ASTM and 50Cal

[Beemer]

HERE

[BigEvil]

That should pretty much be the end of the big 50 Cal push.


***edit*** FIX YOUR QUOTE TAGS. Do I have to teach you how to post on the internet or what?? Ugh, AO isnt what it used to be LOL


So, how come no one makes a ball that is 68 Caliber and 3.5 g? The heavier, the better, no?

[Ando]

That should pretty much be the end of the big 50 Cal push.


***edit*** FIX YOUR QUOTE TAGS. Do I have to teach you how to post on the internet or what?? Ugh, AO isnt what it used to be LOL


So, how come no one makes a ball that is 68 Caliber and 3.5 g? The heavier, the more bloodier, no?

....FIXED

[xero28]

[Beemer]

So, how come no one makes a ball that is 68 Caliber and 3.5 g? The heavier, the better, no?

The heavier and Smaller the better. Its not 68 much anymore. Its smaller and lighter these days. Any guesses why.

How many fields allow 300FPS these days.

Over the years the paint has got lighter and smaller. The velocity has dropped to around 280FPS and the range has been shortened on Small fields.

[Gadget]

Nothing in that article changes the current situation.

The .50 paint from GI MilSim available today weighs 1.21g, well within the ASTM spec. According to MCB data .50 balls would only need to weigh 1.6g to perform as well as .68 paint weighing 3.0g at 300fps.

The ASTM limits have no impact on .50 cal at all (sadly!) unless .68 manufacturers start to increase the weight of their paint from the current 3.0 - 3.2g up to the max 3.5g.

[MANN]

The velocity has dropped to around 280FPS

Only to protect people from pressure spikes. Insurance dictates that you must be below 300(or at least it was ~4 years ago when I was shopping for field insurance). Inexperienced players with markers they know nothing of will create pressure spikes over 300 if you chrono at 300.

I dare to say that alot of Xvalve owners dont realize the velocity differences you can achieve with changing the amount of time between trigger pulls/releases.

If one chooses to use a consistent marker this is not a problem.

[punkncat]

Just out of curiousity. Aren't ASTM standards the same ones that the paintball industry has been ignoring all these years about BPS, etc.?

[Frizzle Fry]

Just out of curiousity. Aren't ASTM standards the same ones that the paintball industry has been ignoring all these years about BPS, etc.?

Well, their velocity standards, paintball weight standards and mask standards have all been pretty well enforced.

[Chronobreak]

Well, their velocity standards, paintball weight standards and mask standards have all been pretty well enforced.

i wouldnt go that far,

i would say most have been adheard to, but i dont think they are actively being enforced.

[maniacmechanic]

I dare to say that alot of Xvalve owners dont realize the velocity differences you can achieve with changing the amount of time between trigger pulls/releases.

Some of us do

[thejere]

Nothing in that article changes the current situation. The .50 paint from GI MilSim available today weighs 1.21g, well within the ASTM spec. According to MCB data .50 balls would only need to weigh 1.6g to perform as well as .68 paint weighing 3.0g at 300fps. The ASTM limits have no impact on .50 cal at all (sadly!) unless .68 manufacturers start to increase the weight of their paint from the current 3.0 - 3.2g up to the max 3.5g.

But can they develop a heavy enough fill? Consider, a .50 cal has about 40% the volume of a .68 cal and were are currently seeing 1.21g and 3 to 3.1g respectively for weight. Check the math and see that right now the .50's are being filled with the same paint. A fill nearly twice as heavy is needed to bring .50 to 2.6g ASTM limit.

I don't think .50cal will be adopted if it performs 'on par' with .68cal. Why invest in a whole new rig for the same end result?
.50cals biggest obstacles: Bouncing and marking. Will a heavier fill induce more breakage or is that a function of shell thickness? Will a heavier fill be more viscous because an elimination is still greater than a quarter.

[Frizzle Fry]

Uhhhhhh...

yes, at anything over 1.5 grams the .50 would be superior to .68.

I'm not quite sure what to think, though I do know that they have enough trouble breaking already and 1.1g

[Ando]

How would they make the fill heavier

Lead shot

[automagmasta]

How would they make the fill heavier

Lead shot

they could go back to the old clay-base fill like the old pro caps stuff. that is heavy, bloody, and staining. VERY staining. However, no one has any reason to think we are going to switch to .50 cal. at PB expo this year (as I have heard from the local field owner) Most if not all field owners rejected the idea of even having co-exitence between .50 cal and .68 cal. While .50 cal has higher profit rates, field owners just dont like the idea. And I hate to break it to GI milsim, but if the fields dont like it, it ain't taking off. And most if not all of the manufacturers have scrapped the .50 cal stuff IIRC.


And on a side note, CCM had the .50 cal idea produced and rejected long before GI milsim made a big deal about it.