. When the paintball leaves the barrel under ordinary circumstances it does not hit anything with a different density/pressure than that it encountered inside the barrel.

[spantol]

Strongboy, Gravity; Gravity, Strongboy.

Now that the introductions are out of the way...

Re-read my post. I'm speaking of strictly horizontal motion. Gravity acts on the ball as well, vertically, eventually stopping it. You've also got a force acting on the ball in the direction opposite to the motion of the ball due to air friction, but that's not goint to make much of a difference for our discussion here.



Originally posted by strongboy2005

So A=F/M ? If the F = 0 then the A = 0. This actually proves an entirely different point. This proves that once a paintball is fired the ball continues the same velocity that it left the barrel. Essentially this shows that once a paintball is fired it will never stop. EVER. OK so now we can all dispell this argument and move on to the next.

[spantol]

Actually, there's quite a big pressure difference inside the barrel, behind the paintball. This is why they sting a bit when they hit you. :)


Originally posted by strongboy2005

Ultimately the atmoshopere in the barrel and outside the barrel are the same. Wind factors are the only difference. Atmospheric pressure applies to anything that is directly exposed to the air. In your brick wall example the paintball is going from little to no friction to an instant stop. When the paintball leaves the barrel under ordinary circumstances it does not hit anything with a different density/pressure than that it encountered inside the barrel.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
Strongboy, Gravity; Gravity, Strongboy.

Now that the introductions are out of the way...

Re-read my post. I'm speaking of strictly horizontal motion. Gravity acts on the ball as well, vertically, eventually stopping it. You've also got a force acting on the ball in the direction opposite to the motion of the ball due to air friction, but that's not goint to make much of a difference for our discussion here.



gravity does not affect horizontal movement, so it is not a factor in this discussion. If you drop a bullet at the same time you fire a gun, both bullets will hit the ground at the same time (on a flat plane of course). That is why this doesn't affect the discussion.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
Actually, there's quite a big pressure difference inside the barrel, behind the paintball. This is why they sting a bit when they hit you. :)


Actually I was referring to the atmospheric pressure in the barrel and the outside air in front of the ball. That is the air that is going to provide the ball's friction.

[spantol]

Gravity has a huge effect on horizontal movement--eventually, it prevents it. In the last round, you tried to use my F=MA argument to show that a fired paintball never stops (reductio ad absurdum, for those playing along at home), and I pointed out that the vertical movement from gravity stops the ball. This is the only reason gravity was brought up.




Originally posted by strongboy2005

gravity does not affect horizontal movement, so it is not a factor in this discussion. If you drop a bullet at the same time you fire a gun, both bullets will hit the ground at the same time (on a flat plane of course). That is why this doesn't affect the discussion.

[spantol]

Beautiful. So inside the barrel, you're dealing with friction due to atmospheric pressure and the ball's contact with the barrel itself, and outside the barrel you're dealing with friction due to atmospheric pressure alone? Or are we ignoring the barrel-related friction for now?

I'm just looking for clarification of your argument here, not trying to make a point.


Originally posted by strongboy2005

Actually I was referring to the atmospheric pressure in the barrel and the outside air in front of the ball. That is the air that is going to provide the ball's friction.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
Gravity has a huge effect on horizontal movement--eventually, it prevents it. In the last round, you tried to use my F=MA argument to show that a fired paintball never stops (reductio ad absurdum, for those playing along at home), and I pointed out that the vertical movement from gravity stops the ball. This is the only reason gravity was brought up.




oh sorry I thought you understood that I was being sarcastic. of course eventually gravity always will pull the ball to the ground, but from point A to point B in the air gravity does not affect the horizontal movement. Of course when the ball slams into the ground horizontal movement will be affected.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
Beautiful. So inside the barrel, you're dealing with friction due to atmospheric pressure and the ball's contact with the barrel itself, and outside the barrel you're dealing with friction due to atmospheric pressure alone? Or are we ignoring the barrel-related friction for now?

