[LoneWolf99]

Yeah, and I'd like pin-point accuracy at all ranges up to 200 feet. Never going to happen.

If GI Milsim's charts represent the best of all their tests (and I would assume they do), and they aren't outright fabrications (wouldn't be surprised), a 2" difference (1" on either side of the circle) probably falls into the standard deviation anyway (always hated statistics), which seeems to me that there isn't any difference at all - so again, why is .50 so great again?

Why do I need to run out and spend $500 - 750 on all new equipment so I can shoot a paintball that doesn't travel as far, break as often or be as or more accurate than my current paint? And why should I give my money to a company that has blatantly misrepresented (at best) or lied (at worst) about this product?

Seriously, why?

[bigman1416]

You can have pin point accuracy, it's called the First Strike Round.

[ikillforsupersoaker]

all this did is compare a all american barrel to a cheap low end stock barrel. fail.

[bigman1416]

Ok that's a fair point... But what it did do is mirror GI's own findings with it's own round, happy's numbers were in-line with what GI's been saying. The big lie we caught them in is the accuracy of .68. We know from PunkWorks, Mann's barrel testing and Tom Kaye that any barrel 12" to 16" in length will create a 12" to 15" circle at 75'. Every accuracy test done so far has drawn those results reguardless of marker or barrel a 12" to 15" circle at what would be the apex of the flight path will create that pattern, better barrels with a quality internal finish and quality paint will get 12" to 14" more consistantly, but even with GI's own test .50 averages a 17" circle at 70' to 75'. This test proves those results in closer to real world application, not only that but at 75' hitting a semi-solid target .50 does not carry enough energy to guarante a break, that's close to the distance from the back corner to the center "X" of most fields.

The findings hold ground cause if anything they match what the manufacturer has said. Happy, good testing.

[Malitov]

Originally Posted by JD9940

all you 50cal ******s need to shut the **** up about this mythic "final batch" bull****.

With Idiots like you being against 50cal we won't even have to worry about it failing. Your ******* post proves that you have no clue what your even trying to talk about. Do you work at GI Milsim or one of the other major paint companies? No? Thats a good thing for all of us.

So you don't know one way or the other if there will be a havier fill.
I really doubt we will see a heavier fill for quite a few years. Do you see me running around telling people to STFU? Next time try to post about something you know about.

[orgasmo2]

Originally Posted by Malitov

So you've got undeniable facts that state that GI Milsim or another company aren't attempting a heavier "Final" fill? You can state that with 100% accuracy?


My point was that alot of people(myself included) have posted supposed facts when in actuality they don't really know. I myself highly doubt there will be another heavier fill but running around telling people there isn't going to be one is stupid. For all we know tommorow GI Milsim, DXS, KEE or Neslon could announce they have 1.5 gram 50cal paintball thats completely eco friendly.

They won't be able to make the paint heavy enough without it being toxic. Additionally you will have shell issues, shipping issues, and breakage issues.

I guess there is a huge difference in what you post and what other people actually know.

I am sure they spent millions of dollars developing this so they could bring crappy prototypes to World Cup and not have a final fill.

If you want to believe in magical pixie dust covered balls, that is all you. But you should know that this paint is almost exactly like the 50cal from the late 80s.

So if they were going to have a better ball, we would have seen it.

I won't even get into the part about having better and thinner shell ribbons because the shell is exactly the same as 68.

Originally Posted by jerzyb0rn

Don't you think if they could make a 1.5 gram .50 they would. Don't you think if they were getting close to making a 1.5 gram .50 they wouldn't have released all there products already?

They could come out with somthing a little heavier, but im sure they tried out all there options.

Bingo.



There is a reason all of their marketing hoopla is at 70 feet. That is where they have the best ballistics.

[eyeownyu]

haha all the people who were worshipping 50 cal, and supporting the BS statistics made by smart parts and others.....pwned

[Gatyr]

Originally Posted by painthappy

You do realize it's 50 vs 68 right? Two completely different things. The fill is the same though. So your argument is moot.

I'm assuming you have a reason for saying "the fill is the same," so I would like to hear it. I've always been under the impression that it was the shell that affected the flight path more (weight of the paint/fill not withstanding, as obviously there will always be a difference in weight between .50 and .68) so than the fill.

I'm open to criticisms, because I haven't read into that much.

We used an oversized J&J barrel (the paint would roll right down the barrel) in a 1999 shocker!!! 1999 folks. So if todays technology 10 years later, can't compete... Then why the HECK are you even buying new guns?

My reason for having my 08 ego aside, you are comparing a marker that was/is known for it's accruacy and consistency to a gun that I and most other people have had little to no experience with. Moreover, you don't even use a good barrel for the shocker.

My point in my original post was that the test was not very scientific or well done, and could very easily be construed as disingenuous in the desire to effectively compare both calibers of paintball.

