my new hinge frame

[spantol]

We've been over this before, strongboy. Newton's second law, force equals mass times acceleration. Restated, acceleration equals force divided by mass. There is no force behind the ball once it has left the barrel. Solving for acceleration is left as an exercise for the reader.

[spantol]

Geez, strongboy, you don't remember this thread? You started it, for crying out loud...

[Cha0tic]

well, your profile says your 16, so you probably haven't taken physics class yet. why don't you go to the bookstore and buy a few physics books and read up on some laws.

[FooTemps]

Originally posted by strongboy2005
The ball DOES accelertate out of the barrel if it accelerates more slowly down the barrel. In the example of the automag, the ball accelerates incredibly fast, making it's top speed, at the end of the barrel, 300 fps. Autocockers, at the point of chrono, have only accelerated to 3/4 of its potental. This means that the autococker will continue to accelerate up to 25% faster, resulting in a greater distance.

And like I said... That guy is spouting off bs. You see, the air propells the ball because the only way to escape is to push the ball out the barrel. Once the air reaches the tip, the air dispurses in any/every direction. That means there's no more air behind the ball pushing it. That means that you can't propell the ball any more (aka, NO MORE ACCELLERATION!). Once the ball leaves the barrel, it begins to decellerate.

[RAM3139]

Wow, i just finished reading cockermongols revolutionary new theory of physics. Everyone else already explained why its bad physics, but heres another point i saw:
"In an autococker the design is open bolt blowback. This design has an advantage of a slower rate of accleration..."
I think that pretty much ruins any credibility of that "info" page.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by FooTemps


And like I said... That guy is spouting off bs. You see, the air propells the ball because the only way to escape is to push the ball out the barrel. Once the air reaches the tip, the air dispurses in any/every direction. That means there's no more air behind the ball pushing it. That means that you can't propell the ball any more (aka, NO MORE ACCELLERATION!). Once the ball leaves the barrel, it begins to decellerate.

And, to quote you, you stated above that the air, after dispersment, will spout off in any/every direction. Does this not include behind the ball? The ball, after leaving the barrel, is aerodynamically designed to continue acceleration for as long as possible. Up to 25% increased rate. This is the advantage of slower acceleration. The ball in the cocker accelerates and when it reaches 300 fps, at the end of the barrel, it continues to accelerate beyond that point while the automag has reached its maximum velocity immediately at the exit of the barrel. As for pbstar's test, they did not test either of the guns in argument, so that is not relevant in this situation. None of the gun's mentioned in that test had the same firing action as the autococker or the automag. They were basically comparing pirahnas with spyers, obviously the distances will be very similar.

EDIT ** They also said that "excluding the Tippmann" so that totally discredits their theory. The theory stating that ANY ball exiting the barrel of the gun at 300 FPS, will travel the EXACT SAME DISTANCE in a frictionless environment. If the Tippmann has reached 300 fps, how could it go farther if it did not accelerate further? Tom Kaye already proved that backspin takes no effect on the aerodynamics of the ball's travel so how can we say it has greater distance? I believe the same rule applies in this situation, slower rate of acceleration resulting in after-barrel increased acceleration therby allowing a greater increase in the overall distance of the paintball. It makes sense.

[FreshmanBob]

Strongboy, you poor poor kid

First of all, every gun releases a certain amount of air to propell the ball. That air expands and puts force on the ball, as it expands there is less and less acceleration because the gas is expanding and has less psi. This is because you had a controlled amount of gas comming out, say a cubic inch of gas at 100 psi. The gas expands to say 2 cubic inches and goes down to 50 psi, 3 cubic inches and its 33 psi and so on. That means there is less and less force on the ball. Eventually after about 7 or 8 inches the ball is travelling faster than the expanding gas because the initial burst of gas got it going quickly. So when the gas displaces in 'each and every direction' its not moving fast enough to effect the ball.

Tom NEVER stated that backspin does not effect accurate. Don't you know what the flatline is? It uses a curved barrel to put backspin on the ball and make it go father, that is why people site the tippman as not counting because it uses backspin.

Also the ball is not aerodynamically designed to keep accelerating for as long as possible, its designed to be as cheap as possible to make. It's a circle and originally was made from the same machines that make medical pills for horses. If it was designed to fly further it'd be a bullet shape.

[spantol]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

And, to quote you, you stated above that the air, after dispersment, will spout off in any/every direction. Does this not include behind the ball? The ball, after leaving the barrel, is aerodynamically designed to continue acceleration for as long as possible. Up to 25% increased rate. This is the advantage of slower acceleration. The ball in the cocker accelerates and when it reaches 300 fps, at the end of the barrel, it continues to accelerate beyond that point while the automag has reached its maximum velocity immediately at the exit of the barrel. As for pbstar's test, they did not test either of the guns in argument, so that is not relevant in this situation. None of the gun's mentioned in that test had the same firing action as the autococker or the automag. They were basically comparing pirahnas with spyers, obviously the distances will be very similar.

Strongboy, strongboy, strongboy.... Why are you so determined to take the self-professed random speculation of a geocities webpage over rationality and simple physics? Please, that's what pbnation is for.

EDIT ** They also said that "excluding the Tippmann" so that totally discredits their theory. The theory stating that ANY ball exiting the barrel of the gun at 300 FPS, will travel the EXACT SAME DISTANCE in a frictionless environment. If the Tippmann has reached 300 fps, how could it go farther if it did not accelerate further? Tom Kaye already proved that backspin takes no effect on the aerodynamics of the ball's travel so how can we say it has greater distance? I believe the same rule applies in this situation, slower rate of acceleration resulting in after-barrel increased acceleration therby allowing a greater increase in the overall distance of the paintball. It makes sense.

