Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-08-2009, 01:40 AM #43
aapter
DoYouKnowWhatIAmSaying?
 
aapter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Boise, ID
aapter donated to help Peyton Trent
aapter supports Bob Gurnsey
aapter supports our troops
Quote:
Originally Posted by leprechaun8942 View Post
The rationale I am using is the idea in physics that force= mass times velocity. Therefore, as mass goes down, force also goes down, reducing the "hurt". However, throwing a nail into the equation adds the variable of a piercing object, which is far and away from the effect that would be had by a similarly shaped object. I guess a better example than a car would have been a wrecking ball to portray that same idea.
No!

Force = mass x acceleration

or

F=ma

It's Newton's Second Law.

If we want .50 cal paint to have the same effective breakage as .68 cal paint, we need to increase the acceleration of the paintball to achieve the same force.

The same force applied over a smaller surface area = more painful

The could design it so that less force overall is used, but then we will have huge problems with distance and breakage of the .50 cal paint. Huge problems.

For those of you who don't know, acceleration can be found by taking the derivative of velocity. In other words acceleration is the rate of change of velocity, or the slope.
aapter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 10-08-2009, 01:41 AM #44
visor
Samurai
 
visor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Lee's Summit, Mo
visor supports Cereal Killerz 2
visor is playing at Living Legends III
visor is playing at Living Legends VII
visor supports Empire
Well this is what Tom Kaye had to say about .50

http://www.automags.org/forums/showt...47#post2637947

Quote:
Hello Everyone,

Well I don't come to the forum for a few days while I am chasing dinos and look what pops up.

First of all, I have actually PLAYED with 50 cal back in the day using Budd's Sniper. In the 80's 50 cal held the same hope it does today, a way to sell cheaper paint and get more of it in the gun. Back then it was a double bonus since a 12 gram would fire a whole lot more 50's than 68's. As you can imagine, the 50 had piss poor accuracy and didn't break. It was quickly given up on along with 62 cal. promoted by Tippmann.

My read of the story tells me something different that I will SPECULATE on. Richmond sold his company from what I understand, and likely has a specific non-compete. The 50 cal ball probably gets around this and this could be the major motivation. I know personally because we have the same thing between Pepper Ball and FN, in our case the weight of the ball makes the difference.

I have to think that as you have already speculated, they took the ability to make fragile paint and mixed in a heavy fill to get a small 3.3 gram paintball. This should in fact be more accurate and fly farther at the same velocity. The reduction in frontal area is a big plus and the issues with a smaller ball and vortex shedding should not negate all of those gains.

The big trick will be to see if they break well. With a 50 you are distributing the energy no matter what over a smaller area. The smaller shape of the ball makes it inherently harder to break all things being equal. I don't think you can go much thinner in the paint shell and still be able to seal it together so they are probably making the shell tensile strength weaker. By my estimations they will hurt more with 3.3 grams at 300 fps.

The fill will absolutely be the most challenging part hands down. I calculated that a 50 has .07 cu inch of fill against the 68 at .16. So a bit better than 2-1. In order to make a heavier 50, you have to come up with a NON-TOXIC fill that's TWICE as heavy. This is no easy task. Most liquids hover around a specific gravity of 1-1.5 ish. There are liquids that get up to 2.0 but they are all toxic that I know of. We used liquids to 3.0 in the early 90's when we were investigating paintball accuracy and I still have the stuff today because you can't throw it away.

So here is the specific problem the way I see it. In order to up the weight of the fill you have to put some type of particle in it. Ground rock, powdered metal (bismuth) etc. We went down this road, the problem was that we could never inject a slurry through a needle without the needle plugging up no matter what we did. Eventually we gave up and put the powder in first and the fluid in after. Today's gelatin machines absolutely depend on a needle injecting the fluid into the ball as it pinches off the seam. I am dying to see how they accomplish this but Richmond has some pretty smart people around him.

Other problems you don't think about are things like the size of the holes in the mask. A 50 can squeeze through a pretty small hole in a rubber mask guard. My question is who is going to build a motorized hopper for these guns???

