There is a ton of information on here guys so I want to first thank everyone for thier opinion. I would be interested to know where the plateau is with length and efficiency and fps...etc
I don't know if I can tell much of a real difference playing one game to the next switching lengths with the exception of bunker manipulation as before mentioned by someone. Anyway like I said I never expected so much information thanks again. ... keep iy coming
Over a chrono is the only way to see imperical results of which barrel is most efficient for that particular gun with that particular paint..but you can make some generalizations based on whatever you find.
NJEmortal, I think that test you're suggesting would be great, as that relates to the op's question - what will be effected by changing tip length only.
Can't wait to see the results. ... this may be a bit off topic of length but does anyone have any kind of proof or opinion or thought on stainless steel like the dye bs or aluminum like the dye ul or cf like the dw as far as the difderebt ways the materials act against the paintbalk - drag or so forth? I have read and heard a lot of different things just trying to find some good evidence of one or the other or some consitency in what people think.....
Thanks
Correct. For efficiency you are really looking at anything from 9-11 inches before you start needing more gas to push the ball out at good chrono speed.
in a 14 inch barrel like a Dye UL, or a freak, you literally have 4 inches of barrel, and 10 inches of muzzle brake..just venting gas waiting for the ball to get out of the barrel....
I believe Dye UL backs are 6", Freak insert is 5.06". There is a lot more to the what goes on after the step past the control bore, depending on the step out diameter and porting, the ball doesn't simply stop accelerating as soon as it leaves the control bore.
Can't wait to see the results. ... this may be a bit off topic of length but does anyone have any kind of proof or opinion or thought on stainless steel like the dye bs or aluminum like the dye ul or cf like the dw as far as the difderebt ways the materials act against the paintbalk - drag or so forth? I have read and heard a lot of different things just trying to find some good evidence of one or the other or some consitency in what people think.....
Thanks
The ball really does not touch or drag along the walls after the control bore, so the material does not really matter so much at that point other than how well the paint can "self clean" off the material surface past the control bore. What matters is the control bore material (SS, anodized aluminum, brass, etc). Some people say that brass has an inherit lubricating property that has the least amount of friction on a ball, which is why there are brass Freak inserts available out there now! Back when weight didn't matter, entire barrels were made of brass and weighed a tonne.
People are confusing control bore with overall length. Control bore is where you want the length. Past the control bore the ball really isn't touching the barrel like Nicad just said above me so length doesn't matter that much (though super short barrels with no porting are, of course, louder so there are reasons for having a barrel longer than the control bore.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ibunkerupwnd
Bottom line whats the difference between 14 and 16 inch
Exactly 2 inches.
__________________
This line is in remembrance of Jared Wilson, friend and paintball teammate who died on 7/27/2005. My Old Feedback +1/-0 | CCM T2 | OLED G6R | Entertaining Offers for either/both
People are confusing control bore with overall length. Control bore is where you want the length. Past the control bore the ball really isn't touching the barrel like Nicad just said above me so length doesn't matter that much (though super short barrels with no porting are, of course, louder so there are reasons for having a barrel longer than the control bore.
Exactly 2 inches.
I ment like proformance wise
__________________
THERE IS A FAT KID ON EVERY PAINTBALL TEAM. IF YOU ARE THAT FAT KID, PUT THIS IN YOUR SIG
HK Army
So did SKI008. No known difference other than barrel length. One may be slightly less efficient than the other. I would guess 14 inches is slightly more efficient, but when both are going to be barrels with 5 inches or whatever of control bore and 9-13 inches of large internal diameter porting, it isn't going to make a big difference.
So did SKI008. No known difference other than barrel length. One may be slightly less efficient than the other. I would guess 14 inches is slightly more efficient, but when both are going to be barrels with 5 inches or whatever of control bore and 9-13 inches of large internal diameter porting, it isn't going to make a big difference.
You know what the difference in efficiency is? Nope, neither do I. I would guess its somewhere in the vicinity of 20-50 shots. Not enough to make a difference.
A shorter barrel is easier to maneuver, a longer one is easier to aim down. That's it. As for OP, I'd personally go with the shorter barrel.
To answer your question, only sound signature can be effected by barrel length; distance, accuracy & trajectory cannot. (emphasis on "length" - as all these factors can be effected in one way or another)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElJefe13
This. Also, a short (>12 inches) gets less efficiency, same if they get above 16 inches.
I'd definitely suggest going with the 15.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crowntheking
Oh is that right?
Efficiency is based on you boring (amount of space around ball in the barrel) and sound signature will be based on porting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmcl281
we all know it's going to be less efficient if you keep going longer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Person
Correct. For efficiency you are really looking at anything from 9-11 inches before you start needing more gas to push the ball out at good chrono speed.
Typical PBNation of people saying things as fact when they don't know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJEmortal
Again, barrel length isn't the only factor in efficiency and sound signature, but it is a factor.
Very well done video and easily shows the results. The point at which you stop gaining efficiency is past the functional and usable length of a barrel. It is obviously past 17". I wouldn't use a barrel that long anyway. Also the improvements start dropping off fast. By 22" I would guess all the air would be vented and the ball would start slowing down. Keep in mind that is based on Ultralite porting. A barrel with more porting would lose velocity earlier and a barrel with less would lose velocity later.
Very well done video and easily shows the results. The point at which you stop gaining efficiency is past the functional and usable length of a barrel. It is obviously past 17". I wouldn't use a barrel that long anyway. Also the improvements start dropping off fast. By 22" I would guess all the air would be vented and the ball would start slowing down. Keep in mind that is based on Ultralite porting. A barrel with more porting would lose velocity earlier and a barrel with less would lose velocity later.
That was an amazing video and has some actual tangible results attached to it about efficiency, sound signature and velocity. Thanks for all the work you put into it. As a side note... part two might be something about overboreing/underboreing - just a thought since it will effect velocity and efficiency as well.
Again awesome video!
Jinx, I was talking about the length of the actual bore, not the length of a stepped bore barrel.
I actually don't know about a series. This test was nice because it showed one thing pretty clearly. Possibly results would be different with a tighter bored barrel..but at least for the fitment you ran the extra length of ported barrel increased FPS.
drgonzo is right in mentioning that different back lengths and bore fitments could change things.
I guess for a follow up video, do the exact same thing with all 3 (or however many you have) of those dye carbon barrel backs, and see what kinda results you get. Maybe with a tighter bore it won't show gains going from 15 to 17 inches, or something. It would just be fun to see.
With that back length and bore fitment, let's not overstate the data.
What I said was true. "The point at which you stop gaining efficiency is past the functional and usable length of a barrel. It is obviously past 17" for an Ultralite. He showed velocity increases all the way up to 17" and it would continue for a little longer aswell. Would you shoot a 17" or longer barrel? I sure wouldnt. On top of that the increases start dropping fast. I wouldn't say get a 17" barrel for the extra couple of fps.
Your Privacy Choices