Jump to content


Member Since 24 Dec 2008
Offline Last Active Dec 27 2009 12:55 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: !2 gram effiency in relation to the timing in between the shots

12 January 2009 - 08:38 AM

Interesting idea about the heat transfer beteen the 12 gram and the gun/changer. I wonder if you would get any better results with a 12ie spraypainted with a thin coat of flat black paint. Seems a little counterintuitive, but I have read that it does help with heat sinks (I assume because of the additional IR heat transfer and maybe the additional surface area of the flat finish). Pretty mojo-ey. Plus it would be difficult to test due to the variance between 12 gram powerlets.


In Topic: barrel test part 2

07 January 2009 - 11:36 PM

So I wonder if you would mind saying something about the 50 foot distance. I am imagining that there is probably a distance that best measures barrels, rather than paint. And maybe the further the taret, the more you are seeing the effects of paint and less that of barrel. But maybe not. Thoughts?


In Topic: barrel test part 2

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.


In Topic: barrel test part 1 data and videos -

01 January 2009 - 03:22 PM

Ok, one more thing and I promise to stop spamming this thread :)

Every time I read about someone shooting +-3fps or +-5fps I wonder what they are doing that I'm not. I am very happy to see that even with an entire scuba tank and a $750 emag, you guys are getting a standard deviation of around 5 fps. That means that if you shoot 20 shots at an average speed of 280fps, roughly 19 of them will be between 270 and 290 fps (2-sigma) and one will be outside that range.

So an emag with a scuba tank - arguably an insanely consistent setup - only shoots +-10fps! Next time someone with a pump on 12ies claims +-3fps I'm going to create an animated gif of me kicking them square in the nuts! The only way you can get +- 3fps with most guns is if you only shoot 1 shot (joke).


footnote: http://en.wikipedia....ndard_deviation

In Topic: barrel test part 1 data and videos -

01 January 2009 - 02:44 PM

Another question this helps to answer is whether it is better to size an entire barrel, or just part of it (like you do with a kit). If we look at the data for the 12/.685 one piece CP vs. the 12/.685 front/back kit, I think we might have an answer that makes a lot of sense.

The 1 piece barrel is more efficient (290.25 vs. 276.95) but less consistent (5.73 vs. 4.70). This seems to validate the theory that a 2 piece barrel does most of the acceleration of the ball in the first 5 inches (or whatever the length of the back is) instead of the full 12 inches of barrel length, so therefore there is less barrel length that can act on the ball (via friction that magnifies the ireegularity of the paint) and cause variation in velocity. Do you guys agree with this?

I can't wait to see the accuracy test. I would also like to see a Palmer barrel in there since that is the only other significantly different barrel design besides 1 piece, 2 piece, and rifled. That could be test 3 - where you test the effects of barrel porting :)