If anything, the Nemesis looked to have a consistent vertical grouping while the Lapco had a more horizontal spread. The vertical spread of the Nemesis is due to the FPS variations of the marker. That said, if a person is standing straight up, more of those shots are hits. Keep in mind, the Lapco had a horizontal spread without wind. With wind, youre looking at a greater spread than the Nemesis.
NV SNAKE You have no way of knowing WHAT the vertical spread of the Nemesis is due to. You might be right, not saying you’re wrong, but you are ultimately just guessing. You didn’t even see the velocity for any of the shots. Assumptions like these are how paintball myths get started. It’s totally fine to voice your hypotheses, but wait for the evidence before drawing conclusions.
You contradict yourself: marker velocity fluctuation is EQUAL across both barrels, therefore vertical spread will be exact same regardless of any barrel used. So if nemesis has higher vertical spread, it's due to the barrel itself.
@@drcpaintball The fluctuations caused by velocity are equal across both barrels, but innaccuracy is a combination of velocity fluctuations as well as barrel inaccuracy. Not just velocity. So vertical spread will not be equal across both barrels
I would like to see a comparison of the hammerhead bang stikxx vs the nemesis on a Dye DAM. So many differing opinions that the nemesis makes a big difference on that marker.
I was loaned a nemesis to run on my DAM at a meetup last week and it made an incredible difference over the stock barrel and a freak barrel, it was so dramatic that I ordered one for my DAM and my FSC.
Thank you for doing this. The results here were very surprising to me. I fully expected the Nemesis to destroy the Lapco. Now I’m starting to wonder whether rifling of any kind has any enhancing effect on FSR accuracy at all. When/if you do this test again, please include a regular old smoothbore barrel to serve as the control for your experiment. Doesn’t matter which smoothbore...maybe a Lapco Big Shot to keep things consistent. Also, please provide sample sizes that are larger than 10 if you can. And you must must MUST use a chrono to measure the velocity of each shot next time.
Don’t know how I missed this until now. Great work Alex. Nice to see the comparison at that range and with a marker technically built around the first strike round.
You just must do the test on the Sar 12! Here it looks like the Nemesis is much more consistent and it seems like it isn't due to the fps variations on the marker! I'm looking forward for a next test! Why not try throwing in some round ball and see how it performs?
I'm pretty sure this is a minor observation, but does anyone think that the barrels in the testing may prove to be more accurate if the FSR's loaded into the T15 were under spring tension from a magazine instead of being manually loaded into the breach? I feel like it may prevent the projectiles from moving around as much (as minor as it may be) if each one is seated exactly the same due to the spring tension.
I haven't shot FSR through a t15, but my ion was much more consistent after I modified the bolt to reduce rollback so you may be correct. They should have used a closed bolt marker or loaded from a magazine
Yup. You wpuld want to fire from the mag to get best results. However, testing the way he did, is better only because it shows how well it does under its minimum conditions, or weakest link type od situation. Testing the way he did, you know for sure that using a mag is going to be amazing
If your going to continue with these test might I suggest you use a much more accurate crony a optical chronograph will be way more accurate and give you much better data I've put about 1000 fsr through the old hammer head 20 inch and the nemesis 20 and it's clear as day the nemesis groupings are about half the size
Would actually like to see a comparison in the different nemisis sizes. Exact same as this but use different barrel sizes. Also comparison of tip and no tip
Awesome new segment! Maybe you can test Roundball performance on a Rifled Barrel vs. a Smoothbore Barrel. Best way to do it would be the FS USP Rounds, so there are no inconsistencys. The Barrels i would use would be the Nemesis (they claimed i would be good with Roundball too) and a Lapco BigShot or Dye BoomStick.
