yes, paint/barrel matching matters

[rawbutter]

I did a thing today.

I had just recently finished working on a project for a client, but I was disappointed about the FPS consistency over my chrono. I was getting numbers everywhere from 238-306. After complaining about it on the Facebook Automag group, both Jake and James suggested that it could be the paint, which I didn't really believe.....but I had the time today, so why not test it?

First test was the gun (a ULE Automag) with a Freak barrel (0.682 insert) and Valken Graffiti paint. I was intentionally sloppy with the trigger (sometimes pulling fast and sometimes slow), and I didn't match the paint to the barrel. I just grabbed a handful out of the bag and shot it.

For test #2, I kept everything the same except for the paint and the trigger discipline. I pulled out about a dozen good paintball matches for the barrel, and I always pulled the trigger with a quick, crisp action.

The difference was really night and day. I couldn't believe it. I mean, it's not like I thought you all were lying when you said that paint/barrel matching was important. I believed it made a difference. I just didn't think it made that MUCH of a difference. But now I might have to start doing this more often.

[Walker]

Wowser..... I'll take that consistency anytime! Thanks!


Walker

[Handy]

I'm in the camp of:
No detent to stop rollouts? Tight match.
Some sort of rollout prevention? Overbore the heck out of it.

In my, albeit limited, experience compared to some, over boring has been more consistent shot to shot for me with paint that is less than optimal. My anecdotal evidence shows less wingers with an overbore compared to the tight match.

I think it has a negative effect on efficiency, but I find myself worrying less about ball shape/size than I have been in the past which is a compromise I'm willing to make.

Thank you for the video, I enjoy seeing tests/comparisons.

[autococker04]

You’re gonna give the hive mind on Reddit an aneurysm.

That’s actually very interesting to me too, I’ve gone to a one barrel system for convenience sake, but now I might have to start dragging a freak kit around.

Also, in terms of the bOrE MAtcHiNg is A SCAm argument, I’ve always thought that yeah, maybe it doesn’t make that much of a difference side to side, but if you’re getting +\- 10 FPS, one balls gonna go further than the other, and how is that not affecting how often you hit a target?

[MrBarraclough]

That's why you use a bore size that will be overbore for all (or virtually all) paint in the bag. Being a little bit more or a little bit less overbore is thought to have less effect than crossing the overbore/underbore boundary, which is precisely what one would expect to occur in a bore-matching situation where you don't hand select every ball as was done here.

To be fair, consistently underbore should also avoid the problem of randomly crossing the boundary. It seems to be generally disfavored compared to overboring primarily because of the increased risk of breakage.

[iamthelazerviking]

The anti bore to barrel match stems from paint being inconsistently sized, even from the same bag. A handful of 10-20 will all vary quite a bit. Especially today with how lousy paint has become. Good testing though, and seems like a good batch of ballz. I always tended to lean towards the either under or overbore, but never try to match.

[rawbutter]

The anti bore to barrel match stems from paint being inconsistently sized, even from the same bag. A handful of 10-20 will all vary quite a bit. Especially today with how lousy paint has become.

That's a really good point. All this paint came from the same bag, and I was using calipers to test them, and I was getting anywhere from 670-686. In the same bag. Some of the balls were also egg-shaped, so the same ball could measure 684 one way and then measure 678 another way. And this was Valken Graffiti. Not the best paint in the world, but certainly not the worst either.

So does this test prove something? Sure. But how practical is this knowledge? Well, to really use it to my advantage, I'd have to test EVERY ball in the bag and put them into a few different piles. Then I'd have to shoot all the 680-684 paint for one game, then change the barrel sleeve and switch to the 676-680 paint for the next game, and so on.

So yes, if ALL the paintballs in a bag were actually the same size, then this is useful. But if not....well...I'll probably just stick to overboring with my 688 Dye Ultralite. It works fine, and everyone else at the field is shooting the same crappy paint that I am, so we'll all at the same disadvantage.