I'm just looking for clarification of your argument here, not trying to make a point.


well actually I'm saying the friction of the barrel is greater than the friction it experiences when it leaves the barrel. Inside the barrel you deal with the atomospheric pressure, friction of the ball and barrel, and gravity (gravity pulls the ball down into the barrel). Outside the barrel you lose the friction of the barrel and the gravity (gravity is still there, but it is just pulling down, not offering horizontal friction until the ball hits the ground) and you gain wind resistance, which is less than the direct scraping in the barrel, and maintaining the same atmospheric pressure.

[joeyjoe367]

I don't even see a "percieved" longer-range. Even if it did have longer range, it would probably be so subtle and stupid, it wouldn't matter.

Acceleration outside the barrel is fallacy.

[agdemagman69]

There are two reasons why everyone thinks cockers shoot further:

1.THEY WOULDNT BE POPULAR IF PEOPLE DIDNT THINK THEY WERE MORE ACCURATE! This is hype made up by cocker owners and cocker manufacturers to make you buy their gun.
Think about it, what advantages does a 500$ cocker have over a 500$ electro? NONE! There a pain in the butt to fix/maintain, they have to be timed and every little piece on them breaks easily(oh and they can leak from about 50 places), their limited to 12.6 bps, which means their slower than electros... it goes on
other companies have hype too

2.lol my theory is that it just seems like their shooting farther cause of that damn back block...it mystifies people. you know how many newbies see a guy with a cocker at their field, and say i want that guy on my team! he must be good cause his guns does that awesome thing block moving thing and makes that awesome air swooshing noise.

and as a side note:
I honestly think they wouldnt sell half as many cockers if they didnt have a back block.

just my .025 cents

[spantol]

The sarcasm was understood, but the purpose of the sarcasm probably wasn't. I was assuming that you were taking my application of Newton's Second Law, and trying to show that in this case, it leads to a contradictory if not outright stupid conclusion (through sarcasm), thereby proving that this application wasn't truly applicable--reducing my argument to absurdity. I like to refer to this technique as proof by contradiction with an attitude. It's all kinds of fun.




Originally posted by strongboy2005

oh sorry I thought you understood that I was being sarcastic. of course eventually gravity always will pull the ball to the ground, but from point A to point B in the air gravity does not affect the horizontal movement. Of course when the ball slams into the ground horizontal movement will be affected.

[strongboy2005]

I don't want your .025 cents if you're just going to try to turn this into a cocker vs mag war. If you are ignorant in the subject of physics, save us the pleasure of hearing your stupid posts for when we give a crap. This has moved beyond the question of which gun shoots furthur, simple tests could prove which one could win in that test, but we have moved into an argument on the affect acceleration has on a paintball after it leaves the barrel. Maybe a paintball doesn't accelerate after it leaves the barrel, but I believe that different situations/variations could slightly affect the decelleration of the ball therefore affecting the speed and moving on to the distance the paintball travels, not only that but it also will show that the paintball that decelerates slower would be more effective (ie the ball breaking) at the longer distances.

[strongboy2005]

Oh BTW that last message wasn't directed to you spantol, you and I are having a civilized argument.

[spantol]

Okay, so when the ball leaves the barrel, it loses some of the decelerating influences (the barrel friction, essentially)? And you're positing that this translates into an increase in acceleration?

I would offer that while the first part of that may hold, the ball also loses its accelerating force when it leaves the barrel. Any decelerating forces are now acting on an object with an acceleration of zero. This would result in deceleration out of the barrel, rather than acceleration, which seems to be what most of us have observed.



Originally posted by strongboy2005

well actually I'm saying the friction of the barrel is greater than the friction it experiences when it leaves the barrel. Inside the barrel you deal with the atomospheric pressure, friction of the ball and barrel, and gravity (gravity pulls the ball down into the barrel). Outside the barrel you lose the friction of the barrel and the gravity (gravity is still there, but it is just pulling down, not offering horizontal friction until the ball hits the ground) and you gain wind resistance, which is less than the direct scraping in the barrel, and maintaining the same atmospheric pressure.

