Stacked tube markers do not have more of a lobbed trajectory over single tube markers

[ATBen]

Looks like I found a ray of hope on the Bookface paintball pages! I've never thought much about marker vs trajectory until now. One thing I've always said (but could never prove) was that my Shocker Sport 4x4 shot the flattest.

Anyway, the discussion implies that a stacked tubed marker is lobbing the ball above a line of perfect trajectory, when paint in reality is dropping as soon as it stops accelerating. Nothing about a ball leaving a straight tube of aluminum would give the ball lift creating that arc or lob.

Any truth to the claim that different markers shootna different lob or trajectory, other than a flatline or apex?

[Magmoormaster]

I have a teammate who swears up and down that the LV1 has more of a lobbed trajectory. He even chronos low to accentuate it.

[Bow]

I think it has to do with how you hold the marker and the fact that the top tube is slightly higher up than say a single tube spool. Get that extra inch or two down range lol.

[Fubarius]

This has been tested.

A lot.

When properly tested, as in guns clamped down, barrels all leveled, all velocity equal, and nothing causing a significant spin, all round ball paint flies in the same trajectory.

But, optical illusions are a thing. For example, I have an Alley Cat that if I just point and shoot by instinct seems to hook the ball to the side. But if I carefully aim across the top the hook "magically" disappears. The truth is that it never was hooking to the side, just the layout of that particular gun and how I happened to the be holding it created an illusion.

Think of it this way, imagine a ball travelling in an arc. Now picture that arc from above, now below. Your perception of the arc would be different for each. Also imagine a gun with a tall back, so if you aim across the top the barrel is pointed up slightly though the top of the gun appears level.

And spin is a thing, either intentional like the flatline or apex, but sometimes unintentional. Usually an unintentional forward spin from a bottom mounted detent and a super loose and slippery barrel. Specifically, an old .68 Carbine with a stainless J&J that I used to have that if the paint was too tiny would spin them right into the dirt.

[Dusty Bottoms]

I always think my opponent’s shots are flying straighter than mine, which seem like they are lobbing in an arc. I know this is actually a optical illusion. When I shoot my friend’s cockers, or whatever, they shoot with a trajectory just like my mags.

[Euphie]

Oh absolutely some markers are going to seem like they fire in more of an arc, but if you put a laser pointer down the barrel it becomes obvious that you just tilt some markers more than others. When I was doing a bit of testing I noticed that for some reason perhaps the swoopy milling I would point an Angel speed more downward than a Cobra LCD with the square window milling. But it is just like a car seeming bigger or smaller than it is when looking out of it, merely an optical illusion.

fun thing is though I realized that straight lines like on my Shocker 4x4 tend to make me aim properly so it remains one of my favorites. Also aiming over the top almost totally eliminates this for me.

[gabe]

I don't think an LV actually shoots the ball at a higher arc or anything like that but it does certainly seems that the ball drops off shorter than other guns. When I chrono'd my LV1 this last weekend I could have sworn it was shooting low but it was definitely 290fps over the chrono. The autococker I was also shooting the same day used noticeably less elevation to shoot targets at the same distance. This whole thing about "drop shots" is apparently common knowledge at the field I go to and I kind of always fought against it but after doing a lot of switching guns around and trying different ones I can definitely notice a difference in the shot trajectory between certain guns. The field owner has an LV1 and loaned it to a new player and the guy was immediately commenting on how the shot would "hook down". We swapped some parts between my gun and his and found the lighter rammer has a slightly flatter arc to the shot compared to the heavy rammer.

Now, I don't have any science behind it and the FB discussion got a bit "lively" but this is just what myself and a few people I play with have noticed. It's a phenomenon that's experienced fairly equally between a few people so it's unlikely that it's ergonomics or something that's an individual's way of sighting down the gun. My working theory is that the way the gun "kicks" or rocks when you shoot it somehow causes the ball to drag in the barrel in a way that causes a bottom spin. A spin would make the most sense as the shot seems to come out straight for a bit then hook down possibly when the velocity bleeds off and air resistance takes it's toll on the trajectory. I would guess if you clamped the gun down in a vice and took the human factor and how the gun is held out the trajectory would possibly straighten out but who knows.

