.50 cal accuracy test

[Frizzle Fry]

....and come on Frizz old chap. No mater what, you're going to be spending 20-60 min f'en with the cocker anyways

Reason I never got one back in the day. Too much work.

...And that's why I've only ever owned that one cocker; the rest of my "sheridan-style aluminum markers" are Snipers.

[MANN]

...But paintball isn't played in a bubble. If your goal is to test the efficiency of both paints in a controlled environment and then compare them, you've succeeded, but I fail to see the value of your tests to paintball manufacturers and players if that's true.

Yes, but you have to try to remove as many variables when testing something. The best of the best inside with no variables is going to preform the best of the best outside. No paint/barrel preforms better when hot/cold.

[mostpeople]

The other thing to note during the testing, is that the .50 cal is slower, considerably slower. Thus the reason it probably wont hurt as bad.

Cya .50 cal

http://www.techpb.com/forum/Index.php?showtopic=65591

[Frizzle Fry]

Yes, but you have to try to remove as many variables when testing something. The best of the best inside with no variables is going to preform the best of the best outside. No paint/barrel preforms better when hot/cold.

...Yes, they do. That's why there is "winter" paint, "rain" barrels without porting, and more.

Humidity, wind, temperature, and plenty of other variables effect how different valve systems and different fills, shells, and sizes of paint perform. In removing those elements when testing two different sizes of paint against one another is just silly; it will only show how those paints and marker systems perform in that specific environment. Heat can make paintballs sweat, humidity can make paintballs expand, cold can make them shrink, cold can reduce c02 expansion... Obviously wet paintballs bleed, and even a light wind can effect the velocity and accuracy of a paintball in flight.

While ideally every game of paintball would be played at 74* with no wind and 0 humidity, that just doesn't happen much.



The same issue came up several years ago in Airsoft. 6mm and 8mm bbs were tested at Clarence Lai's shop and it was found that 6mm bbs (proportionately weighted to their 8mm counterpart) performed better in range and accuracy with GBB and NBB guns. Then followup testing in from Tanio Kobayashi and a group of engineers (who were ironically opposed to Marushins 8mm market) found that in even slightly windy conditions the 6mm was greatly outperformed by the 8mm in range, accuracy, and even efficiency when chronographed to the then-industry standard of 450fps.

[Old School 626]

After watching the video and looking for but not finding the supporting spreadsheet I have come to the conclusion that 50 cal does NOT provide a substantial improvement in performance and anticipating that there will be little difference in retail paint prices I will NOT be switching. Good luck with your efforts to create "buzz" to get the agglets to adopt 50 cal.

[Frizzle Fry]

Good luck with your efforts to create "buzz" to get the agglets to adopt 50 cal.

C'mon. That's just stupid

Seriously, this is just the tip of the iceburg (or maybe icecube in the long run) when it comes to testing and comparison of the .50cal and .68cal paintball... Last I checked, CockerPunk and Brycelarson didn't pick up their paychecks from GI Milsim and niether of their last names are "Italia" or "Gardner".

Tossing around the "agglet" phrase and making unfounded accusations doesn't make you "cool" and won't earn you any respect.

[going_home]

I don't think these guys are pushing this stuff any more than Carter or Mike are pushing .50 cal. Its putting the data out there. That's all. The link to the spreadsheet upper rh corner in the video description. Someone posted where they watched a tourney with the Kingman .43 cal pistols and it was bounce heaven.

[MANN]

...Yes, they do. That's why there is "winter" paint, "rain" barrels without porting, and more.

Humidity, wind, temperature, and plenty of other variables effect how different valve systems and different fills, shells, and sizes of paint perform. In removing those elements when testing two different sizes of paint against one another is just silly; it will only show how those paints and marker systems perform in that specific environment. Heat can make paintballs sweat, humidity can make paintballs expand, cold can make them shrink, cold can reduce c02 expansion... Obviously wet paintballs bleed, and even a light wind can effect the velocity and accuracy of a paintball in flight.

While ideally every game of paintball would be played at 74* with no wind and 0 humidity, that just doesn't happen much.

Rain barrels are nothing but a gimmick. Second to riffling. A few wraps of electrical tape will keep any water out of your barrel. Porting makes no difference in accuracy. (sorry hammerhead)

As for all the other conditions. They are going to affect both 50cal and 68 cal the same. (to my knowledge they are made out of the same material on the shell) The temp, humidity, etc, etc are going to affect both balls equally.

The only thing that would affect one more than the other is wind. In this I personally dont care. If the wind is blowing then you have to just adjust where you aim to where the paint is going to hit.

Again to test a specific performance in a "system" you have to hold all variables constant to compare one specific constraint. CP is correct in testing the caliber differences indoors. If you feel that this gives one an advantage you are wrong.

[cockerpunk]

Good luck with your efforts to create "buzz" to get the agglets to adopt 50 cal.

now thats just downright disrespectful.

1. you assume we are pro-50 cal.
2. you assume we do this to create buzz
3. agglet? what is this, MCB? (sorry MCBers, its a joke ... )

of course, none of those three things are true. PunkWorks has no dog in the fight. we put the data out there to inform consumers so that they can make an educated choice. we are pro-science, we follow the chain of evidence.

in this case, the assumption that less mass meant less range AND less accuracy was false. range is certainly reduced, but accuracy seems pretty comparable.

[Beemer]

Watching thread closely. Stay on topic. This wont turn into one of those Threads.

Remember where you are posting.

[Beemer]

in this case, the assumption that less mass meant less range AND less accuracy was false. range is certainly reduced, but accuracy seems pretty comparable.

Less mass = Less range. Whats the comparison at a longer range then?

[cockerpunk]

Less mass = Less range. Whats the comparison at a longer range then?

i think you missed where i placed the emphasis. it was on the "and"

with simple high school physics mathematics it is easy to show that less mass means less range, and in this case, 50 cal is also tougher, so less effective range. however, the assumption that less mass meant less accuracy was not sustained. even with the less mass, the 50 cal showed comparable accuracy.

[Lohman446]

:P Gotta love this. Even if the face of testing either side is capable of maintaining an argument that the tests benefit there preheld beleifs.

[Beemer]

Thats my point. 68 will have BETTER range at same FPS.

[cockerpunk]

Thats my point. 68 will have BETTER range at same FPS.

i dont think anyone is disputing this.