Jump to content


Photo

barrel test part 2


  • Please log in to reply
124 replies to this topic

#1 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,590 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 02 January 2009 - 07:38 PM

Thanks to Chris Nathan for the donation of the indoor testing facility! We made a much smaller mess this time. :)

Full Data Sheet

Video Intro for test

Barrel test 2 - test in progress

Posted Image

Posted Image

enjoy everyone!

Edited by brycelarson, 06 January 2009 - 02:39 PM.


#2 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 02 January 2009 - 10:56 PM

And the results are? I'll take unprocessed data even...

#3 Troy

Troy

    What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma City

Posted 02 January 2009 - 11:20 PM

This is just a placeholder and a bit of a tease to make people excited. The accuracy portion of our barrel test is done - data and videos coming up quick.


I EXPECTED DATA!!! :angry:
\m/

#4 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,590 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 02 January 2009 - 11:33 PM

soon, be patient.

#5 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,117 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 03 January 2009 - 02:22 AM

holy smokes you guys will like this test.

i've been looking at the numbers for a good 4 hours now, very very very interesting stuff.

bryce, we'll talk tomorrow about our stuff.

Edited by cockerpunk, 03 January 2009 - 02:22 AM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#6 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 03 January 2009 - 06:08 AM

holy smokes you guys will like this test.

i've been looking at the numbers for a good 4 hours now, very very very interesting stuff.

bryce, we'll talk tomorrow about our stuff.


Oh quit teasing and post the damn numbers already. ;)

#7 lukewarm

lukewarm

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:brantford / hamilton ontario

Posted 03 January 2009 - 06:46 AM

ive checked this thread 15 times in the last 40min

"are you ignorant or apathetic?" i don't know and i don't give a fuck


#8 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 03 January 2009 - 09:01 AM

Well, cockerpunk's last post was at 2:22 AM Eastern. My guess is shortly after posting, he went to bed. So, we've probably got several hours before there's any chance of getting the results.

#9 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,590 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 03 January 2009 - 09:52 AM

I'm looking at the numbers right now as well - there are a few things we need to decide how to attack (mathematically) - so hopefully soon.

#10 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 03 January 2009 - 10:05 AM

Well, here are a couple suggestions from the guy who sucks at statistics:

I'm assuming you have a table that's basically X and Y coordinates for each shot.

I'd suggest:
1. Center the grouping: Average of all of the X values. Add this value to all of the X values. Average all of the Y values. Add this to all of the Y values.
2. For each shot, determin the distance the shot is from the center of the group. I believe the best approache would be taking sqrt((X^2)+(Y^2)).
3. Average the distance each shot is from the center of the group.

#11 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,590 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 03 January 2009 - 10:20 AM

Well, here are a couple suggestions from the guy who sucks at statistics:

I'm assuming you have a table that's basically X and Y coordinates for each shot.

I'd suggest:
1. Center the grouping: Average of all of the X values. Add this value to all of the X values. Average all of the Y values. Add this to all of the Y values.
2. For each shot, determin the distance the shot is from the center of the group. I believe the best approache would be taking sqrt((X^2)+(Y^2)).
3. Average the distance each shot is from the center of the group.


you don't need to do that if you use a standard deviation - the SD will tell you how far from the mean all of the shots are.

If you wanted to do analysis of how consistent the pattern was - then you would need to normalize the data. for our needs - the SD works fine.

#12 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 03 January 2009 - 10:54 AM

I would imagine knowing how consistant the pattern is will be important. Any chance I can get a copy of the raw data to work on?

#13 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,117 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 03 January 2009 - 11:11 AM

data should be up momentarily.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#14 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,590 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 03 January 2009 - 11:19 AM

check the first post

#15 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 03 January 2009 - 12:06 PM

Thanks

#16 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 03 January 2009 - 12:31 PM

After looking at the data and manipulating it the way I had suggested, I would conclude that they are all about the same. I'm not seeing any pattern to the data that could be used to conclude that any specifc relationship between accuracy and bore size/length/number of pieces.

