How to make a photo smaller?
Best Barrel
Hello Guest
  
  • Login
• Register…
• Start blog
  • Who, Where, When
• What is interesting here?
• Duels
  • Polls
• Avatars
• Interests
  • Cities and Countries
• Random blog
• Users search
  • Search
• Games
• Tests
• GYXU
  • Ñîîáùåñòâà
• Talxy Chat
• Horoscope
• Online
 
Register!

GYXU > General > Best Barrel 24 June 2008 00:42:54

  Recent blog posts: 
  Forums:   
  Discuss: 
  Recent forum topics: 
  Recent forum comments:
  Ìîäåðàòîð:

Best Barrel

Gryphyn 3 March 2005 06:44:16
 What would be the best barrel for a 98 monetary matters aside? I've got
a good empire twister but I'm curious and would like to know.

Add comment
Gryphyn 3 March 2005 06:44:21 permanent link ]
 What would be the best barrel for a 98 monetary matters aside? I've got
a good empire twister but I'm curious and would like to know.

Add comment
Guest 4 March 2005 14:08:36 permanent link ]
 CMI tru fight thunder pig is the BESTbarrel. Better accuracy distance
and intimidating soung

Add comment
Tony Sr. 4 March 2005 15:28:57 permanent link ]
 well guys we all have the best barrel....I like dye ultralite .691-2...paint
is so bad these days I would rather use a ;little more air and not have to
clean barrels....don't forget for you new guys who like the ( perfect fit)
use rain-x in your barrel it cleans out with 2-4 shots to 98%.
<jabario@backpacker­.com> wrote in message
news:1109930916.628­327.30820@z14g2000cw­z.googlegroups.com..­.> CMI tru fight thunder pig is the BESTbarrel. Better accuracy distance> and intimidating soung>


Add comment
Mike Smith 4 March 2005 16:08:21 permanent link ]
 On 2 Mar 2005 18:44:16 -0800, "Gryphyn" <paintwiz@gmail.com­> wrote:
What would be the best barrel for a 98 monetary matters aside? I've got>a good empire twister but I'm curious and would like to know.

Hammerhead.
http://www.hammerhe­adpaintball.com/main­/feedback.shtml

Mike Smith
Add comment
That Guy 5 March 2005 12:31:03 permanent link ]
 Are you kidding me? Lets look at the facts;the 1st place team of both of
the major national tournament leagues (NPPL-Dynasty and NXL-Philadelphia
Americans) are all shooting the Freak barrel system.True,it is just an
aftermarket barrel.But,I'm sure you know(if you are as experienced as
you claim to be) how important the barrel to paint match is.And with the
Freak kit,you have all the possible bore sizes you would need to match
up with any paint.
What barrel would you suggest? Seeing as you are ready to put down
other's suggestions so quickly.By the way,how long have you been
playing for? And what type of paintball do you play?What marker(s) do
you play with?
I simply ask because you seem to be quite the all-knowing Nazi
overlord of this group,with the way you attack others posts and
suggestions at will.I would expect one with an attitude such as yours to
have been around both the rec-ball and tournament scene,aswell as the
professional industry, for quite a few years.However you appear to be
just a loud mouthed blowhard who thinks he is a paintball genius.

Add comment
Tony Sr. 5 March 2005 13:34:42 permanent link ]
 you realize SP sponsored Dynasty so hence the freak ;-)­
"that guy" <Norradthegreat@web­tv.net> wrote in message
news:13164-42296E47­-508@storefull-3212.­bay.webtv.net...> Are you kidding me? Lets look at the facts;the 1st place team of both of> the major national tournament leagues (NPPL-Dynasty and NXL-Philadelphia> Americans) are all shooting the Freak barrel system.True,it is just an> aftermarket barrel.But,I'm sure you know(if you are as experienced as> you claim to be) how important the barrel to paint match is.And with the> Freak kit,you have all the possible bore sizes you would need to match> up with any paint.> What barrel would you suggest? Seeing as you are ready to put down> other's suggestions so quickly.By the way,how long have you been> playing for? And what type of paintball do you play?What marker(s) do> you play with?> I simply ask because you seem to be quite the all-knowing Nazi> overlord of this group,with the way you attack others posts and> suggestions at will.I would expect one with an attitude such as yours to> have been around both the rec-ball and tournament scene,aswell as the> professional industry, for quite a few years.However you appear to be> just a loud mouthed blowhard who thinks he is a paintball genius.>


Add comment
Aaron Reimer 6 March 2005 00:44:35 permanent link ]
 I call Godwin's Law!

That was a lot shorter than it usually takes . . .

"that guy" <Norradthegreat@web­tv.net> wrote in message
news:13164-42296E47­-508@storefull-3212.­bay.webtv.net...> Are you kidding me? Lets look at the facts;the 1st place team of both of> the major national tournament leagues (NPPL-Dynasty and NXL-Philadelphia> Americans) are all shooting the Freak barrel system.True,it is just an> aftermarket barrel.But,I'm sure you know(if you are as experienced as> you claim to be) how important the barrel to paint match is.And with the> Freak kit,you have all the possible bore sizes you would need to match> up with any paint.> What barrel would you suggest? Seeing as you are ready to put down> other's suggestions so quickly.By the way,how long have you been> playing for? And what type of paintball do you play?What marker(s) do> you play with?> I simply ask because you seem to be quite the all-knowing Nazi> overlord of this group,with the way you attack others posts and> suggestions at will.I would expect one with an attitude such as yours to> have been around both the rec-ball and tournament scene,aswell as the> professional industry, for quite a few years.However you appear to be> just a loud mouthed blowhard who thinks he is a paintball genius.>


Add comment
Gryphyn 6 March 2005 03:12:14 permanent link ]
 Thanx for your suggestions everyone!

Add comment
Mike Smith 6 March 2005 04:45:59 permanent link ]
 On 5 Mar 2005 15:12:14 -0800, "Gryphyn" <paintwiz@gmail.com­> wrote:
Thanx for your suggestions everyone!

Yea... ignore them all and get a Hammerhead system.

http://www.hammerhe­adpaintball.com

Mike Smith
Add comment
D Money 6 March 2005 05:02:22 permanent link ]
 both Philly and Dynasty have won there respective leage championships
back to back 2003 and 2004.and Dynasty tied with the SC Ironmen for the
NPPL series title in 2002,and they won it in 2001.the NXL has only had
two seasons,and Philly has won it both years.and as a matter of fact,the
captain and owner of the Philly Americans is co-owner of SP.(Adam
Gardner) i thought everyone knew that.but the freak is still
awsome,despite what others say.

Add comment
Gryphyn 6 March 2005 11:07:26 permanent link ]
 Whats good about the hammerhead? I'm not the most knowlegeble here.
been playing 2 years.

Add comment
Mike Smith 6 March 2005 17:16:49 permanent link ]
 On 5 Mar 2005 23:07:26 -0800, "Gryphyn" <paintwiz@gmail.com­> wrote:
Whats good about the hammerhead? I'm not the most knowlegeble here.>been playing 2 years.

It will break paint on your opponents about 25 feet further than other
barrels.

http://www.hammerhe­adpaintball.com/main­/barrels.htm

Mike Smith
Add comment
Lee Drake 6 March 2005 22:02:48 permanent link ]
 "Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
news:qh0m2159m67rs4­0ochekt3m4dfer5n194o­@4ax.com...> On 5 Mar 2005 23:07:26 -0800, "Gryphyn" <paintwiz@gmail.com­> wrote:>
Whats good about the hammerhead? I'm not the most knowlegeble here.>>been playing 2 years.>
It will break paint on your opponents about 25 feet further than other> barrels.>
Mike Smith

How? Scientifically that is... Where's the proof?

Lee


Add comment
Mike Smith 7 March 2005 01:07:50 permanent link ]
 On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 18:02:48 GMT, "Lee Drake"
<verysexymanNO@SPAM­hotmail.com> wrote:
"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message >news:qh0m2159m67rs­40ochekt3m4dfer5n194­o@4ax.com...>> On 5 Mar 2005 23:07:26 -0800, "Gryphyn" <paintwiz@gmail.com­> wrote:>>
Whats good about the hammerhead? I'm not the most knowlegeble here.>>>been playing 2 years.>>
It will break paint on your opponents about 25 feet further than other>> barrels.>>
Mike Smith>
How? Scientifically that is... Where's the proof?>

First, you will have to let me know what type of proof you will
accept.
{Why the barrel will break paint 25 feet further is very obvious}

Have you visited the Hammerhead site, yet?

Mike Smith
Add comment
Tom Greening 7 March 2005 04:22:53 permanent link ]
 
"op4_camper" <op4_camper@hotmail­.com> wrote in message
news:D­%KWd.1401$dj.­237000@news1.epix.ne­t...>
Hey don't say old armson barrel I still have and use one of those on my
tipp> 98. To be honest I don't know if it does anything more. But it better then> the stock barrel.>

No offense intended. I said "old" Armson because I thought it possible
there may be something "newer" from then other than their original rifled
barrels.