Unknown_User It’s already been done. Tom Kaye of Airgun Designs famously tested how gyroscopic spin (like a bullet or a football) would affect paintball accuracy. To ensure that tested paintballs were actually spinning in flight how he wanted, he built a machine that was basically a paintball gun with a motorized spinning smoothbore barrel. He’d stick a ball in the barrel and could set the rate of spin anywhere up to 30,000 rpms, thus spinning the paintball before firing. He found that there was zero difference in paintball accuracy with a standard smoothbore barrel when his machine was set below 10,000 rpms. However, when set above 10,000 rpms, he found that fired paintballs would hook radically all over the place similar to a barrel with broken paint in the bore or badly dimpled paintballs. Punkworks also tested numerous rifled barrels in their exhaustive and massive barrel accuracy testing. They found zero difference in accuracy between rifled and smoothbore barrels. Spherical objects simply don’t aerodynamically react the same way to gyroscopic spin like, say, bullets or footballs do.
What you should consider is doing a deep break down of all barrels under controlled conditions with both FSR and roundball. I'd also like to see my personal fav J&Js compared to other common brands.
rankothefiremage Do you realize how deep that rabbit hole goes? You’re talking about a massive test involving an extraordinary number of variables (short vs long barrels, ported vs. non-ported, one-piece vs two-piece, match bore vs underbore vs overbore, aluminum vs. steel vs Teflon vs carbon fiber, smoothbore vs spiral rifled vs straight rifled, stock barrel vs aftermarket, and every combination of everything mentioned above. Yeah, no. This is a simple test for which barrel, of any, works best with FSR. Leave roundball out of this. And besides, scientifically conducted barrel accuracy tests involving roundball have been done already. Look up the research that Punkworks and others have conducted. *spoiler alert* ...The science in these tests has shown that barrels have almost zero effect on roundball accuracy. Pretty much all accuracy is attributed to the quality of paint being used. Gear accuracy isn’t in the barrel. It’s not in the gun. It’s overwhelmingly in the paint.
There is one huge difference you failed to mention the patterns. The lapco had a left to right variation where at the nemisis had a more vertical variation. I know it seems small but aiming a little higher or lower is much easier than left to right. Just wanted to throw my analysis in the hat.
The pure group size is one thing but the average distribution or deviation if that's what you'd call it, was much tighter on the Nemesis. As in, out of 10 shots the probability of one of the shots being in a rather tight central group was much higher. Plenty of the rounds were in a very nice central group. Also the T15 being an unregulated blowback means you get the telltale vertical distribution due to FPS variance as others have mentioned. Which means for the T-15, you're best off doing double or triple taps. That's been my experience so far with it.
Scott Watrous I’m not so sure. We don’t know whether the T15’s velocity was actually inconsistent here. Furthermore, the vertical spread was only present in the Nemesis grouping. If what you say about the unregulated blowback valve being the cause for the vertical spread is the case, then why didn’t we see the same vertical spread with the Lapco. Did it the velocity become more consistent in the Lapco? Or are these sample sizes too small to rule out random chance? Perhaps we a seeing a pattern that isn’t actually there, and both barrels really do have comparable accuracy. And by the way, unless he’s using CO2, the T15 here is, in fact, regulated. There is a regulator on the HPA tank. It does the same job just as if it were on the gun, does it not? And why would the valve type matter anyway? Are you saying that some guns are more accurate than others?
corin noob He doesn’t even need a scope for this test, nor is a bullseye necessary. We just need groupings downrange. The smallest group of shots one wins.
I also would like to see the performance with normal rounds, 10 shoots with first strike and 10 round ball's, then change the barrel (because, you can't use first strike in all the games/fields). Including a Hammerhead rifled .687 barrel would be nice too. Thanks!
Why would we test roundball with rifled barrels? Imparting gyroscopic spin (like a bullet or a football) on spheres can only hurt accuracy. Tom Kaye of Airgun Designs famously tested it years ago and found that it doesn’t improve accuracy in the slightest bit. Leave roundball out of this. I want to see whether rifling even works at all with First Strikes.
I have an 18 inch hammerhead rifled barrel with .686 diameter, and an important thing to note is it only works at 50 - 60 degrees. It is easily accurate enough at 70 or so meters and you can potentially hit your shots at up to 100. FSRs apparently do get deformed in cold weather and I get much better accuracy and less chopping then if running inserts and tightening the bore up. Couple hundredth of an inch makes world of a difference. Also at 30 or so degrees FSRs tend to not break, so you might as well run conventional paint.