[halB]

strongboy, stop, your emberassing yourself. your whole "a ball thats accellerated slower will decelerate slower is bull doody. lets look at it this way


car A accelerates at 5 m/s^2 car B accelerates at 10 m/s^2. car A and car B hit a brick wall at the same time (because they started from different distances) which one will stop sooner??

the answer is both will stop at the same time, as they go into the brick wall. plop. it doesnt matter in what way the ball was accelerated, once it reaches 300 fps, and then is released from its main power source gravity, wind, everything will effect the same as if it was accelerated over a million miles or over 1 inch. it doesnt matter how the ball was accelerated. also, lets assume that its accelerated differently.

oh, no wait lets not, its still fired from the gun with the bolt in a closed position with a burst of air behind it, pressure relative to the guns parts, just like a spyder, pump, tippy, and your gramma.

lemme also demonstrate this to you

take cocker A
take spyder B
take futuristic loader
fire at 40 bps (the max a spyder can cycle)

both cocker A and spyder B are firing int he exact same position, with the exact same pattern. one just starts from a different place. if you would look at the bolt of each move and load the paintball gun, then you would not be able to tell teh difference.


so once again strongboy, i ask that you please stop, there are many of us here who make our livings in aerodynamics, or are well versed in it.

[joeyjoe367]

..it's not a 'cocker vs. mag debate.

it's a "someone knows their physics" and "someone doesn't" debate.

I'm going to stop now, cuz this is getting silly.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
Okay, so when the ball leaves the barrel, it loses some of the decelerating influences (the barrel friction, essentially)? And you're positing that this translates into an increase in acceleration?

I would offer that while the first part of that may hold, the ball also loses its accelerating force when it leaves the barrel. Any decelerating forces are now acting on an object with an acceleration of zero. This would result in deceleration out of the barrel, rather than acceleration, which seems to be what most of us have observed.



no, once the ball begins to decellerate the only way to accelerate it is to apply more force. Less friction will cause the ball to decellerate slower, increasing the distance of the ball. that is the basic argument. As for the acceleration of the ball, who knows? It may stop accellerating before it leaves the barrel. who's to say that the ball doesn't go from 0 to 320 to 300 in the length of the barrel. With direct friction I wouldn't be suprised. But if a mag hits it from 0 to 380 to 300 then wouldn't it be decellerating the ball more quickly? Ultimately the ball from the mag would drop off in distance as the ball decellerated to 0.

[agdemagman69]

Theres no need to be an ***

not once in that sentence did i say that mags were better. I was simply pointing out a possible reason why people think that cockers shoot farther.

I came in a little late and my post was a bit more directed towards the begining of this thread

and im not very fluent in physics, i'm in honors chemistry this year, and i dont have physics till next year.

but i have understood everything so far...

[AcemanPB]

So according to this theory a longer barrel has more range because the ball accelerates longer? :rolleyes:

BTW excelent example with the cars halb

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by halB
car A accelerates at 5 m/s^2 car B accelerates at 10 m/s^2. car A and car B hit a brick wall at the same time (because they started from different distances) which one will stop sooner??

the answer is both will stop at the same time, as they go into the brick wall. plop. it doesnt matter in what way the ball was accelerated, once it reaches 300 fps, and then is released from its main power source gravity, wind, everything will effect the same as if it was accelerated over a million miles or over 1 inch. it doesnt matter how the ball was accelerated.

interesting. so let's apply this bit of information to the argument. let's say for the sake of the speeds that car A is the cocker (that, in this theory, accelertates slower) and car B is the mag. we have already touched on the differences between barrel friction and atmospheric friction. the only time gravity comes into play is when the ball is in the barrel, so we'll take these cars and put them in a tunnel that scrapes on them (a little over exaggerated, but you get the idea.) Then floor it, all the while sparks are flying and we'll say that the mag is just cooking and it reaches its maximum velocity 1/4 of the way down the tunnel and when the car tops out they let go of the accelerator. The car barely makes it out of the end of the tunnel and travels about 20 more feet. Then the cocker starts and floors it. It doesn't reach its maximum velocity until half way down the barrel, and then continues through. The cocker will decellerate slower and travel furthur when it reaches the end of the tunnel.

