[DbDBlackJack]

Originally Posted by Spitlebug

I think (don't quote me) the real reason for not increasing the velocity on 50 caliber products is that it creates somewhat of a problem for (poorly) trained field employees checking velocities...

Also, imagine someone chronoing their marker at lets say 285, and then dropping in a .50 kit.

We're about to test out ~10 .50 cals as a rental option at our facility. In lieu of this, GIMilsim sent me a Micro and 2 cases of .50 to dick around with first.

At 260 fps, them *****es hurt. It's not long lasting, but it's a pretty good sting. I would hate to see someone with bad intentions chrono their .68 marker and then install a .50 kit. I don't know how easy it is to do or how quickly it can be done, but I know someone out there will try it.

As for all the other talk, I don't have proof or anything, but .50, in my limited real world experience with it, is inferior to .68. Not by a huge margin as some would have everyone think. The difference is there though.

However, .50 is cheaper for us (the fields around the nation) to purchase. The price to the end user will not change, it will just be added margin for us. Realistically, this doesn't mean we will change our entire rental fleet to .50, but it will definitely be an option. Out of the 500 players we see every week, if 15 or 20% of them use .50, we just made that much more money and the players didn't necessarily have any worse of a time playing. Rental players really don't understand the varying nuances of paintball and will use what we give/rent them anyway.

[TheColiseum71]

Originally Posted by JOHNwaynegaCy

Nobody has used the no true scotsman fallacy in this thread.
I can only assume you have a different interpretation of the no true scotsman fallacy, compared to the rest of us.
.

Philosophy

Originally Posted by Moodyman117

Well then... Ok so im jusst gonna point something out.
When most people here are talking about the force of a paintball striking a person, they are using the equation:

F=ma Force=Mass x Acceleration

there is a problem here. The paintball is not self propelled (duh). Any acceleration is negative (resistance). Since paintballs work on balistic principles, the formula to use would be:

KE=(.5)mv^2 Kinetic Energy (Joules)= One half mass times Velocity squared

Physics

Originally Posted by TokenAlcoholic

Look the up the asch conformity experiments, you are giving too much credit to your fellow man.

Behavioral Psychology


Impressive, PBN

not that impressive though, Token. That was a pretty bad and slanted example. That experiment was designed and carried out to show that people will suppress the urge to do what they think is right to conform to a group in a social setting. Trying to equate that study to how people will behave when purchasing a product is irresponsible at best. It is absolutely dishonest to post that implication if you have actually given any thought to the variables and completely different setting and conditions.

[TokenAlcoholic (Banned)]

Originally Posted by TheColiseum71

Philosophy



Physics



Behavioral Psychology


Impressive, PBN

not that impressive though, Token. That was a pretty bad and slanted example. That experiment was designed and carried out to show that people will suppress the urge to do what they think is right to conform to a group in a social setting. Trying to equate that study to how people will behave when purchasing a product is irresponsible at best. It is absolutely dishonest to post that implication if you have actually given any thought to the variables and completely different setting and conditions.

When attempting to predict the future the only thing you have to go on is past experience since "history tends to repeat itself" I see no reason why this would be any different.

[Fubarius]

Originally Posted by TokenAlcoholic

When attempting to predict the future the only thing you have to go on is past experience since "history tends to repeat itself" I see no reason why this would be any different.

PMI Max 55...
http://actionpursuitgames.com/index....48&Item id=87
Smaller, cheaper, less impact, total failure.

SMG 60...
http://www.vintagerex.com/museum/Tippmann/SMG-60.html
When everyone else was making pumps, Tippmann goes and releases a FULL AUTO magazine fed gun. One down side, the smaller .62 cal paint. Less range than a .68 cal ball, so players would just hang back and let the SMG player run out of paint and then rush him. 2 years after introduction they switched to the SMG 68, and many SMG 60's were sent back to the factory to be converted to 68 caliber direct feed semi auto 68 Specials.

Crosman 3357...
http://www.vintagerex.com/museum/Cro...potmarker.html
First .50 cal paintball gun, released in 1987. The paint had a reputation for... wait for it... less range and breakability. Some popularity as a rental at western themed fields, but never really escaped the niche market.

So you're right, this time probably won't be any different.

[Blitchy]

whats .50 cal?

out here i have yet to see a .50 cal gun used or even the thought of using it, it just doesn't add up to the wallet for most the people who already have gear.

[Rhino1XL]

I'm 37. Been playing since I was 14. Yes, that's 23 years. Seen 62 cal come and go. I'll watch 50 cal come and go as well. Simply put; there is NO ADVANTAGE to 50 cal. PERIOD. The laws of physics will not change for anyone or anything. Dont waste your time or money on this "fad" that was brought onto us by one of the SLEAZIEST guys in the industry. Remember that the guy that brought this to you is the same guy that invented the PSP so that he could sell more of his paint. Then, sold his company for an inflated amount of $$$, then to return and try to pull the wol over our eyes with this 50 cal stuff. RUN AS FAST AS YOU CAN away from this and anything associated with it.