Originally Posted by [paintball.ninja]

I'm also glad to see that Gatyr wants to stuff .68 cal paint into a .50 cal marker

That's not at all what I said or meant. I want the test to be accurate, and part of that would involve using paint that is as similar as possible. In other words, the use of paint from a single manufacturer that is of the same grade. Evil especially has a well-earned reputation for consistently good shape of the balls, while Milsim hasn't even been making paint for more than a few months (to my knowledge; I've definitely never heard of anyone using milsim paint at any PSPs I have played at).

Regarding GI's tests, I am inclined not to take their word for it, if only for their affiliation with SP. And also because they are comparing different guns with no mention of the types of paint/barrels used.

I don't care either way which one is better; I'm going to use the better product because it will benefit me. I would just like for anyone who is in the position to do tests do so in a way that marginalizes variability as best as possible.

[jerzyb0rn]

Originally Posted by Gatyr

Milsim hasn't even been making paint for more than a few months (to my knowledge; I've definitely never heard of anyone using milsim paint at any PSPs I have played at).

do you know who founded this company?

[eforcegtid00d]

What I'd like to see is an Ego test (.68 first, then .50 with the production conversion kit) conducted by an independent third party.

[Gatyr]

Originally Posted by jerzyb0rn

do you know who founded this company?

No, I don't.

[custar]

Originally Posted by Gatyr

No, I don't.

Adam and Billy Gardner of Smart Parts fame (or infamy) and Richmond Italia.

custar

[jerzyb0rn]

^^Richmond Italia was also the president of Procaps...DXS paintballs.

[Malitov]

Originally Posted by orgasmo2

They won't be able to make the paint heavy enough without it being toxic. Additionally you will have shell issues, shipping issues, and breakage issues.

I guess there is a huge difference in what you post and what other people actually know.

I am sure they spent millions of dollars developing this so they could bring crappy prototypes to World Cup and not have a final fill.

If you want to believe in magical pixie dust covered balls, that is all you. But you should know that this paint is almost exactly like the 50cal from the late 80s.

So if they were going to have a better ball, we would have seen it.

I won't even get into the part about having better and thinner shell ribbons because the shell is exactly the same as 68.

Did you actually read the part where I stated my doubts about the heavier fill? Evidently not. My post was intended to make the user and others realize that they don't really know what is going on. People come to assumptions and then suddenly decide its a fact and have to start posting as if they were the heads of the R&D department. I could care less if they ever have a heavier fill. You seemed to have failed to read that part but oh well.

[red_merkin]

Did you actually read the part where I stated my doubts about the heavier fill? Evidently not. My post was intended to make the user and others realize that they don't really know what is going on. People come to assumptions and then suddenly decide its a fact and have to start posting as if they were the heads of the R&D department. I could care less if they ever have a heavier fill. You seemed to have failed to read that part but oh well.

I find it interesting that people want to believe they somehow have it all figured out by reading about from forum posts on the internet. There's a lot of stuff going on that people don't know about.

Honestly if i didn't know the things i know, and if i hadn't seen the things i've seen, then i might be inclined to follow the PBN mob. I can understand why people are reacting the way they are really.

I think people really need to try this for themselves, and see for themselves if this is a good idea or not.

[jerzyb0rn]

^^ were all waiting to try it...in the mean time were talking about it because this is whats supposed to be done on a forum after all.

[miniman777]

yea this video was a fail. the guns were COMPLETELY different.
they need to do this with the new SP impulse or something that is both .50 and .68 cal. and that will make the barrel both be the same. and the firing mechanism the same as well.

this video doesnt really prove anything. its like comparing a stock tippmann to an ego for accuracy. of course the ego is gonna win.

[Spitlebug]

Originally Posted by eforcegtid00d

What I'd like to see is an Ego test (.68 first, then .50 with the production conversion kit) conducted by an independent third party.

Would Punkworks qualify? They have an Ego and a .50 cal kit.

Originally Posted by red_merkin

I find it interesting that people want to believe they somehow have it all figured out by reading about from forum posts on the internet. There's a lot of stuff going on that people don't know about.

Honestly if i didn't know the things i know, and if i hadn't seen the things i've seen, then i might be inclined to follow the PBN mob. I can understand why people are reacting the way they are really.

I think people really need to try this for themselves, and see for themselves if this is a good idea or not.

If only you knew what I know... then you'd be all over the .68 caliber bandwagon.

[red_merkin]

^^ were all waiting to try it...in the mean time were talking about it because this is whats supposed to be done on a forum after all.

true, and there's been a lot of good discussion, but there's also been an incredible amount of garbage.

My point in my original post was that the test was not very scientific or well done, and could very easily be construed as disingenuous in the desire to effectively compare both calibers of paintball.

I've been looking over the accuracy test video, and i apprecitate the effort the guys put into it, but i can't help feeling it's a bit flawed.