[Euphie]

I always thought that if I could make a machine that would gently roll my paint and I could filter it by actual dimension that it would be a huge advantage but, it couldn't roll in just one direction it would have to roll the paint front to back and left to right in order to find the smallest hole it would fit through and then somehow advance balls that wouldn't fit through that hole. Though in my dreams I hook my pods to this machine and keep the labeled by bore size and make real use of my inserts over the course of the day

[MrBarraclough]

Euphie, so basically like an automated coin sorting machine then?

I think the next logical step after having labeled pods of different bore sizes would then be a barrel back system that was like a huge revolver cylinder with differently sized inserts as each chamber so you could select them on the fly. Ridiculously over-engineered for the slight amount of benefit, not to mention a ton of added weight. If DocsMachine ever draws a character based on you, I will be disappointed if she doesn't have such a contraption.

(Also, with your disregard for gear weight concerns, I would half expect a character with a powered exoskeleton not dissimilar to the power loader from Aliens.)

[cfos00]

I've had engineers in the industry and that have been small shops do technical testing for it, and the info came out the same. It does matter, and you want to be +/-.005 within the bore for best results with an underbore, or you want to overbore. Worst thing you can do is blow through. My personal experience with cockers (so underbore) absolutely lines up with the testing results. It definitely helps, and really can help a ton, esp in underboring for cockers. Give the paint the same environment over and over, and it will go the same place over and over.

[DocsMachine]

Thing is, both sides are kind of right.

With good paint, a lightly snug fit is, in my experience, better. With lower grade paint, a looser fit is preferred. For a fast electro honkin' a case a game, you want loose. For a pump gun or closed bolt semi you want that snug fit again.

With a shortish barrel, you want snug, with a longer one (one-piece, that is) you want it looser.

Too loose and even good paint doesn't fly well. Too tight and you're risking breakage.

Too loose and it's costing you air efficiency. Same with too tight- you have to increase air pressure to overcome the drag.

And so on and so on.

And, because paint is so widely variable- batch to batch, box to box, brand to brand, and even cool morning to hot afternoon- if you want the best performance, yeah, you need multiple bores or barrels, and take a moment here and there to see which works best for that box under those conditions.

On the other hand, yes, the average player can often easily get away with just the one barrel on their gun- especially open-bolt semis with a largish bore. If you don't do much "longballing" or one-shot snap-shooting, the comparatively minor difference between an 'okay' barrel and a 'properly matched' one is not all that significant.

And, as always, the paint is the prime variable. Nearly any barrel can shoot good, round, consistent paint well. Almost no barrel can shoot lumpy, oblong paint well.

Doc.

[latches109]

consistency ≠ accuracy

Appiled specifically to automags, I still believe tom Kaye’s tests were the best so far - one conclusion was overnoring is more accurate.

First clip was in sun, second in shade.
Gun not in vice in between tests.
no trigger control test on one

I do not see a clear determination on the results.
Pls re-test.

edit: with freaks pls check the insert is centered on the orings. If it is not, one insert vs another can send the ball bouncing off the tip.

[DocsMachine]

consistency ≠ accuracy

-Consistency is very much a component of accuracy.

Obviously, a ball travelling at 200 FPS is going to hit in a very different spot than one travelling at 300 FPS. In exactly the same way, one going 275 is going to land- all else being precisely equal- in a slightly different spot than 295.

Appiled specifically to automags, I still believe tom Kaye’s tests were the best so far - one conclusion was over{b}oring is more accurate.

-Kaye did excellent work back in the day, but that test was with his one specific kind of marker (and pre-level-10) and a limited range of bore sizes. (Only three or four, as I recall, and all one-piece barrels.)

The point I was trying to make in my earlier post is, essentially, there's no perfect combination. Some markers with certain paints, might work better slightly underbored. Others prefer overbored. I've been to the field, swapped guns between games, and noticed a slight but definite difference, despite still using the same barrel, with the same paint, under the same conditions.

edit: with freaks pls check the insert is centered on the orings. If it is not, one insert vs another can send the ball bouncing off the tip.