[spantol]

Once the ball leaves the barrel, any deceleratory forces acting on the paintball are going to be identical whether it be a ball fired from a mag or a cocker. Once either the ball has cleared the barrel, acceleration on that ball drops to zero, as there is no longer a force acting in the direction of the ball's motion. Given this, we would seem to be in a situation where all factors are equal.

It should be noted that the ball does not "decelerate" until that force of motion ceases. I think that this is causing some confusion. In the barrel, acceleratory and deceleratory forces act on the ball, but the net result is a positive acceleration.




Originally posted by strongboy2005

no, once the ball begins to decellerate the only way to accelerate it is to apply more force. Less friction will cause the ball to decellerate slower, increasing the distance of the ball. that is the basic argument. As for the acceleration of the ball, who knows? It may stop accellerating before it leaves the barrel. who's to say that the ball doesn't go from 0 to 320 to 300 in the length of the barrel. With direct friction I wouldn't be suprised. But if a mag hits it from 0 to 380 to 300 then wouldn't it be decellerating the ball more quickly? Ultimately the ball from the mag would drop off in distance as the ball decellerated to 0.

[spantol]

Okay, I think I see the disconnect. Acceleration is not velocity. When the balls exit the barrel, acceleration is zero--it has to be, there is no longer a force behind the ball--and velocity is, say, 300 fps. Once outside of the barrel, deceleratory forces act on the ball, decreasing that velocity.



Originally posted by strongboy2005

interesting. so let's apply this bit of information to the argument. let's say for the sake of the speeds that car A is the cocker (that, in this theory, accelertates slower) and car B is the mag. we have already touched on the differences between barrel friction and atmospheric friction. the only time gravity comes into play is when the ball is in the barrel, so we'll take these cars and put them in a tunnel that scrapes on them (a little over exaggerated, but you get the idea.) Then floor it, all the while sparks are flying and we'll say that the mag is just cooking and it reaches its maximum velocity 1/4 of the way down the tunnel and when the car tops out they let go of the accelerator. The car barely makes it out of the end of the tunnel and travels about 20 more feet. Then the cocker starts and floors it. It doesn't reach its maximum velocity until half way down the barrel, and then continues through. The cocker will decellerate slower and travel furthur when it reaches the end of the tunnel.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by AcemanPB
So according to this theory a longer barrel has more range because the ball accelerates longer? :rolleyes:

BTW excelent example with the cars halb
barrel length is a factor, but if you have a longer barrel the pressure of the gun is increased and the ball will, fractionally, accelerate the same.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
Once the ball leaves the barrel, any deceleratory forces acting on the paintball are going to be identical whether it be a ball fired from a mag or a cocker. Once either the ball has cleared the barrel, acceleration on that ball drops to zero, as there is no longer a force acting in the direction of the ball's motion. Given this, we would seem to be in a situation where all factors are equal.

It should be noted that the ball does not "decelerate" until that force of motion ceases. I think that this is causing some confusion. In the barrel, acceleratory and deceleratory forces act on the ball, but the net result is a positive acceleration.




again, this is circumstantial. if I stand right on a chono and fire will it fire faster or slower than if I fire from 5 feet away? I'm saying (I know it may be kind of out there) that the ball would accelerate, falling back on my original argument even though my argument has already begun to change with what i've been saying with you guys. I do not see why a ball could not continue to accelerate. If the conditions outside the barrel has less friction then what is stopping it. Sure, it won't accelerate as fast, because the atmospheric pressure behind the ball will begin to dispell, but for a few fractions of a second the ball still has the acceleratory forces that it contained in the barrel, outside of the barrel the conditions change. There is less force behind the ball, but there is also less friction. But for a fraction of a second you get the best of both worlds. You have the air blast pushing you and hardly any friction, giving you a slight little boost.