Add comment
Mike Smith 7 March 2005 17:40:02 permanent link ]
 On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 06:27:13 -0500, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.ne­t>
wrote:
"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message>news:4t4n21­d0alv4cmp23jm204lplu­cb1kkjm6@4ax.com...>­> Hammerhead pumps their engineering, but I have actual field use of the>> barrel.>
I think you'd find that if you independently tested their barrel against>some other quality barrels that the differences between them would be>negligeble, despite your having been sucked in by their marketing hype.>
Shooting a paintball through a regular barrel gets it downrange in>> about the same shape as when it was loaded. Shooting a paintball>> through a rifled barrel imparts some spin on the ball, creating some>> slight improvement in accuracy...>
Oh my. It's worse than I thought.

You? Thinking? Good one....
Ok, smart guy, explain to me how air ESCAPING from a barrel at specific>points will impart spin on a ball that has already past the hole in the>barrel that the air escapes from. I'm listening...

Ummm... You are in your own little fantasy world, aren't you....
Yeah, I thought thats what you were going to say.

Of course.
And, not to relish in poking fun at you mercilessly(and it really is fun to>do, honest!),

Of course its fun when you just make up wildassed, unsubstantiated
claims... Hell, anyone can do that....
but even if spin WAS somehow imparted to the ball by rifling,>please explain how this spin could POSSIBLY tighten up the path of a>relatively spherical object like a paintball? Spin on a bullet or football>gives it stability by rotating the bullet/ball on it's longitudinal axis.

Email hammerhead and ask them.
Even if you could guarantee that a paintball would spin in a predictable>directi­on(that's a laugh),

Ummmm... I'm not "guaranteeing" anything...
you'd be spinning an object without so much of a>hint of a longitudinal axis around which to spin. That means that, at best,>it would have NO impact. At worst, the ball HAS somewhat of an axis, and>the ball is rotating so much that it puts the ball off course by way of>rotational momentum, so much so that accuracy is actually NEGATIVELY>impacted­.

As opposed to random spin as imparted by a smooth paintball being
launched out of a smooth barrel. Or are you stating that a normal
barrel will not impart any spin on a paintball?
It also puts little microcuts in the gelcoat of the paintball as it>> gets launched through the rifled barrel, giving you an effective range>> advantage. The shell is weaker, so it breaks easier.>
Did I mention I have a bridge for sale? Quite inexpensive, it's in New>York, Brooklyn to be precise.

So, a paintball being shot out of a rifled barrel will not nick the
gelcoat of the paintball... You obviously believe that the shell is
tougher than the rifling in the barrel, right?

Mike Smith
Add comment
Jeff Goslin 8 March 2005 00:23:32 permanent link ]
 "Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
news:rvlo21pcop7d5l­9h35ciqbnvhneoj80pfa­@4ax.com...> >Oh my. It's worse than I thought.>
You? Thinking? Good one....

Yeah, almost as much as you thought about what Hammerhead said about their
barrels.
Ok, smart guy, explain to me how air ESCAPING from a barrel at specific> >points will impart spin on a ball that has already past the hole in the> >barrel that the air escapes from. I'm listening...>
Ummm... You are in your own little fantasy world, aren't you....

That was an absolutely excellently articulated and reasoned response!
Kudos! *thumbsup*

Think about it. Air would only escape from porting holes after the ball had
already past the point where the hole was in the barrel, right? If the ball
has already past the hole when the air escapes, how can the air escaping
affect the ball in any appreciable way?
And, not to relish in poking fun at you mercilessly(and it really is fun
do, honest!),>
Of course its fun when you just make up wildassed, unsubstantiated> claims... Hell, anyone can do that....

Actually, *I* am not the one making claims. I'm the one explaining why the
claims YOU spoke aren't going to work.
but even if spin WAS somehow imparted to the ball by rifling,> >please explain how this spin could POSSIBLY tighten up the path of a> >relatively spherical object like a paintball? Spin on a bullet or
football> >gives it stability by rotating the bullet/ball on it's longitudinal axis.>
Email hammerhead and ask them.

I don't own a barrel like this, so honestly, I don't care that much.
However, I would highly recommend that YOU ask them, and then post what they
come up with. Bear in mind that anyone who has truly valid scientific data
would be happy to share it with you, because it would only serve to bolster
their position. It's the ones who don't have real support for their
conclusions that would work NOT to have it out there("Oh, we don't share our
test data with anyone, our competitors might see it!" Sure
barrelcompanyguy, whatever). Not entirely uncoincidentally, I couldn't
actually find any real data on their site.
Even if you could guarantee that a paintball would spin in a predictable> >direction(that's a laugh),>
Ummmm... I'm not "guaranteeing" anything...

The "you" in this case is the ubiquitous you, not the specific you.
you'd be spinning an object without so much of a> >hint of a longitudinal axis around which to spin. That means that, at
best,> >it would have NO impact. At worst, the ball HAS somewhat of an axis, and> >the ball is rotating so much that it puts the ball off course by way of> >rotational momentum, so much so that accuracy is actually NEGATIVELY> >impacted.>
As opposed to random spin as imparted by a smooth paintball being> launched out of a smooth barrel. Or are you stating that a normal> barrel will not impart any spin on a paintball?

Well, that's the idea. Most quality barrels try their hardest not to impart
ANY spin on the ball before it leaves the barrel. There pretty much is zero
random spin. Any spin that you might experience from a quality barrel is
often the result of flaws in the paint rather than any other factor.

Spin on a sphere of non-uniform density will only serve a single purpose:
to throw that object off a predictable flight path, a result of rotational
inertia. The accuracy would be further impacted if the paint is defective
in pretty much any way, resulting in drag/air friction. Sometimes, as in
the case of the flatline, this is intentionally done, with predictably
inaccurate paintball flight as a result(even if the range is dramatically
increased, in the case of the flatline).
So, a paintball being shot out of a rifled barrel will not nick the> gelcoat of the paintball... You obviously believe that the shell is> tougher than the rifling in the barrel, right?

It *might* nick the gelatin that makes up the shell, but that's hardly the
point, now is it? The point is that TRUE rifling(grooves in a barrel), when
used in a paintball gun, only serves to rotate a physically unstable liquid
filled sphere in unpredictable ways. This has been tested over and over
again, and people don't do it because it doesn't work.

Now, what people refer to as "rifled barrels" in paintball tend to be the
spiral ported barrels, and NO, there will NOT be any modification of the
paintball from spiral porting.

And yes, I think it's fairly obvious that a hardened metal or ceramic barrel
designed for years of use and abuse OBVIOUSLY pales in comparison to the
toughness of the shell of a paintball, designed to break on it's first and
only use. I mean, that's obvious, isn't it? ;)

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
Mike Smith 8 March 2005 05:45:25 permanent link ]
 On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 00:26:35 GMT, "Tom Greening" <tgreen@yohmama.com­>
wrote:
"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message>news:o9cn21­1rj3h5m9n6l83qhrb9sl­p1nviqks@4ax.com...>­> On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 00:21:19 GMT, "Tom Greening" <tgreen@yohmama.com­>>>
Ummm.. You do know that I was allowed to try it {for free} before I>> bought it, right? It is definitely more accurate than my Lapco, Dye,>> or original Mag barrel, according to me.>>
Yes I know that. More accurate? I'll take your word for it. The doubt>arrises as to WHY that may be the case.>
Why? I don't know.... I didn't spend $1000's of dollars trying to find>> out.>>
What do you mean you don't know? Didn't you just get done telling us all>it's because of rifling and such?

Hello.... I was discussing it with Jeff..... You know he has to have
all of the scientific data furnished to him for whatever he's ranting
against....
Ummm.... Are you attempting to state that the balls are not sliced, or>> they do not break easier when they are sliced or because they are>> sliced, they break in the barrel? Or are you stating that the metal in>> a rifled barrel will not "scratch" the paintball's gelcoat?>>
If I HAD to pick one of the above I'd say that any barrel tight enough for>rifling to have any serious and significant grip on the ball would be>detrimental to the structural integrity of said ball. IOW, it's odds of>busting inside increase. Besides, have you ever by chance looked down your>barrel when there is a ball in it? If it's like just about every other>barrel in the free world your ball only touches in 2, maybe 3 places at the>most and at that only BARELY touches.>
Oh, and up above where you said "you do know that I was allowed to try it>{for free}" (how is that relevant?) all I can say to you is, you do know>that I used to manufacture these things don't you?>

Nope, didn't know that...... So, what's the theory behind it?

Mike Smith
Add comment
Dan Martin 8 March 2005 06:41:17 permanent link ]
 But then why can you balance a basket ball on your finger tip if it's
rotating, but not if it 's not rotating. Does the centifigul )or is it
centripital) force give it its stability?
If so, why wouldn;t that same effect work horizontally?



Dan



direction(that's a laugh), you'd be spinning an object without so much of
hint of a longitudinal axis around which to spin. That means that, at
best,> it would have NO impact. At worst, the ball HAS somewhat of an axis, and> the ball is rotating so much that it puts the ball off course by way of> rotational momentum, so much so that accuracy is actually NEGATIVELY> impacted.


Add comment
Dan Martin 8 March 2005 06:49:41 permanent link ]
 There goes the hook, and now from a wee it of line, and finally to top off
this meal, some lead based sinker.
Isn't this the same guy that had you going a month ago Jeff?