I'd love to see the comparison be made with these two barrels and maybe a hammerhead and a smooth bore (maybe a freak XL) barrel bored to the paint. Just to see if there's that much of a difference with the rifling.
steven biedrzycki +1 to that! I’m starting to wonder whether a smoothbore would offer the same accuracy as all 3 rifled barrels. In regards to matching paint, though, matching paint to bore may not be optimal for an accuracy test. Other tests have found the following: Match Bore: moderate accuracy, moderate air efficiency, poor velocity consistency Overbore: slightly higher accuracy, poor air efficiency, high velocity consistency Underbore: slightly poorer accuracy, high air efficiency, high velocity consistency
I am skeptical about the premise. How do we know that the rifling has any effect in the first place? To have an effect the projectile would need to be in a form which enables rotating. And with paintballs this is highly questionable.
This would be a big project... But 1st aspect, show the difference between 240-260-280 with low mid and high quality paint, then test the barrels by categories, underboring vs overboring accuracy, 12 vs 16 inches barrel (same bore obviously) to see if range is affected, (height of the grouping)
@@defconpaintball that would be a huge step in the right direction for paintballers, I was thinking for a while lol... In these types of videos, barrel brand would make no difference since we are testing specifing things, a kill house 12" vs 16" or lapco 12" vs 16", would not change the results of the test
I would really like to see MARKSMAN 6" Rifled (.688) vs hammerhead (.685) or the némesis on this test. I really would like to see how the bore and length of the barrel works on first strikes.
next time use the magazine to load the round you was shaking the lead slead way to much knocking it side to side when putting rounds inside of the dustcover, also the barrel size difference also makes your testing invalid. you took alot of the science out of this when you put way to much human factor and could not straight do a comparison due to the barrel bore size difference. but great video and keep making great content.
I realize this video is a little dated now but I just gotta ask, why is the scope mounted so high over the bore? I haven't played paintball in decades and I normally shoot real steel guns (as you guys say) in competitions such as service rifle at the Camp Perry National matches . Normally you would want the scope as close to the bore as possible so what gives?
The reason is that you are going to be wearing a mask which can make it more difficult or uncomfortable to look down sights that are too low. That being said the one in this video is a little excessive. Plus a lot of the newer, higher end masked these days are taking this into consideration and are making the cheeks more flexible.
Hey too tall, question might have already been asked but in case not, in barrel comparisons and forums the nemises 10" barrel seems to be he most accurate, would that not factor in overall accuracy? Thanks
Marshall Murphy It’s not any better than the Lapco, really. I own a Hammerhead. It’s fine. Kind of whatever with FSRs. 🤷🏼♂️ Nothing amazing, and I’m not entirely convinced that it shoots FSRs any better than a smoothbore. I haven’t actually tested this though so i can’t say for sure.
I'm a fan of 10" barrels (I use a .684 bore). But, am wondering if it is actually true if one would get more distance from a 14" barrel of the same bore?
a 14" barrel will add about 4" of distance over a 10" barrel. I am sure you can go too short, but unless the valve is tuned to provide acceleration throughout the entire barrel, there is no difference. Also, most markers can make 300fps in 6-8". I know that the newer 468 markers advise not going over 12" as the valve will cause a vacumm on the FSR and flip it. This is to conserve gas and make their system more efficient.
That raiser for the scope is absolutely ridiculous as far as height goes. Everything about the marker is meant to minimize size for hits. That scope completely defeated the purpose of that. Plus, why even have a scope when your have at best 50-100 meters of effective range with a spherical, compressed gas propelled paintball. At best you should have a red dot or a variant thereof.