Learn from history guys.

Rhino

[ilocanoTornado]

Originally Posted by AirSin2000

I'm not talking about rolling up a ball of ****en paper and shooting it @ 300 fps. I'm talking about a .68 caliber paintball, LIKE WE HAVE ALL BEEN.

We don't do joules here, we do FPS. Anything past 300 fps has been deemed hazardous enough which is why the legal limit is @ 300 fps, NO MORE.

No, you're right.. we DON'T do JOULES here we do FOOT POUNDS OF ENERGY.

And no, you're wrong. "Anything" past 300 fps IS NOT hazardous. It all depends on the weight and material.

Think about it like this...

It takes a muzzle energy of 10fpe to the dome to kill a bob cat within 30 yards (clean kill too). With .68 paintballs weighing 3 grams and going 600fps and producing 37fpe at the muzzle, you'd think this would produce a kill at 20 yards right? Even with a VERY WELL PLACED SHOT? No.
------------
With a pellet (preferably diabolos) that weighs 1.5 grams (HALF the weight of a paintball) and going 600fps and producing ONLY 12fpe at the muzzle, would this kill at 20 yards? With a somewhat decent shot? Yes.

Weight and material come into play. Material being the determining factor in the above example.

Now I'm not advocating raising the FPS. I'm just saying that it's not the FPS that matters.. it's the energy. Trust me, I've hunted with both pellet guns and centerfire rifles. With my pellet gun I can kill HUGE foxes and coyotes because it can do 950fps w/ 30grains producing 60fpe.... rather than a garbage $200 pellet gun you find at walmart that can do 1200fps w/ 9grains and producing less than 30fpe (and probably aren't accurate). Here is where you can see how WEIGHT comes into play.

Again, FPS is not what matters... it's the ENERGY (joules or fpe). That's why a .50 paintball going more than 300fps probably won't even do as much damage as a .68 going 250fps. Because it produces less ENERGY!

And then off course you gotta factor in range, velocity drop off, etc. A paintball that produces 37fpe at the muzzle will probably only have like.. 10fpe after 20 yards LOL (because paintball velocity DROPS FAST)! But that's another story for another time.

[LoneWolf99]

It all comes down to what the insurance companies will accept - and they won't accept anything that has the potential to cause an uptick in claims being filed (injuries, accidents, etc).

They have spent years building their actuarial tables around 300FPS - it is a known quantity with .68 & all of the equipment is sized and built to accommodate that particular set of attributes.

We can argue the physics of it all we want, but at the end of the day, it is going to come down to money - and the insurance industry as a whole isn't real excited about making changes that could impact their bottom line.

[ilocanoTornado]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf99

It all comes down to what the insurance companies will accept - and they won't accept anything that has the potential to cause an uptick in claims being filed (injuries, accidents, etc).

They have spent years building their actuarial tables around 300FPS - it is a known quantity with .68 & all of the equipment is sized and built to accommodate that particular set of attributes.

We can argue the physics of it all we want, but at the end of the day, it is going to come down to money - and the insurance industry as a whole isn't real excited about making changes that could impact their bottom line.

Yeah I 100% agree. I was just pointing out that FPS isn't really the culprit in determining how hard something can hit.

[fAllout_oMen]

Originally Posted by Spitlebug

Blah, blah, blah. You are full of ****, from one old timer to another.

.

And Spitlebug is a well-known face 'round these parts, ya see?

[AirSin2000]

Originally Posted by ilocanoTornado

Yeah I 100% agree. I was just pointing out that FPS isn't really the culprit in determining how hard something can hit.

I was talking about 300 fps with the size and weight of a 68 cal paintball. So yes, anything past 300 fps is hazardous, WHEN shooting a 68 cal paintball.

[ilocanoTornado]

Originally Posted by AirSin2000

I was talking about 300 fps with the size and weight of a 68 cal paintball. So yes, anything past 300 fps is hazardous, WHEN shooting a 68 cal paintball.

Yeah I know. But it's not the velocity that makes it hazardous it's because of the energy it produces. So yeah, we're all on the same page I think.

[DonnCath]

Wait... who is... that short, fat greaser trying to... sell me gear... I already own... Oh... It's Richmond Italia. Now it's makes sense. I must be on the wrong bandwagon, because I shoot .68 OH NO! Apparently there won't be any .68 soon! Well, until they stop producing it, as Richmond Italia says, I'll be shooting it!

[maxinvasion]

im gonna be running an etek 3 .50cal set u soon

[NCONTROL]

Originally Posted by Shortbuscrew

I would consider using .50 cal at my field we play at.

