Hammerhead barrels, and their lies!

[SlartyBartFast]

Ya know, I unsubscribed from this thread as I figured it was dead in the water and jousting with the troll just wasn't amusing me anymore.

But in so doing, I had missed the post from Hammerhead (Arson51/Robert Judson).

What a riot. Spin!=rotation.

Can't Mike or Arson51 adress even one of the points made against them?

It's like arguing with fundamentalist religious types. They sit back a smuggly declare tehmselves victorious because they decalre IT is the truth because IT is written (or some other vacuous circular argument) while the sentient and logical break apart having a deep philisophical argument.

Army and Bill, you agree with each other. Stop.

Anyone who supports Hammerhead: Give us some proof of the claims please. Basic science says you have to prove the claim/hypothesis. Not the falsehood (indeed scientifically it is impossible to prove negatives).

[Arson51]

Ya know, I unsubscribed from this thread as I figured it was dead in the water and jousting with the troll just wasn't amusing me anymore.

But in so doing, I had missed the post from Hammerhead (Arson51/Robert Judson).

What a riot. Spin!=rotation.

Can't Mike or Arson51 adress even one of the points made against them?

It's like arguing with fundamentalist religious types. They sit back a smuggly declare tehmselves victorious because they decalre IT is the truth because IT is written (or some other vacuous circular argument) while the sentient and logical break apart having a deep philisophical argument.

Army and Bill, you agree with each other. Stop.

Anyone who supports Hammerhead: Give us some proof of the claims please. Basic science says you have to prove the claim/hypothesis. Not the falsehood (indeed scientifically it is impossible to prove negatives).

Im on holiday right now Im not able to get on the computer often, I plan to call him and discuss what he mailed to me once Im not enjoying cockails on the beach, and partying until dawn's break .

I'd like to respond but Im seriously intimidated by some of the very competent regulars here. Id pipe in but every time I have a good idea its posted quicker, and more eloquently than I would manage. Actually I caught a nasty cold with chills nasal drainage and everything .

[Miscue]

Bill, the Flatline uses the entire length of the barrel to roll the ball into a backspin (magnus effect), the ball is in hard contact all the way out. The ball and fill begin rotation at the same speed, at the same time. (slowly turn the glass of water, liquid will follow). Let's call it 1 full second of barrel influence.

Hammerhead claims to spin the ball axially (point on, like a football), with minimum at best contact with the very abreviated rifled section of the barrel (spin the glas 1/8 turn quickly, liquid will not follow). Any possible rotation given the ball, will be too fast for the liquid inside to follow. The shell will slow and stop.....much like spinning a raw egg. Let's call it 1/100 of a second.

1 full second of hard influence, compared to 1/100th of a second of marginal, if any at all, influence.

Which is all a moot point. Earlier testing with very slow, to very high rotational values concluded that axial rotation does nothing for the accuracy potential of paintballs.

I am sure that Hammerhead barrels are very well made, at least the few I have been able to examine. But unsubstantiated and unproven claims are the focus of this thread. Hammerhead barrels do NOT induce increased accuracy due to some arbitrary rotational value, which cannot be achieved by conventional firearm style rifling in the first place.

I've too many years in real life ballistic research, and many years in paintball. I can process reality with fiction, and easily discern the difference:)

I still... very much dislike any comparison between paintball fill and water / raw eggs / etc... it makes me cringe. I don't find it pertinent.

I don't understand "1 full second" of barrel influence. For a 12" barrel... that's roughly 60 fps. Ok... if I stop to think about what you're trying to say... you're kinda making up some kind of comparative scale... and I kinda get the point that's trying to be made. Still don't like it. I also don't like the idea that a longer duration of contact implies significantly more spin.

Supposing that the "rifling" of the Hammerhead actually did anything... it also goes for most of the barrel length.

[Miscue]

Ya know, I unsubscribed from this thread as I figured it was dead in the water and jousting with the troll just wasn't amusing me anymore.

But in so doing, I had missed the post from Hammerhead (Arson51/Robert Judson).

What a riot. Spin!=rotation.

Can't Mike or Arson51 adress even one of the points made against them?

It's like arguing with fundamentalist religious types. They sit back a smuggly declare tehmselves victorious because they decalre IT is the truth because IT is written (or some other vacuous circular argument) while the sentient and logical break apart having a deep philisophical argument.

Army and Bill, you agree with each other. Stop.

Anyone who supports Hammerhead: Give us some proof of the claims please. Basic science says you have to prove the claim/hypothesis. Not the falsehood (indeed scientifically it is impossible to prove negatives).