The can fit way more holes in the drum of the gelatin machine so the output per hour per machine will probably be more than double having an impact on cost. The fill has to add to the price so we will see how it shakes out. Remember to calculate the price per POUND of 50 vs 68 paintballs to see if there was really an economic advantage.

In the final equation my personal opinion is that its a bad idea for paintball only because it puts us that much closer to airsoft. If cheaper smaller balls are a good idea, why not get the cheapest smallest balls you can find (airsoft)? We already made the guns look mil-sim and hands down the airsoft guns look cooler and go full auto. So I don't personally understand it but hey, Richmond made WAY more money in paintball than I ever did so he must see things I don't.

My final comment. Everyone seems to agree that the paintball industry has been in trouble for some time. If I was god-of-paintball and wanted to get the industry going. I would get all the existing manufacturers together and force them to agree to licensing anyone their patents for 5 years for a dollar. This would bring a flurry of new businesses back into the market and you would have a flood of new products and cool ideas. In my opinion, that would help paintball more than anything.

AGD
He makes some good points. I also do not support .50 cal
__________________
St. Louis Samurai

Company's that I support: Ninja Paintball, Techt, Lurker, Pinokio
visor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 01:46 AM #45
havokrooster
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by visor View Post
Well this is what Tom Kaye had to say about .50

http://www.automags.org/forums/showt...47#post2637947



He makes some good points. I also do not support .50 cal
his final paragraph makes the most sense ive heard all year.
havokrooster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 02:54 AM #46
ebe9
Captain Hobbes
 
ebe9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: South Africa
Quote:
Originally Posted by visor View Post
Well this is what Tom Kaye had to say about .50

http://www.automags.org/forums/showt...47#post2637947



He makes some good points. I also do not support .50 cal

Very nicely written comment of Tom's.

I honestly don't see .50 cal becoming the primary size anytime soon.

There will of course be those in the industry who will push the "new" products and those of the buying public that decide to try it out or adopt it as their primary calibre choice.

Personally I will take the wait and see approach. If it does carry all the benefits that the industry players as stating, and they can be proven, then I would certainly try it out.

However at this point in time I feel there is a lot of big talk happening without a lot of merit to it.

The only real place right now where I could see .50 cal having some benefit for me would be for a secondary marker such as a pistol, i.e. not wanting to carry a larger (in terms of the actual physical pistol size) pistol, but not wanting to make use of the smaller calibre 0.43 makes.
__________________
What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too little.

Blarg Honk
ebe9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 03:09 AM #47
timbertiger20
 
 
timbertiger20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
timbertiger20 is a Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by leprechaun8942 View Post
Well you can't use the argument that it will hurt more because there is something in the paint that is going to make it more forceful and then turn around and say that it isn't going to fly as far....There are going to be cons either way. However, it would be interesting to find out if that variable can be changed by just increasing the velocity used for a 50 cal ball so that it equals the distance and force of a .68 cal ball, and what type of side affects/benefits that would have. Like I said, there are WAY too many things gone unproven for anyone to make any type of judgement on whether or not they are behind a change.
Actually..............not totally unproven.................I have a .43 caliber RAP pistol laying here. I use it specifically at night games because it makes people yelp when hit! Sure if you hit someone with enough padding it won't do much. Hit someone with a t-shirt and that small impact point really hurts alot more! BTW that's at 300 FPS. Rumor I heard is they will need to boost that speed up a bit to get the distance and power to break paint consistantly! Unfortunately..................no one has mentioned the speeds they are thinking of implementing!

I say good luck to those implementing the change.............but you won't be playing on our field with it!
timbertiger20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 03:30 AM #48
Trevan
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Trevan owns a Planet Eclipse Geo
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenvertboy View Post
You are all short sighted people. You don't have to make this switch now. It's still going to come out. Keep on using your .68 cal markers now. But In three years, when you go to buy a new marker, do you buy a $1000 dollar .68 caliber marker, or do you buy the $500 .50 caliber marker that gets better efficiency, shoots farther, is more accurate, cycles faster, less kick, and is lighter? Oh and it costs less to feed it those little paint filled capsules.