[Cypres0099]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by strongboy2005

interesting. so let's apply this bit of information to the argument. let's say for the sake of the speeds that car A is the cocker (that, in this theory, accelertates slower) and car B is the mag. we have already touched on the differences between barrel friction and atmospheric friction. the only time gravity comes into play is when the ball is in the barrel, so we'll take these cars and put them in a tunnel that scrapes on them (a little over exaggerated, but you get the idea.) Then floor it, all the while sparks are flying and we'll say that the mag is just cooking and it reaches its maximum velocity 1/4 of the way down the tunnel and when the car tops out they let go of the accelerator. The car barely makes it out of the end of the tunnel and travels about 20 more feet. Then the cocker starts and floors it. It doesn't reach its maximum velocity until half way down the barrel, and then continues through. The cocker will decellerate slower and travel furthur when it reaches the end of the tunnel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


But the idea of a chrono is to have each "car" at the same speed when it exits the "tunnel"

There is no acceleration after the force (air blast) is taken away so without any spin on the paintball there won't be any change in distance.

[Army]

I should close this thread, as I don't have a hammer with a handle long enough to beat some sense into people.

Deceleration forces are EQUAL. You can't put two different barrels into the equation if you are doing a comparison.

OK kids, last time, listen up: Both guns have 12" barrels. Both guns have perfect paint to barrel match. Both guns are running Flatlines at 850psi input (shameless corporate spam). Both tank are full. Both guns have been chrono'ed at 300fps, 4' from the muzzle (standard for radar bench type chronographs). There is NOTHING the gun can influence at this point. There is NOTHING the gas can influence at this point. NO FRICTION in the barrels will effect the balls once they are out of the barrels and have been chrono'ed. There is NOTHING the magic elves can influence at this point. Deceleration is EQUAL on both balls. Atmospheric pressure is EQUAL on both balls. Atmospheric resistence is EQUAL on both balls. The ONLY THING that can influence forward speed is atmospheric resistence, and this is immediately after the firing pressure can no longer accelerate the ball after 10" of barrel, and is constant inside the barrel and out. Gravity is a constant and will drag the balls to Earth at the exact same time and speed.

Whatever you have read or heard otherwise is WRONG and/or a lie. Let this ignorance end now:)

[spantol]

The ball just can't suddenly start moving faster--something must actively give it a push to do so. A reduction in deceleratory forces does not translate into an increase in acceleratory forces. Once the ball has left the barrel, no force is behind it, which means no acceleration. All that can happen to the ball from this point on is deceleration, to varying degrees.

If I'm pushing you back, and then ease up, have you moved forward?


Originally posted by strongboy2005

again, this is circumstantial. if I stand right on a chono and fire will it fire faster or slower than if I fire from 5 feet away? I'm saying (I know it may be kind of out there) that the ball would accelerate, falling back on my original argument even though my argument has already begun to change with what i've been saying with you guys. I do not see why a ball could not continue to accelerate. If the conditions outside the barrel has less friction then what is stopping it. Sure, it won't accelerate as fast, because the atmospheric pressure behind the ball will begin to dispell, but for a few fractions of a second the ball still has the acceleratory forces that it contained in the barrel, outside of the barrel the conditions change. There is less force behind the ball, but there is also less friction. But for a fraction of a second you get the best of both worlds. You have the air blast pushing you and hardly any friction, giving you a slight little boost.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Cypres0099
But the idea of a chrono is to have each "car" at the same speed when it exits the "tunnel"

There is no acceleration after the force (air blast) is taken away so without any spin on the paintball there won't be any change in velocity.
But the decelleration is slower with the cocker. speed and acceleration are two different things. take plane A that is traveling at 400 MPH and plane B which is traveling at 400 MPH, now have both planes turn off their engines and see which one crashes first. Now let's say when this "snapshot" of the two speeds was taken that plane A was dropping in its speed from 800 MPH to 0 MPH in 5 seconds, and plane B was accelerating from 300 MPH to 600 MPH. When each plane is looked at it appears that the two planes, when their engines turn off, will decellerate at the same rate, when in fact plane A would continue in it's plummit of speed and plane B would continue to accelerate.

[speeddemon]

I have to agree with Army. This thread is getting absolutely rediculous. The only force that matters on a ball after it leaves the barrel is air resisitance, which is going to be the same on every ball from every gun.

