[sticktodrum]

I just got through reading the thread "Test Videos" on PBNation. I'm assuming that's the thread this is all happening in. It seems to me that Jack honestly believes that when some people watch his initial video, and shot his marker/bolt system out in the open, that the testimonials coming from that should be regarded as legitimate evidence.

I sort of get a bad taste from his objections to the videos not showing the actual shooting, and the boasting of his video despite his video not showing or documenting the velocities or consistent positioning of the marker. True, your videos are really just a visual to placate anyone who doesn't want to read the charted results, but no one is even really talking about the charts.

The attacks are strictly on the videos, even though bryce and CrazyLittle are insisting that the charts contain all of the data from the tests. It's a slew of post-hoc rationalizations from Jack as to why the tests didn't show results consistent with his. I'm still leaning towards the notion that any air creating a backspin on a ball would be diminished greatly (if not entirely) when the ball travels down the barrel, either due to the seal from an underbore or the rolling through an overbore.

[Seward]

Cockerpunk if you beleive in your data so much then y r u getting all defensive and mad about it... you kno its true. But i kinda have to agree with some of the nay sayers becuz there is no actual footage of you even shooting the gun. Even if it is just a couple paintballs over the chrono.

Y dont you just do an over the side view of the gun in that gun vice shooting at the target at 10bps and show the bolt and stuff. You say theres always going to be disbeleivers but if u do that and show wat the gun is chronoed at there arent going to be very much

[cockerpunk]

Seward, on Jul 4 2009, 05:56 PM, said:

Cockerpunk if you beleive in your data so much then y r u getting all defensive and mad about it... you kno its true.

getting defensive? mad?

no quiet the opposite really. if you dont believe we shot the gun, a sideshow isn't going to prove it.

only those open enough to accept the data will understand what it means, if someone doesn't want to accept the data, there is nothing i can do to change there mind.

[Lewthor]

You need a clear breech cam like Eclipse has. So you can see the ball spinning backwards in the breech, which you won't. There is no way a bolt can cause spin when the ball has to move through the entire length of the barrel afterwards. The expanding air isn't going to just be on the bottom of the ball.
I'm not one to agree with CP or Punkworks in general, but I don't think they lie about their tests. If they say they did something they did it. If I don't agree I'll try it myself. It's not like they claimed the cure for cancer, it's paintball everything is a gimmick.

[sunshaker]

Cockerpunk, Bryce, I've found the results from all of your tests useful, none of the tests you have performed have contradicted my personal experiences, I look forward to each test you do (even if it has little direct value or interest to me, like say this one), so thanks for taking the time and doing this test and all the others you have done (I'd donate but the whole work/economy thing is making that tough). Again thanks.

[Dragon1291]

i just read like the few pages of mindless argueing on the PBN forums....
Bryce i gotta give it to ya, you have the patience of well... You ahve Great patience, Even when the guy was personally attacking you.
Isnt it evident that the system wont work? I mean, for it to really work, the ball and bolt face must have a perfect seal. Even a small Mil gap would allow the air to expand (even at 80 psi) and push the ball out evenly...

[rntlee]

Does anyone know how to calculate how much backspin needs to be induced on a ball to begin to affect it's trajectory? There was an old page I saw one time about paintball physics that had a trajectory calculator on it...can't find it now tho.

Edit, HERE IT IS

I find you'd need ~7500 rpm to give a 2' rise at 100', shooting at a 5 degree angle and 280 fps.

This post has been edited by rntlee: 05 July 2009 - 07:08 AM

[rntlee]

I goldwaved the Alien video, and I can detect no signifigant increase in velocity via the gun report/ball impact. Both bolts have about 0.65 secs between @ 100'.
To get the rise in shots shown in their vid via the magnus effect would require about 7500 rpm (125 rotations/sec). Clearly, that doesn't show up in the high speed video.

Imo, he altered the marker elevation (intentionally or not) when changing out bolts. He does have something to prove, doesn't he.

[cockerpunk]

great work rnt

knowing that the frame rate on the camera was 1200 frames per second and knowing what intervals the paintball is marked at, you can actually make a pretty reasonable estimate of the true RPM and RPS of the ball. comparing that to the calculations, you can actually see if there is any major deviation is shot pattern.

i'd also like to keep this thread clean of any references to jack rices character. in his forum he can say whatever he wants, and he has said some pretty terrible things. however, this is punkworks, not a pissing contest. we will keep the topic to science and leave the personalities out of it. if his best defense is "they simply lied" well then i consider that a pretty good test.

thank you.

This post has been edited by cockerpunk: 05 July 2009 - 11:21 AM

[brycelarson]

sticktodrum, on Jul 4 2009, 08:16 AM, said:

Saying "I am not satisfied with these results, I want to see more," is just snobbish. Whether your make a claim about a product, or disagree with someone's testing, take the responsibility and contribute.

no, I'll give anyone the benefit of the doubt until they've proved they don't deserve it - suggesting that we can improve our tests is helpful - we're always looking for ways to be better.

Dragon1291, on Jul 4 2009, 10:16 PM, said:

i just read like the few pages of mindless argueing on the PBN forums....
Bryce i gotta give it to ya, you have the patience of well... You ahve Great patience, Even when the guy was personally attacking you.
Isnt it evident that the system wont work? I mean, for it to really work, the ball and bolt face must have a perfect seal. Even a small Mil gap would allow the air to expand (even at 80 psi) and push the ball out evenly...

should have heard me on the phone with Jack

[Mora]

^haha GO GET 'EM BRYCE!!