Hardly. The Flatline is, as has been mentioned many, many times, a special case. Volumes have been written about the physics behind it, and at no point does a ball propelled out of a flatline accelerate after it has cleared the barrel. I suggest further acquainting yourself with the principles involved.

[la690]

did anyone read the caption belows the illustration of cocker mongols theory?

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.

[strongboy2005]

Originally posted by FreshmanBob
Strongboy, you poor poor kid

First of all, every gun releases a certain amount of air to propell the ball. That air expands and puts force on the ball, as it expands there is less and less acceleration because the gas is expanding and has less psi. This is because you had a controlled amount of gas comming out, say a cubic inch of gas at 100 psi. The gas expands to say 2 cubic inches and goes down to 50 psi, 3 cubic inches and its 33 psi and so on. That means there is less and less force on the ball. Eventually after about 7 or 8 inches the ball is travelling faster than the expanding gas because the initial burst of gas got it going quickly. So when the gas displaces in 'each and every direction' its not moving fast enough to effect the ball.

Tom NEVER stated that backspin does not effect accurate. Don't you know what the flatline is? It uses a curved barrel to put backspin on the ball and make it go father, that is why people site the tippman as not counting because it uses backspin.

Also the ball is not aerodynamically designed to keep accelerating for as long as possible, its designed to be as cheap as possible to make. It's a circle and originally was made from the same machines that make medical pills for horses. If it was designed to fly further it'd be a bullet shape.

The gas does not disperse like that inside the gun. It is a blast of air, if the pressure ceased we could not reach any kind of velocity like our paintball guns can achieve. Even if the pressure does drop, in that space it would be so insignificant it would not slow the ball. Even 1 psi more than the air outside would still have enough force on the back of the ball to continue acceleration.

On the Tippmann thing... I remember reading that Tom said that the shell on the outside of the ball would spin, but take no effect on the ball because the fill would stay in perfect stillness.

[spantol]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

The gas does not disperse like that inside the gun. It is a blast of air, if the pressure ceased we could not reach any kind of velocity like our paintball guns can achieve. Even if the pressure does drop, in that space it would be so insignificant it would not slow the ball. Even 1 psi more than the air outside would still have enough force on the back of the ball to continue acceleration.

I think I see your problem--you don't seem to understand the difference between acceleration and velocity. The pressure does indeed disperse, at which point acceleration--the rate of change in velocity--becomes zero. The ball then continues to cruise along at the velocity it had accelerated to. Acceleration requires a force behind it, force that ceases to exist once the ball has cleared the barrel.

[RAM3139]

i have an idea to convince u strongboy. Take your autococker and chrono it to 300fps, with the barrel resting on the chrono. Take ten shots like this and find the average. Back up ten feet and fire ten more, again finding the average. Back up another ten and repeat. According to your theory, an autococker (or another "openbolt blowback" as the webpage states) will have a higher velocity 20 feet away from the chrono, while an automag (or other "fast accelerating" gun) will be slower. Try it out and let the results speak for themselves.

[booyah]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

As for pbstar's test, they did not test either of the guns in argument, so that is not relevant in this situation. None of the gun's mentioned in that test had the same firing action as the autococker or the automag. They were basically comparing pirahnas with spyers, obviously the distances will be very similar.

Actually they test a shocker. the two "theories" (and i use that word in the loosest definition) that the range morons use is that closed bolt and low pressure makes a differnce. a shocker is both closed bolt and very low pressure... but makes no noticible difference.

Also, if a cocker somehow magically makes the ball accelerate slower, wouldnt you need a longer barrel to get the same velocities out of it as you would a mag?? I do like the idea someone posted of shooting then backing up and shooting another group, that should be enough to prove that the theory you propose is wrong.

[spantol]

On a related note, there's a thread over at PBNation discussing this very topic. In it, someone puts forth the first rational, physically-sound theory I've encountered for why autocockers may appear to shoot greater distances at normal velocities. RoddyMySpyder posits that the physical body design of the autococker lends itself to being held at a slight upward angle when one aims down the barrel. This may or not be the case for everyone, but at least it's an argument that follows--a refreshing alternative to the claims made in this thread.

[FooTemps]

Originally posted by strongboy2005

And, to quote you, you stated above that the air, after dispersment, will spout off in any/every direction. Does this not include behind the ball? The ball, after leaving the barrel, is aerodynamically designed to continue acceleration for as long as possible. Up to 25% increased rate. This is the advantage of slower acceleration. The ball in the cocker accelerates and when it reaches 300 fps, at the end of the barrel, it continues to accelerate beyond that point while the automag has reached its maximum velocity immediately at the exit of the barrel. As for pbstar's test, they did not test either of the guns in argument, so that is not relevant in this situation. None of the gun's mentioned in that test had the same firing action as the autococker or the automag. They were basically comparing pirahnas with spyers, obviously the distances will be very similar.

EDIT ** They also said that "excluding the Tippmann" so that totally discredits their theory. The theory stating that ANY ball exiting the barrel of the gun at 300 FPS, will travel the EXACT SAME DISTANCE in a frictionless environment. If the Tippmann has reached 300 fps, how could it go farther if it did not accelerate further? Tom Kaye already proved that backspin takes no effect on the aerodynamics of the ball's travel so how can we say it has greater distance? I believe the same rule applies in this situation, slower rate of acceleration resulting in after-barrel increased acceleration therby allowing a greater increase in the overall distance of the paintball. It makes sense.

OOPS! hahaha, I forgot to mention air always takes the path of least resistance. That's why the air would flow around and about the ball, not stay behind it.