Which will you buy in a few years? Especially when I buy the .50 cal now and get to experience those gains now. After a few years of getting shot up by the guys shooting a .50, you'll want to switch. Don't think that will happen? Too bad, it'll happen by HB '10. Mark my words. .50 cal will be out and you'll be *****ing because it's better. You'll say it's unfair.

But in the end, you'll only be able to blame yourselves. Take to it now. You'll lose less in the coming year.
Do you really think the paint manufactures like RPS DXS XO etc. are going to pass the savings on to the consumer? I dont think so, they have been hurting since the recession, I would imagine if .50 cal does catch on we are not going to see any savings if any they would be very tiny.
Trevan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 05:18 AM #49
s3sixshot
Team Nefarious
 
s3sixshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: PG County
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenvertboy View Post
Partly because I want to believe the hype, I want it to be real, and I want those benefits. Because it WILL be less expensive in the long run, and that's NEVER a bad thing. And because in a few years, when the industry takes to this, I can see all kinds of neat ideas coming to life. New guns, new ways of operating, smaller guns.

I'm looking into the future, as I always do, and the future to me SCREAMS .50 cal.

Edit: To the above post. There are FAR more variables involved in it than that. No one currently has the necessary info to properly assess whether they might hurt more or less. It shouldn't matter much anyway. Paintballs can sometimes just plain old ****ing hurt. We're use to it. If these ones hurt more, oh well, if they hurt less....oh well again.
How can you say more thhings can open up and new guns and new ways of operating?
Whatever they can do to a .50 They can do to .68
A .50 cal still operates the same as a .68
__________________
Team Nefarious
oapaintball.com
LUXE http://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...2#post63800182
s3sixshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 05:55 AM #50
vijil
Giant Paintball Robot
 
vijil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Zealand
So, .50 cal has potential benefits -

accuracy
cost
efficiency

IF:

the guys doing it are not completely corrupt, as they may well be.
they can get around the extra pain factor
they can effectively make a heavier fill
they can make a decently breakable shell
they can figure out a distribution model that doesn't hurt the industry
they can pass on the savings in a way that makes it worthwhile for players and especially fields.

Thread, summed up.

My opinion? I don't have one. Lets wait and see.
vijil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 06:53 AM #51
tonyneedspills2
nutrider
 
tonyneedspills2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: bay area, ca
my opinion market it to kids and woman, bring the velocity down if possible and maybe the operating pressures. less impact less ouch more happy players. have like a true begginers level at every field. once they get used to whats going on step up to the 68 cals.
__________________
2 THE BATDAR!
tonyneedspills2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 07:00 AM #52
Spock
Live Long and Bluster
 
Spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SE PA
Spock is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by havokrooster View Post
his final paragraph makes the most sense ive heard all year.
Sure, and while we're at it, why don't we force all the paint manufacturers to rent out their factories to anyone who wants them for $5 per year so they can make their own paint.

Brilliant.
__________________
"Once I make someone die, and they see me....they can't change their mind." -- God

Originally posted by matt00iconoclast:
"there are variables outside of physics that will affect the flight of the ball"
Spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 07:03 AM #53
tonyneedspills2
nutrider
 
tonyneedspills2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: bay area, ca
__________________
2 THE BATDAR!
tonyneedspills2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 07:07 AM #54
fonzel17
Vicious Geo2 Owner
 
fonzel17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wilmington NC
fonzel17 supports Team VICIOUS
A basic understanding of physics makes it obvious that it will not shoot as well as .68 without making it less cost efficient, among other things.
fonzel17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 07:08 AM #55
tonyneedspills2
nutrider
 
tonyneedspills2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: bay area, ca
**** the paintball thing whos up for lazer tag
__________________
2 THE BATDAR!
tonyneedspills2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 07:09 AM #56
Spock
Live Long and Bluster
 
Spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SE PA
Spock is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by fonzel17 View Post
A basic understanding of physics makes it obvious that it will not shoot as well as .68 without making it less cost efficient, among other things.
Oh? Please explain.
__________________
"Once I make someone die, and they see me....they can't change their mind." -- God

