.50 cal ballistics data
- Thread starter Gadget
- Start date
Eloquently put
What can I say to Robbo's reply. His wit, his expertly put argument, his ability to clearly undermine and overcome my objections which were so eloquently delivered that it has left me humbled. Truely, I see the light now, .50 must be the way forward.
Perhaps if we answered the questions and dealt with peoples misgivings rather than try to label anyone who has doubts as illinformed or living in the past there might be a more constructive level of debate.
Anyone who has been inpaintball for a while knows the inherent problems with traditional .50. Now if you have got a radical solution to those problems get out and explain your message, engage with the critics and if your product is as good as you say it is it will prove itself.
In terms of price, well as a site owner the prices I have seen quoted on here are ridiculous when you consider that the product must use considerably less material to make and package and is way more expensive than any site paint I buy currently.
There seems a bit of a trend on this .50 forum to attack anyone who has doubts or expresses there concerns over the physics of the properties of paintballs. We seem to be labeling anyone who disagrees or who has a less than favourable opinion or review of .50 as biassed or illinformed while those who are paid to promote and sell the product are portrayed as unbiased and having the correct information.
For your information I am a site owner, Prozone Paintball (look it up), I will spend anything up to £50,000 to £75,000 on paintballs this year and I will be at the UKPSF conference this Wednesday where someone will be giving us a sales pitch on .50. I need to be convinced this is a better product, competitively priced and one which will enhance the playing experience of my paying customers be they joe public or experienced players. I am not the only site owner who thinks this way so piss us off if you want, its your product but our money and our choice.
What can I say to Robbo's reply. His wit, his expertly put argument, his ability to clearly undermine and overcome my objections which were so eloquently delivered that it has left me humbled. Truely, I see the light now, .50 must be the way forward.
Perhaps if we answered the questions and dealt with peoples misgivings rather than try to label anyone who has doubts as illinformed or living in the past there might be a more constructive level of debate.
Anyone who has been inpaintball for a while knows the inherent problems with traditional .50. Now if you have got a radical solution to those problems get out and explain your message, engage with the critics and if your product is as good as you say it is it will prove itself.
In terms of price, well as a site owner the prices I have seen quoted on here are ridiculous when you consider that the product must use considerably less material to make and package and is way more expensive than any site paint I buy currently.
There seems a bit of a trend on this .50 forum to attack anyone who has doubts or expresses there concerns over the physics of the properties of paintballs. We seem to be labeling anyone who disagrees or who has a less than favourable opinion or review of .50 as biassed or illinformed while those who are paid to promote and sell the product are portrayed as unbiased and having the correct information.
For your information I am a site owner, Prozone Paintball (look it up), I will spend anything up to £50,000 to £75,000 on paintballs this year and I will be at the UKPSF conference this Wednesday where someone will be giving us a sales pitch on .50. I need to be convinced this is a better product, competitively priced and one which will enhance the playing experience of my paying customers be they joe public or experienced players. I am not the only site owner who thinks this way so piss us off if you want, its your product but our money and our choice.
Bob Long video
Good video and he makes some good points about younger players and the pain thing for punters.
However I would point out that most sites set their site guns to 250fps, we issue body armour, armoured gloves and padded hoods and that all makes a huge difference (he was firing his .68 at 290fps). As for Bob saying about shooting 7 year olds, well no one should be playing that young. It is a physical sport and people need to be robust enough to play it and sites, well those who value their customers, already go to great lengths to minimise the pain and maximise the fun.
Interestingly he also admits that it does not have the range, kinetic energy or accuracy of .68 (which are the biggest points of concern) but he does make a good point that .50 should have a place in paintball and from the thrust of his video he seems to be suggesting it could be a junior ball for younger players.
Good video and he makes some good points about younger players and the pain thing for punters.
However I would point out that most sites set their site guns to 250fps, we issue body armour, armoured gloves and padded hoods and that all makes a huge difference (he was firing his .68 at 290fps). As for Bob saying about shooting 7 year olds, well no one should be playing that young. It is a physical sport and people need to be robust enough to play it and sites, well those who value their customers, already go to great lengths to minimise the pain and maximise the fun.
