Jump to content


Photo

Perfect Barrel


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 PBphilosopher

PBphilosopher

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:00 PM

It seems the Lurker comes closest to incorporating the Punkworks research into their design. I had a few questions:

1. Should the ported portion of the bore be larger than .685"?
2. What bore sizes would shoot most of today's paint with the fewest number of barrels?
3. Are there any other changes that research has shown would improve the design?

If this barrel set existed, would you buy it and how much would you be willing to pay? (assuming it was a quality, reputable company building it)

Edited by PBphilosopher, 18 April 2013 - 08:03 PM.


#2 Snipez4664

Snipez4664

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 785 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:43 PM

Lurker 3.0s are coming
Posted Image

This post brought to you by: Lurker
Owner/Operator/Lead Engineer - Lurker Paintball
Check out our products at Lurker Paintball

#3 Orange Chicken

Orange Chicken

    TechPB's Most Annoying member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,591 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, Arizona

Posted 18 April 2013 - 09:24 PM

2. .685

OrangeChicken_zpsbeae94b0.jpg?t=13691803

 


#4 kingJurzy

kingJurzy

    OFFICIAL TechPB's best member 2012

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bay Area, California


Posted 18 April 2013 - 09:40 PM

Lurker 3.0s are coming


NICE!

FEEDBACK: 23/0/0


#5 PBphilosopher

PBphilosopher

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 09:44 PM

Lurker 3.0s are coming

What are these going to be?

Edited by PBphilosopher, 18 April 2013 - 10:47 PM.


#6 kingJurzy

kingJurzy

    OFFICIAL TechPB's best member 2012

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bay Area, California


Posted 18 April 2013 - 09:48 PM

I believe he means the 3rd gen lurker barrels.

FEEDBACK: 23/0/0


#7 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,588 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 22 April 2013 - 07:43 AM

It seems the Lurker comes closest to incorporating the Punkworks research into their design. I had a few questions:

1. Should the ported portion of the bore be larger than .685"?
2. What bore sizes would shoot most of today's paint with the fewest number of barrels?
3. Are there any other changes that research has shown would improve the design?

If this barrel set existed, would you buy it and how much would you be willing to pay? (assuming it was a quality, reputable company building it)


1. depends on the paint size and the barrel design goals
2. I choose to carry a small bore and a mid sized barrel. Something like .678, .685. That lets me shoot paint from .678 up to about .692.
3. Not really. At this point I still stand by my proposed barrel from August of 09 - .003-.005 underbore, longer control bore (9.5-ish) and a 3+ inch moderately ported front section, total length 12-16"

#8 XGC_Cheevo

XGC_Cheevo

    Pod Scalping You

  • BST Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,848 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mitchell, SD

Posted 22 April 2013 - 10:12 AM

I love my Flasc barrel kit since it gives me almost exactly what Bryce recommends. Only issue I have is the porting comes in an extension for the barrel itself instead of being integrated :( .

#9 PBphilosopher

PBphilosopher

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 24 April 2013 - 11:31 AM


It seems the Lurker comes closest to incorporating the Punkworks research into their design. I had a few questions:

1. Should the ported portion of the bore be larger than .685"?
2. What bore sizes would shoot most of today's paint with the fewest number of barrels?
3. Are there any other changes that research has shown would improve the design?

If this barrel set existed, would you buy it and how much would you be willing to pay? (assuming it was a quality, reputable company building it)


1. depends on the paint size and the barrel design goals
2. I choose to carry a small bore and a mid sized barrel. Something like .678, .685. That lets me shoot paint from .678 up to about .692.
3. Not really. At this point I still stand by my proposed barrel from August of 09 - .003-.005 underbore, longer control bore (9.5-ish) and a 3+ inch moderately ported front section, total length 12-16"


Could you elaborate on your answer to #1? Assuming you had the 2 control bore sizes you mentioned, what should the porting portion be bored at, and what design goals would change the size?

#10 cockerpunk

cockerpunk

    All the Dudes

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,112 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 24 April 2013 - 06:53 PM



It seems the Lurker comes closest to incorporating the Punkworks research into their design. I had a few questions:

1. Should the ported portion of the bore be larger than .685"?
2. What bore sizes would shoot most of today's paint with the fewest number of barrels?
3. Are there any other changes that research has shown would improve the design?

If this barrel set existed, would you buy it and how much would you be willing to pay? (assuming it was a quality, reputable company building it)


1. depends on the paint size and the barrel design goals
2. I choose to carry a small bore and a mid sized barrel. Something like .678, .685. That lets me shoot paint from .678 up to about .692.
3. Not really. At this point I still stand by my proposed barrel from August of 09 - .003-.005 underbore, longer control bore (9.5-ish) and a 3+ inch moderately ported front section, total length 12-16"


Could you elaborate on your answer to #1? Assuming you had the 2 control bore sizes you mentioned, what should the porting portion be bored at, and what design goals would change the size?


the perfect barrel depends on the paint you are shooting
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."


#11 brycelarson

brycelarson

    Show me the Data!

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,588 posts
  • Gender:Male


Posted 25 April 2013 - 07:47 AM

Could you elaborate on your answer to #1? Assuming you had the 2 control bore sizes you mentioned, what should the porting portion be bored at, and what design goals would change the size?


An overbored barrel front adds efficiency while also somewhat increasing consistency.

Since we've determined that consistency doesn't seem to have a measurable effect on accuracy that's not much of a consideration.

Based on our sound testing:
http://www.techpb.co...howtopic=108836

barrel front bore size doesn't seem to effect sound levels - so that's also not an issue.

I guess short answer long - doesn't really matter. It's just important that it's somewhat ported to reduce sound somewhat and possibly help transition the ball to the air.

#12 David A.

David A.

    Sophomore Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles Area

Posted 13 June 2013 - 01:15 AM

Hard to choose a single barrel, the closest thing I can think of is a Deadlywind other barre that uses FREAK inserts. One barrel, multiple inserts with bores from .675 - .695.

If you are thinking a single, one piece , fixed bore barrel, ten you may want to get the Lurker .684 or a Lapco Tightstick (.681 bore). They are both top quality barrels, I like the Tight-Stick better.

Good luck!

My Markers:

Polished Silver CCM T2, Polished Black CCM T2, Dust Black CCM T2, Black Bob Long MVP, Dust Back Sanchez Machine SM-1, Polished Silver CCI Phantom, Dust Black Empire AXE. 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users