Paintball Guns and Gear forums banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Wheeeeee!
Joined
·
1,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A brief idea for a paintball barrel that might improve accuracy and range.

The idea is this: What if you designed a barrel, half of which (say the top half) is made of a higher friction metal than the lower half? Ideally, this would cause the balls to have a more predictable spin right out of the barrel. However, it might not be so severe as the Flatline barrel system, but it should generally prevent the ball (so long as the paint is matched) from spinning the opposite direction, and so you might see a 5-8 foot or so increase in range, and closer grouping since the spin would hopefully be restricted to backspin, with maybe a little variance to the left or the right. The advantage here over the Flatline system is that you wouldn't be firing your balls right into the edge of the barrel, causing obvious pressure to the ball.

This could actually be achieved through other means, like an adjustable rubber grip plate, like on the Galactic Systems Z Body (automag). But I've never seen this done on a straight barrel system. You might even be able to incorporate it into a barrel system, by lining half of an insert with rubber or some other smooth but high-friction surface (maybe silicon?)

Anyway, I suppose I'm not looking to patent it, or anything. It's something I'd like to see emerge on the market, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
It would have to be a single bore barrel. With a kit you need the barrel tip to be a larger size than the sleeves, with the sleeve giving backspin you'd run the risk of having the ball rise inside the barrel and bounce off the top portion of the tip. Now maybe if the barrel was bent at a less severe angle than the Flatline you'd be in business.
 

·
Wheeeeee!
Joined
·
1,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Not nessecerilly. Actually, if the tip bore was larger, there would be a bigger chance of the ball having a collision with the inside of the barrel, because it's not already in contact with it. If the barrel were the same bore all the way through, though, the ball should simply keep rolling along the top of the barrel, creating more backspin.

But I see the problem this poses. It should need to be a single bore, because if the tip were larger, it would create that problem (in theory.) Good point. Perhaps the ideal backspin barrel system might include inserts that are all the same size as the barrel, but with varying degrees of friction, so you can fine tune the back-spin to the integrity of your paint. Which would be prefferable to an adjustable barrel in that you can chrono all the way up, so you can fire at full velocity without having to chrono with the adjuster all the way out (thus losing some range, and possibly negating your range advantage.)

As for the higher friction metal slowing down the ball- not really. You'd just raise your velocity to match. It might be slightly less efficient, but not noticably so. The big problem with the higher friction metal (and intending the ball to roll off the top of the barrel, as well) is that there is a higher chance for ball breaks. As long as the paint match is good, and the barrel is straight, it shouldn't be a problem to self-clean.

It's also important that the seam between the top and bottom metals must be smooth. If the manufacturing process isn't good enough, there will be a loss of integrity. Which would cause hella problems with ball breaks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
790 Posts
i have tried this idea, actually. but the dual metal parts is a good idea, manufacturing would drive this product into an unfeasable cost for the extra few feet. this idea was originally manifested in an "insert" for the top of the barrel. like the slimy hands you can buy at your local market for a quarter. what it would do is grab the paintball violently (NO NOT THE HAND the material!) and give it a backspin. but for this idea to work, you cant have traditional paint/bore match because this is not a traditional approach for paintball barrels. it would have to have a VERY large bore for the ball to get even a small backspin because if the ball would be rubbing against the bottom part of the barrel making it loose spin. even if it was very slick on the bottom, the top would be, as you said, frictious (is this a word), and having something that moves the paintball at a FAST and a SLOW rate will tear it apart. the paintball would be pushed along at the slick parts rate, with the friction of the top parts place. this idea in its current execution is not feasable.

even if we were able to pull this off. as i mentioned before. the costs for this to gain small amounts of range is NOT gonna fly well with anyone. a few collectors would buy it for curiosity or ****s and giggles. but nobody would use this.
 

·
Wheeeeee!
Joined
·
1,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Sounds about accurate, on most accounts.

