AOSC Forum Archive

First I should mention, this is a Copy/Paste of something I posted in my airsoft team's facebook group. much of the tone is overly "I-know-what-I'm-talking-about" and that is a JOKE. these guys know me well, and they would find it funny, hopefully knowing this, now you can too! I'm just an idiot, so realize I may say stupid things below, thanks!! =] (also enjoy how I can't spell "bb" the same way ever.)

_______________________________________

Here's a brain burner.. a 50 page scientific comparison of airsoft BB's done in Switzerland.

http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/239149 ... ode=scroll

Enjoy that.

...

Ok, I know NONE of you want to read 50 pages of science-y rambling.. scroll to the charts at the bottom, specifically these two..

http://airsoftinformations.blogspot.com ... sults.html

..are the most significant. The following tables are speed readings (in meters per second) at distances (V0 = muzzle, V10 - 10 meters from muzzle, etc)

I HAVE read all 50 pages, and my 2 conclusions are as follows:

1) There are 4 distinct tiers of airsoft BB's ranked as follows.

Best: Bioval BBMAX This is, by large margin, the best airsoft BB in manufacture today. It defeated every other opponent in every test in every way. it earns a forth tier to stand alone in, it's that different in this testing. This is presumably because it is made in a different fashion than all of it's competition, who use injection molding. might this be a forged or milled BB? Hmmm.. curious..

Better than most: The japanese BB's (Marui, Marushin, Maruzen) Bioval bb's (all other models than BBMAX) and Digicom's greater than or equal to .3g. These performed WELL above the competition, and were the only BB's that maintained the necessary accuracy to be measured at 30 meters.

Notably Average: Excel, G&G*, Systema, SIIS, Toy-jet, and WA (what even are those last three brands?) These maintained good velocity through the 20m distance at all speeds, and stood above the others in the 2 charts re-linked above.

*It should be mentioned that even though velocity and quality measurements didn't set the G&G's 2.5g and 2.8g bbs that far above it's peers, it was the only BB not mentioned in the first two categories to hit the speed target at 30 meters at both the 130mps and 170mps tests, displaying accuracy similar to a 'better than most' bb, even though other results put it in the lower category. these two BBs could be considered simply "better" mainly because this test did not explicitly measure true "accuracy" but only implied it by leaving out the speed data of BB's that did not consistently pass through the farthest speed target. meaning, if data was given, it must have performed at a better accuracy than bbs that weren't.

The rest: the rest. (notably, KSC, ICS, KSD tac's, and AE's! though, the AE's did at least a little better than the rest of 'the rest'.) Interestingly enough, I'm pretty sure every BB I've ever fired was in this category, or not tested.

2) I have always worked under the assumption that heavier BB's were more accurate than lighter bb's, but that at some point you were sacrificing distance and reach using them in guns that weren't loaded with 160 springs. This data proves that completely wrong , and in fact shows that the crossover between the lighter bb's gained advantage in speed out of the muzzle is much shorter that I ever would have thought, and I didn't really think that crossover even happened! (that is to say, the speed advantaged gained down range by heavier bb's through greater inertia over lighter bb's resulting in their eventual faster travel) (that is to say.. wait, I can't seem to say that easily. forget it.)

For example, by the time most BB's had gotten to just over 30 feet, some .23's, and most .25's and even SIIS's .27's had eclipsed the speed of each brand's relative .2g bb! And that's at the lowest measured velocity, just over 300fps!! this effect is only heightened when velocities increase... by the time you get to the chart displaying the >500fps tests, the results have flipped completely, and the faster speeds are consistently paired with the heavier BB's, speeds decreasing with weight. This completely flips my view of when to choose heavier BB's from 'with DMR guns, and only for accuracy' to 'all the time'.

*Interesting side note on this, at the lowest velocity, at only 30 feet, the bioval BBMAX .27 gram bb was traveling considerably faster than every other bb of every weight on the chart, near as I can tell by almost 25 feet per second faster than it's nearest competitors.

I certainly wish some real number data had been provided on diameter, weight, and spherical values, and numbers regarding their consistency, average, and out-liars... plus more data regarding the speed values (I'm assuming averages) ranges, and medians. And some accuracy data would have been nice as well.

_____________________________________________________________end of paste

I'm hoping to take the data from this study and put it in some excel sheets to get a more easily determined ranking of each, provide data representing how far the speed of each bb has fallen at distance, etc etc. and.. you know, convert them to real values. who uses meters anyway? ('merica)

=]

Well, I'll start by saying I skimmed, mostly looking for a date, I'll read it fully when I have some time, so the current info will be from my own knowledge on the subject.

Bioval BBBMAX bbs have been out of production for a few years now (thus looking for a date). The fact that they were basically glass bbs and their reputation for breaking stuff forced them off the market. I would say it's in a 4th tier for several reasons. One is that they had no air bubbles, and the material cannot be more dense in certain areas. So each bb was perfect internally. Combined with Bioval's quality in external bb quality, they were basically the perfect bb. The benefits don't stop there, though. They were smaller than most, at a 5.92mm diameter, they were able to travel through barrels better. That's a different subject about bore size, but the idea is the same. Thirdly, clear bbs are hard to see, sort of. They glint if you can catch them, usually leading to the shooting being able to follow shots, while the target is unable to see the bb. Not only that, but their incredible hardness changes how they impact, causing a higher likelihood of a hit being called. Ultimately, that was their undoing. They were also strong enough to break glass, and with that, created for themselves a horrible reputation.

For your 2nd tier, a new contender has popped up in the recent age, BioShot. Some of the highest quality of bb, for rather cheap. Both BioShot and Bioval have been tested and proven to perform as well as SGM bbs. You know, the $20 pack of 200 .29s. In the American market, that has all but pushed them out of existence, same with most Japanese brands. Due to importing, they are super expensive, and when it's cheaper, and just as effective to go with BioShot or BioVals, the decision is easy.

