[brycelarson]

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=t0X...amp;output=html

There are three tabs.

tab 1 = First Strike data. It is divided into magazines. These groups of shots were then corrected to 0,0 - so that we could use them as an aggregate and analyze the data. The left half is the raw data - the right half is the data corrected to 0,0

tab 2 = Paintball impact data from a previous test.

tab 3 = A bunch of different ways to compare the data. Each is given a number indicating a ratio - since Tiberius says "25x more accurate" - we used a bunch of different calculations. There is a short description to the right - if you have any questions - post up here.

Video is on the way - but there's nothing interesting in that - just a quick walk-through of the rig and some more of the speedy impact footage. It should be on the youtube channel by noon.

enjoy.

[Special Ed]

So, FS rounds are 7 times more accurate....

Or only twice as accurate.


All depends on how you want to present the data.

But they ARE more accurate.

Good data and thanks

[brycelarson]

Special Ed, on Jul 31 2009, 10:36 AM, said:

So, FS rounds are 7 times more accurate....

Or only twice as accurate.


All depends on how you want to present the data.

But they ARE more accurate.

Good data and thanks

yes, much more accurate. 2x isn't anything to sneeze at - 4x or 6x is really impressive.

[cockerpunk]

i think the test does a good job showing exactly how effective the vector method is at evaluating accuracy.

ill have a thought, comments and such video done after work.

[Deadpool]

Given the max range on the FS is 100 yards. This accuracy would be what exactly? 20x more accurate?

Again, great job taking the time to calculate and record this info guys.

[brycelarson]

Deadpool, on Jul 31 2009, 10:59 AM, said:

Given the max range on the FS is 100 yards. This accuracy would be what exactly? 20x more accurate?

Again, great job taking the time to calculate and record this info guys.

sure, there is that. since you can shoot them further - at some range the FS rounds will be infinity more accurate. As in, you cannot hit this guy with a paintball - but you can with a FS - and we all know what happens when you divide by zero.

But, 150' is a good range to test (also, it's the longest we currently have indoors) since it's the start of what is really long range for paintball. At 150' people still try to hit each other - but it gets significantly harder with standard paint.

If you notice in every calculation the FS rounds performed more better at 150' than at 100' It's reasonable to assume that this trend continues - and that at longer ranges the rounds are more more accurate.

like the creative english on that one?

[Deadpool]

brycelarson, on Jul 31 2009, 12:12 PM, said:

like the creative english on that one?

lmao.... excellent. Love it.

Where is the Techpber that made those charts last time??

This post has been edited by Deadpool: 31 July 2009 - 11:21 AM

[cockerpunk]

i too think it is interesting to note that although the FS are more accurate at 100 feet, they are not amazingly more accurate at 100 feet. but out at 150 feet they seem to be commandingly more accurate. by any measure.

this might lend some support to the theory mike has about FS rounds needing to spin up, and that out of the barrel they "wobble" until they find a straight path. of course that might not be true, and it might simply be a matter of FS rounds dont slow down as fast, and that they keep tighter longer becuase they maintain speed so well.

but it is interesting to note becuase whatever causes inaccuracy seems to happen real early in the flight. the same thing was observed by TK with normal paintballs.

This post has been edited by cockerpunk: 31 July 2009 - 11:29 AM

[PrometheanFlame]

brycelarson, on Jul 31 2009, 11:12 AM, said:

If you notice in every calculation the FS rounds performed more better at 150' than at 100' It's reasonable to assume that this trend continues - and that at longer ranges the rounds are more more accurate.

like the creative english on that one?

Bryce, do you think that First Strike rounds could ever be produced by other companies as they grow more popular? I mean...whoever made the first paintball obviously didn't reserve rights to be the only company allowed to make them. Could something similar happen with FS rounds, where you might see a version produced by Tippmann or something? Or...no?

It would be interesting to see them become more popular, because then you might see a legitimate difference between woods and speedball guns. Speedball guns would use normal, cheaper balls with big hoppers, and woods guns would use FS-style rounds...but with smaller magazine feeds. Both types would cost about the same to shoot in a day, but it would be a very different experience.

