What do you guys think of Hamerhead Rifled Barrels?

[Lohman446]

If anyone knows where I can get my hands on a highspeed camera (just rent it or borrow it that is) I'll put an end to the question of "does the ball spin comming out of a hammerhead"

Lohman446: why ban the apex? have you ever seen someone try to play speedball with it? I watched someone try at the IAO where I was reffing, he spent all his time playing with the barrel and no time shooting or moving.... guess how efective that was in order to make it work you would have to just set it to increas range and leave it there, basicaly like having a flatline except you would be shooting slower as with the flatline you set the gun at 280 and you are done, with the apex you have to chrono at 280 with no backspin then turn it on after. (thus slowing down the ball) the same way as with the galactic z body mag

We banned it under the theory that one could adjust velocity on field without the use of tools, thus making it illegal. Well I appreciate the fact it was downward, I still went with it

[SR_matt]

Sorry, but your statements are simply revealing a complete ignorance of ballistics and physics.

NOTHING could put more consistent a spin on a projectile than spinning the barrel.

How on earth does one method of imparting a spin create a different spin than the other?

With out "biting" into the projectile, it's IMPOSSIBLE for any spin to be imparted. Consistent or otherwise.

The second part is just funny. Not only does the hammer head have rifling that can't affect a paintball passing through the barrel, but it has too tiny a twist to give any effect even if it did. :rofl:

so ok spinning a barrel that the ball barely glides down will impart spin but rifiling that the ball glides on wont? ya that makes a whole lot of sence.

and yet again becasue it wont do crap on paper doesnt mean it wont change anything in real life.

-matt

[Lohman446]

so ok spinning a barrel that the ball barely glides down will impart spin but rifiling that the ball glides on wont? ya that makes a whole lot of sence.

and yet again becasue it wont do crap on paper doesnt mean it wont change anything in real life.

-matt

The barrel, the marker (and the ball inside) were all spun on a special machine. So unless that ball was just sitting still while everything around it was spinning - yes.

PHYSICS, if fully understood and considered, mean something in real life.

[Drizit]

We banned it under the theory that one could adjust velocity on field without the use of tools, thus making it illegal. Well I appreciate the fact it was downward, I still went with it

fair enough, do you also ban the zbody then though? also loosening any barrel will drop the velocity... or the cheeters version loosen it for chrono then tighten it up on the field... we should then all have setscrews on the barrel

SR_matt: In Tom's test the barrel was spun to 30,000 rpm and kept there until both the ball and fill had matched speeds with it. While I feel the Hammerhead is an excellent barrel system (I own two) I won't say for sure it's the spin the rifling puts on the ball, in fact until I see high speed footage I won't even go so far as to say it even does impart any significant amount of spin... However previous statements saying that any spin put on the ball will be lost as soon as it exits the barrel are obviously wrong or none of the backspin products would work, and no one disputes the flatline, apex, zbody, and undertow bolt all give better range due to spin placed on the ball while still in the marker.

as I've said before I won't clame that the hammerhead imparts any spin or that it's the spin that makes it shoot well, I just say it shoots well for whatever reason. Again in my opinion.

Have fun, but dont try and pass off your test as fact, its gonna be a subjective test, not Empirical (sp?).

Why would it be subjective? If I actually do everything I say I plan on doing, in a controlled environment, and only provide the data obtained from the test then how is that not quantitative and conclusive? (Oh and double check that you meant to use the word Empirical, the definition may not be exactly what you intended.) I will be attempting to use scientific method to the best of my ability. And data will be gotten through measurement of results not through sitting at the back of the target range and saying "this is better because I have one"

[Lohman446]

However previous statements saying that any spin put on the ball will be lost as soon as it exits the barrel are obviously wrong or none of the backspin products would work, and no one disputes the flatline, apex, zbody, and undertow bolt all give better range due to spin placed on the ball while still in the marker.

It has to do with the direction of spin compared to the axis of flight - we are not debating backspin works. Backspin is far different than the spin on the axis parrellel to the flight of the paintball. So well it is "obvious" to you its not actually accurate.

[MANN]

My friend just purchased a hammerhead barrel. I am going to get that and my freak, and do some testing. One thing I did notice is that both freak, and hammerhead barrels are not exact on there measurements. hammerhead barrels and the ss freaks are closer to there marked diameter, but both are off. (I tested 4 freak kits both ss and alum, and 1 hammerhead to arrive at this conclusion) I will record the data, and post it in a couple of days/a week when I have time to do the test

I dont beleive in spinning, because I have had 400 level fluid mechanics classes, and beleive more in physics/fluids/dynamics than so and so. Either way they both shoot straight, and I am going to test these out, and post the data

/continue arguing

[cyrus-the-virus]

:spit_take

[SR_matt]

drizit, i am not saying nessecarly that the hamemr haed puts spin on the ball, in fact i believe it just controls the spin of the ball (preventing the ball from rolling any way it wants to )

-matt

[Drizit]

It has to do with the direction of spin compared to the axis of flight - we are not debating backspin works. Backspin is far different than the spin on the axis parrellel to the flight of the paintball. So well it is "obvious" to you its not actually accurate.

The thing is it was stated that the fill in the ball killed the spin as soon as it left the barrel, this would apply no matter what direction you spin the ball, go back to tom's glass of ice water example, if you put the ice water in a globe and spin it any direction I bet the results are the same. A ball spun backwards continues to spin after exit why then would axile spin stop any faster?

[Lohman446]

The thing is it was stated that the fill in the ball killed the spin as soon as it left the barrel, this would apply no matter what direction you spin the ball, go back to tom's glass of ice water example, if you put the ice water in a globe and spin it any direction I bet the results are the same. A ball spun backwards continues to spin after exit why then would axile spin stop any faster?

It does - controlled testing indicates it does.

[Drizit]

drizit, i am not saying nessecarly that the hamemr haed puts spin on the ball, in fact i believe it just controls the spin of the ball (preventing the ball from rolling any way it wants to )

-matt

I'd buy that but I'll hold of judgement until I get access to high speed footage.



[QUOTE=lohman446]It does - controlled testing indicates it does.[QUOTE]

sounds odd but I can't comment from experience on it, (and I'm willing to defer to someone with a degrea in fluid mechanics) how would a spinning sphear be slowed by it's liquid contents faster in one direction then another?

[MANN]

how would a spinning sphear be slowed by it's liquid contents faster in one direction then another?

It is because its coeficient of friction is greater when spining in different axial directions than the other.

IMO it has more to do with the fact that paintballs are not spherical. I beleive that that is the reason that paintballs do not go straight.

[cyrus-the-virus]

Round and round we go where we stop nobody know's

[Drizit]

It is because its coeficient of friction is greater when spining in different axial directions than the other.

Odd, I'll take your word for it but is there that much differance in friction that the ball would stop spinning almost right away for a lateral spin vs. a vertical one? I would infact think that the friction would be greater for backspin as the acceleration would prevent the fill from following the spin whereas a lateral spin imparted by rifleing (or a spinning barrel) would not compeat with the acceleration of the ball.

IMO it has more to do with the fact that paintballs are not spherical. I beleive that that is the reason that paintballs do not go straight.

That's my opinion on why paintballs go all over the place as well.