[Ecapnation]

It's all perception.... I'm thinking it's because the line I'd sight on lv's is slightly higher.

[Pyrate Jim]

Years and years ago, there was a paper that went over the physics of paintball trajectories.
The Physics of Paintball Introduction Page (csufresno.edu)

Pretty technical, about six pages long (links to each page at the bottom) and covers both spinning and non-spinning paintballs.

[Grendel]

This smacks of anecdotal observation and correlation bias. The laws of physics dictate the trajectory of a moving object. Stacked Tube vs. Single Tube will have no effect on that directly only indirectly due to variance on what the paintball in this case is doing as it exits the barrel. Why is this even debated or rather argued about; debate implies some thought went into the discussion? There are way too many variables beyond single tube/stacked tube that any empirical experimentation is moot.

The linked paper above, in Pyrate Jim's post, should be given as THE answer anytime these arguments like this come up. This is right up there with, "what barrel should I get...."

[Seajay]

This smacks of anecdotal observation and correlation bias. The laws of physics dictate the trajectory of a moving object. Stacked Tube vs. Single Tube will have no effect on that directly only indirectly due to variance on what the paintball in this case is doing as it exits the barrel. Why is this even debated or rather argued about; debate implies some thought went into the discussion? There are way too many variables beyond single tube/stacked tube that any empirical experimentation is moot.

The linked paper above, in Pyrate Jim's post, should be given as THE answer anytime these arguments like this come up. This is right up there with, "what barrel should I get...."

So true! In fact it should move the discussion to the marker itself regarding ergonomics. Some markers naturally are easier to point than others and this could be tested. When you quickly shoulder the marker where are you shooting, how much correction do you need, even what categorized physical traits impact the ergonomics.

Does any of that matter? No... as ergo bias can be solved by practicing... but it makes a lot more sense that a brick can seem to shoot worse than a marker specifically crafted to have very good ergo.

[Chuck E Ducky]

It’s 100% just perspective. The paint flys the same.

It has to do with your hand, and how close to the barrel line it sits. PE put a lot of effort getting there poppets as close to the barrel line as possible for a reason. It makes them point more naturally. I remember Jack talking about it when they came out. Some are use to the line of sight on stack tubes so that’s there preference. There is definitely a difference in how the shot looks, when shooting but it doesn’t change trajectory given the same conditions.

It makes them aim differently because of this perspective because most aim by muscle memory. The best snap shooters are relying on muscle memory they are not looking at the marker but actually past it, watching paint, field awareness is key to knowing your zones close range. The marker is peripheral and just a point of reference. When you change that point of reference the marker seems to aim differently. Some that point of reference is the back of the marker some it’s the tip of the barrel. It’s all how your eyes focus and your brain process what you are doing. Even eye dominance plays a factor in how a shot is perceived.

It’s less important in the woods ware you are generally taking longer range shots. You often have more time to actually aim unless you get close. It’s two different skills, honed in two different styles of play. It’s also why some people are better woods players vs Hyper pipe/Xball players. Not saying You don’t use both skills but it really depends on the format. It’s also why there is such a discussion on the topic.

Reality is given the same conditions a paintballs trajectory is no different.

Now with some pumps you can get an Ark shoot by holding the handle back a bit and lowering the velocity a bit by venting the breach a bit on a shot. My CCM drop about 25-30FPS due to the super light return springs by just by taking your hand off the handle and letting the bolt bounce on a shot. It takes some practice but it can be effective on opponents shooting over the top of bunkers at the right range. With this your changing the velocity so the paint drops off early over the top. Like lowering your velocity in Xball to shoot over snake beams making the bunker save zone smaller at the cost of cross field shots. Again it’s only effective on certain layouts and plays to gain advantage, and only getting the paint to drop off early because your changing velocity.