ok fine would u like me to restate that? yes there are extremely accuarate guns (snipers) in paintball. What is a good mod for a to make my gun for strong and accuate?

new barell and HPA

an E-ggrip might help but i've never liked the idea of my batteries dying on the feild

^^ here here.

Who uses a scope for 150 ft?

A5upYourAss wrote: ok fine would u like me to restate that? yes there are extremely accuarate guns (snipers) in paintball. What is a good mod for a to make my gun for strong and accuate?

Extermely accurate gun =/= Sniper. There are match grade M16A2 assualt rifles out there, does that make them sniper rifles? No. Your theory is all bad. There are no snipers in paintball. It is physically impossible.

Some basic things you have to do to be a sniper:

Infiltrate an area undecteted to take out specific high value targets.

Stalk said high value target for hours or even days.

Once you have found a good shooting position on the said high value target, and you have calculated windage and distance said single shot at said target is taken from beyond the effective range of return fire.

After this single accurate shot is taken the sniper then egresses the area without being located or engaged by return fire.

Unless you can do all this, you are not a sniper in paintball. Get over yourself.

I think his intention is to try to be a sharp shooter of sorts. Though, even this is not really attainable in paintball.

If you do have your heart set on it, then you need HPA and a good barrel kit for your A5. Thats pretty much as accurate as the A5 gets.

Welcome to the forum.  Please open a new account with a less offensive username.

As you may have gathered by now, sniper discussions can quickly get heated.  I encourage all new users to tread lightly on this subject.

I encourage all old users to stop being total jerks about it.

Mack wrote: netramakin wrote: xXK1CK1NVV1NGXx wrote: No such thing as snipers in paintball. Sure there is b/c  http://rap4.com/paintball/os/rap4-frostbite-sniper-with-marker-p-3771.html - RAP4 says so . That's great.  They've upgraded their low ammo capacity, odd calibred (provides the benefit of decreased availability and historical problems with quality control), marker, which is not allowed on some commercial fields because of the paint size, with a smoke simulator to help give the user's position away with each shot.

SUCCESS!!

I find it interesting that the TIPPMANN forum is so anti-sniper when TIPPMANN themselves are PRO sniper!!!

At TIPPMANN sponsored events they have sniper training classes and one of Tippmann's affilates "Special Ops Paintball" is one of the biggest "sniper" sellers and places to find sniper info and tactics out there!!!!!!!

At THE biggest scenario game in the us "D-Day" in Oklohoma (over 4000 players attended!!!!!)  There were Sniper classes as well as leadership classes held pre-game.  Hmm, the BIGEST scenario event in the world believes paintball snipers exist and gives sniper CLASSES,  TIPPMANN affiliates themselves with the biggest sniper outfitter in paintball, but some children and feebs on a forum say they don't?  I wonder who to believe?

Now if that does not put a plug in the "no snipers in paintball" fools, well I guess some people would argue that gravity does not exist either.  How they stay on earth is a mystery to me, but he you just keep on sniping man, blast those guys before they ever know where you are and do it so they can not find you after you shoot them!

Oh, and just decide what paint you will use most often and get a barrel that has a great fit to the paint!  Also get the LONGEST barrle you can stand to use (I use a 21", the length does not bother me, it is still shorter than ny hunting rifle).  If you use a lot of different paint, get a mid sized bore on your barrel to give you the best all around "fit" and the fewest breakes.  REmember, too big is better than too small, THAT can cause more breaks and a loss in accuracy until you can clean your barrle out!

The extra length wil not give you any additional accuracy (the good fit between barrle and paint does that) but the LONG barle, prted for silence will make your marker a LOT quieter!!!!  The les noise your marker makes the less chance that your OSOK will give your position away!!!!

tallen702 wrote: It's been proven that anything over 14 inches does nothing to dampen the sound any further

If you believe this then I feel so sad for you.  You are just accepting what you are told by the masses of speedball players who have NO USE for either length or silence on thier marker.  Go out and do some tests YOURSELF for a change and don't let the vocal minority tell you what to think.  That is a SAD way to live man.

I have a 14" progressive barrel that is just as acurate as my 21" however I would never use it as it makes over twice as much noise!!!!  This is s simple FACT that can be heard by anyone foolish enough to stand in front of the thing.  I have had MANY people comment on the amazing silence of my barrel over EVERY other shorter barrel they have tried.  As to needing more gas (making more noise?!?!) to push the balls out at the same speed?  THAT is the most bogus statement I have heard for a while.  The speed difference between a 14" and a 21" barrel of the same size is less than 10-15fps.  I wouldn't even adjust it up for that!  depending on paint size of the day I get more flucuation than that just changing from box to box of paint!