No, the Nemesis was not more accurate. Not significantly anyway. I get what you’re saying about vertical spread being preferable to horizontal spread, but the sizes of the groupings are still surprisingly comparable to each other. I fully expected the Nemesis to blow the Lapco out of the water and that didn’t happen. This is causing me to re-evaluate what I thought I knew about rifled barrels and FSRs. I’m now wondering whether a standard smoothbore barrel would actually be any less accurate shooting FSRs than either of these rifled barrels. Maybe rifled barrels with FSRs are just a gimmick like they are with spherical paintballs. Who knows until somebody actually tests it. Furthermore, you have no way of knowing how likely the spread of the Nemesis’s grouping was due to velocity inconsistency, or whether the barrel length was appropriate or not appropriate for that particular valve, or whether or not barrel length even CAN affect velocity consistency in the first place. First demonstrate that different valves have different velocity fluctuations with different barrels and then we can talk. Until then, you’re just speculating...which is totally fine as long as you keep in mind that your speculation is totally inconclusive until it is objectively tested. Every paintball myth ever told has been born out of nothing more than untested speculation. People make assumptions about gear all the time because the idea they have makes sense to them (even though their idea may or may not, unbeknownst to them, violate the laws of physics), and then they just leave it at that. Case in point, it made sense to people that longer barrels have a greater range, or that closed bolt guns are more accurate, or that paintball barrels have a huge effect on roundball accuracy, or that some markers are more accurate than others, or that frozen paintballs are as dangerous as being shot at with ice balls. We now know today that none of these are true, but all of these myths were universally believed until people came along and actually tested them.
@@Tomcat82 Veil does make a good point that velocity fluctuation on this gun could be causing vertical stringing, which means higher accuracy. We need a better gun however to do this comparison as from my experience the T15 is not that great in shot to shot velocity consistency. If you could achieve +1/-1 fps consistency, I think we'd get a much better result.
Why dnt you zero in the marker and scope first then just swap barrels. Other wise youll be chaseing it forever no matter the distance. Awesome head to head videos
I really enjoy your content :) :) :) Please keep it up. I have subscribed! Skinny arms ;) Gotta do some more working out and eating properly. I used to weigh 112lbs and now I weigh 165lbs, a journey that took several years and lots of practice and refinement. I feel like I can see something I relate with but then again I could always be wrong and out of place.
Please compare the Nemesis 14’ to the Marksman Predator 14’ they both rifled at .68 I believe? Correct me if I’m wrong people. I have the Marksman Predator but never used first strikes in 2019 I’m using strictly those on my Milsig M17 (sniper loadout) and just got a Milsig M5 and making an assault class with those hybrid mags and FSR’s and wonder to get another Marksman Barrel if anyone used? Or get the Nemesis. Thanks planning on getting another barrel in like 2 weeks
All paintballs fall within .68, it's the differences in the thousandths that make the real difference on bore matching. Paintballs are usually measured to the thousandths not the hundredths.
what in the hell is that scope mount? i mean get it has to be raised a bit to compensate for wearing a mask while playing but damn that thing’s like 6 inches above the barrel
Yeah my rifles, even shooting FSR's are never more than 5x magnification. There's just no reason for it. Even though First Strike rounds can break on a target over 400 feet away, zooming in that far is impractical because you see less of the flight path of the projectile which makes follow up shots more difficult to correct. Most fields aren't even 100 yards end to end so your engagement distance is usually between 45-60 yards max...
Coria Roberto An accuracy test between these two would be pointless. Both of these barrels’s accuracy is entirely dependent on the exact side-to-side tilt of the gun/barrel as its being held by the user while firing. Nobody holds either one perfectly vertical while shooting, and any slight tilt one way or the other will cause the paintball to veer left or right. This alone makes both barrels the least accurate in paintball. When chrono‘d at a field though, the Flatline will always hold a 20 fps advantage over an Apex (with “Magnus Effect mode” turned on). Apex barrels are required to be chrono’d with the Apex turned off because turning the Apex on causes the velocity to drop off 20 fps.
I was shocked coming back into paintball that there was not more technology besides first strikes's to get straight trajectory from round balls after 10 years its pathetic. basically it balls arch same as if you threw them the apex 2 is joke & flatline only works on 3 markers
They said the same thing when paintballers started using constant air instead of 12 gram cartridges. They said it again when semi-automatic guns came out. Magfed may not be the same game of speedball that you’ve been playing for x number of years, but it’s still paintball. Plus it’s nice not having a big blimp sticking up above my gun, and I really enjoy the firepower handicap that magfed offers. First Strikes are fun, but you pay through the nose for that range and accuracy, and they don’t break on target all that well, so I generally stick to roundball in my Automag MFG (which is a non-milsim magfed gun). And FYI, loading a fresh magazine in your gun is super cool. Don’t knock it til you try it.