I found the center of each group, and then the distance each shot was from the center. Graphed the average and standard deviation. "Two" is for the two piece, "One" is for the one piece. I dropped the Dye/Armson/Empire barrels off the list so it's all from one manufacturer.
Posted Image

Edited by Iram, 03 January 2009 - 12:37 PM.


#17 Capt. Kirk

Capt. Kirk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 93 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ca

Posted 03 January 2009 - 12:41 PM

i assume you where aiming for the origin? how did you determin that you where aimed in the right spot to begin with?

yeah... the captain plays too : )

#18 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,117 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 03 January 2009 - 12:45 PM

i assume you where aiming for the origin? how did you determin that you where aimed in the right spot to begin with?


we did not aim at anything in particular.

as long as the shots land on the grid somewhere, we can back calculate the center of the pattern, thats what Iram did.

i prefer to use the standard deviation, which is automatically normalized.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#19 Capt. Kirk

Capt. Kirk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 93 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ca

Posted 03 January 2009 - 12:51 PM

so you where looking at the consistancy of the clusters rather than the position on the grid?

yeah... the captain plays too : )

#20 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,117 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 03 January 2009 - 01:00 PM

so you where looking at the consistancy of the clusters rather than the position on the grid?


yup!
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#21 Capt. Kirk

Capt. Kirk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 93 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ca

Posted 03 January 2009 - 01:07 PM

oh! that was creative i wouldn't have thought to do it that way....
though it does make the data more difficult to interprate.

why is the higher varriance from the vector the more accurate?

i wish you took pictures of the clusters.... which barrel had te tightest clusters?

yeah... the captain plays too : )

#22 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,117 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 03 January 2009 - 01:13 PM

oh! that was creative i wouldn't have thought to do it that way....
though it does make the data more difficult to interprate.

why is the higher varriance from the vector the more accurate?

i wish you took pictures of the clusters.... which barrel had te tightest clusters?


thats the way bryce graphed it. he is comparing the average of all the vectors, to each vector individually, some were better, others were worse. he arbitrarily said that better vector = higher on the graph.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#23 Capt. Kirk

Capt. Kirk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 93 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ca

Posted 03 January 2009 - 01:18 PM

is the vector from the center of the cluster?

sorry, i'm much better at paintball than i am at math.

yeah... the captain plays too : )

#24 Chris Williams

Chris Williams

    This Is My Boomstick

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,208 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uniondale, NY

Posted 03 January 2009 - 01:54 PM

Whats the best barrel
2009 Sponsors-ANSgear
Posted Image
My Feedback +6/0/0
My Moderator Application

#25 Lord Odin

Lord Odin

    3 may keep a secret if 2 of them are dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oak Lawn, IL


Posted 03 January 2009 - 02:24 PM

oh! that was creative i wouldn't have thought to do it that way....
though it does make the data more difficult to interprate.

why is the higher varriance from the vector the more accurate?

i wish you took pictures of the clusters.... which barrel had te tightest clusters?


thats the way bryce graphed it. he is comparing the average of all the vectors, to each vector individually, some were better, others were worse. he arbitrarily said that better vector = higher on the graph.

Very interesting test guys! Great job. I'm still studying the results right now, so sorry if I miss something.

So is the higher variance better or is the variance closest to zero better?

#26 o-baller

o-baller

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 663 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisville Kentucky

Posted 03 January 2009 - 03:41 PM

What exactly is a Vector?
Sqaush the Bug and Whip the Hips- Coach Watkins

98% of statistics in peoples sigs are made up

#27 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 03 January 2009 - 05:21 PM

Whats the best barrel


Well, based on my interpretation of the data, I'm planning to buy either a 14" one-piece 0.685 bore CP barrel (in other words, the smallest bore one-piece barrel CP makes with 10" unported) or a the smallest bore Lapco barrel I can find.