[Deadpool]

PrometheanFlame, on Jul 31 2009, 12:31 PM, said:

Bryce, do you think that First Strike rounds could ever be produced by other companies as they grow more popular? I mean...whoever made the first paintball obviously didn't reserve rights to be the only company allowed to make them. Could something similar happen with FS rounds, where you might see a version produced by Tippmann or something? Or...no?

It would be interesting to see them become more popular, because then you might see a legitimate difference between woods and speedball guns. Speedball guns would use normal, cheaper balls with big hoppers, and woods guns would use FS-style rounds...but with smaller magazine feeds. Both types would cost about the same to shoot in a day, but it would be a very different experience.

Ditto. I would love to see them catch on AND be more accessible at more fields as another alternative to regular PBs. But I would say that in the time being I like the little "exclusivity" of the sniper round. It brings another true dynamic to the sport.

This post has been edited by Deadpool: 31 July 2009 - 11:39 AM

[brycelarson]

PrometheanFlame, on Jul 31 2009, 11:31 AM, said:

Bryce, do you think that First Strike rounds could ever be produced by other companies as they grow more popular? I mean...whoever made the first paintball obviously didn't reserve rights to be the only company allowed to make them. Could something similar happen with FS rounds, where you might see a version produced by Tippmann or something? Or...no?

maybe. I'm sure there are a number of patents on these guys - so I suppose if Tiberius is willing to license - AND other companies can manufacture at a cost that allows them to be competitive while paying the licensing fee.

I think what's more likely is that other companies build guns for them. After having worked with the T9 and played with the TPX - I think Tippmann has a superior delivery system - once they modify it to shoot FS rounds. The T9 wins on coolness factor at this point - but the operation of the TPX is really good. stick a 12" barrel, a stock and modifications to shoot FS rounds and the TPX is going to be a spectacular system for these rounds.

This post has been edited by brycelarson: 31 July 2009 - 11:44 AM

[PrometheanFlame]

It seems like modifying any mag-fed marker to shoot FS rounds, especially a pistol like the TPX, would be easy-peasy.

[PacosTacos88]

Totally agree about the exclusivity about the round. I just hope more fields adopt this round as it would be very nice to see a true sniper team take out command leaders or key bunkers.

[Poe]

cockerpunk, on Jul 31 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

i too think it is interesting to note that although the FS are more accurate at 100 feet, they are not amazingly more accurate at 100 feet. but out at 150 feet they seem to be commandingly more accurate. by any measure.

this might lend some support to the theory mike has about FS rounds needing to spin up, and that out of the barrel they "wobble" until they find a straight path. of course that might not be true, and it might simply be a matter of FS rounds dont slow down as fast, and that they keep tighter longer becuase they maintain speed so well.

but it is interesting to note becuase whatever causes inaccuracy seems to happen real early in the flight. the same thing was observed by TK with normal paintballs.

Any chance Punkworks will be using the high speed camera to investigate this further? Since these rounds were fired in the correct orientation (fins-back). Any chance you could test these rounds fins-first to see if it has an impact on accuracy? I would assume the fin-first orientation delays spin and negatively affects accuracy.

Although the 25 fold increase in accuracy was obviously marketing and you have done a great job putting the real world accuracy in perspective; Any chance Punkworks will try to test this claim by measuring accuracy at a normal paintball's max range? I know you mentioned interior space limitations. Maybe try a local private airstrip. They typically have empty hangars practically abandoned three days out of the week.

The accuracy data for normal paintballs appears to be from a different gun. Are we assuming the T9 will have the same accuracy?

[cockerpunk]

well 150 feet is about the max range you can expect from a regular ball.

yes, we are assuming the accuracy is similar with the normal paintballs form any gun. we have yet to see any reason why this is not true, and we were short on time. the original plan was to shoot normal paint from the T9, but we lacked the time to do it.

i would like to see if i can observe FS with the highspeed farther in the flight path, but i need to work on the logistics of it.

[UV Halo]

Excellent work guys!!

Applying the data:

The FS round is marketed towards paintball snipers (at least presently) so, let's look at what we'd have a 95% chance of hitting.

Paintball @ 100ft: 95% chance against a target with a diameter of 28.28" (i.e. an adult male torso from the front)

Paintball @ 150ft: 95% chance against a target with a diameter of 64.68" (two people standing shoulder to shoulder, or more likely, a paintball tank.