Going back to the dual-metal issues, though, perhaps it may be possible to basically machine two sets of barrels (say, I dunno, aluminum for the top, and steel or brass for the bottom), only schizm the two sets symetrically, bond them, and then hone the barrel. As a cosmetic aside, the exterior could then be either plated with, say, chrome, or painted (less effective than anno, I know.) Although, I'm not sure that the mechanics of splitting a barrel in half are going to maintain the exact circular proportions of a barrel. In any event, I maintain that one barrels worth of two diffirent metals each shoud (could?) still yeild two barrels, right?

Alternately, might it be possible to use one metal, but give the top half a slight striated texture to grip the ball? This might still require the barrel be split in half for mechanical reasons.

Or, in another venue, might it be plausable to create the top half from a translucent plastic? This opens a whole new can of worms with cosmetic options, and I can only surmise that the plastic would also grip the ball more than most conventional metals. It also gives the functional advantage of knowing when you've broken paint in your barrel.

Another high priority concern should be making sure that the top half is always the top half, from marker to marker. (For instance, many of the new ULE bodies from AGD cause the cocker threaded barrels to appear 'upside-down.') Which could be easily done using a rotating thread system that could maybe be locked down with a small screw, or tensioned in as it screws on.
 

·
Just Chillin'
Joined
·
5,062 Posts
Are you saying they should make a barrel with one side of the bore aluminum, and the other side stainless steel, like that? So that when a ball is going through it, the side that causes more friction would slow the ball down, and since the other side has less friction, it would cause a spin effect on the ball? Sounds phat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,591 Posts
Shytkicker
Its a great idea.... and it has been done.
In fact, its already patented!

People seem to think the "Flatline" is a new idea, and it is not. The idea started with the CooperT Maximizer that came out in 1990. It did the same thing, and was somewhat popular. It was just a special bolt with the face looking like this:



It started a flood of "backspin generator" systems in the early 90s that were mostly complete flops.

One notable one was the Bob Long system, which consistent of a series of holes drilled on the BOTTOM of the barrel. Bob thought this would generate backspin, but it did NOT. Not whatsoever, but Bob still advertised it that it did.
There was also a few barrels with extra friction on the top part. Apparently, it broke about 1 in 5 paintballs!

There were also a barrel that was longer on the top then the bottom. I once tried my own homemade version that looked something like this:


It didnt work. Eventually I just got the CooperT system, since it works, and can be used on any sheridan-based gun.

Anyway, SHytkicker, check out the patent for the flatline. You will see that it references all these quack backspin ideas from the early 90s.... They didn't work, but legally tippmann has to mention them since the Flatline idea was not original.

Nick
 

·
Wheeeeee!
Joined
·
1,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
yep. Found the 'backspin porting' idea and, what appears to be, a pivoting roller device to induce backspin. (Do I have that around right?)

I haven't seen the two materials idea yet, though. Particularly, not with the plastic top half (though, I really have no idea how practical that might be outside of inducing backspin). I might have missed it also, in the midst of the patent jargon-speak.

To be sure, though, you have been around this crazy paintball scene much longer than I have. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
you could prolly do it yourself as a quick test. put take a swap squeegie and put vaseline on the bottom half of it and run it through the barrel to get a thin coating of it on the bottom half of the barrel. its just an idea but it wouldnt cost much to at least try.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,548 Posts
lol....i put some vaseline on my barrel so the balls could speed up and slow down....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
790 Posts
woohoo! lets put some petrol based jelly in our barrels to ruin our accuracy!

not only is petrol corrosive (petrol....AKA GASOLINE!) it smells like ****.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,548 Posts
ya plus it doesnt sound right when you say your gonna put vaseline in or on your barrel to make your balls have backspin...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
790 Posts
woo. another moron taking something out of context when we were trying to have an intelligent conversation...its never gonna get back on track now.......