Edited by Iram, 03 January 2009 - 05:22 PM.


#28 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,117 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 03 January 2009 - 05:58 PM

What exactly is a Vector?

http://en.wikipedia....uclidean_vector

it is more or less a 2 dimensional number.

in our case, we didn't much care to use the direction, but the length of the vector.

Edited by cockerpunk, 03 January 2009 - 05:59 PM.

The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#29 RubberCoconut

RubberCoconut

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Plainfield

Posted 03 January 2009 - 06:38 PM

im sorry but im really confused



are longer barrels better?

are one pieces better?

are the smaller bores the best?



thats the most i got out of this lol
Chicago Wise Guys

#30 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 03 January 2009 - 07:42 PM

im sorry but im really confused

are longer barrels better?

are one pieces better?

are the smaller bores the best?

thats the most i got out of this lol


Well, after looking at the data from the accuracy test, I don't think it's possible to say that some specific length/bore size/pieces is more accurate than any other. The test shows some variation, but there's no general trend. Unless someone can massage the data and get something else (and show there work), I'm going to stick with the assumption that accuracy is generally equal.

Based on the barrel break test, underboring doesn't break significantly more paint. It's possible that underboring breaks LESS pant, but there isn't enough data to say for sure.

Underboring does provide better efficiency than overboring, somewhere around 10% when compering a 0.693 to a 0.679.

With one-piece CP barrels (with about 4" of porting at the end), 14" barrels give better efficiency than 12", and 12" are better than 10". For 2-piece CP barrels, it's all about the same regardless of the length of the tip, but you're better off with the 1-piece.

Edited by Iram, 30 January 2009 - 09:36 PM.


#31 PrometheanFlame

PrometheanFlame

    Nein, you tiny demons! NEIN!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,357 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cocoa, FL

Posted 03 January 2009 - 10:08 PM

Efficiency. Does anyone buy a barrel to make their gun more efficient? We want to hear about accuracy! What common factors make a barrel more accurate?

Posted Image

Grammar Nazi Fuhrer : LL3 Soulja : Eleven Percenter


#32 o-baller

o-baller

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 663 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisville Kentucky

Posted 03 January 2009 - 11:23 PM

I really see that nothing corresponds to accuracy. I cant see any factor that makes a barrel more or less accurate. What is your opinion Cockerpunk?

Edited by o-baller, 03 January 2009 - 11:25 PM.

Sqaush the Bug and Whip the Hips- Coach Watkins

98% of statistics in peoples sigs are made up

#33 LieutenantDan

LieutenantDan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Briarcliff Manor, NY

Posted 03 January 2009 - 11:27 PM

So I just took a look at the raw data, and from what I can tell it seems to me that I should be picking up either a Dye Ultralight with a small bore back so that I can underbore or the same deal with the CP barrels
Posted Image

My Feedback +5|-0
To HELL with georgia

#34 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,590 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 04 January 2009 - 01:26 AM

is the vector from the center of the cluster?


think of the vector this way: it's the radius of a circle that would contain %68 of all shots fired from that barrel. double that and the circle would contain %95 of the shots. So, a vector of 3" would mean that %68 of paintballs would land in a circle 6" across - and %95 in a circle 12" across. make sense?


I really see that nothing corresponds to accuracy. I cant see any factor that makes a barrel more or less accurate. What is your opinion Cockerpunk?

We also seem to see no real pattern here. You also have to take into consideration the scale of the data. The worst to best is only a difference of a bit over 1" in vector. That's really not much to go on. Our graphs make it easy to see the difference - but the scatter on the board doesn't really.


So I just took a look at the raw data, and from what I can tell it seems to me that I should be picking up either a Dye Ultralight with a small bore back so that I can underbore or the same deal with the CP barrels


the problem with the dye barrels is that they were sold as the same barrel. Those barrels don't have a bore marked on them. Also, keep in mind that the dye only performed about ONE INCH better than the worst barrel.

i wish you took pictures of the clusters.... which barrel had te tightest clusters?


you can make your own pictures of the impact locations - we gave you x and y co-ordinates for every impact during the test. :)

Edited by brycelarson, 04 January 2009 - 01:29 AM.