They don't have to. People like us are not going to buy it anyway. The people they fool will not think to question it, they will just believe. That's their target customer - the ignoramus. Plenty of them out there with cash in their pockets. Hey... I believed that SmartParts spiral rifling worked too, and that somehow some barrels were more accurate than others - when I first got into paintball and didn't know anything. However... I was always very skeptical because I never had a clear answer as to why that was... and more information on this subject was unavailable to me.

And I don't really blame Hammerhead too much for doing that - don't like it either. The barrel market is pretty saturated... gotta offer some kind of novelty to attract customers - even if it's Dumbo's magic feather (as suggested by Shartley) that they are offering.

[Mike Smith]

When I'm having a discussion with anyone, I always look for the intentional misrepresentation made by that person, such as:

I've too many years in real life ballistic research, and many years in paintball. I can process reality with fiction, and easily discern the difference

And

Bill, the Flatline uses the entire length of the barrel to roll the ball into a backspin (magnus effect), the ball is in hard contact all the way out.

Wrong. The flatline is curved for maybe 1/3 of its length. I'm wondering if this "expert" is contending that the straight part of the flatline is inducing spin on the ball, too?

And then we have the blanket "informed" statements, such as:

People like us are not going to buy it anyway. The people they fool will not think to question it, they will just believe.

Despite the fact that the Hammerhead clearly improved the accuracy of my gun, based on my 14-year history with my Mag, this person just "knows" I've been duped....


Yea.... Right.....

[Lohman446]

I question anyone that mentions extended testing, goes straight to there "credentials" and never bothers to show us how these tests were conducted or the outcome.

[shartley]

[Muzikman]

I guess I would have had to actually seen Dumbo to understand that post:)

There are now two barrels that prove that you CAN "spin" a paintball (Flatline & BT Apex). Both however spin the ball on a different axis than what the hammerhead claims.

The new BT Apex barrel also proves that to spin a ball you only need about 2" of travel in a 12-14" barrel.

Does this prove the Hammerhead really works...nope. But it does prove you can spin a paintball.

[zupe]

See what happens when Tom retires............ fresh tread, more traction, maybe more people should retire and get a grip

[VFX_Fenix]

Wrong. The flatline is curved for maybe 1/3 of its length. I'm wondering if this "expert" is contending that the straight part of the flatline is inducing spin on the ball, too?.

Actually he's correct, because of the initial curvature of the Flatline barrel the ball will ride the top surface of the barrel until it exits the barrel because of centripital force. The ball is influenced by the upper surface of the Flatline Barrel for the entire length of that barrel once the ball comes in contact with that surface. The same principle works with Hi-Ligh(sp?) scoops (I have no idea what the propper term for these are) and roller coasters and just about everything else that you can imagine that follows a curved path which is then allowed to travel more or less freely on its own.

[SlartyBartFast]

See what happens when Tom retires............ fresh tread, more traction, maybe more people should retire and get a grip

Considering the fount of knowledge, research, and insight that AGD represented under the leadership of TK, it's quite disappointing that the current president reminas virtually invisible on AO and only surfaces to make a snide remark.

Oh, well. Looks like if discussing the fundamentals of physics and paintball dynamics is "failing to get a grip" we can no longer count on AGD to be a source of hype free information. Does this forshadow a new direction for AGD products....

[Target Practice]

Wrong. The flatline is curved for maybe 1/3 of its length. I'm wondering if this "expert" is contending that the straight part of the flatline is inducing spin on the ball, too?

I just want to chime in and say that the expert you're referring to has forgotten more about ballistics than you'll ever learn.

[Mike Smith]

Actually he's correct, because of the initial curvature of the Flatline barrel the ball will ride the top surface of the barrel until it exits the barrel because of centripital force.

Oh? So centrifical force, combined with the "standard issue" pixie dust, keeps that paintball firmly attached to the top of the straight part of the barrel so it can continue to pick up spin from the previously curved part of the barrel?

Yea.... Right.....

[hitech]

Oh? So centrifical force...

I believe he said centripetal force.

Centripetal (meaning "center seeking" in Latin) means directed towards the center. CENTRIPETAL FORCE Centripetal force is a force that acts upon a body moving in a curved path. This force is directed towards the center of the curvature of the path. It is equal to, but opposite the centrifugal force.

Centrifugal (meaning "center fleeing" in Latin) means directed outwards from the center. CENTRIFUGAL FORCE Centrifugal force is a force that acts upon a body spinning on an axis. This force is directed away from the body. Centrifugal force is equal to, but opposite the centripeta force.

[VFX_Fenix]

Oh? So centrifical force, combined with the "standard issue" pixie dust, keeps that paintball firmly attached to the top of the straight part of the barrel so it can continue to pick up spin from the previously curved part of the barrel?

Yea.... Right.....

It's centripetal force (center seeking) for one, and the pixie dust you're talking about is basic Newtonian physics that's taught in colleges and highschools around the world.

Centrifugal force (center fleeing) is a false force.