*sigh*


WHY WOULD YOU THINK OF IT THAT WAY VASELINE BALLS BOY!??!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
287 Posts
UnderDog said:
woohoo! lets put some petrol based jelly in our barrels to ruin our accuracy!

not only is petrol corrosive (petrol....AKA GASOLINE!) it smells like ****.
didnt know that. use a stock barrel thumup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
790 Posts
bushmaster....know what ive noticed about you, your choice in comments, and your siggie? youre one sexually frustrated kid.....

but lets get this thread back on topic!

shyt, have you tried it yet(the vasenline) oh and it will only work once with vaseline, because it might put on a backspin which will get the vaseline on the top of the barrel...so youd have to squeegee it out and clean it perfectly each time to test it.

i think the whole problem with this system will be the two diffrent frictions. sure, it will cause a backspin, but it wouldnt just be feasable. i have the answer in my head but i cant put it in words....gah. so frustrating. OH YEAH. this would put a backspin on the ball, but if it were on a two stage barrel, it might travel up and hit the top at some odd angle once it reaches the 2nd stage and it would throw off the spin and make it curve around the second it got out of the barrel. so 2 stage barrels are gone.

what about one stage? single bore the whole way through? this wouldnt work either, because for the backspin to work, it would need to have a Large bore barrel/small bore paint match. this is also called the Tippmann Air Bearing technique. this technique was the way to get the "most accuracy" out of your gun. like all fads, this one faded. The Tippmann Air Bearing technique said the air would hold the ball in the middle of the barrel perfectly and it would be guided out the barrel on a puff of air. this never worked out well because the ball really skipped around the barrel (thanks to AGD for debunking this myth of accuracy.) but back to the topic at hand. the largebore/smallball match that this barrel requires has ONE BIG FLAW. how do we get the ball at the top of the barrel and keep it there to gain backspin? we cant. the ball would just fly around the barrel, hitting every side, causing strange spinning right out of the barrel.

sorry shyt, but your idea was a flop....good job of thinking outta the box though!
 

·
Wheeeeee!
Joined
·
1,366 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
I'm not sure if the physics behind your assessment is entirely accurate. It seems to have worked successfully in the Glactic Systems Z-Body for the 'mag (pbreview). The idea there was a body that put a rubber 'skid plate' on the top, before the barrel. Generally, yes, they used large-bore barrels. The idea, I suppose, was to put the backspin on the ball before it entered the barrel, and it would naturally roll across the top of the barrel. Seems to work fine, so long as you're wise to use at least a large bore/medium paint scheme. So I wonder why you might not put the same system two inches forward?

All the same, it may be a flop. I'm really just discussing it on a trial v. error basis. So by all means, it's an open target for scrutiny. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,591 Posts
Shytkicker said:
I'm not sure if the physics behind your assessment is entirely accurate. It seems to have worked successfully in the Glactic Systems Z-Body for the 'mag.....
The Z-Body works pretty much the same as the CooperT Maximizer.
Both put the spin on the ball AT the bolt.
Z_Body uses a skidplate, and the Maximizer uses a special bolt.

In both cases, you need the barrel bore to be much larger then the ball bore.
For example: If I used a matched bore/paint barrel setup, it would produce corkscrew balls, likely because it screwed up the spin.

I also learned that a longer barrel is worse then a shorter barrel. The longer barrel tends to produce corkscrew balls as well. It sounds crazy, but my BEST barrel was only 3" and bored to .696!!
Ineffecient? Yes. But it worked perfect. The spin was generated at the bolt, so you wanted the LEAST amount of resistent possible in the barrel. Performance exactly like the Flatline, and this was back in 1993.

There are other backspin systems as well on the market. But the ONLY ones that REALLY work are the Flatline, Maximizer, and Z-Body.
The science is simple- You need the spin to be fast enough to generate the required amount of MAGNUS to counteract GRAVITY. The 3 that I mentioned are the only ones that generate the required amount of MAGNUS.

I have also seen a few "homemade" flatlines, made by bending plasting piping, and using JB-weld to attach to the gun. I suppose in theory they should work, as long as you don't mind looking like a fool (and firing at an angle).

Nick
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top