Anyways, air woul;d escape throught the porting to some degree ahead of the
ball as the ball would be pushing out air before it left the barrel, ( the
air that was in the barrel) Now, how much would go through the porting, very
little, but some would.I *MAY* just try to examine how much air, but it
won't be until I build that replaica of the Taj Mahal in my back yard.

cheers
Dan


Think about it. Air would only escape from porting holes after the ball
already past the point where the hole was in the barrel, right? If the
ball> has already past the hole when the air escapes, how can the air escaping> affect the ball in any appreciable way?>


Add comment


Jeff Goslin 8 March 2005 09:21:04 permanent link ]
 "dan martin" <nospamdwmartin@idi­rect.com> wrote in message
news:HKSdnblMdf2ujb­DfRVn-rA@look.ca...>­ But then why can you balance a basket ball on your finger tip if it's> rotating, but not if it 's not rotating. Does the centifigul )or is it> centripital) force give it its stability?> If so, why wouldn;t that same effect work horizontally?


A basketball spins reliably on a finger because of rotational inertia.

A basketball is a (more or less) solid sphere filled with gas of uniform
density. There are few density fluctuations that might throw it off it's
rotation. A paintball is a (more or less) solid sphere filled with liquid
that has a tendancy to settle, and because of it's small size and
manufacturing, is susceptible to manufacturing imperfections that (in terms
of size ratio) are much larger than the imperfections on a basketball.
These density fluctuations make it much more susceptible to the rotational
inertia doing wacky things. It's much more like spinning a water balloon
than it is like spinning a basketball.

All that said, the force of air to propel a paintball is applied more or
less equally on the back side of the ball. When you spin a basketball on
your finger, you have to expend (relatively) tremendous energy on a
specifically directional force, the act of spinning the ball. If you were
to simply smack a basketball from the center rather than the side, it would
be HIGHLY unlikely that it would spin on your finger. It's more likely to
simply fly across the room with no spin at all. Same thing with a
paintball. You'd have to apply a very disproportionate amount of force to a
single side of the paintball to reliably get it spinning.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
Jeff Goslin 8 March 2005 09:23:05 permanent link ]
 "dan martin" <nospamdwmartin@idi­rect.com> wrote in message
news:BZOdnQQ9Rqy1j7­DfRVn-hQ@look.ca...>­ Anyways, air woul;d escape throught the porting to some degree ahead of
ball as the ball would be pushing out air before it left the barrel, ( the> air that was in the barrel) Now, how much would go through the porting,
very> little, but some would.

I agree that "some" would escape. But we're talking about modifications
that are miniscule in comparison to the amount of energy already expended.
Porting only exists after the ball has reached it's maximum acceleration, at
least for most barrels.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment


LCT Paintball 8 March 2005 16:45:28 permanent link ]
 
Not even close. If that was true, we'd be trying everything before we> buy it, cars, lawyers, deer rifles, etc. In fact, try it before you> buy it is relatively rare.


You didn't really say that did you?

Hey Mike. Send me your mag barrel. I'll set it up in a vise with my mag, and
run some paint through it at 100 feet inside my shop. I'd like to see how it
does. Oh, wait, mines a Tach One. I think it might have cocker threads.


Add comment
Aaron Reimer 8 March 2005 16:51:20 permanent link ]
 Take a look at some clear shelled Wal-Mart paint sometime. Notice the large
bubble of air that resides at the top at any given time. Then try to spin a
hammer. The weight imbalance is noticeable.

Man. You can tell that I'm bored when I've actually started replying to
threads on this group . . .

"dan martin" <nospamdwmartin@idi­rect.com> wrote in message
news:HKSdnblMdf2ujb­DfRVn-rA@look.ca...>­ But then why can you balance a basket ball on your finger tip if it's> rotating, but not if it 's not rotating. Does the centifigul )or is it> centripital) force give it its stability?> If so, why wouldn;t that same effect work horizontally?>
direction(that's a laugh), you'd be spinning an object without so much of> a>> hint of a longitudinal axis around which to spin. That means that, at> best,>> it would have NO impact. At worst, the ball HAS somewhat of an axis, and>> the ball is rotating so much that it puts the ball off course by way of>> rotational momentum, so much so that accuracy is actually NEGATIVELY>> impacted.>


Add comment


Mike Smith 8 March 2005 17:38:00 permanent link ]
 On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 12:45:28 GMT, "LCT Paintball"
<nospampleasemnotly­on@mchsi.com> wrote:
Not even close. If that was true, we'd be trying everything before we>> buy it, cars, lawyers, deer rifles, etc. In fact, try it before you>> buy it is relatively rare.>
You didn't really say that did you?

No... but I did type and post it.... :-P­
Hey Mike. Send me your mag barrel. I'll set it up in a vise with my mag, and >run some paint through it at 100 feet inside my shop. I'd like to see how it >does. Oh, wait, mines a Tach One. I think it might have cocker threads. >

Yea... What's your point? My Mag has cocker threads, too.... but why
would I want to send you "MY" barrel?

Mike Smith
Add comment
Mike Smith 8 March 2005 17:44:39 permanent link ]
 On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 07:48:00 -0500, "Aaron Reimer"
<strongwilledchild@­hotmail.com> wrote:
Sorry, but I've been reading this thread for a while now. I hear you >calling Jeff a moron,

No, Jeff is not in the "moron" catagory. In fact he's not even close
to that catagory. You're watching me "tweak" him, not call him a
moron.
but I don't hear you actually answering his main >question, which seems to be how you think rifling will make the barrel more >accurate, when the spin throws accuracy off.

I don't know. I do know I can hit small bits of arms or hoppers or
toes better than I could with my Lapco, Dye, or Automag barrels.

I used to have an armson >rifled barrel (yes, the one with internal rifling, not spiral porting, >which, I'm sorry Jeff, I've never heard referred to as rifling), and it shot >pretty much identical to the rest of my barrels but was notably less >efficient. The only time I've seen a noticeable accuracy difference in a >rifled barrel was when there's broken paint in it, and the paint fills up >the grooves against the ball. Then you can actually watch the paint >corkscrew instead of just arc . . . still doesn't hit anything though.

OK.... Practice, practice, practice... or dump that barrel....You're
choice...

Mike Smith

Add comment
Gryphyn 9 March 2005 01:28:20 permanent link ]
 Seeing as how this argument spans days I think I should simply ask the
question ,again I know, from every one who's been following this topic.
After hearing all of Mike's preserverence and Jeff's unbiased scienced
it is time for everyone to say which barrel rocks (apart from flatline
and freak since I've already heard tons of stuff on those). Pick away!
:)­

Add comment
Aaron Reimer 9 March 2005 02:48:36 permanent link ]
 
I used to have an armson>>rifled barrel (yes, the one with internal rifling, not spiral porting,>>which, I'm sorry Jeff, I've never heard referred to as rifling), and it >>shot>>pretty much identical to the rest of my barrels but was notably less>>efficient. The only time I've seen a noticeable accuracy difference in a>>rifled barrel was when there's broken paint in it, and the paint fills up>>the grooves against the ball. Then you can actually watch the paint>>corkscrew instead of just arc . . . still doesn't hit anything though.>
OK.... Practice, practice, practice... or dump that barrel....You're> choice...

Read "used to" the barrel was dumped long ago, in favour of a BOA SS
snakebite, which, I must say, outperformed the stealth with every paint I
shot through. Later sold my whole setup, bought a new one, and went with a
LongShot, which is also a wonderful barrel, and at least on par with the
stealth. All I'm saying, is that (since we're speaking about experiencial
evidence) the rifling did nothing to improve accuracy during a time when I
was playing 4 days a week, and was asked by the owner not to shoot at anyone
using rental gear (easily recognizable with field camo jackets) because I
was frustrating the hell out of them with elbow and hopper shots.

Granted, I couldn't do it now without practice, practice, practice, but even
with practice, practice, practice, a wet barrel isn't going to let me hit
anything. You'll notice that that is what I was talking about. We might
also want to point out the difficulty of cleaning a rifled barrel, since you
basically have to remove it and run it under water if you want to get rid of
a break. No chance of shooting that one clean...


Add comment
Tom Greening 9 March 2005 03:25:47 permanent link ]
 
"Aaron Reimer" <strongwilledchild@­hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tXpXd.9478$RM2­.5063@read1.cgocable­.net...> >
OK.... Practice, practice, practice... or dump that barrel....You're> > choice...>
Read "used to" the barrel was dumped long ago, in favour of a BOA SS> snakebite, which, I must say, outperformed the stealth with every paint I


Doesn't make much difference but, BOA never made a SS barrel. Common
misconception.


Add comment
Aaron Reimer 9 March 2005 03:40:15 permanent link ]
 My bad . . . the snakebite without the stupid patterning on it then.