The benefits outweigh the cons here in canada.

Paint having issues not breaking, Well its cold and up on a mountain where i play, so this could fix the issue by chilling the paint.

Paint cost - a case is $80. If i could pay 80-100$ for a case of 4000 This would save me money.

Size of paint - Shooting people between cracks would help a ton.

- The 285-300FPS limit. a 68 Cal ball at 300 fps is about 13 joules, a 50cal is about 5 joules. It's about half the distance.
Masks are rated for 300FPS. If you take a 50 cal at 1.2 grams at 13 joules, you get about 482 FPS. at 5 joules you get 299FPS.

If paintball regulations change for the FPS rule on .50 cal paint to atleast 450-480, You will have the same impact force as the 68 caliber, fixing the issue with paint not breaking on impact.

Some of you may think 482FPS is outrageous and will never happen, but don't think of how much a .68cal paintball weighs.

1.2 grams(50 cal) 3.2 grams (68cal)
5 joules @ 299.42 FPS 13.385 joules @ 300 FPS
135.2Ft effective range 135.46Ft effective range

Now If you could have the regulations changed at 300FPS to the 482FPS limit at 13 joules(the same kinetic force of a 68cal hitting your mask/body). You will have the same breakage, and an effective range of 218 feet.

But this is all theory that makes me wonder. If you can shoot it faster, it will have the same force as a 68.

I think you have one of the most informative and worth while posts in this thread. Like the math backing your ideas. However, being a smaller projectile at .50 cal do you think a higher velocity could be dangerous at close ranges? I am thinking in relation to getting your foot stepped on by a flat sole versus a high heel. While actual force may be the same, the smaller area of impact could concentrate the amount of force?

[ilocanoTornado]

Originally Posted by NCONTROL

However, being a smaller projectile at .50 cal do you think a higher velocity could be dangerous at close ranges? I am thinking in relation to getting your foot stepped on by a flat sole versus a high heel. While actual force may be the same, the smaller area of impact could concentrate the amount of force?

A .50 cal paintball going 480fps will produce the same amount of energy as a .68 paintball going 300 fps.. which is about 10 foot-pounds of energy AT THE MUZZLE. It would not be more "dangerous" (if you want to even call getting hit by a paintball dangerous).

The whole "flat sole versus high heel" question is good, though. It does not apply in this case but I cannot tell you exactly why because I don't know much about physics. But an easy answer is that you really can't compare a paintball to a high heel and flat sole because paintballs are not completely solid. They're filled with paint and are easily broken.

[LoneWolf99]

Except a smaller sphere with the same size shell as the larger one will be more structurally-solid & less likely to break at the same impact force.

[ilocanoTornado]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf99

Except a smaller sphere with the same size shell as the larger one will be more structurally-solid & less likely to break at the same impact force.

Right but I doubt that those factors are enough to make it hurt more. After all, it's a measurement of ENERGY and NOT a measurement of FORCE OVER AREA. This is all from the top of my head and whatever I know about physics, so if you know more than me then feel free to correct me.

I believe that they'll both hurt the same when both have similar muzzle energy. Same energy, same distance, same accuracy, different velocities.

Not sure whoever started the whole fps and energy conversation.. but if fields started to allow .50 cal at 480, then it would be on even ground with .68 as far as range and accuracy goes. Then again, the less pain factor is one of the reasons why they're pushing .50.

[LoneWolf99]

Pain is very subjective - I've taken shots in different areas from the same marker, yet the feel of the impact can be substantially different (some people also barely feel hits, while others might be on the ground crying).

So this becomes a very subjective discussion on what might "hurt" more or less. In general, a paintball that does not break on impact "seems" to hurt more, which to mean could mean that since .50 won't break as often, the overall feel between a .50 that bounces vs. a .68 that breaks might not be all that different.

Of course, this is where some additional real-world testing comes in - I would suggest some double-blind testing, where players don't know which size paintball they are getting shot with (at 25, 50, 75 & 100ft) and see how they react. You'd also need to get a good cross-section of ages & playing experience - so it wouldn't be a small sample size (the larger the better results).

I would also recommend a comparison between the "known" shot - you see the guy shooting at you, so you anticipate the hit, and the "surprise" shot where you are hit from an angle you aren't expecting. That would have an effect on how a player would "feel" the hit.

Just my suggestion for a true scientific study.

[loldongs]

Just remember people have tried things as well and failed like when tippmann tried to release their own caliber paint and to add to that propane powered markers etc. fads come fads go but I think 50cal has found a home with younger players and is here to stay for their conveniance.

[PntBllnSquirrel]

I have yet to see anyone use a .50cal anything on any of the fields around here. I was thinking about getting the pistol, but probably will get a Tac instead.