[Panthrprey]

Originally Posted by ori1984

I like your propaganda thar

mine???

been playing off and on for over 20 yrs SemiPro to rec play

1990s guns shot 8 bps people complained and 3 shot rule made up
2000s guns shoot 15-25 bps 3 shot rule can't be enforced because overshooting happens too much .
2010 FPS ramped up , .50cal balls , 25-40 bps guns , kids get lit up at close range 5, 10 maybe 20 hits that child and others around that child won't come back.

This will up the pain factor, the blood factor and thus kill alot of business.

its a physical and fact of life which IMO can't be avoided.

[EugeneC (Banned)]

Originally Posted by GreekGod

By this i am not stating that Velocity is going to be increased. im just stating that as an answer if accuracy is effected by the different weight of the ball

But since it is smaller the ball will have higher rpms and resistance, and let say you got paint in the barrel it would affect it more than an .68 round I would assume..

[stfuicantspell]

tell me if this hasnt ben awserd but the hoppers and gun feed necks would it get jamed and have more then one balle in it?

[The_Leech]

That would most likely happen if you don't have a conversion kit or compatable hopper.

[stfuicantspell]

does any one have any idea how much these kits would cost. and wouldnt the bolts in the guns be too big too?

[dragonoftheninja]

"Mass*Velocity= Force"

M*V=P which is momentum you are looking for the change in momentum or the impulse. Not the force F=ma

[GreekGod]

i do understnad that i changed the word to Velocity so that the general paintball population would understand that im talking about the speed at witch teh gun shoots

[BIGN]

Originally Posted by GreekGod

Answers are in BOLD

**Sorry for all my miss spelling i am dyslesic and used word to spell check my first post just so we dont have 1000 post saying i cant spell. Im sorry God made me this way, but i do understand math/physics and the human body quite well

Very easy to understand.

Thanx

[BIGN]

Originally Posted by stfuicantspell

does any one have any idea how much these kits would cost. and wouldnt the bolts in the guns be too big too?

http://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...7#post62438757


Pics of the conversion kit for a .50 cal on an EGO10.

[Lohman446]

Your Pros list misses some points

Under cons you acknowledge range issues, and then assume that a higher velocity will be allowed. If a higher velocity is allowed your less pain pro is also out.

You have assumed it will cost less - this has not been shown yet

YOu have assumed it will result in smaller markers - the markers shown do not reflect that - yet. Besides, how much smaller can we get before ergonomics take a serious hit.

More effiecient - at what velocity? If we increase the velocity to get equal (or better) range are we still going to be more efficient?

[Clemroc]

Great info! Now I can use it as a reference and won't have to type it again everytime I hear a little whiny kid saying ".50 sux bawls d00d itz sh*tz, me not want change".

As I always say, change is not necessarily bad!

STICKY

[stfuicantspell]

what about the old guns maby its because its just new but the people that shoot older guns would the copaies make converson kits?

[Panthrprey]

on smaller guns: the bolt for example travels .18" less .68-.50 I don't think this will shorten a gun all that much. Might make the gun not as tall but its only .18"

as someone stated its alot of marketing and less science.

[T-Willi]

-personally i dont think this is going to be cheaper because obviously the economy is down and IF they make this .50 cal paintball then as what was stated earlier they would be cheaper ($35 range)
-but I THINK that they are going to speed the guns back and in turn we end up shooting more paint and spending more money than we did in the first place...
-but this is just my theory on it lol

[IonFreak111]

Actually, .50 caliber paint will hurt more. Less surface are to distribute kinetic energy = more depression of skin due to a more focused impact area of the ball = more pain, broken blood vessels under the skin = larger bruises / welts, and a higher chance of broken skin.

[DJGreiner]

Originally Posted by dragonoftheninja

"Mass*Velocity= Force"

M*V=P which is momentum you are looking for the change in momentum or the impulse. Not the force F=ma

you actually want the pressure so P=F/A so making a smaller area will increase the amount of pressure

[thnks]

in the vids that GI milsim put out, 50 cal looks 25% more accurate, but i suppose we will have to wait and see

[VSOwnage]

Player X: "I can't wait to use my cocker pump I just put together!"
Field Owner X: "Sorry sir, .50 isn't going to fit in that gun"
Player X: "Guess I'm done with paintball..$300 out the window"

Basically, say goodbye to vintage guns if we go this route (which imo is dumb).

[IntenseImage]

I think everyone just needs to STFU until more info is out because all this *****ing back and forth isnt brining anything beneficial to the table. With so much speculation and potential mis-information turning the children on this forum away, because they all love to hop on bandwagons, you may ultimately be hurting what could be the best thing to come to this sport in a long time.

[bigman1416]

Actually I've been sitting on the fence (and admittedly throwing stones at SP while sitting up here) and even from preliminary data it looks like the only real change was an improved shell, which isn't a shocker, today's rec paint at $30 and $50 bucks a case was yesterdays tourny paint. Granted it is preliminary but honestly that doesn't say we should just sit back and not look at this stuff objectively. We have every right to, especially when claims of a paintball revolution are being thrown around. If this was a new idea I'd be more optomistic, but it's not. If it was being brought out by people who hadn't been appart of the corporate take over of paintball (and on the possible loosing side of a buyout) I'd be more optomistic. If SP wasn't directly involved I'd more optomistic, but all the above plays into the motivation behind the .50, I'm not saying I know why they're moving with this, I don't know if Richmond has a specific not compete clause with KEE, I don't know why a financially rocky SP (Gardners) is/are putting something behind this, or what for that matter, I don't have the answers, these are my observations which drive my dicision and views.

No matter for or against there's nothing wrong with looking at this and the situation in the sport objectively, now that a thread has boomed into a section ALOT of good numbers have come out.

But only the release will tell us what's actually being produced, I'm holding final judgement for when people I can trust get their hands on it (or I can, which won't happen soon). Till then I'm going to look at the data that's coming out, look at the findings we've know for some time and compare them to the current situation. Ignoring history is the first step to failure, till then I'm going to be scepticle since I haven't seen much that's very reasuring and what I've seen in video isn't reasuring, but there are afew testimonials that give me some positive light on the matter. Again time will tell.


Last bit for numbers:
Known .68 accuracy with good barrel match (over/under boring) and decent paint will create a 12"-15" circle at 75', GI's demo shows more around 28" depending on the grid measure.

Also take into consideration on the demo video the incoming trajectory of the .68 vs. the .50, the .68 enters the frame at the bottom of the screen while the .50 enters from the top and drops in slightly. This would comply with the ballistics charts posted else where. Again this is an assumption that the rig did not change from .68 to .50 so it may have been a technical issue, just an observation.

[TheSpy11]

I have a pro/con that doesn't need testing to confirm. It particularly applies to recball/woodsball since larger distances are a major factor. It's paintball visibility when shooting/aiming or being shot at. The smaller shell and less paint in a .50 caliber ball will be harder to see in the air and when it makes a mark. Now that will make it harder to see the paint coming at you, but it's always been harder to see on the receiving end of the fire. The larger difference should be when shooting at the opponent from long ranges. I know I rely heavily on being able to see where my paint is contacting in my rec games, and even bright colors and large fill in a .68 caliber ball is barely enough. With a .50 caliber ball, I would think that anytime you're in a dark area, it's going to be very difficult to see where you're shooting, even with brightly colored paint. And if you can't see where you're shooting, there's little point to playing.