"Tom Greening" <tgreen@yohmama.com­> wrote in message
news:%vqXd.1542$gS.­1435@fe1.columbus.rr­.com...>
"Aaron Reimer" <strongwilledchild@­hotmail.com> wrote in message> news:tXpXd.9478$RM2­.5063@read1.cgocable­.net...>> >
OK.... Practice, practice, practice... or dump that barrel....You're>> > choice...>>
Read "used to" the barrel was dumped long ago, in favour of a BOA SS>> snakebite, which, I must say, outperformed the stealth with every paint I>
Doesn't make much difference but, BOA never made a SS barrel. Common> misconception.>


Add comment
Gryphyn 9 March 2005 04:46:24 permanent link ]
 Man! You two just can't stop arguing over that freekin barrel. I've
heard of enthusiasim but really. *sigh* Mike, Jeff, no chance you guys
could get over your issues and let up already?

Add comment
Edtheward 9 March 2005 15:22:34 permanent link ]
 
"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.ne­t> wrote in message
news:7P6dneLvbbZ42L­PfRVn-iQ@comcast.com­...
I'm smart, but I'm not a mind reader.
-- > Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info> It's not a god complex when you're always right>
you're NOT?!?!?!

AHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

loser.


Add comment
Mike Smith 9 March 2005 16:18:57 permanent link ]
 On 8 Mar 2005 16:46:24 -0800, "Gryphyn" <paintwiz@gmail.com­> wrote:
Man! You two just can't stop arguing over that freekin barrel. I've>heard of enthusiasim but really. *sigh* Mike, Jeff, no chance you guys>could get over your issues and let up already?

I'm from Texas, and Jeff's not.

So... no... no chance.... None at all....

Mike Smith
Add comment
Mike Smith 9 March 2005 16:44:16 permanent link ]
 On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 19:38:54 -0500, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.ne­t>
wrote:
"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
What? Go back and re-read my posts...>
In your first post, you gave the pseudo-pscientific reasoning that is the>cause of this backlash. There's nothing you can say to change that fact.>Furthermore, and more specifically, you haven't mentioned that your primary>reason was simply "liking it", ever. If that truly WAS your primary reason,>you should have said so. I'm smart, but I'm not a mind reader.

Perhaps I could have been clearer when I posted {on March 6}:

<begin quote>
Hammerhead pumps their engineering, but I have actual field use of the
barrel.

Shooting a paintball through a regular barrel gets it downrange in
about the same shape as when it was loaded. Shooting a paintball
through a rifled barrel imparts some spin on the ball, creating some
slight improvement in accuracy...

However

It also puts little microcuts in the gelcoat of the paintball as it
gets launched through the rifled barrel, giving you an effective range
advantage. The shell is weaker, so it breaks easier.
<end quote>

The "however" is where my opinion and Hammerhead's opinion separated.

How about:
Hammerhead says...
{yadda, yadda, yadda}
--->HOWEVER<---
I think.....
{yadda, yadda, yadda}

Mike Smith
Add comment
Jeff Goslin 9 March 2005 21:26:55 permanent link ]
 "Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
news:h8rt215sps41sd­r021bupc54v5etnquah8­@4ax.com...> Perhaps I could have been clearer when I posted {on March 6}:>
<begin quote>> Hammerhead pumps their engineering, but I have actual field use of the> barrel.>
Shooting a paintball through a regular barrel gets it downrange in> about the same shape as when it was loaded. Shooting a paintball> through a rifled barrel imparts some spin on the ball, creating some> slight improvement in accuracy...>
However>
It also puts little microcuts in the gelcoat of the paintball as it> gets launched through the rifled barrel, giving you an effective range> advantage. The shell is weaker, so it breaks easier.> <end quote>>
The "however" is where my opinion and Hammerhead's opinion separated.

In other words, it's our fault for not realizing that something without
quotation marks or some attribution denoting who wrote what was not written
by you. Ok then. I've had about enough of you. It's been fun talking to
you, but I think I'll go talk to someone with a brain now.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
LCT Paintball 9 March 2005 23:04:42 permanent link ]
 
It also puts little microcuts in the gelcoat of the paintball as it> gets launched through the rifled barrel, giving you an effective range> advantage. The shell is weaker, so it breaks easier.> <end quote>

That's an interesting theory. I'd be curious to know if you've ever shot a
series into a net so that they didn't break and examined these "micro cuts".
If the barrel was creating a consistent rifling effect, I would expect the
pattern of the "micro cuts" to be identical. I would also expect a larger
than normal amount of barrel breaks.


Add comment
Gryphyn 10 March 2005 02:08:49 permanent link ]
 
Stand behind me and say "yeah what he said"

No thanks Jeff I'd rather shoot myself in the toe, or you preferably.
I'll take RKN over YPBA now.

Add comment
Mike Smith 10 March 2005 04:07:43 permanent link ]
 On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 12:26:55 -0500, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.ne­t>
wrote:
"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message>news:h8rt21­5sps41sdr021bupc54v5­etnquah8@4ax.com...>­> Perhaps I could have been clearer when I posted {on March 6}:>>
<begin quote>>> Hammerhead pumps their engineering, but I have actual field use of the>> barrel.>>
Shooting a paintball through a regular barrel gets it downrange in>> about the same shape as when it was loaded. Shooting a paintball>> through a rifled barrel imparts some spin on the ball, creating some>> slight improvement in accuracy...>>
However>>
It also puts little microcuts in the gelcoat of the paintball as it>> gets launched through the rifled barrel, giving you an effective range>> advantage. The shell is weaker, so it breaks easier.>> <end quote>>>
The "however" is where my opinion and Hammerhead's opinion separated.>
In other words, it's our fault for not realizing that something without>quotation marks or some attribution denoting who wrote what was not written>by you. Ok then. I've had about enough of you. It's been fun talking to>you, but I think I'll go talk to someone with a brain now.


Great.... Jeff's going to discuss politics with his PGP, again....

Mike Smith
Add comment
Edtheward 10 March 2005 04:41:37 permanent link ]
 
"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.ne­t> wrote in message
news:svudnVS3MPxlHb­LfRVn-> It was a terrible tragedy, but he was quite cushy, truth be told. We> actually used him instead of the bean bag chair until he became too messed> up to sit on any longer. ;)>
Jeff,

many people make this mistake. once the body starts decomposing, there is a
bloating phase. This of course LOOKS like ( to the untrained eye) the body
is in the perfect "bean Bag" state. Unfortunately, if one sits on the corpse
in this state, you will only get ONE "slightly more" comfortable sitting.
With the gasses at an all time high pressure in the organs, once you sit,
you are bursting said organs WAY too early. Wait until the bloating starts
to recede and there is less pressure in the body. the organs start to harden
(like a football skin) and you may get an extra week or 2 out of your dead
body before your dogs take an interest.

just a FYI from someone who has been there.

..and of course Dye manufactures the best corpses, if you don't want to do
the corpse-making yourself.


Add comment
Jeff Goslin 10 March 2005 13:51:26 permanent link ]
 "Matt" <MathU41@aol.com> wrote in message
news:399glbF604u5cU­2@individual.net...>­ Just my two cents here. The field I go to sells Hammerheads, and I've had> the opportunity to use one. It is a DAMNED good barrel. Why, I dunno. I

I'm not doubting that the Hammerhead is a decent barrel. Most aftermarket
barrels are just fine. All I'm saying is that it can't be THAT much better
than any other barrel out there. We've taken the accuracy of a gelatin
coated glob of liquid about as far as we can take it. The big leap forward
at THIS point in paintball technology is making a commercially viable
rotatable and orientable oddly shaped paintball that is something OTHER than
a sphere that is able to achieve the benefits of rotational inertia(football
shape is the one most often thrown around). Get THAT bad boy rotating, and
you've got yourself an accurate projectile! The problem is the mass
production and delivery of these to the breech in a manner that we can work
with.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
Jeff Goslin 10 March 2005 13:53:18 permanent link ]
 "EDTHEWARD" <BLARG@BLARG.NET> wrote in message
news:5JMXd.1828$gS.­1470@fe1.columbus.rr­.com...> ..and of course Dye manufactures the best corpses, if you don't want to do> the corpse-making yourself.

He's here all week, folks! Tip the waitstaff, and try the veal!

good one, LOL ;)

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
Matt 11 March 2005 07:23:41 permanent link ]
 
I'm not doubting that the Hammerhead is a decent barrel. Most aftermarket> barrels are just fine. All I'm saying is that it can't be THAT much
better> than any other barrel out there. We've taken the accuracy of a gelatin> coated glob of liquid about as far as we can take it. The big leap
forward> at THIS point in paintball technology is making a commercially viable> rotatable and orientable oddly shaped paintball that is something OTHER
than> a sphere that is able to achieve the benefits of rotational
inertia(football> shape is the one most often thrown around). Get THAT bad boy rotating,
you've got yourself an accurate projectile! The problem is the mass> production and delivery of these to the breech in a manner that we can
work> with.

Doesn't seem like it'd be too hard. Make a football or bullet-shaped
paintball, put it in a spring-fed or gravity-fed clip just like a standard
gun. Heck, even a drum clip would work. Might take a little longer to load,
but if you standardize the connections, put a detachable belt clip on one
side of the clip like a 2-way, it wouldn't be too hard.