First Strike @ 100ft: 95% chance against a target with a diameter of 17.76" (You could pick upper/lower torso, or have somewhere between a 68-95% chance to hit an adult head)

First Strike @ 150ft: 95% chance against a target with a diameter of 25.28" (an adult male torso).

My thoughts on other comments in this thread:

Accuracy Vs Distance- Spin up is certainly a possible contributor to how these rounds compare to a paintball at 100-150ft but, consider these numbers:

FS round 100ft (95%) number: 17.76", x1.5 (scaling to 150ft) = 26.64" Vs 25.28"
PB round 100ft (95%) number: 28.28", x1.5 = 42.42" Vs 64.68"

Paintballs seem to deviate along a curve, deviating more, the further they go. This isn't as much of a factor with a First Strike round.

Other Manufacturers making these rounds- Presently Tiberius Arms is only the distributor for these rounds. "Perfect Circle Paintball" owns the intellectual property of the rounds design, and the patents to it's manufacturing methods (how to make a shock-sensitive, photo-degradable polymer shell).

Other manufacturers making guns to shoot them- The ballpark is open here. Anyone can do it. Simple spring loaded magazines are not patentable (due to expired firearm patents). This open-ness presents a challenge. Anyone can make a gun based off of an existing mechanical marker design (spyder, autococker, Tippmann CVX, etc) with a spring loaded clip and it will will do perfectly well. The problem comes when you make it and sell it, there is nothing patentable about it so, you will see clones very quickly, forcing you to drop your price and lower the profitability. Consider another option though- Take a gun that is modular by design and make a body/grip for it that allows it to be clip fed from below. Let's look at the Ion/SP1/Vibe for example: You would need a body/grip design that would relocate the solenoid/board and reg, a new breech (to accept the clip) and a tapered front bolt (to guide the round into the barrel).

This post has been edited by UV Halo: 31 July 2009 - 01:00 PM

[brycelarson]

Poe, on Jul 31 2009, 12:37 PM, said:

The accuracy data for normal paintballs appears to be from a different gun. Are we assuming the T9 will have the same accuracy?

two answers to this:

1. yes, this is a different gun - we have found that no gun we have shot in our rig has appreciably better or worse accuracy. that's all up to the paint.

2. here's the graph from Tiberius' web site. they say that this is at 100'



That's a vertical and horizontal range of 30" - our paint at 100' was 18"x20" - meaning that their paintball accuracy was worse than ours. My assumption is that the paint quality was less than what we used.

They also have a range of 1/2 of what we got using the FS. I don't know why.

[MNpaintball]

pretty cool stuff guys.
i would also like to see more markers made to fire the FS rounds.

[Deadpool]

mnpaintball, on Jul 31 2009, 02:10 PM, said:

pretty cool stuff guys.
i would also like to see more markers made to fire the FS rounds.

I would like to see more markers but I would like for those markers to be marketed as sniper/marksman guns. I dont want to see a gun that has a over 10bps firing FS at that same rate. In fact, a clip fed marker holding < 15 rounds (or even less).

If you want to rock a gun that shoots over 10 bps get an Mtac or Sp1 or equivalent. Keep the FS rounds in the "sniper" class.

[brycelarson]

UV Halo, on Jul 31 2009, 12:59 PM, said:

Excellent work guys!!

Applying the data:

The FS round is marketed towards paintball snipers (at least presently) so, let's look at what we'd have a 95% chance of hitting.

Paintball @ 100ft: 95% chance against a target with a diameter of 28.28" (i.e. an adult male torso from the front)

Paintball @ 150ft: 95% chance against a target with a diameter of 64.68" (two people standing shoulder to shoulder, or more likely, a paintball tank.

First Strike @ 100ft: 95% chance against a target with a diameter of 17.76" (You could pick upper/lower torso, or have somewhere between a 68-95% chance to hit an adult head)

First Strike @ 150ft: 95% chance against a target with a diameter of 25.28" (an adult male torso).

yup, look for my thoughts on video in a little while - this is really the important stuff to keep in mind. at 150' the difference between a 2' and 5' pattern is HUGE. and you mean radius - not diameter. The vector is the radius of the pattern, so the 95% circle is 4x the vector in diameter.

This post has been edited by brycelarson: 31 July 2009 - 01:22 PM