Originally posted by matt00iconoclast:
"there are variables outside of physics that will affect the flight of the ball"
Spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 07:11 AM #57
tonyneedspills2
nutrider
 
tonyneedspills2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: bay area, ca
im thinking because its too light to retain its speed. if you disagree please explain.
__________________
2 THE BATDAR!
tonyneedspills2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 07:21 AM #58
IntenseImage
Death Dealer
 
IntenseImage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Northampton, PA
IntenseImage is playing at Living Legends III
Something that everyone is just assuming (again since no one has really seen this stuff) is that it will take the same force to break a 50 that it does to break a 68. If the force required to break a 50 is less, then all of your "it will hurt more" complaints are for nothing.
__________________
IntenseImage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 07:25 AM #59
tonyneedspills2
nutrider
 
tonyneedspills2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: bay area, ca
but if they break easier what about chops and berrel breaks, not to mention changing settings to a 50 cal.
oh man id dump 50s into 68s hoppers alll day. there team would be ****ed. its all around a bad idea. what about out dated protective gear? little timmys gunna walk onto the field with his old *** preditor vents and take one right to the tonsols.
__________________
2 THE BATDAR!
tonyneedspills2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 08:29 AM #60
Spock
Live Long and Bluster
 
Spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SE PA
Spock is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyneedspills2 View Post
im thinking because its too light to retain its speed. if you disagree please explain.
I have explained it in another thread.

The short story is as follows:

The only force that acts to slow down a paintball is drag (basically friction between the air and the surface of the paintball)

The smaller cross section of a .50 caliber paintball means there is less drag on in as if flies through the air.

However, the lighter weight means that a given amount of drag will slow the ball down more.

These two opposing effects almost balance each other out. Assuming that both size balls have the same overall density, however, the overall effect would be for the smaller ball to drop off sooner.

Therefore, in order for a .50 caliber paintball to compete with the 68, it needs to be more dense.

Based on simple calculations (which may or may not account for all relevant factors), the density should be increased by about 35%
__________________
"Once I make someone die, and they see me....they can't change their mind." -- God

Originally posted by matt00iconoclast:
"there are variables outside of physics that will affect the flight of the ball"
Spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 08:31 AM #61
steve_81
Paintballing since 1996
 
steve_81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
steve_81 is reppin' sidebar 4 life
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenvertboy View Post
You are all short sighted people. You don't have to make this switch now. It's still going to come out. Keep on using your .68 cal markers now. But In three years, when you go to buy a new marker, do you buy a $1000 dollar .68 caliber marker, or do you buy the $500 .50 caliber marker that gets better efficiency, shoots farther, is more accurate, cycles faster, less kick, and is lighter? Oh and it costs less to feed it those little paint filled capsules.

Which will you buy in a few years? Especially when I buy the .50 cal now and get to experience those gains now. After a few years of getting shot up by the guys shooting a .50, you'll want to switch. Don't think that will happen? Too bad, it'll happen by HB '10. Mark my words. .50 cal will be out and you'll be *****ing because it's better. You'll say it's unfair.

But in the end, you'll only be able to blame yourselves. Take to it now. You'll lose less in the coming year.
.50 cal is not new. The industry leaders in the early 90's tried it out but it failed miserably hence why we shoot 68. caliber. It isn't a step forward it is a step back!
steve_81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 08:33 AM #62
Spock
Live Long and Bluster
 
Spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SE PA
Spock is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve_81 View Post
.50 cal is not new. The industry leaders in the early 90's tried it out but it failed miserably hence why we shoot 68. caliber. It isn't a step forward it is a step back!
Yeah, because the .50 caliber paintballs that are being promoted now are exactly the same as the .50 caliber paintballs that were being tested 20 years ago.
__________________
"Once I make someone die, and they see me....they can't change their mind." -- God

Originally posted by matt00iconoclast:
"there are variables outside of physics that will affect the flight of the ball"
Spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 08:41 AM #63
tonyneedspills2
nutrider
 
tonyneedspills2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: bay area, ca
no uh uh once a object is in motion its going to stay in motion sorry you get something that ways more up to 280fps its going to fly farther then something that ways less flying 280 fps i disagree.
__________________
2 THE BATDAR!
tonyneedspills2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
Forum Jump