Add comment
Tony Sr. 11 March 2005 10:29:06 permanent link ]
 well Aaron that tells me what you know....sorry
"Aaron Reimer" <strongwilledchild@­hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%HqXd.6603$If1­.1385854@read2.cgoca­ble.net...> My bad . . . the snakebite without the stupid patterning on it then.>
"Tom Greening" <tgreen@yohmama.com­> wrote in message> news:%vqXd.1542$gS.­1435@fe1.columbus.rr­.com...> >
"Aaron Reimer" <strongwilledchild@­hotmail.com> wrote in message> > news:tXpXd.9478$RM2­.5063@read1.cgocable­.net...> >> >
OK.... Practice, practice, practice... or dump that barrel....You're> >> > choice...> >>
Read "used to" the barrel was dumped long ago, in favour of a BOA SS> >> snakebite, which, I must say, outperformed the stealth with every paint
Doesn't make much difference but, BOA never made a SS barrel. Common> > misconception.> >


Add comment
Tony Sr. 11 March 2005 10:34:50 permanent link ]
 stay at K-Mart...wow what can you get at that store that is any good for
paintball ??
"Aaron Reimer" <strongwilledchild@­hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:vbhXd.9391$RM2­.4603@read1.cgocable­.net...> Take a look at some clear shelled Wal-Mart paint sometime. Notice the
large> bubble of air that resides at the top at any given time. Then try to spin
hammer. The weight imbalance is noticeable.>
Man. You can tell that I'm bored when I've actually started replying to> threads on this group . . .>
"dan martin" <nospamdwmartin@idi­rect.com> wrote in message> news:HKSdnblMdf2ujb­DfRVn-rA@look.ca...>­ > But then why can you balance a basket ball on your finger tip if it's> > rotating, but not if it 's not rotating. Does the centifigul )or is it> > centripital) force give it its stability?> > If so, why wouldn;t that same effect work horizontally?> >
direction(that's a laugh), you'd be spinning an object without so much
hint of a longitudinal axis around which to spin. That means that, at> > best,> >> it would have NO impact. At worst, the ball HAS somewhat of an axis,
the ball is rotating so much that it puts the ball off course by way of> >> rotational momentum, so much so that accuracy is actually NEGATIVELY> >> impacted.> >


Add comment
Mike Smith 11 March 2005 16:13:16 permanent link ]
 On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:27:05 -0500, "Jeff Goslin"
<autockr@comcast.ne­t> wrote:
"Matt" <MathU41@aol.com> wrote in message>news:39chbv­F606ce0U2@individual­.net...>> Doesn't seem like it'd be too hard. Make a football or bullet-shaped>> paintball, put it in a spring-fed or gravity-fed clip just like a standard>> gun. Heck, even a drum clip would work. Might take a little longer to>load,>> but if you standardize the connections, put a detachable belt clip on one>> side of the clip like a 2-way, it wouldn't be too hard.>
Here's the thing. If it wasn't too hard to do, someone would already be>rich because of it. The problem is that accomplishing the goal as described>would run directly in the face of standards and practices.>
<snipped the long-winded response>

Let's keep this simple.

Everyone has been hit with a paintball that stung/hurt pretty good....

Now imagine that paintball having a point....

YEOUCH!!!!

Mike Smith
Add comment
Dan Martin 12 March 2005 01:21:13 permanent link ]
 Another reason why I wouldn't use it.

Dan

"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
news:im2331t1dincgv­b6mhj1dtbfqp1olngbfs­@4ax.com...> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:27:05 -0500, "Jeff Goslin"> <autockr@comcast.ne­t> wrote:>
"Matt" <MathU41@aol.com> wrote in message> >news:39chbvF606ce0­U2@individual.net...­> >> Doesn't seem like it'd be too hard. Make a football or bullet-shaped> >> paintball, put it in a spring-fed or gravity-fed clip just like a
standard> >> gun. Heck, even a drum clip would work. Might take a little longer to> >load,> >> but if you standardize the connections, put a detachable belt clip on
side of the clip like a 2-way, it wouldn't be too hard.> >
Here's the thing. If it wasn't too hard to do, someone would already be> >rich because of it. The problem is that accomplishing the goal as
described> >would run directly in the face of standards and practices.> >
<snipped the long-winded response>>
Let's keep this simple.>
Everyone has been hit with a paintball that stung/hurt pretty good....>
Now imagine that paintball having a point....>
YEOUCH!!!!>
Mike Smith


Add comment
LCT Paintball 12 March 2005 04:30:54 permanent link ]
 
I wish you luck, chief, because I would *NEVER* want to try to overcome > all> of those obstacles just to have a paintball that flies a few inches more> accurately..>

I think you're marketing wrong. It is true that it would require a complete
new system. It's also true that it would be difficult to keep up with
today's rate of fire, and the ability to shoot 200 rounds without reloading.
If that's what you're after, I agree there are major obstacles.

OTOH, a bullet shaped paintball would have much better accuracy, and better
range at the same speed. Woodsballers WOULD buy that, and they would pay big
bucks for it too. You're looking at a large investment to get something like
that started though.


Add comment
Matt 12 March 2005 11:57:21 permanent link ]
 <snipped for length>> I wish you luck, chief, because I would *NEVER* want to try to overcome
of those obstacles just to have a paintball that flies a few inches more> accurately..>
-- > Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info> It's not a god complex when you're always right

I didn't mention anything about marketing it. Just the technical aspects.

First, indeed, it wouldn't be hard to make them a different shape. And if
you went with a thick gel or foam-type fill, it may actually spin right.
Second, I did mention the clip. In fact, if the balls were just a different
shape, and not longer, a clip should hold standard paintballs perfectly
fine, with no modifications. With your mention of the belt, it 1) could be
sold pre-belted, so just open the box, plug it, and go 2) could have some
sort of hopper adapter to feed in standard, 3) could have reusable belts
that standard balls could be put it, or any number of other adaptations or
methods. Suggestions, anyone?

As for making it compatible with standard paintballs, it would be simple to
use the same interchangable system we do now. 'cocker threads, maybe.
Likewise, bullet-shaped paintballs could be just slightly larger, just like
large-bore paint, and maybe with a thicker, softer shell to allow them to
grip rifled ridges. Anyway, shooting a standard paintball would be just like
shooting a ball down a loose barrel. Hell, with the shell I mentioned, you
could use a Hammerhead system and not have to change the ball size, and it
would work well with either.

And like Mike mentioned, it wouldn't have to have a pointy shape. Could be
more-or-less round-tipped.


Add comment
Jeff Goslin 12 March 2005 14:46:15 permanent link ]
 "LCT Paintball" <nospampleasemnotly­on@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:1LqYd.57802$Ze­3.20697@attbi_s51...­> OTOH, a bullet shaped paintball would have much better accuracy, and
better> range at the same speed. Woodsballers WOULD buy that, and they would pay
bucks for it too. You're looking at a large investment to get something
like> that started though.

I dunno, dude. Very few people have pinpoint accuracy in their game, and
even fewer actually utilize it. Even in the woods, spray and pray is
standard practice, even if they do fire less. The only reason they fire
less is because they can't get open lanes as easily, so there's not much
point. But put a woodsballer on a field in position to fire a lane of ANY
sort, and they probably will.

Back in the pump days, the new paint/system MIGHT have stood a chance, but
these days, people rely on volume of fire, rather than accurate shooting.
It works, I suppose, probably mainly because any tard can do it, but it's
certainly not elegant.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
Jeff Goslin 12 March 2005 14:55:54 permanent link ]
 "Gryphyn" <paintwiz@gmail.com­> wrote in message
news:1110588974.778­539.130360@g14g2000c­wa.googlegroups.com.­..> Actually, if you made it into a clip or snail drum ( I think someone> else said that to) and gave it a bullet shape it could have a great> effect. you might have to make the fill heavier and maybe change bore> size and without rifling it could make it really unnacurate but apart> from that distance would probly increase by about 25-50 ft and> accuaracy would definetly increase.

Distance MIGHT be improved, accuracy would probably only be improved by 50%
at best(maybe from a 12" spread to a 6" spread?). You'd need a new barrel,
a new or radically modified gun, a new hopper device, new paint. Basically,
you'd need a whole new set of paintball technology from the ground up. Not
exactly viable.

The problem ISN'T that it can't be done, it can and has been done. The
problem is the acceptance of the public, who are not going to go out and buy
a whole new gun just to try some funky new paint.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
Jeff Goslin 12 March 2005 15:08:22 permanent link ]
 "Matt" <MathU41@aol.com> wrote in message
news:39flp4F5pjp7rU­2@individual.net...>­ First, indeed, it wouldn't be hard to make them a different shape. And if> you went with a thick gel or foam-type fill, it may actually spin right.> Second, I did mention the clip. In fact, if the balls were just a
different> shape, and not longer, a clip should hold standard paintballs perfectly> fine, with no modifications. With your mention of the belt, it 1) could be> sold pre-belted, so just open the box, plug it, and go 2) could have some> sort of hopper adapter to feed in standard, 3) could have reusable belts> that standard balls could be put it, or any number of other adaptations or> methods. Suggestions, anyone?