Interestingly he also admits that it does not have the range, kinetic energy or accuracy of .68 (which are the biggest points of concern) but he does make a good point that .50 should have a place in paintball and from the thrust of his video he seems to be suggesting it could be a junior ball for younger players.
its the best video i have seen, and from a good source. see how you get on on Wednesday like you say it needs to be shot. But report back And i am also looking forward to trying it. guess we will see how it unfolds and as people start to use it
Good thoughtful video on .50
Check out this video on TechPB
Interesting how he also makes the point how .50 cal attack and insult those who have their doubts. He makes some good points for and against but importantly he points out this needs to be SOLD to us by them engaging with the paintball community.
Check out this video on TechPB
Interesting how he also makes the point how .50 cal attack and insult those who have their doubts. He makes some good points for and against but importantly he points out this needs to be SOLD to us by them engaging with the paintball community.
the guys that need to be convinced
will find out this week at the ukpsf conference
if this is the product that takes their sites forward and gives them an advantage over the opposition
but the problem for sites is the set up costs in this economic down turn
even if they put drop in kits in their site markers they are probably looking at £20-£30 a marker to convert
an average site as in the region of 200 markers,plus new hoppers to go with them
so you are looking at £4000-£6000 to convert
the bigger sites even more
unless these guys convert to .50 it will die off
wether it is a better product or not
will find out this week at the ukpsf conference
if this is the product that takes their sites forward and gives them an advantage over the opposition
but the problem for sites is the set up costs in this economic down turn
even if they put drop in kits in their site markers they are probably looking at £20-£30 a marker to convert
an average site as in the region of 200 markers,plus new hoppers to go with them
so you are looking at £4000-£6000 to convert
the bigger sites even more
unless these guys convert to .50 it will die off
wether it is a better product or not
Sites
Indeed, its site owners that need to be convinced as we are the big purchasers of paint and as you have already pointed out we all have already invested a lot of cash in .68 equipment. Its the ecconomics of it that will drive it one way or the other and a major part of that is the player experience. The ball will have to perform in terms of range, breakability and reliability and be highly price competitive for sites to even consider it.
A lot is made of the pain thing, and it is a major consideration for punter players, but as I mentioned above there is much we do to minimise that problem already with .68. Those selling .50 need to SELL it and prove to us that it is as good as they say it is.
So some questions.
What weight is a .50 ball (normal weight was 1.1 grams)
What FPS are they to be fired at? (.68 norm for events is 280fps and sites 250fps)
What price is rental paint going to come in at per box?
Would be good to get some simple answers to these simple questions.
Indeed, its site owners that need to be convinced as we are the big purchasers of paint and as you have already pointed out we all have already invested a lot of cash in .68 equipment. Its the ecconomics of it that will drive it one way or the other and a major part of that is the player experience. The ball will have to perform in terms of range, breakability and reliability and be highly price competitive for sites to even consider it.
A lot is made of the pain thing, and it is a major consideration for punter players, but as I mentioned above there is much we do to minimise that problem already with .68. Those selling .50 need to SELL it and prove to us that it is as good as they say it is.
So some questions.
What weight is a .50 ball (normal weight was 1.1 grams)
What FPS are they to be fired at? (.68 norm for events is 280fps and sites 250fps)
What price is rental paint going to come in at per box?
Would be good to get some simple answers to these simple questions.
I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve with this paragraph because it's self-evident from the use of that pic [and of course from the quoted text], I was focusing on a single comment you made which hardly constituted an 'attempt to undermine and overcome your objections' by the use of wit or eloquence .. I think you maybe attempted a witty rebuttal but I'm afraid it belly-flopped due to a complete lack of wit or substance, nevertheless, I will continue with this post in the hope you can redeem yourself later on.
My post merely illustrated the ambiguity of your statement, and it was done in a hopefully humorous way but you seem to think I have somehow fallen short ... I haven't fallen short at all, I accomplished exactly what I set out to do and any shortfalls seem to have been created by yourself.
I wasn't attempting to engage you in any way, if I had wanted to, I would have, it's as simple as that.
Now before I go any further here, you seem to think I have some connection with 50 cal products ..... I now have no connection, either directly or indirectly and so what the hell are you talking about here????
Clarity
Robbo,
thanks for making it clear you are not connected to .50 cal . Your postings on here certainly made it look like you were but its good to know what is actually happening.
Now back to the product.
Weight? FPS? Cost?
Robbo,
thanks for making it clear you are not connected to .50 cal . Your postings on here certainly made it look like you were but its good to know what is actually happening.
Now back to the product.
Weight? FPS? Cost?