#35 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 04 January 2009 - 07:13 AM

Efficiency. Does anyone buy a barrel to make their gun more efficient? We want to hear about accuracy! What common factors make a barrel more accurate?


Nothing makes a barrel more accurate. Look at the data. They're all essentially the same. So, since you can't get accuracy from a barrel, you might as well get what you can, which is fewer runs to a fill station.

#36 WihGlah

WihGlah

    Planet Eclipse FanBoy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,370 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 04 January 2009 - 08:46 AM

Looks to me that there is very little difference between any of the barrels.

If I had to pick the best it would be the two piece 0.682 (which is also the smallest bore)

14" seems to be slightly better as well

It's a shame you couldn't test a 0.682 one piece.

Posted Image

Proudly sponsored by Eclipse and LIPS


#37 A.E.D.paintballer

A.E.D.paintballer

    maritime baller!

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dieppe N.B.

Posted 04 January 2009 - 09:06 AM

i guess the true secret to good accuracy is good paint <_<
08 slg, ul trigger and feedneck, hybrid push button asa and full freak kit


Got a SLG? Join the SLG Owners Group

#38 Iram

Iram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Acton, MA

Posted 04 January 2009 - 09:08 AM

i guess the true secret to good accuracy is good paint <_<


That seems to be the secret to just about everything in paintball.

So, eta on paintball-type accuracy testing? j/k

#39 Troy

Troy

    What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma City

Posted 04 January 2009 - 09:52 AM

When you look at the comparable CP barrels with equal bores and lengths you notice a pattern that tends to favor the two piece barrels:
One Piece 12"
Bore SD
.685 4.29
.689 2.82
.693 3.7
Two Piece 12"
.685 3.14
.689 4.07
.693 3.44

You can see that in 2 out of the 3 test groups two piece barrels did better than one piece barrels. Its disappointing to not see any significant underboring in a one piece barrel, or the huge overboring that was possible in the two piece barrels. That would increase our basis for comparison greatly.

I don't know if I can call a clear winner yet... This is frustrating. I want there to be a resolution to these questions, not more questions!
\m/

#40 o-baller

o-baller

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 663 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisville Kentucky

Posted 04 January 2009 - 11:37 AM

My resolution is better paint.
Sqaush the Bug and Whip the Hips- Coach Watkins

98% of statistics in peoples sigs are made up

#41 HavocAE

HavocAE

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 04 January 2009 - 12:52 PM

After looking at the data it seems like the data sample is to small. Another option would be to increase the range to the target, which might give more distinction between barrels.

#42 Lord Odin

Lord Odin

    3 may keep a secret if 2 of them are dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oak Lawn, IL


Posted 04 January 2009 - 05:44 PM

Perhaps the accuracy is correlated to ball size and roundness. If some balls are more oblong than round, perhaps that will affect it's trajectory. One ball that is bigger than another would make me think it would travel differently. It would be paintstaking work to presort the balls, organize them, and then record each ball but it might show a trend.

#43 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,117 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 04 January 2009 - 05:54 PM

Perhaps the accuracy is correlated to ball size and roundness. If some balls are more oblong than round, perhaps that will affect it's trajectory. One ball that is bigger than another would make me think it would travel differently. It would be paintstaking work to presort the balls, organize them, and then record each ball but it might show a trend.


the issue with that is then looking at how to use that in real life, on the paintball field.

are you gonna bring a mic and mic every paintball before a game? how can we use that knowledge, if we actually can?
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#44 Lord Odin

Lord Odin

    3 may keep a secret if 2 of them are dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oak Lawn, IL


Posted 04 January 2009 - 06:03 PM

Perhaps the accuracy is correlated to ball size and roundness. If some balls are more oblong than round, perhaps that will affect it's trajectory. One ball that is bigger than another would make me think it would travel differently. It would be paintstaking work to presort the balls, organize them, and then record each ball but it might show a trend.


the issue with that is then looking at how to use that in real life, on the paintball field.

are you gonna bring a mic and mic every paintball before a game? how can we use that knowledge, if we actually can?

