50 Caliber Revolution

[Missy-Q]

Just weigh that then.............

That wouldn't help. Chris wants you to weight the 50cal balls you used to out-range 68cal at 280fps. The ones he had from cup won't outdistance 68 at 280, so you must have the much-lauded 'heavier fill' in yours. You know, the crazy-heavy fill that makes the ball heavier than 68cal, and therefore fits within the discipline of physics, allowing it to outrange 68cal...

Now that he has your assurances that your 50cal does actually outrange 68cal (at 280) he just needs to know the weight of the 50cal balls you have there (the heavier fill ones). Once he knows that he can apply physics and no-doubt put 2 & 2 together to discover that GI Milsim were telling the absolute truth all along.
I know it will be a relief to all of us to finally prove once and for all that the GI Milsim crowd are 'not-guilty' of cooking their figures.

 

[John C]

That wouldn't help. Chris wants you to weight the 50cal balls you used to out-range 68cal at 280fps. The ones he had from cup won't outdistance 68 at 280, so you must have the much-lauded 'heavier fill' in yours. You know, the crazy-heavy fill that makes the ball heavier than 68cal, and therefore fits within the discipline of physics, allowing it to outrange 68cal...

Now that he has your assurances that your 50cal does actually outrange 68cal (at 280) he just needs to know the weight of the 50cal balls you have there (the heavier fill ones). Once he knows that he can apply physics and no-doubt put 2 & 2 together to discover that GI Milsim were telling the absolute truth all along.
I know it will be a relief to all of us to finally prove once and for all that the GI Milsim crowd are 'not-guilty' of cooking their figures.

It wouldnt have to be heavier to out range it.
50 cal would only need to be the same weight to out range the 68, because the smaller ball is slightly more aerodynamic.



I dont think A heavier fill is practical at all.
Apart from the materials side of things it would negate some of the claimed advantages of 50 cal.

The air efficiency tests would need to be re done with the heavier ball.

And putting twice as many balls in your hopper suddenly becomes a lot less practical if the balls are twice as heavy.

 

[Chicago]

Just weigh that then.............

I did. They weigh 1.21 grams. That's 38% of a standard 3.2 gram .68 cal paintball. A .50 cal paintball has 54% of the cross-sectional area of a .68 cal paintball. This results in three indisputable facts:

1) A 1.21g .50 cal paintball will be significantly out-ranged by a .68 cal paintball.
2) A 1.21g .50 cal paintball will travel a flight path with a higher arc to get to the same target
3) A 1.21g .50 cal paintball will take longer to get to the target - about 25% longer at 100 ft, and worse if more than that.


So, if you have a .50 cal paintball that out-ranges a .68 cal paintball, I can only assume that the .50 cal paintballs you have are significantly denser than the ones I have. So how much do they weigh?

 

[Missy-Q]

I did. They weigh 1.21 grams. That's 38% of a standard 3.2 gram .68 cal paintball. A .50 cal paintball has 54% of the cross-sectional area of a .68 cal paintball. This results in three indisputable facts:

1) A 1.21g .50 cal paintball will be significantly out-ranged by a .68 cal paintball.
2) A 1.21g .50 cal paintball will travel a flight path with a higher arc to get to the same target
3) A 1.21g .50 cal paintball will take longer to get to the target - about 25% longer at 100 ft, and worse if more than that.


So, if you have a .50 cal paintball that out-ranges a .68 cal paintball, I can only assume that the .50 cal paintballs you have are significantly denser than the ones I have. So how much do they weigh?

Out of interest Chicago - and I don't want to take the heat off Pipes in any way - but have you calculated how heavy a 50cal ball would actually need to be in order to fly equidistant to the 68 round?

 

[Chicago]

Out of interest Chicago - and I don't want to take the heat off Pipes in any way - but have you calculated how heavy a 50cal ball would actually need to be in order to fly equidistant to the 68 round?

Depends on the velocity, and even then it's not something you calculate so much as something you plug into a ballistics model which is created by actually observing projectiles of a similar shape. Trying to keep mass proportional to cross-sectional area has you at 1.73 grams. People whose expertise I trust more than mine that have run the ballistic models have been saying you get about even performance at 1.5 grams. So at least 1.5, maybe more.

One interesting tidbit is that the density of the 1.21g .50 cal paint is actually lower by 5% than that of a 3.2g .68 cal ball.

 

[Piper]

Weight of the paint I have here is 1.28g.

 

[Chicago]

Weight of the paint I have here is 1.28g.

Then it isn't out-ranging .68 caliber, unless you have a .50 cal flatline or apex.

 

[Piper]

Then it isn't out-ranging .68 caliber, unless you have a .50 cal flatline or apex.

How did I know you would say that........ I was kind of screwed either way, if I post the weight you say it did not happen and if I don't post the weight you say, he is not posting because it won't happen.

That is the weight of the ball I have here, the one's we used we have no more of, I did not weigh those before we used them, we have played around with formula's and fills, so there is a chance those balls were heavier. I have never said it would out perform 68 consistantly and on every shot, just when we did that test at that time it did. Those are the facts, there could have been any number of fator's that made it possible, one being the weight of the ball.

I think my statement could possible be taken as I am stating it wil ALWAYS out perform .68 cal, what I said was I have shot a .50 and a .68 side by side both at around 280 fps and the .50 shot further than the .68 so it was that test and that time that it did.

 

[gambo47]

I think the .50 cal will be great for sites...I will hopefully have one of these .50 cals soon enough and it has to start somewhere...no one should be afraid of or against .50 cal paint as new folk into the game/sport won't have anything to compare it against and will be "unbiased". Its like an option just like hopper, gun, clothes, goggles and now you can choose calibre!..

 

[John C]

How did I know you would say that........ I was kind of screwed either way, if I post the weight you say it did not happen and if I don't post the weight you say, he is not posting because it won't happen.

That is the weight of the ball I have here, the one's we used we have no more of, I did not weigh those before we used them, we have played around with formula's and fills, so there is a chance those balls were heavier. I have never said it would out perform 68 consistantly and on every shot, just when we did that test at that time it did. Those are the facts, there could have been any number of fator's that made it possible, one being the weight of the ball.

I think my statement could possible be taken as I am stating it wil ALWAYS out perform .68 cal, what I said was I have shot a .50 and a .68 side by side both at around 280 fps and the .50 shot further than the .68 so it was that test and that time that it did.

I think Chigago was trying to determine whether the 50 cal actually did fly further.
Or whether it simply appeared to fly further.

Human perception alone is a far less reliable means of measuring something like this, than physics is at predicting it.

In this instance both interpretations are relevent because 50 cal is ultimately going to be judged by human perception not physics.