Well, I'm old and stubborn and usually I don't like changes, but this story sounds exiting to me. It's going to be a complete relaunch of paintball eqipment and this will for sure bring some interesting innovations with it. Performancewise it should be a big improvement. Can't wait to give it a try!
Also, I'm sure there will be some .68 caliber available in the future, so I won't have to put my Phantom on the wall.
Why am I not astonished to see Robbo involved
DZ, I think people are gonna knee jerk mainly because they might think it's going to come in quick or be forced upon people, neither is true mate.I was a tad negative i do admit, sorry and yes I hadn't really thought about it enough. I was set in seeing it from a walkon/torni point of view and not from a paintball site's point of view.
I suppose im stubborn I dont like to see change, and it is a big change, you have to admit. However there is a part of me that thinks it would be interesting to see if there are any changes to the way the smaller paintballs are loaded in via the hopper and if the paintballs themselves perform any differently. Im not sure how they could cost less, apart from the obvious fact of using less materials. I cant see this adding up to much of a saving per case.
Would they be sold in cases of 2000 or 3000
.50 caliber performs in every way worse than .68 caliber. Field owners are not going to switch to cheaper paint if it's also ****ty paint - they don't' want players shooting paint that is not accurate, bounces all over the place, etc, etc, even if it might save them money.
Second, it won't save any money. The MATERIAL costs of the paintball are tiny in comparison to the total costs of selling paintballs.
Even if there were significant cost savings, cheaper paintballs DO NOT make for cheaper paint bills! Paintball costs have been going down for almost 30 years, and the cost of paint has stayed the same, because cheaper paint just means people shoot more of it.
This change does nothing to help field owners. It does nothing to help players. It might make the milsim guys get a bit more realistic looking guns, but that's not enough to drive the other 90% of the industry.
And, if field owners really did want to make more money, the answer is simple: Limit bps to 1 or 2 bps, charge the same $40-$50 per player per day they're already charging, and only give out 100 paintballs instead of 1000 or 2000. That actually cuts the cost of paint, and the customer is having MORE fun, which is what the customer is actually paying the field for in the first place.
It might be truly amazing Pete but i think to just align your self with one gun maker is a bit, well dodgy cause it gives them the rights to it all,This is the original press release-we got the exclusive.
..and I can't believe what some of you guys in this thread concern yourselves with, it's truly amazing.
Markie, I wasn't referring to doubts concerning this aspect mate, but to answer your question, I think when Richmond had this idea, he realised markers would have to be manufactured at one point and so he HAD to go somewhere mate and so why not SP?It might be truly amazing Pete but i think to just align your self with one gun maker is a bit, well dodgy cause it gives them the rights to it all,
Might be wrong they all might be on the 50cal wagon but if it is a "New Start" then surly it should of been opened up to every one?
Markie, I think you'll find that will be down to the respective promoters and federations; I can't really see any problem in principle unless politics rears its ugly head.Cool,
It sounds like a cool idea,
How will it work in the tournament side of things?
Will it be you will have to shoot all the same thing or would it have to be one or the other ?
Just thinking about performance they say they go further and faster.
You can't beat physics. You might temporarily obscure physics with some very nice press releases, but physics will ultimately win. That should be pretty obvious from even a casual glance at the history of paintball products.And Chris, if what you are saying is right, then Richmond is wrong.. and if I look at both your track records in paintball, I think I am gonna put my money on a town called Richmond (we have such a town in London) and not a city called Chicago ...no disrespect intended mate.
There must be some pretty darned revolutionary technology that is going to change how a sphere travels through air...he has engineered a new paintball with an improved flight trajectory that means they fly farther and more accurately