[sticktodrum]

brycelarson, on Jul 5 2009, 08:42 PM, said:

sticktodrum, on Jul 4 2009, 08:16 AM, said:

Saying "I am not satisfied with these results, I want to see more," is just snobbish. Whether your make a claim about a product, or disagree with someone's testing, take the responsibility and contribute.

no, I'll give anyone the benefit of the doubt until they've proved they don't deserve it - suggesting that we can improve our tests is helpful - we're always looking for ways to be better.

You're too nice. Gotta harden up man!

[Nasher6113]

meh, jack is just pissed that someone proved one of his marketing gimmicks wrong... lol should get jack out to watch the test himself live again.. that would shut him up

thanks CP for doing all this testing, its really interesting and seperates the bullshit (sweep bolt) from the real stuff

[Gorsha]

Didn't read the entire PBN thread, as it got pretty aggravating pretty fast and I didn't want to hurt myself from face palming too hard. But when I was busy typing up my rant about the ridiculous complaints they had over the validity of the testing done, I thought of something.

It would be interesting to see the test done with as short a barrel as possible. Ideally something that just covered the threads so the paint didn't break, a barrel back should suffice. If the ball doesn't have any spin in that test, then the bolt just plain doesn't make the balls spin. If it does spin, then that means something happens that removes it. Maybe the pressure around the ball stabilizes it as it passes through the barrel, or friction from contact with the inside of the barrel removes any spin imparted by the sweep bolt.

Although, even if it does spin, if the spin just gets removed I don't see how the bolt could possible be useful. I'm mostly just curious if you can actually spin a paintball with just air flow.

[FailureElite]

brycelarson, on Jul 5 2009, 08:42 PM, said:

should have heard me on the phone with Jack

Though I don't know exactly why you guys do all this testing that will possibly get you angry looks, I rather like that you do it. You really do seem unbiased to me and I appreciate that. There is no way to remove all variables from tests such as these or prove to everyone in the sport that you are 100% correct without walking on water.

I have a few questions for you though, forgive me if they were already brought up. Do you think testing outdoors with a headwind may explain the extra lift Jack may have experienced? Do you think if you just mounted the marker and did what was done in the Alien Sweep Bolt Demo video you would have a different outcome? Without quantitative analysis that is.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think bolt design can affect anything other than gentleness on paint and air efficiency. From all my years in the venturi arguments, all I have found from personal experience is that a bolt with low restriction is always better than one with high restriction. But that is just me and if I am ever proven wrong, well...I roll with it. I don't have marketing involved.

[Mora]

^true that. the pillow bolt without the pillow gains about 10-12 fps as opposed to with the pillow installed.

[brycelarson]

Gorsha, on Jul 5 2009, 11:30 PM, said:

It would be interesting to see the test done with as short a barrel as possible. Ideally something that just covered the threads so the paint didn't break, a barrel back should suffice. If the ball doesn't have any spin in that test, then the bolt just plain doesn't make the balls spin. If it does spin, then that means something happens that removes it. Maybe the pressure around the ball stabilizes it as it passes through the barrel, or friction from contact with the inside of the barrel removes any spin imparted by the sweep bolt.

when we shot the cooper-t backspin bolt a while ago we shot all the way down to a 696 freak - w/o the front attached. we didn't have the camera - but the trajectory was unaffected.

FailureElite, on Jul 6 2009, 01:04 AM, said:

There is no way to remove all variables from tests such as these or prove to everyone in the sport that you are 100% correct without walking on water.

I have a few questions for you though, forgive me if they were already brought up. Do you think testing outdoors with a headwind may explain the extra lift Jack may have experienced? Do you think if you just mounted the marker and did what was done in the Alien Sweep Bolt Demo video you would have a different outcome? Without quantitative analysis that is.

we don't have the walking-on-water equipment.... yet....

I don't know what the explanation is to Jack's video. I'm unwilling to say that he faked it at this point - I have no reason to think he did.

I'm confident that our test was sound. I think that anyone who does any well designed, quantified test will get the same results that we got.

[Gorsha]

brycelarson, on Jul 6 2009, 09:48 AM, said:

when we shot the cooper-t backspin bolt a while ago we shot all the way down to a 696 freak - w/o the front attached. we didn't have the camera - but the trajectory was unaffected.

Oh yeah, I had forgotten about that. I was kind of hoping against hope that the sweep bolt would actually work. Even if it didn't make the balls go further, if it simply added a small amount of spin that would make the paint more resistant to wind I would have been content. I don't understand how Alien was able to get the results that they claim to have been getting, and I'm out of theories as to how it could have been possible.

As for the debate over the validity of your guys' test results; I honestly don't understand how anyone could take the biased word of someone trying to sell them something over the unbiased scientific data of two people actually testing a product's claims.

[Ced]

It's simple. You pick up the flag of the guy you like more and wade knee-deep into Bullshit Swamps to defend it.

[haro37]

so if I'm understanding this correctly, the design of the bolt wast to cut off part of the air flow so it hits one side of the ball first thus inducing spin? (I gleaned a bit, so you must pardon me if I missed anything)

that seems really... unlikely, even without testing. We all know that it takes a ridiculous amount of spin to get a ball to adjust flight, and it seems entirely impractical to try and achieve that through the air flow... then again, its an interesting attempt at least.

I'm not too sure why Alien would get really upset over this, however. By the looks of it, this doesn't really look like its much of an investment on the part of alien, just a small modification of the bolt. hardly revolutionary, or particularly expensive. Would have been great if it had worked, but like a lot of paintball gimmicks (and there are oh so many) its really just bells and whistles. It seems strange to me that someone at alien really thought this would work, as even rudimentary guessings through physics points to no, and thus takes serious offense to Punkworks' testing, but who knows?

it would be nice if the industry in general could just step away from trying to design the next huge breakthrough in super-awesome paintball technology and focus more on core improvements of their markers, but I guess this is the economic game of the paintball industry.