Have any of you acutally taken college level physics (those of you that think one gun can shoot further)?

[strongboy2005]

see the way this relates is that a chrono is just a snapshot, it doesn't measure how fast the ball will be traveling 10 feet later.

[spantol]

What's with this pluralized usage of "you?"


Originally posted by speeddemon
I have to agree with Army. This thread is getting absolutely rediculous. The only force that matters on a ball after it leaves the barrel is air resisitance, which is going to be the same on every ball from every gun.

Have any of you acutally taken college level physics (those of you that think one gun can shoot further)?

[speeddemon]

Ok, well, it seems that strongboy is the only one that thinks the gun makes a difference, so i guess im talking to him

[spantol]

But we *know* it cannot be traveling faster, as there is no force present that can account for that, so what does it matter?


Originally posted by strongboy2005
see the way this relates is that a chrono is just a snapshot, it doesn't measure hopw fast the ball will be traveling 10 feet later.

[spantol]

For the record, there was an implied smiley there. :)


Originally posted by speeddemon
Ok, well, it seems that strongboy is the only one that thinks the gun makes a difference, so i guess im talking to him

[Army]

Stongboy, are you serious, or are you just yanking our chains by acting so dumb?

[speeddemon]

Originally posted by spantol
For the record, there was an implied smiley there. :)



Don't worry, I figured;)

[strongboy2005]

i just think it's a good explanation for why cockers shoot furthur than mags. again, it's just a theory, and I'm just trying to have a friendly discussion of facts and some inferrences (when I test this I will bring this thread back to life and post my results, and conclusions that can be drawn from it) Of course the first thing i'll do is see if a cocker truly shoots further than a mag, and i'll get some pics of the test. screw it if they shoot the same distance, i will admit defeat. but if the cocker truly does shoot furthur then I want to know why, by experiments and hypothesis the whole works.

[2xFast]

Stronboy...lol...What do you do for a living? I'm guessing it doesn't involve alot of thinking...

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me what force is acting on the balls after they leave the barrel that would cause them to accelerate...

Or....tell me why this is wrong

F=M*a or a=F/M

2xFast

[speeddemon]

Originally posted by Army
I should close this thread, as I don't have a hammer with a handle long enough to beat some sense into people.

Deceleration forces are EQUAL. You can't put two different barrels into the equation if you are doing a comparison.

OK kids, last time, listen up: Both guns have 12" barrels. Both guns have perfect paint to barrel match. Both guns are running Flatlines at 850psi input (shameless corporate spam). Both tank are full. Both guns have been chrono'ed at 300fps, 4' from the muzzle (standard for radar bench type chronographs). There is NOTHING the gun can influence at this point. There is NOTHING the gas can influence at this point. NO FRICTION in the barrels will effect the balls once they are out of the barrels and have been chrono'ed. There is NOTHING the magic elves can influence at this point. Deceleration is EQUAL on both balls. Atmospheric pressure is EQUAL on both balls. Atmospheric resistence is EQUAL on both balls. The ONLY THING that can influence forward speed is atmospheric resistence, and this is immediately after the firing pressure can no longer accelerate the ball after 10" of barrel, and is constant inside the barrel and out. Gravity is a constant and will drag the balls to Earth at the exact same time and speed.

Whatever you have read or heard otherwise is WRONG and/or a lie. Let this ignorance end now:)

Read this one more time, it is true. Tests will only confirm it, if they don't, then the person conducting the test did something wrong. The same arguements in physics that are being used here are based on the same things that put people on the moon. If they are wrong, then Neil Armstrong missed the moon and is floating off in space somewhere.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by 2xFast
Stronboy...lol...What do you do for a living? I'm guessing it doesn't involve alot of thinking...

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me what force is acting on the balls after they leave the barrel that would cause them to accelerate...

Or....tell me why this is wrong

F=M*a or a=F/M

2xFast
hehe. well i'm a bionuclear aerodynamics engineer for NASA. (not really... LOL). but... I think the acceleration force is just going to be the lack of resistance and the left over air that is still being fired.