The sound reduction qiality of a well ported barrel increases as length increases as the ports on the barrel allow the sound to escape a little at a time, in all directions, as the ball passes the ports.  It is not that the TOTAL sound is reduced, but the effective FORWARD sound (towards your target I would HOPE) is GREATLY reduced.  With a well ported barrel over 16" and as many sound reducing adjustments made to your marker as you can afford (low pressure redues your mechanical noise as well but it is pricy) you can create a marker that produces less sound projecting forward than you would believe.  Mine is currently silent enough that at over 30-40ft the sound of the ball whizzing through the air is LOUDER than the sound from the marker.  This is NOT "opinion" but FACT tested and proven to MANY people who have heard it themselves.

Don't belive it?  Want to be a SHEEP to the masses of children who want to justify buying that $150 barrel or $300 kit?  GO ahead.  Want to know the TRUTH? 

TRY IT YOURSELF.

I honestly didn't believe it myself until I made the real life tests myself.  NOTHING beats REAL LIFE tests.

As to the sniper issue, I return to the D-Day event.  The LARGEST scenario event ever held, as well as several events held by TIPPMANN themselves (one was an X-7 release) where one of the owners was present.  Guess what, sniper classes THERE TOO?  Yep.

Anyone wanting to get away from the thoughtless children following like sheep in the "no sniper" brigade here should head over to "OSOK Paintball Sniper Group" or Special Ops Paintball.  You can get information there to not only step up your sniper game and blast those who don't believe you exist but you will not be hounded by speedball feebs who just can't take being sniped in the woods so the are forced to deny you exist.  If you don't exist you can't shoot them right?

(P.S. You "no sniper" guys better tie yourselves to something before you stop believing in gravity and fly off the face of the Earth.  After all, if you SAY it doesn't exist it must be the truth right?)

tallen702 wrote: It's been proven that anything over 14 inches does nothing to dampen the sound any further unless a suppressor is attached due to the fact that the ball must exit the barrel at the same speed (300fps) to achieve the same distance unless back-spin is created to give the ball lift as in accordance with Bernoulli's law. The reason is that it takes a higher volume of gas to get the ball to, and keep it at, muzzle velocity after the 14" mark than it does with anything below it. The larger volume of gas needed to keep the ball at speed in turn causes just as much sound even though there is more length for the gas to expand and dissipate through the porting. These are simple Newtonian laws of wave-form and mechanical physics and thus, incontrovertible.

McNote:  This is known as diminishing returns.  In any endeavor, (paintball, finance, whatever) there comes a point where additional investment of resources (barrel length in this case) provides reduced, nil, or even negative returns.  Tallen's point is that 14 inches is approximately where for most barrels a paintball that is moving at acceptable velocity requires more air to maintain that velocity as compared to the noise dissapation benefits of the longer barrel.  Beyond this it becomes counter-productive to have additional barrel length because the air being dissipated is not "excess air" that causes a louder report, but propulsive air that moves the ball. 

RedDragon1313 wrote: If you believe this then I feel so sad for you.  You are just accepting what you are told by the masses of speedball players who have NO USE for either length or silence on thier marker.  Go out and do some tests YOURSELF for a change and don't let the vocal minority tell you what to think.  That is a SAD way to live man. . . . . . . I have a 14" progressive barrel that is just as acurate as my 21" however I would never use it as it makes over twice as much noise!!!! . . . Don't belive it?  Want to be a SHEEP to the masses of children who want to justify buying that $150 barrel or $300 kit?  GO ahead.  Want to know the TRUTH?  TRY IT YOURSELF.

If I get the gist of this reply, it is forget the science because this is what I say I saw with a little additional name calling/insults ("sheep" and "sad way to live" from this post and "fools" and "feebs" from the previous post) thrown in because we all know that name-calling equates to logical discussion.  For added emphasis some bold print was added to indicate yelling because everyone knows whoever makes the loudest noise must be right (end sarcasm).  I wasn't sure how to reply then I realized all I had to do was quote EEs reply to RedDragon from a different thread.

Evil Elvis wrote: I love when peopleget slapped with Facts and Science and go to the "well from what I saw..." Facts are Facts Your statements are Opinions. While Opinions are good they dont beat Hard Facts.

And e-shouting, insults, and name-calling don't make the opinions any more correct or add crediblity to the one who is presenting them in that manner. 

Edited Notes:  I just had to come back to comment on these statements.

RedDragon1313 wrote: . . . get a barrel that has a great fit to the paint . . . .REmember, too big is better than too small, THAT can cause more breaks . . . .

