[Cookybiscuit]

This is probably covered somewhere in a test but is there numbers on how much control bore effects things like consistency and efficiency? Also I remember in a video it was mentioned that data seems to suggest that a control bore somewhere around 9" would be best, do we know how much better a control bore of this length would be? I'm guessing not since to my knowledge it dosent exist.

Thanks.

[rntlee]

Here's one I did...marker was rechrono'd with each barrel, so I can't comment on efficiency differences though. Consistency was best with the 5" length.

[brycelarson]

http://www.punkworks...x.php?p=7&id=42

[cockerpunk]

on the whole spools seemed more sensitive to control bore, but both really were better in the 8-10 inch range.

[Iktinos]

Forgive me, I'm confused. This seems to show that you used the same control bore, the same barrel back, with different tips and different length tips. Have you guys done a test where you shot something like the TechT iFit, a Smart Parts barrel system, and the FLASC setup to show that the FLASC, with it's longer control bore, was more consistent? Or accurate? Or whatever it is that you guys are testing for that shows that a longer control bore like the FLASC is the best of the choices?

[cockerpunk]

Iktinos, on 01 November 2011 - 10:42 AM, said:

Forgive me, I'm confused. This seems to show that you used the same control bore, the same barrel back, with different tips and different length tips. Have you guys done a test where you shot something like the TechT iFit, a Smart Parts barrel system, and the FLASC setup to show that the FLASC, with it's longer control bore, was more consistent? Or accurate? Or whatever it is that you guys are testing for that shows that a longer control bore like the FLASC is the best of the choices?

we did a test where we used multiple custom made different length FLASC barrel backs, and used teh different fronts to make them all the same length. i believe bryce already linked to it. done on both poppit valved guns (sniper/ego) and a spool (matrix).

[Iktinos]

cockerpunk, on 01 November 2011 - 11:00 AM, said:

Iktinos, on 01 November 2011 - 10:42 AM, said:

Forgive me, I'm confused. This seems to show that you used the same control bore, the same barrel back, with different tips and different length tips. Have you guys done a test where you shot something like the TechT iFit, a Smart Parts barrel system, and the FLASC setup to show that the FLASC, with it's longer control bore, was more consistent? Or accurate? Or whatever it is that you guys are testing for that shows that a longer control bore like the FLASC is the best of the choices?

we did a test where we used multiple custom made different length FLASC barrel backs, and used teh different fronts to make them all the same length. i believe bryce already linked to it. done on both poppit valved guns (sniper/ego) and a spool (matrix).

I get it, I misread it. So the first number is how long of a control bore each barrel was, and then you have extensions and tips to make the barrel around 14-14.5 inches?

[brycelarson]

Iktinos, on 01 November 2011 - 01:26 PM, said:

I get it, I misread it. So the first number is how long of a control bore each barrel was, and then you have extensions and tips to make the barrel around 14-14.5 inches?

exactly. We couldn't make everything exactly the same length due to the lengths of the various extensions we had - but they're all very close.

[Iktinos]

Again, if I get this correctly, the 9" control bore had the best consistency until you got the largest bore size tested, in the top three tests?

The middle and left showed the SD in velocity with each bore diameter using the same .681ish paint through sizes of .700 to .680? And the last one was specific to an Ego9, using the same method as the above charts?

[cockerpunk]

yup!

[Cookybiscuit]

*Goes on the phone to CP and yells at them to make 9" barrel backs*



Why haven't manufacturers tested this their selves and realized more is better? Or is it a case of manufacturing costs or the benefits not being big enough?

[zuchaka]

very interesting

[brycelarson]

Cookybiscuit, on 01 November 2011 - 03:22 PM, said:

Why haven't manufacturers tested this their selves and realized more is better? Or is it a case of manufacturing costs or the benefits not being big enough?

yes, manufacture costs. the longer the barrel the longer the tools required to make them - short barrels and two piece barrels are cheaper to make than long and single piece barrels.

[Cookybiscuit]

brycelarson, on 01 November 2011 - 03:54 PM, said:

yes, manufacture costs. the longer the barrel the longer the tools required to make them - short barrels and two piece barrels are cheaper to make than long and single piece barrels.

I see, thats a shame.

[cockerpunk]

Cookybiscuit, on 01 November 2011 - 03:22 PM, said:

*Goes on the phone to CP and yells at them to make 9" barrel backs*



Why haven't manufacturers tested this their selves and realized more is better? Or is it a case of manufacturing costs or the benefits not being big enough?

notice how control bores have been getting longer and longer ...

new shaft
GnB kit
new empire kit with the empire pump ...

[Cookybiscuit]

cockerpunk, on 01 November 2011 - 04:08 PM, said:

notice how control bores have been getting longer and longer ...

new shaft
GnB kit
new empire kit with the empire pump ...

I see what you mean, does this mean they're getting wise or have found ways of cutting costs? Either way, there's been barrels out with relatively large control bores for quite a while, the Freak has been out for years and that was a decent length 5" control bore.

[98Pro]

I thought peppersticks always had like 8" of control bore.