How fragile paint with L7 vs. L10 bolts?

[GoatBoy]

two things:

1. you don't get folks around the world to help you by calling them all dumb as monkeys. i've never said such things, and people still hated the notion of actually going out and testing things when they thought my tests were bunk. i always have encouraged them to do so, and really, the entire point of punkworks being a forum, was to get other folks to test other things, or re-test our stuff, and really to have a real scientific community in paintball. but no one wanted that, if a test didn't reinforce there preconceived notion, they just *****ed and moaned and called me (us) names.

hell, they still do it.

2. that exact test was actually done. its actually a great test method, it is however extremely time consuming and expensive. i understand why it was hard, cause i freakin did it, but to actually test what we wanted to test, it was the only way.

Whether or not someone runs a test is independent of whether or not I call them a monkey. I haven't seen any evidence where buddying up to a liar made him ... not a liar, nor have I seen evidence for the converse of that.

i.e. did anyone calling you names ever make you want to ... stop running tests?

What matters is the barrier to entry to testing. It has to be lowered. How low? Monkey level.

After having explained the method for catching the paint, do you still think the test itself would not yield results? Don't get distracted by the monkey business. It's the test that matters.

[Spider-TW]

It has to be lowered. How low? Monkey level.

I have a mechanical typewriter, but flinging poo is more fun.

[cockerpunk]

Whether or not someone runs a test is independent of whether or not I call them a monkey. I haven't seen any evidence where buddying up to a liar made him ... not a liar, nor have I seen evidence for the converse of that.

i.e. did anyone calling you names ever make you want to ... stop running tests?

What matters is the barrier to entry to testing. It has to be lowered. How low? Monkey level.

After having explained the method for catching the paint, do you still think the test itself would not yield results? Don't get distracted by the monkey business. It's the test that matters.

no, we only really stopped doing testing because the investment in instrumentation to improve and study the next things we wanted to, was prohibitively expensive. people on forums don't like argument enders. the point of forums is to have arguments/discussions, so they don't much like it when someone comes in and can end the argument. this simply means the argument now becomes about the person who can end the technical argument ie, personal attacks.

having caught a lot of paintballs, its very unpredictable and very bad for the paintballs. you will get like cracked and leaking paintballs, which will dirty up the rest of the balls, you will break some, no matter how nicely you plan to catch them, its just a huge variable. catching paintballs was a constant problem for us in testing, our rig to do so was always under development.

this is why for low cost of entry, i'd recommend taking an established brand of paint, dropping its temp, and then shooting a fixed number of them and counting the breaks. ie, you take marbalizer, lower its temp to 35 degrees, and then shoot a bag of it (500), counting the breaks, and cleaning the gun/loader between each break. should give you a fairly large sample. but fairly cheaply and easily.

[Spider-TW]

people on forums don't like argument enders. the point of forums is to have arguments/discussions, so they don't much like it when someone comes in and can end the argument.

That is often true, but people also put up "science" and say that other people won't do the work to get the (statistically significant) proof. The basic, low energy answer is "no, I won't work to prove your point for you and to prove that I am wrong." Arguments and abuse are free.

[GoatBoy]

no, we only really stopped doing testing because the investment in instrumentation to improve and study the next things we wanted to, was prohibitively expensive. people on forums don't like argument enders. the point of forums is to have arguments/discussions, so they don't much like it when someone comes in and can end the argument. this simply means the argument now becomes about the person who can end the technical argument ie, personal attacks.

Right, so that pretty much validates what I'm saying. I totally hear you guys regarding the attitude.

Where I think we should be is with testing where the barrier is lowered so far that you can reasonably tell the other parties to just run the tests themselves. Basically put the onus back on them. If they disagree with the test, then the onus, again, is on them to run the more expensive test to disprove the cheaper one, which is a really good place to be.

If you ran out of runway because the investment in instrumentation was prohibitively expensive, you went the opposite direction. Understandable, but I think if you are really clever with the tests, you can get a lot done for much cheaper.

having caught a lot of paintballs, its very unpredictable and very bad for the paintballs. you will get like cracked and leaking paintballs, which will dirty up the rest of the balls, you will break some, no matter how nicely you plan to catch them, its just a huge variable. catching paintballs was a constant problem for us in testing, our rig to do so was always under development.

this is why for low cost of entry, i'd recommend taking an established brand of paint, dropping its temp, and then shooting a fixed number of them and counting the breaks. ie, you take marbalizer, lower its temp to 35 degrees, and then shoot a bag of it (500), counting the breaks, and cleaning the gun/loader between each break. should give you a fairly large sample. but fairly cheaply and easily.

Broke a lot of paint this weekend which reminded me of this thread, although I was testing way too many parts simultaneously to be able to narrow things down.

I didn't know you had already tried catching paint, although I'm not sure if you tried catching the way I would, specifically without even a barrel attached. As soon as a ball cracks or breaks, that is considered the end for that ball and is no longer fired. There shouldn't be that much fouling of subsequent paint because we are literally doing one ball at a time.

In a way, the test can self-validate itself. If I take brittle paint and successfully fire and catch it a large number of times, then the method of catching the paint can't possibly be causing that much damage.

One of these weekends I might try this out. The biggest barrier for me is actually lack of facilities. Hard to kind of use a field when the field is... in use. I don't have any other facilities available to me.