[spantol]

I'm curious as to why you would think that the cocker might shoot farther than a mag, particularly in light of tonight's discussion so far.

This, again, has shades of affirming the consequent. Why are you seeking an explanation to results that you have not observed?


Originally posted by strongboy2005
i just think it's a good explanation for why cockers shoot furthur than mags. again, it's just a theory, and I'm just trying to have a friendly discussion of facts and some inferrences (when I test this I will bring this thread back to life and post my results, and conclusions that can be drawn from it) Of course the first thing i'll do is see if a cocker truly shoots further than a mag, and i'll get some pics of the test. screw it if they shoot the same distance, i will admit defeat. but if the cocker truly does shoot furthur then I want to know why, by experiments and hypothesis the whole works.

[speeddemon]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

hehe. well i'm a bionuclear aerodynamics engineer for NASA. (not really... LOL). but... In think the acceleration force is just going to be the lack of resistance and the left over air that is still being fired.

Bionuclear aerodynamics engineer?

Hehehe, thats pretty good.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by Army
There is NOTHING the gun can influence at this point.
if Gun A is accelerating and Gun B is decellerating then after the choron there will be a variation. If gun A shoots the ball from 0 to 500 to 300 (when the chrono takes the snapshot) then the ball will continue on decellerating to 175 then 120 and so on (again measurements are just for a mental image). gun B shoots it from 0 to 200 to 300 then the ball will probably hit 315 and then drop to 275 then 250 then 200 and so on, and as you can see they both chronoed the same, yet gun B decellerated at a slower pace, allowing the ball to travel at a furthur distance.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by spantol
I'm curious as to why you would think that the cocker might shoot farther than a mag, particularly in light of tonight's discussion so far.

This, again, has shades of affirming the consequent. Why are you seeking an explanation to results that you have not observed?


actually i did this so i'd know how to test it. if i could see flaws in the argument then I could formulate ways to test your concerns (and everyone elses) in experiments, which could either prove me wrong or right.

[speeddemon]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

if Gun A is accelerating and Gun B is decellerating then after the choron there will be a variation. If gun A shoots the ball from 0 to 500 to 300 (when the chrono takes the snapshot) then the ball will continue on decellerating to 175 then 120 and so on (again measurements are just for a mental image). gun B shoots it from 0 to 200 to 300 then the ball will probably hit 315 and then drop to 275 then 250 then 200 and so on, and as you can see they both chronoed the same, yet gun B decellerated at a slower pace, allowing the ball to travel at a furthur distance.

The thing is they CAN'T accelerate outside of the barrel. The pressure behind the ball equalizes within an inch of leaving the barrel if it is an unported barrel (which most barrels are not). Since there is no longer any pressure behind the ball (especially at the distance that the gun is checked at the chrono), there is nothing accelerating it, so the only force acting on it is the resistance of the air, which is the same.

[strongboy2005]

well i'm gonna go to sleep, it's 12:07 PM here on the west coast and I can barely keep my eyes open. I'll get back on tommorrow and argue some more. good night...

[Potatoboy]

I've got an idea!

Let this guy win!

Then everyone with cockers will either have to switch to a new Tournament legal marker, or chrono in lower than everyone else to stay in range after the magical acceleration!

:rolleyes:

[speeddemon]

Originally posted by Potatoboy
I've got an idea!

Let this guy win!

Then everyone with cockers will either have to switch to a new Tournament legal marker, or chrono in lower than everyone else to stay in range after the magical acceleration!

:rolleyes:

Hey, thats a great idea. Since cockers have more range, then its not fair for everyone else, so now they have to chrono in at 15 fps lower than everyone else. I can live with this.:D

[spantol]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong (it's late, I can't think this through as thoroughly as I should), but doesn't the ball's velocity increase throughout the length of the unported section of the barrel? I'm under the impression that the rate of accelation may change, but that it remains positive up until the ball hits porting or the open air.