The problem is NOT the belted configuration of the paint, the problem is
getting people to either buy new guns or modify their existing guns to
accept belted paint. The belt has to go SOMEWHERE, even if it's that
breakaway belt that they use on like M60's and whatnot(the metal bits). If
you don't use standard configurations of guns, people have to buy new guns
or modify their current guns, presumably in a manner that can't be reversed.
As for making it compatible with standard paintballs, it would be simple
use the same interchangable system we do now. 'cocker threads, maybe.> Likewise, bullet-shaped paintballs could be just slightly larger, just
like> large-bore paint, and maybe with a thicker, softer shell to allow them to> grip rifled ridges. Anyway, shooting a standard paintball would be just
like> shooting a ball down a loose barrel. Hell, with the shell I mentioned, you> could use a Hammerhead system and not have to change the ball size, and it> would work well with either.

The barrel is NOT the concern when I talk about use with standard
paintballs. The hopper or feed system must allow for the use of standard
paintballs AND new paintballs in the same gun without modification.
Otherwise, you have a gun for new paint, and a gun for regular paint.
And like Mike mentioned, it wouldn't have to have a pointy shape. Could be> more-or-less round-tipped.

Not pointy pointy, but it would definitely have to be aerodynamically shaped
in order to gain the advantages we're talking about.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
LCT Paintball 12 March 2005 22:22:29 permanent link ]
 
I dunno, dude. Very few people have pinpoint accuracy in their game, and> even fewer actually utilize it. Even in the woods, spray and pray is> standard practice, even if they do fire less. The only reason they fire> less is because they can't get open lanes as easily, so there's not much> point. But put a woodsballer on a field in position to fire a lane of ANY> sort, and they probably will.

That is true, but only because that's the best our technology can do. Many
woods players actually enjoy playing sniper. If those players had a tool
that would actually let them effectively play that role, they would. If they
had to buy a complete new system, and they had to pay 4 times as much for
paint they would, if they could improve their accuracy and range
dramatically.


Add comment
Pukindog 13 March 2005 04:20:14 permanent link ]
 LCT wrote:
<<That's an interesting theory. I'd be curious to know if you've ever
shot a
series into a net so that they didn't break and examined these "micro
cuts".
If the barrel was creating a consistent rifling effect, I would expect
the
pattern of the "micro cuts" to be identical. I would also expect a
larger
than normal amount of barrel breaks. >>

Interesting idea. I have not heard about the whole micro cuts thing. I
bought a hammerhead barrel because I was looking for something nice and
lighter weight for my autococker. I spent a little time listening to
the sales pitch, and to be honest, I wasn't deeply interested in the
alleged technical aspects. I wanted to see how it shot. I spent a good
part of the day during the Quest scenario game on field playing with it
before I bought it. Actually, the first time I took it out it shot like
crap, and I returned it, disappointed. The balls (and velocity) were
just all over the place. I took it back to the guy selling it and he
swapped the breech sizers for a smaller one. Remember I am shooting an
autococker, and breech sizers do make a difference if only for keeping
the ball from rolling half way down the barrel before being fired.
After taking it back on the field and playing for a while, I came away
impressed enough to buy it. It shot at least as good, if not a little
better than the Dye stainless I was looking to replace. I like the way
it looks, the kit with several breech sizers is nicely done, it weighs
less than my Dye stainless, and it only cost a few dollars more than
the Boomstick I was considering. After using it for the remainder of
the game, I can certainly say I am not disappointed with the purchase.
Eventually I will conduct a more thourough test to see if it really
shoots any different than other barrels. The internal rifling is really
slow, maybe about an 1/8 to 1/4 turn down the whole 12 inches. I don't
think I can test whether or not the rifling is actually having an
impact on the flight of the ball, but I can sure do some bench rest
comparisons with a variety of other barrels. Meanwhile I'll be doing
some more field testing next week :)­

Billy Goodman -
http://www.pukindog­spaintball.com
If you let yourself have a bad experience and are looking for someone
else to blame, there's usually someone available to accomodate you.

Add comment
Gryphyn 13 March 2005 04:26:40 permanent link ]
 Wait! What if instead of applying it to the normal guns we apply it to
pistols and give the pistols clips and allow barrels to be added. If a
new system can't use a handle fed clip then you attach it at a diagonal
or horizontal angle in front of the bolt so that you can get higher
capacity by buying more clips which would also add a bit of realism.

Add comment
LCT Paintball 13 March 2005 04:34:27 permanent link ]
 
impact on the flight of the ball, but I can sure do some bench rest> comparisons with a variety of other barrels.

Make sure you post the results. I'd like to see them.


Add comment
LCT Paintball 13 March 2005 19:03:12 permanent link ]
 "Gryphyn" <paintwiz@gmail.com­> wrote in message
news:1110673600.912­233.313270@z14g2000c­wz.googlegroups.com.­..> Wait! What if instead of applying it to the normal guns we apply it to> pistols and give the pistols clips and allow barrels to be added.

Pistols kinda take away from the accuracy.

If a> new system can't use a handle fed clip then you attach it at a diagonal> or horizontal angle in front of the bolt so that you can get higher> capacity by buying more clips which would also add a bit of realism.>

I think, if someone would actually do it, you'd find the design would evolve
similar to more traditional paintball systems. They would start as single
shots, or maybe pumps. If the design became popular they would move onto
clips and then some sort of bulk loader.


Add comment
Mike Smith 13 March 2005 19:32:17 permanent link ]
 On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 00:34:27 GMT, "LCT Paintball"
<nospampleasemnotly­on@mchsi.com> wrote:
impact on the flight of the ball, but I can sure do some bench rest>> comparisons with a variety of other barrels.>
Make sure you post the results. I'd like to see them. >

I just shot 14 balls into a towel and broke out the magnifying glass.
(7 blue and 7 green/yellow) I didn't see any etching on the paintballs
until I used my 2 million candlepower spotlight in combination with my
magnifying glass. There are definite skuff marks on a small area of
most of the paintballs. The yellow parts of the green/yellow balls
were not visible to me, but the blue ones and the green parts had
skuffs on them. I intend to get a higher magnification and see if
there are any consistancies amoung all of them.

I would have assumed that I would see microcuts on all of the balls,
instead of the skuff marks on most of them. I'll be inspecting them
closer and at a higher magnification.

Right now, my theory is mostly shot to crap.....
More later.

Mike Smith
Add comment
Edtheward 13 March 2005 21:24:13 permanent link ]
 
"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message> Right now, my theory is mostly shot to crap.....> More later.>
Mike Smith

don't tell Jeff...


Add comment
Matt 14 March 2005 06:26:29 permanent link ]
 
The problem is NOT the belted configuration of the paint, the problem is> getting people to either buy new guns or modify their existing guns to> accept belted paint. The belt has to go SOMEWHERE, even if it's that> breakaway belt that they use on like M60's and whatnot(the metal bits).
you don't use standard configurations of guns, people have to buy new guns> or modify their current guns, presumably in a manner that can't be
reversed.

I said it last time, and I'll say it again in your phrases this time. The
discussion is NOT about getting people to buy new paint, the discussion is
if it was possible and worthwhile to make paint and a marker that would make
use of a rifled system. NOWHERE did I say that it would be with current
markers, and NOWHERE did I say we would have to sell paint to run through
current ones. You grabbed the original post and, like Forest Gump, ran
wherever you were looking at the time.

My idea is that it would be possible--and not at all hard--to make a marker
to utilize bullet-shaped paint. Hell, with an adapter--maybe an
interchangeable breech like the old Matrices--you could even use standard
paint. You could even sell them with a vertical- or power-feed breech and
smoothbore barrel stock, and offer a rifled barrel and belt-feed breech as
an after-market kit for those that actually wanted to take advantage of a
rifled system. Some time at a mill could make that quite feasible with a
standard Spyder, if you felt like stealing my idea before Das Fuhrer
Paintenballen (SP) does.
The barrel is NOT the concern when I talk about use with standard> paintballs. The hopper or feed system must allow for the use of standard> paintballs AND new paintballs in the same gun without modification.> Otherwise, you have a gun for new paint, and a gun for regular paint.

The feed system (clips or interchangable belts) that I suggested would. I
said that. You're agreeing with me, in your roundabout way.

And, yes, the barrel MUST be a concern, to some extent. Save the Hammerhead
system, rifling is known for simply shooting the balls out everywhere BUT
where you're trying to put them. It must be loose enough to not effect them
much, or interchangable to deal with that.
Not pointy pointy, but it would definitely have to be aerodynamically
shaped> in order to gain the advantages we're talking about.

Thank you for meeting me eye-to-eye at some extent, Jeff.


Add comment
Edtheward 14 March 2005 07:07:44 permanent link ]
 
"Matt" <MathU41@aol.com> wrote in message
news:39kb4tF4a7jstU­2@individual.net...
My idea is that it would be possible--and not at all hard--to make a > marker> to utilize bullet-shaped paint.

Jeff I think mentioned tht this was already done. we had this discussion
before, and someone posted the patent link w/ pictures and photos of
football shaped paintballs and the marker.

here is something similar, used for training. a little more realistic than
paintball as it uses a real gun, but the same idea. bullet shaped for sure.

http://www.simuniti­on.com/index.php?sec­tion_id=51



Add comment
LCT Paintball 15 March 2005 08:27:37 permanent link ]
 
Very few people bought A5's and M98's who didn't already have them to use> the flatline. A few did, even a few in this newsgroup, but overall, the> people using the flatline were people who already had the gun they needed.