For your third tier, your question again makes me wonder the age of the article you have linked. The G&G .28 has often been described as a top of the line bb, and for sure, they are very good bbs.

The rest is the rest, there are plenty of bbs in this category. Good enough for your average uses, but certainly not competition grade.

Your second point. At a time, this was true. Again, the technology discussed in this article dates it. The popularization and the resulting extensive research of the prolonged hop contact is the reason heavier is better, to put it shortly. The reason heavier bbs are used is for long range shots. It's not necessarily the difference in speed, but accuracy at range.

Now that I've read further, I see I might have misinterpreted what you were saying. Yes, heavier bbs travel faster than ligher bbs at a point. iirc, the difference in speed between a .2 and a .25s is only 20ft. That means that shooting a .2 and a .25 out of the same gun, at 20ft, the .25 will be traveling faster than the .2, for those that might have missed it.

I'll have some time this weekend, I think, I'll have to see if I can work my way through all 50 pages.

Star_folder wrote: Bioval BBBMAX bbs have been out of production for a few years now (thus looking for a date).

ppfft! haha, I can't believe I never thought to actually look for a date myself! sheesh.. I'm suddenly far less motivated to attempt to crunch some of these numbers knowing there may be better data out there.

Thanks for the reply Star! As I was typing this at first it wasn't with much serious intent, but the more I typed the more interested I got! I wanted to post it here to get the good feedback I knew I might, so thanks!!

I went back into my browser history, and ya.. the forum post I found this on was dated 2009, and later said the study was at least a year old... so that dates it when I was in highschool... ouch!

well, lesson learned. I guess i have to at least provide some kinda data crunch to make this thread worth it.. haha.

Know of any better studies done more recently off hand? I'm done google searching for tonight. too many late nights this week, gotta get the sleeps. =]

I'm curious at what weight the BBs actually do become too heavy to present an advantage.

Dang, yeah, that's old. But, the data is still good. The bb analysis might be old for the brands, but weights, penetration, and the physics behind the bbs doesn't change.

I don't know of a report about bbs as well done as this one is, but another article comes to mind, the ATP, The Airsoft Trajectory Project. It deals more with testing on different bbs, weights, accuracy, and hop up. It has several graphs that might already have what you were talking about compiling, different speeds of different weights at different distances. It's certainly an interesting read, one you would probably enjoy.

Skywalker wrote:I'm curious at what weight the BBs actually do become too heavy to present an advantage.

Depends on your definition of advantage. Theoretically, given you are able to apply enough hop, the heavier the bb, the further the range. But, it will also be traveling slower and slower as it leaves the barrel. The idea pops up that you get to the point where the bb is leaving the barrel so slowly, that it's easy to dodge at long distances, dropping down all the way to perhaps 100fps or lower. Yet the energy in the bb allows it to continue traveling forward. At these extreme distances and weights, it's more of a long wait game, leading shots, waiting for someone to stop moving.

But, we really don't need to worry about that. The field rules limit the possibilities of such things happening, or even being a problem.

I just want to say, I love reading stuff like this. Its really heart warming to know that you guys take this more than just a "shoot him, shooting, reload, ambush" game. It can actually involve a good amount of physics, math, and work to make the game fun.

My definition of advantage would be...

For a 300 fps gun, the weight BB that reaches 150 feet fastest

For 400 fps, BB reaches 200

500 fps, 250 feet

And 600 fps, 300 feet.

It is possible that in these higher fps builds, the fastest BB to that range is a weight they don't make. But I don't think, out of a 300fps gun, a .40 will be the quickest BB to 150 feet. I didn't read enough of the 50 pages to see if they say that in there... I just scanned for a chart on the topic. Will read when time is abundant, maybe later tonight

Star_folder wrote: [...] I don't know of a report about bbs as well done as this one is, but another article comes to mind, the ATP, The Airsoft Trajectory Project. It deals more with testing on different bbs, weights, accuracy, and hop up. It has several graphs that might already have what you were talking about compiling, different speeds of different weights at different distances. It's certainly an interesting read, one you would probably enjoy. [...]

I'll have to go give that a read!

Skywalker wrote: [...] But I don't think, out of a 300fps gun, a .40 will be the quickest BB to 150 feet. I didn't read enough of the 50 pages to see if they say that in there... I just scanned for a chart on the topic. Will read when time is abundant, maybe later tonight.

It's not in there directly, but there are charts that give the velocity of every BB they test (multiple weights of multiple brands) in meters per second at muzzle, 10m, 20m, and 30m -- first fired at a base 100mps, 130mps, and 170mps. (that is the velocity of the control BB. Apparently, with whatever test 'gas gun' they were using, they had very precise and accurate control of velocity, considering they could adjust it enough to get their 'control bb' to hit 100, 130, and 170mps dead on. -- so they fired every other bb at the same exact pressure.)

So, with that information, you could calculate how fast each bb got to each of those stations, and with 4 points create a pretty decent graph of it's performance further down it's range.

marpat96 wrote:I just want to say, I love reading stuff like this. Its really heart warming to know that you guys take this more than just a "shoot him, shooting, reload, ambush" game. It can actually involve a good amount of physics, math, and work to make the game fun.

I agree! considering the natural limitations of our adopted projectile, the sphere, any advantage is worth the effort!

Also, ran across these, http://www.evike.com/product_info.php?c ... s_id=34987, I'm guessing this is similar to what the BBMAX was? are these pretty much impermissible in games? I see what evike says, but I could care less about that, I'd only care what the AOSC (or applicable governing body to each game) + players general consensus was.