Originally posted by strongboy2005

if Gun A is accelerating and Gun B is decellerating then after the choron there will be a variation. If gun A shoots the ball from 0 to 500 to 300 (when the chrono takes the snapshot) then the ball will continue on decellerating to 175 then 120 and so on (again measurements are just for a mental image). gun B shoots it from 0 to 200 to 300 then the ball will probably hit 315 and then drop to 275 then 250 then 200 and so on, and as you can see they both chronoed the same, yet gun B decellerated at a slower pace, allowing the ball to travel at a furthur distance.

[2xFast]

Ok...for starters, reduced deceleration DOES NOT count as acceleration...extremely poor way of putting it...if you'll stop saying that the ball accelerates after it leaves the barrel maybe I'll stop making fun of you...

I hope you're joking about the left over air...

Stop and think about how these guns fire...

Autococker:

Hammer goes forward, poppet valve goes pop, releases air into the chamber/bolt and closes, air expands, cuasing ball to go forward.

All in all pretty efficient, and I assume in the cases you are reffering to low pressure is being used, which means that the point at which the air has expanded as much as it can and still provide thrust arrives quickly.


Automag:

400 psi dumped through the bolt behind the ball. Higher initial pressure means that the air has a lot of expanding to do. Meaning that more volume will likely be filled before the expansion of the air ceases to provide thrust. The efficiency of a mag also tends to be lower, indicating wasted gas.

So what we have with the mag is a gun that releases air at a higher initial pressure, and wastes more gas. Which means that if you stop and think about it, if any gun is likely to be spitting out enough gas, at a high enough pressure to provide ANY kind of force on the ball anywhere near the end of a barrel, let allone just out side the barrel that gun would be a mag.

My point is that your argument doesn't even make sense when "bench racing" the guns...all you have to do is stop and think about it to see that an LP cocker of all guns wouldn't be able to accelerate a ball after its gone too far down the barrel.

Mags spit out alot of gas, and at high pressures, meaning that they, of all guns are more likely to accelerate a ball towards the end of a barrel.

To which you will probably make another stupid reply improperly using the word ejaculate...I don't know why I'm even bothering....


**After reading this I realize it could be taken the wrong way...my point is that strongboy's theory is total bunk, doesn't work and is especially stupid on cockers. I didn't mean to make it sound like his hype would apply to the way a mag shoots.

[speeddemon]

Originally posted by spantol
Someone correct me if I'm wrong (it's late, I can't think this through as thoroughly as I should), but doesn't the ball's velocity increase throughout the length of the unported section of the barrel? I'm under the impression that the rate of accelation may change, but that it remains positive up until the ball hits porting or the open air.



Yep, the rate of acceleration decreases as the pressure behind it drops, and the force behind the ball decreases, but the acceleration is always positive as long as there is more pressure behind the ball then there is in front of it. Once the ball reaches either a ported section or the end of the barrel, the pressure behind the ball equalizes, and the ball then declerates.

Ok, past 3 in the morning, if anyone thinks the gun makes a difference, i don't care anymore, you can be stupid all you want.

[Mossman]

Originally posted by strongboy2005
my bad. but the point still stands. a ball, once it leaves the barrel, MAY still accelerate some. I'm saying for a fraction of a second the autococker might still be accelertating while the automag would have already begun decelerating.

WRONG!!!!!!!!

The correct thing to say is "for a fraction of a second the automag might still be accelertating while the autococker would have already begun decelerating."

WOWZERS!!!! SEE WHEN I SPIN IT AROUND THE STATEMENT IS EQUALLY LOGICAL (zero logic) but it says a different thing? YONKERS!

[FlipFlops]

I like how a few pages back he says that the flatline barrel's backspin on paintballs causes them to decelerate slower during horizontal flight, and this is why it provides more distance. :)

Learn some physics, buddy. It's called the Magnus Effect, and involves high and low pressure areas around the paintball that provide lift, but not enough to counteract the force of gravity.

If you shot two paintballs, one out of a flatline and one out of a normal barrel, same speed, at 50 feet both would have the same horizontal velocity, but the flatline ball would be higher from the ground.

Try it in a vacuum and the flatline would make no difference in the flight path of a paintball.

[Army]

OK, I'm closing this, because I can see the flames closing in on us.