First, the FM 50 would be best tested against a similar gun, say the Tippman A5 for example. These guns are about the same price, and both are unregulated. Old Shockers are very low pressure, and very accurate guns, (known for this) and are likely to outperform most guns in an accuracy test.
they're clearly not the same class of gun... even if the shocker is 10 years old.
I'm not suprised the Ego shot so straight, i've seen many egos that were very accurate.
I would say in fairness you should test the FM50 against similar competition.


Another issue i have with this is the paint it's self.
I went back and looked at the paint brittleness tests, and breakage tests, and i found the results wern't the same as i was getting with the paint i've been testing. Typically i get 80% breaks from 6 feet with 50 caliber.

In one part of the video, Painthappy actually threw some paint on the floor in his kitchen, and it all bounced. I tried that, and it got a floor full of paint... for which my wife was not happy.

Now how the paint is handled and stored means a lot. I've got a bag of Zap for example that breaks from about 2 feet, and another bag of old Spectrum that is won't bounce even if i hurl it at the ground. Paint can go off if it's not stored correctly, it can get hard and bouncy, or super brittle.

So i'm looking at this video, and i'm thinking "this doesn't look right to me". And i can't reproduce the same results, my paint is breaking at least the same as the fresh DXS Silver i have in office.

If this paint came from World cup, it was almost certainly stored outside in 98 degree heat for 3 days, probably then taken on a plane, stored in the hold at -40 (i'm pretty sure you can't take paint in cary on), then tested.

What i'm driving at is this: there's a lot of factors that can produce test results as shown in the video, and some of those factors could invalidate the results of the tests as emperical evidence (as some have claimed)

Now, i appreciate that these guys went to the trouble to do these tests. I mean they put a lot of effort into setting it up, and it does show us interesting results. I like the fact that they're measuring stuff, and putting effort into showing us how they set up the tests.

But these tests are very subjective. I have a problem when people state that they're emperical proof, because they're not!

Anyhow as it's a forum, and we're debating this, i thought i'd throw in my 2 cents.

I have some fresh GI Milsim paint comming my way this weekend and i'll try again to test the results. It's kind of difficult, because it's cold up here in Montreal, and that too could invalidate any testing too.


EDIT ADD:
It would also be useful to see the same 68 caliber gun and paint used as a baseline in each test. Preferably a high quality gun that is very consistent. It seems there are a number of different guns used all producing varying results.

If only you knew what I know... then you'd be all over the .68 caliber bandwagon.

but if i know what you know, and you know what i know, then we'd still be on opposite sides of this arguement!


anyhow that's my opinion, and to each his own.

[Mi6GY]

Originally Posted by painthappy

You do realize it's 50 vs 68 right? Two completely different things. The fill is the same though. So your argument is moot.

We used an oversized J&J barrel (the paint would roll right down the barrel) in a 1999 shocker!!! 1999 folks. So if todays technology 10 years later, can't compete... Then why the HECK are you even buying new guns?

We shot slower so recharge rates in regulators wouldn't be a factor. The FPS in the shocker was 280 to 290. The FM-.50 was 300 +/- 5.

Up and down has to do with velocity and recharge rates normally. Side to side has to do with quality of paintballs... again.. normally.

The 50 caliber at a higher fps still bounced at 75 feet. I ened up throwing it at Paul later on, and it still never broke even after hitting the cement.

A $299.00 FM-50 vs a $299.00 G3 or Mini, and folks are trying to tell me they're not in the same class of gun? Then why the HECK are you buying a gun for the same price that will do less?

I know people will moan and complain no matter what. But the video is there, and to me, it speaks volumes.

I also played with this in a few games over the weekend. Just wait until you see THAT video.

thank you sir

[brycelarson]

Originally Posted by ikillforsupersoaker

all this did is compare a all american barrel to a cheap low end stock barrel. fail.

barrels don't effect accuracy.

Originally Posted by eforcegtid00d

What I'd like to see is an Ego test (.68 first, then .50 with the production conversion kit) conducted by an independent third party.

I've got one right here in front of me. And I think I do qualify. Sadly, I won't be able to post our results over here - the mods usually won't let us. You'll have to go to that other forum to see them.

Originally Posted by miniman777

this video doesnt really prove anything. its like comparing a stock tippmann to an ego for accuracy. of course the ego is gonna win.

go clamp them down in a vice, do some tests then see if you still think that. A gun is essentially a valve when you're talking bench tests. As long as they get the ball out the barrel reasonably consistently (+/- 15 fps or better) then they're equally as accurate.

I've got tons of data to back up all of my claims in this post. For those of you who have been watching PunkWorks for the last couple years - feel free to link to it. I have to go to work.

We'll have a .50 v .68 ego test coming up. I got the .50 kit from Jack Wood at PE - so it's as good as the conversion kits are going to be.