No, of course we can't measure the balls before games. If ball roundness and size is tied to accuracy, what it can do is scientifically put the majority of the responsibility on the paintball manufacturer. That added pressure along with more demand from the public might influence them to increase their manufacturing standards.

The biggest advantage to doing a test like that is ruling out variables. Why not start with the thing that we're using to test?

#45 lukefresh58

lukefresh58

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 89 posts

Posted 04 January 2009 - 06:57 PM

it would be interesting to see you re-test the best 3 barrels and see if the results change. looks as if most of the barrels are so close that the differences in accuracy may just be small variances in the constistancy of the gun and paint
Posted Image

#46 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,117 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 04 January 2009 - 07:09 PM

it would be interesting to see you re-test the best 3 barrels and see if the results change. looks as if most of the barrels are so close that the differences in accuracy may just be small variances in the constistancy of the gun and paint


in both the chrono test and this test at least one setup was tested twice. i think it was the .682/12" in this case, but it might have been the .683 instead.
The ultimate truth in paintball is that the interaction between the gun and the player is far and away the largest factor in accuracy, consistency, and reliability.

And yes, Gordon is the sexiest manifestation of "to the front."


#47 woodwose

woodwose

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 04 January 2009 - 09:00 PM

I for one, am really happy withthe results. I LOVE to hear that barrels don't make a paintbal gun more accurate. That is one less thing to worry about!

*cough* paint test! *cough*

But seriously. It would be pretty amazing to do an accuracy of a bunch of different paint. Costly? Yes. Hard to find consistent paint? Yes.

Maybe you could start by using a couple different brands of paint to verify that paint makes a staistically significant different in accuracy. If that is the case, then maybe test some paint. Unfoirtunately there are a couple variables that are super hard to test - like how well a ball breaks, or how well a ball tolerates a prticular gun.

The more I think about it, the more daunting a paint test sounds.

w0se

#48 Liqord

Liqord

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 04 January 2009 - 09:33 PM

So, the answer was in Cockerpunks sig all along.......are you a prophet?

#49 o-baller

o-baller

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 663 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisville Kentucky

Posted 04 January 2009 - 10:15 PM

No, of course we can't measure the balls before games. If ball roundness and size is tied to accuracy, what it can do is scientifically put the majority of the responsibility on the paintball manufacturer. That added pressure along with more demand from the public might influence them to increase their manufacturing standards.

The biggest advantage to doing a test like that is ruling out variables. Why not start with the thing that we're using to test?


The Manufacturers already make good paint, it is just more costly. Most players cant afford to buy Marbs or Evil or whatever everytime they go out. Unless there is a better process of manufacturing paintballs.

But on a different note, maybe this will save the public from buying a barrel that honestly makes no difference and put that money towards better paint.

Nice job with the test.

Edited by o-baller, 04 January 2009 - 10:15 PM.

Sqaush the Bug and Whip the Hips- Coach Watkins

98% of statistics in peoples sigs are made up

#50 cabeza the huevo

cabeza the huevo

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 04 January 2009 - 10:46 PM

ok so i am really not that good at numbers...

is there a way to say: most acurate barrell = lenght, bore, and two/one piece ????

i mean , after all that testing, are you saying that there is no way to point out ONE barrel as the best barrel??? please i was hoping to see something like that. i actually though that was the intention of the testing. please could you do something like TESTS RESULTS FOR DUMMIES !! LOL it's just that every time i look at the graphs and the numbers i get even more confused... just pick a winner please !!! jajaj thanks




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users