-Freak inserts can't NOT be centered in the O-rings. There is nothing to push an insert off to the side, and in all the years I've been using Freaks, I've never seen an insert bored off-center. Really, with the walls so thin, how far off center could they be?

In any case, in both the classic and XLs, the insert fits into a machined feature in the tip- I've never seen one made so badly the insert could be mounted eccentrically.

That doesn't preclude actual damage to the insert or elsewhere, but even that is generally pretty visible and obvious.

Doc.

[latches109]

-Consistency is very much a component of accuracy.

We can accelerate a ball to 295fps with NO barrel.. what would happen?

My reference to Tom's test was a comparison to the testing methods. Hand held with many variable vs normalized variables and high speed cameras.

-Freak inserts can't NOT be centered in the O-rings. There is nothing to push an insert off to the side, and in all the years I've been using Freaks, I've never seen an insert bored off-center. Really, with the walls so thin, how far off center could they be?

In any case, in both the classic and XLs, the insert fits into a machined feature in the tip- I've never seen one made so badly the insert could be mounted eccentrically.

That doesn't preclude actual damage to the insert or elsewhere, but even that is generally pretty visible and obvious.

Doc.

I am not referencing milling. Strictly the orings in the tip, and the two in the back.

Put an insert in ~1/3 of the way in so it clears the 1st oring, wiggle it - that is the quantity of play available.

Freak inserts can be centered in the orings. Todd Martinez was the one who showed me this- way back. Put an insert in and look down the front of the barrel, you will see how it is centered in the back. He would spin the insert, take it in and out a few times until the insert was centered. Lot of the pros did this, because the tournament paint was sooo brittle that any bounce in the tip it would beak. This technique would reduce those breaks. I have 7 freak kits here two old style milling, two xl and the rest newer milling style. I can replicate on all of them.


what is funny is I didn't even stage this shot, I literally picked up the first freak barrel I saw and looked. not centered


Same barrel same insert, you can see the same paint smudge - took it in and out a few times and spun it until "centered" better

[iamthelazerviking]

This is why I avoid inserts

[Brokeass_baller]

Wow. That's so crazy. I've been using Freaks since 2004 and never had any problems, and have never heard of centering the insert.

[k_obeastly]

I had a j&j edge that was clearly off center, and was still one of the best shooting barrels I've ever had.

[glaman5266]

I’m a fan of the overbore. Shoots a variety of sizes (and shapes, lol) with little fuss. This is usually what I do, and given how bad paint can be these days it’s the most reliable, consistency be damned.

If the paint is good/great I will bore match & go one size larger.

If I’m shooting a cocker/sniper I’ll bore match.

To top it off, I prefer barrels shorter than 14 inches. I like 10” & 12” barrels the best. More barrel = more drag & breakage. I also find longer barrels harder to shoot through if you do bust one.

[Jonnydread]

In general I'm with Handy in this debate, but I have found that it is easy to get overly focused on chrono numbers when the paint is single shot shooting fine. Consistency absolutely matters, especially with multiple shots fired in a row, but unless something is very wrong it's a trap to get mentally 'stuck' on chrono reads.

[Handy]

Maybe it's just laziness, but at this point I'm aiming for ease of playing.

I chrono every play day (I've heard people saying "chrono'd last weekend so I should be good", which drives me insane). My Phantom with it's stock barrel and ASP detent mod on 12grams is usually right about where I set it the last time I played, right around 270. Are there fluctuations? Yes. Are they still under the limit? Yes. Is that good enough for me? Also yes.

The stock Phantom barrel is usually a decent bit larger than whatever paint is boring too locally. Set up the way it is I've shot oblong paint, fragile paint, etc. and had less issues than people shooting guns that are softer on paint, etc.

[iamthelazerviking]

Handy I like the sound of this approach. Do you have a rough number on how many shots per 12 gram with that setup?