At my store, I sell mostly Tippmanns, and mostly because the flatline and
response triggers are available. Of course I don't cater to the normal
paintball crowd. There aren't any legitimate fields in my town. It's all
renegade ball in the woods. I'm sure I would sell a different type of gun if
there was more speedball available.


Add comment
Jeff Goslin 17 March 2005 01:31:12 permanent link ]
 "LCT Paintball" <nospampleasemnotly­on@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:V8%Zd.141182$4­q6.71293@attbi_s01..­.> In this part of the country, MOST people DO have the skills to realize the> benefits. And, I think you'd find that most scenario game players do as> well.

Well, not to disparage the skills of paintball players in general, but
honestly, in my entire paintball lifetime, I've met very few
players(especially recently) who I could count on to hit a small target at a
distance with any regularity. I can probably count them on the fingers of
one hand, and almost without question, these were stock class players.
These are among the few that would truly benefit from an advance like we're
talking about.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
LCT Paintball 17 March 2005 06:31:05 permanent link ]
 
Well, not to disparage the skills of paintball players in general, but> honestly, in my entire paintball lifetime, I've met very few> players(especially recently) who I could count on to hit a small target at > a> distance with any regularity. I can probably count them on the fingers of> one hand, and almost without question, these were stock class players.> These are among the few that would truly benefit from an advance like > we're> talking about.>

You're still thinking about paintball accuracy. There are very few people
that I know of that are consistent with paintball guns also. I'm talking
about increasing accuracy and range to a point where they are capable of
repeating consistently. Suddenly, a real paintball sniper would be possible.
Where I live, everybody is a hunter. If you give the good ones three
bullets, they'll leave the woods with 3 carcasses. Sometimes, they even get
a deer. ;) In these parts, nearly everybody has the skill, and the patents
to take good shots if given a reliable round.


Add comment
Gryphyn 20 March 2005 22:03:53 permanent link ]
 Would making the ammo itself smaller but the fill heavier would that
increase accuracy as in Accuracy=weight-siz­e or some formula like that?
That way it could cost a bit less to.

Add comment
LCT Paintball 22 March 2005 06:01:58 permanent link ]
 
Would making the ammo itself smaller but the fill heavier would that> increase accuracy as in

Yea, in theory that would work, but how are you going to make it heavier?
You can't shoot lead at people.


Add comment
Jeff Goslin 22 March 2005 08:37:20 permanent link ]
 "LCT Paintball" <nospampleasemnotly­on@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:q0L%d.216$pa.1­46@attbi_s02...> > Would making the ammo itself smaller but the fill heavier would that> > increase accuracy as in>
Yea, in theory that would work, but how are you going to make it heavier?> You can't shoot lead at people.

In order for it to really work, you would have to increase density on an
exponential scale as compared to size. The reason is simple: the main
cause of accuracy issues are environmental, simply put, the paintball is not
large enough or heavy enough to reliably overcome the resistance forces
acting upon it.

Volume is a cubic measurement, and surface area is a square measurement, and
as surface area decreases, volume decreases faster(ergo mass decreases
faster) meaning that the density of the fill would have to DRAMATICALLY
increase just to retain similar flight characteristics.

If anything, I would argue that increasing fill density but retaining the
same size would be the way to go. Unfortunately, that messes with the
kinetic energies in question, meaning that the new paintball would probably
hit much harder, even though it would probably fly a little straighter.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
Sexy Momma 22 March 2005 21:24:40 permanent link ]
 Hi everyone,

I usually just breeze through the NG and pick out the entertainment,
but I had to get my 2 cents in this on going argument.

My hubby and myself have been playing for 20 years now ( paintball, the
other "playing" results in too many children ) and he has been in
search of the holy grail of accuracy ( I just spray and pray ) all
during that time. He has a science background and a machine shop to
boot while I have a medical/mental health background ( yes, Jeff is God
and is always right, and also delusional and absolutely entertaining!).
From my hubby's notes.

Built a gun rest to take out the variance of shooter skill.
Serve the gun with regulated air pressure and an accumulator.
Polished the appropiate mechanisms for consistent gun performance (
this was a nelson 007 with the removable barrels ).
Machines barrels and test at ranges of 40, 80, and 120 feet. Any
further, and wind became the overiding factor.
Crony brand pistol chronograph ( 1fps resolution )

All the above is summerized as trying to remove the shooter and gun
from the equation.

Then, my hubby machined rifled barrels of twists ranging from 1in 16, 1
in 10, 1 in 8 and 1 in 6.
The rifling was triangular with a high of .006 in and 12 evenly spaced
grooves. All barrels were 10 in long and all paint was Nelson brand.

The results of all the above. All the rifled barrels except one,
corkscrewed the paint in all directions. The only one that worked was
the 1 in 6. It shot accurately out to 80 feet. You could hit beercans
every time! At 120 feet you could hit a pie tin every time. The problem
was, the velocity was limited to below 200 fps or you would break balls
like crazy. Consequently, the gun was only usefull out to 80 ft because
the velocity was so low, any further and the ball usually bounced.

My hubby came to the conclusion that the liquid fill did not spin up as
fast as the shell body causing uncontrolled wobbling until the 1 in 6
spin. At that point, the fast spin causes useful stabilization. But of
course, no usable velocity.

He didn't have any high speed cameras to measure actual spin out of
barrel. It must have been lower than the twist because of the fluid
fill.

A set of smooth barrals was then machined and polished. They varied
from .680 , .683, .685 and .687. All 10 in long and of aluminum. They
were treated with rainX ( and you thought this was a new trick?) and
fired with the same setup as above.

The results, they all performed the same at the specified ranges! At 40
ft, the pie tin was hit 90% of the time. At 80, 65%, and at 120 , 20% (
a paper backdrop was used to measure the actual hits and note the
"spread").

The final test was to sort the balls by hand. They were measured on a
scale to sort them by weight ( to .1 grams ). They were sorted in to
groups by size (.680, .683,.685 and anything bigger ). Then they were
visually sorted for roundness.

The conclusion?
Round, consistent balls, fired from ANY of the barrels just about
doubled the previous hit percentages on the pie tin ( 9 in pie tin,
velocity at 265 fps ).

Guys, listen to your mom on this. Jeff is right on. Get a straight,
smooth barrel and consistent paint and you can shoot straighter.

Add comment
Sexy Momma 22 March 2005 21:32:01 permanent link ]
 Hi everyone,

I usually just breeze through the NG and pick out the entertainment,
but I had to get my 2 cents in this on going argument.

My hubby and myself have been playing for 20 years now ( paintball, the
other "playing" results in too many children ) and he has been in
search of the holy grail of accuracy ( I just spray and pray ) all
during that time. He has a science background and a machine shop to
boot while I have a medical/mental health background ( yes, Jeff is God
and is always right, and also delusional and absolutely entertaining!).
From my hubby's notes.

Built a gun rest to take out the variance of shooter skill.
Serve the gun with regulated air pressure and an accumulator.
Polished the appropiate mechanisms for consistent gun performance (
this was a nelson 007 with the removable barrels ).
Machines barrels and test at ranges of 40, 80, and 120 feet. Any
further, and wind became the overiding factor.
Crony brand pistol chronograph ( 1fps resolution )

All the above is summerized as trying to remove the shooter and gun
from the equation.

Then, my hubby machined rifled barrels of twists ranging from 1in 16, 1
in 10, 1 in 8 and 1 in 6.
The rifling was triangular with a high of .006 in and 12 evenly spaced
grooves. All barrels were 10 in long and all paint was Nelson brand.

The results of all the above. All the rifled barrels except one,
corkscrewed the paint in all directions. The only one that worked was
the 1 in 6. It shot accurately out to 80 feet. You could hit beercans
every time! At 120 feet you could hit a pie tin every time. The problem
was, the velocity was limited to below 200 fps or you would break balls
like crazy. Consequently, the gun was only usefull out to 80 ft because
the velocity was so low, any further and the ball usually bounced.

My hubby came to the conclusion that the liquid fill did not spin up as
fast as the shell body causing uncontrolled wobbling until the 1 in 6
spin. At that point, the fast spin causes useful stabilization. But of
course, no usable velocity.

He didn't have any high speed cameras to measure actual spin out of
barrel. It must have been lower than the twist because of the fluid
fill.

A set of smooth barrals was then machined and polished. They varied
from .680 , .683, .685 and .687. All 10 in long and of aluminum. They
were treated with rainX ( and you thought this was a new trick?) and
fired with the same setup as above.

The results, they all performed the same at the specified ranges! At 40
ft, the pie tin was hit 90% of the time. At 80, 65%, and at 120 , 20% (
a paper backdrop was used to measure the actual hits and note the
"spread").

The final test was to sort the balls by hand. They were measured on a
scale to sort them by weight ( to .1 grams ). They were sorted in to
groups by size (.680, .683,.685 and anything bigger ). Then they were
visually sorted for roundness.

The conclusion?
Round, consistent balls, fired from ANY of the barrels just about
doubled the previous hit percentages on the pie tin ( 9 in pie tin,
velocity at 265 fps ).

Guys, listen to your mom on this. Jeff is right on. Get a straight,
smooth barrel and consistent paint and you can shoot straighter.

Add comment
DeathX 22 March 2005 23:43:46 permanent link ]
 
I think "Sexy Momma" is Jeffs mother?

On 22-Mar-2005, "Sexy Momma" <Desyrels@juno.com>­ wrote:
Hi everyone,>
I usually just breeze through the NG and pick out the entertainment,> but I had to get my 2 cents in this on going argument.>
My hubby and myself have been playing for 20 years now ( paintball, the> other "playing" results in too many children ) and he has been in> search of the holy grail of accuracy ( I just spray and pray ) all> during that time. He has a science background and a machine shop to> boot while I have a medical/mental health background ( yes, Jeff is God> and is always right, and also delusional and absolutely entertaining!).>
From my hubby's notes.>
Built a gun rest to take out the variance of shooter skill.> Serve the gun with regulated air pressure and an accumulator.> Polished the appropiate mechanisms for consistent gun performance (> this was a nelson 007 with the removable barrels ).> Machines barrels and test at ranges of 40, 80, and 120 feet. Any> further, and wind became the overiding factor.> Crony brand pistol chronograph ( 1fps resolution )>
All the above is summerized as trying to remove the shooter and gun> from the equation.>
Then, my hubby machined rifled barrels of twists ranging from 1in 16, 1> in 10, 1 in 8 and 1 in 6.> The rifling was triangular with a high of .006 in and 12 evenly spaced> grooves. All barrels were 10 in long and all paint was Nelson brand.>
The results of all the above. All the rifled barrels except one,> corkscrewed the paint in all directions. The only one that worked was> the 1 in 6. It shot accurately out to 80 feet. You could hit beercans> every time! At 120 feet you could hit a pie tin every time. The problem> was, the velocity was limited to below 200 fps or you would break balls> like crazy. Consequently, the gun was only usefull out to 80 ft because> the velocity was so low, any further and the ball usually bounced.>
My hubby came to the conclusion that the liquid fill did not spin up as> fast as the shell body causing uncontrolled wobbling until the 1 in 6> spin. At that point, the fast spin causes useful stabilization. But of> course, no usable velocity.>
He didn't have any high speed cameras to measure actual spin out of> barrel. It must have been lower than the twist because of the fluid> fill.>
A set of smooth barrals was then machined and polished. They varied> from .680 , .683, .685 and .687. All 10 in long and of aluminum. They> were treated with rainX ( and you thought this was a new trick?) and> fired with the same setup as above.>
The results, they all performed the same at the specified ranges! At 40> ft, the pie tin was hit 90% of the time. At 80, 65%, and at 120 , 20% (> a paper backdrop was used to measure the actual hits and note the> "spread").>
The final test was to sort the balls by hand. They were measured on a> scale to sort them by weight ( to .1 grams ). They were sorted in to> groups by size (.680, .683,.685 and anything bigger ). Then they were> visually sorted for roundness.>
The conclusion?> Round, consistent balls, fired from ANY of the barrels just about> doubled the previous hit percentages on the pie tin ( 9 in pie tin,> velocity at 265 fps ).>
Guys, listen to your mom on this. Jeff is right on. Get a straight,> smooth barrel and consistent paint and you can shoot straighter.
Add comment
Volt 23 March 2005 00:38:53 permanent link ]
 Sexy Momma wrote:
Guys, listen to your mom on this. Jeff is right on.

OH JUST OPEN UP THE GATES OF HELL, WHYDON'TCHA?!!!!

--

Volt
Now with less sig!
Add comment
Gryphyn 23 March 2005 20:20:08 permanent link ]
 
OH JUST OPEN UP THE GATES OF HELL, >WHYDON'TCHA?!!!!

EEEEEEEEE. It burns!!

Add comment
Sexy Momma 23 March 2005 20:20:20 permanent link ]
 
DeathX wrote:> I think "Sexy Momma" is Jeffs mother?>
On 22-Mar-2005, "Sexy Momma" <Desyrels@juno.com>­ wrote:>
AM NOT!

Unlike you fellows, we gals KNOW who our children are.

Add comment
Rick Scott 23 March 2005 21:45:24 permanent link ]
 (Sexy Momma <Desyrels@juno.com>­ uttered:)­> DeathX wrote:>> I think "Sexy Momma" is Jeffs mother?>>
AM NOT!>
Unlike you fellows, we gals KNOW who our children are.

Ooooh...*burn*!




Rick
--
key CF8F8A75 / print C5C1 F87D 5056 D2C0 D5CE D58F 970F 04D1 CF8F 8A75
Wit is educated insolence.
:Aristotle
Add comment
Dean 29 March 2005 03:05:42 permanent link ]
 Never forget that a paintball is a liquid fill inside a soft casing. It's
impossible to get that "sniper" accuracy out of it. Paintballs are simply a
sub-standard and inferior ammunition. Inferior to what? Whatever may be
invented later.
Increasing the density of the fill might help a little, but the added weight
would reduce velocity and range. Not to mention possibly cause bruising more
severe than is the norm with getting shot.
Changing the size of the paintball, while great for better accuracy, would
be an industry nightmare, since .68 caliber is the accepted norm.
"LCT Paintball" <nospampleasemnotly­on@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:q0L%d.216$pa.1­46@attbi_s02...>> Would making the ammo itself smaller but the fill heavier would that>> increase accuracy as in>
Yea, in theory that would work, but how are you going to make it heavier? > You can't shoot lead at people.>


Add comment
Rick Scott 29 March 2005 10:18:36 permanent link ]
 (Dean <MrThropic@cfl.rr.c­om> uttered:)­> Increasing the density of the fill might help a little, but the> added weight would reduce velocity and range. Not to mention> possibly cause bruising more severe than is the norm with getting> shot.

There is a certain ASTM maximum mass for a paintball as well, to limit
the total energy that is delivered when it hits someone. So there's
a practical limit on how dense you can make the fill (and thus how
heavy you can make the paintball) as well.




Rick
--
key CF8F8A75 / print C5C1 F87D 5056 D2C0 D5CE D58F 970F 04D1 CF8F 8A75
HEATHEN, n. A benighted creature who has the folly to worship
something that he can see and feel.
:Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" (1911)
Add comment
LCT Paintball 29 March 2005 11:30:38 permanent link ]
 
There is a certain ASTM maximum mass for a paintball as well, to limit> the total energy that is delivered when it hits someone.

Are you sure about that? I thought they just chose an arbitrary number (300
fps) and decided that looked about right. I seem to remember a discussion a
few years ago suggesting that smaller caliber paintballs should be allowed
to shoot faster because of their weight, but nobody allowed the change.


So there's> a practical limit on how dense you can make the fill (and thus how> heavy you can make the paintball) as well.>

There's a practical limit because we're dealing with paint. It's difficult
to effect the density of paint in an amount that would make a difference.
Which is the point I was trying to make but evidently didn't articulate
well.


Add comment
DeathX 29 March 2005 18:10:21 permanent link ]
 Root Beer Barrel.
Add comment
Jeff Goslin 30 March 2005 08:09:45 permanent link ]
 "BEEFJERKYHUNTER" <gameshoes3003@yaho­o.com> wrote in message
news:1112153962.503­465.308120@o13g2000c­wo.googlegroups.com.­..> I didn't read all of this forum, but i'm gonna ask. Is the Flatline> barrel any good for the 98 custom? right now i got the CMI tru-flight> barrel 16"

I'm gonna go with "No." Hope that answer helps.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right



Add comment
LCT Paintball 31 March 2005 02:38:20 permanent link ]
 
I didn't read all of this forum, but i'm gonna ask. Is the Flatline> barrel any good for the 98 custom? right now i got the CMI tru-flight> barrel 16">

Depends on what you consider good. It does add range, but at the cost of
some accuracy (depending on paint quality). If you play in the woods, it's a
good tool to have. If you don't, I wouldn't get one.


Add comment
Guest 24 June 2008 00:35:43 permanent link ]
 it rocks
Add comment
Guest 24 June 2008 00:42:54 permanent link ]
 people have a realy hard time tring to find my know.i used to have to spay a luttal bit if you know what n mean.when i got the heamer head that a chaged.its sick on my etek2.
Add comment
 

Add new comment

As:
Login:  Password:  
 
 
  
 
respect your talk pals, avoid using obscene language, typing entire messages in CAPS, posting buy/sell ads or violating netiquette or the RF Criminal Code..


GYXU > General > Best Barrel 24 June 2008 00:42:54

see also:
Bumrooter etymology?
pass tests:
see also:
:-)
...
Sri Lanka Vs West Indies

  Copyright © 2001—2009 GYXU
Idea: Miñhael Monashev
See Help and FAQ in the community support.gyxu.com.
Write in the community about the bugs you have noticedbugs.gyxu.com.
Write your offers and comments in the communities suggest.gyxu.com.
Information for parents.
Write us at:
If you would like to report an abuse of our service, such as a spam message, please .