Yes because shoving a sphere that is designed to break open through a tube that is to small for it won't cause it to break.  (end sarcasm)

RedDragon1313 wrote: (P.S. You "no sniper" guys better tie yourselves to something before you stop believing in gravity and fly off the face of the Earth.  After all, if you SAY it doesn't exist it must be the truth right?)

Using this logic the inverse must be true is well; merely saying that something exists (i.e. paintball snipers) means it must be true.  Two things:

• This "logic" does not support your position or arguments well.
• Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny are real.  Having made this statement, it follows, based on your netiquette that you will be getting a lump of coal and rabbit pellets when these holidays roll around.
• The following is the manufacturers description for the Core ZX paintball pistol:
• The solid and sleek design of the new ZX is marker perfection. Everything you ever wanted in a paintball gun. Its fully enclosed design eliminates the need for a loader and gives you the light and maneuverable heft you crave. Load, aim, and think Matrix and the next John Woo film. Its fly-through-the-air aluminum frame and quick-and easy, removable clips make it a force to be reckoned with.
• The marketing hype does not make either the Matrix or John woo films suddenly spring into reality.
  

-------------

Rambino wrote: As you may have gathered by now, sniper discussions can quickly get heated.  I encourage all new users to tread lightly on this subject.

You were warned.

TippmannBro wrote: rvieira wrote: Rambino wrote: As you may have gathered by now, sniper discussions can quickly get heated.  I encourage all new users to tread lightly on this subject. You were warned. And yet they still persist. And what kills me is the fact that there are experienced forumers who HATE the thought of paintball snipers so much that they will go out of their way to make life miserable for the poor kid who believes he is a paintball sniper. If he wants to continue to believe something after several of us have already told him the truth about snipers, then LET HIM! He will find out soon enough from his own unsuccessful attempts that sniping doesn't work in paintball. Otherwise, you are just continuing a pointless argument that you already know will spiral out of control and get someone kicked off this forum. In my opinion, that is just as goofy as starting a sniper thread in the first place.

• It's not about altering the beliefs of the "paintball snipers," it's about countering their drivel with facts so other newbs are provided information that may keep them from following the same dark path.
• Anyone who gets so "out of control" during any debate on an internet forum that they "get kicked off" deserves it. (And probably should do some serious growing up before they come back.)
• I enjoy the debates.
• Subnote:  I enjoyed the debates more previously when we used to get a few "snipers" who argued more effectively.
  

carl_the_sniper wrote: Zomg my 21" freak barrel is more accurate than my 10" stock barrel cause of the length, I have done tests.

You should not bother Carl man, there is no reason for YOU to get bashed too!  It seems YOUR PERSONAL experiences are not valid to some people and as a result the results you personally experience with your set-up are meaningless to these few people who have made it thier personal task to drive anyone who disagrees with them off the forum by following them and picking apart thier every post, bashing them relentlessly.

It seems that these few paintball masters (or so they believe) are GREAT at referencing supposed scientiffic facts, tests and theories even when they state NONE of the ACTUAL references or equations involved or misquote them or apply them to TOTALY different circumstances.  Just the application of some of these supposed "facts" to PAINTBALLS adds so many additional variables to the equations that they are no longer valid under the circumstances.  Attempting to apply scientiffic principals written and tested on perfectly spherical SOLID objects with an unchanging shape and consistant surface texture, weight and internal composition to PAINTBALLS is just a gross misrepresentation of facts (NONE of which have EVER been accuratly stated by the way).

It also seems that the fact that every situation adds additional variables and that these differences in equipment will yeald different results is beyond them as well.  They believe if someone posted it in a forum somewhere it must be true for everyone everywhere no matter what marker or set-up they use. (IF they agree with the statement in the first place that is, if they do NOT agree with it then it is summarily ignored no matter how many people report the results)

Carl man, if your 21" is more accurate on YOUR marker, shown through simple, easily reproducable scientiffic tests where the ONLY variable changed is the barrel.  Then use it and leave these guys to their ego trip.

As to MY tests, did ANYONE say that MY tests were NOT conducted in a scientiffic manner or with proper scientiffic methods?  NO.  They were by the way and are easily reproducable, on the spot, as they have been for several others who doubted the results and NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON has EVER left with ANY doubt that the results were accurate. The difference in sound level in each of the 5 barrels we have tested was so great that the human ear could EASILY differentiate between them, even blindfolded.  The 21", ported for silence, reduced the forward projecting muzzle noise so greatly that the sound the paintball made moving through the air was LOUDER at 30ft.  Also the accuracy increased with each additional length increase up to 16".  Over that the only difference was the decrease in forward projecting muzzle noise.  If someone EVER produces a barrel in my presence that reduces the forward sound as much or more than the 21" I currently use, I WILL test it myself on MY marker to see if the results will be the same for me. I have yet to find ANY barrel ANYWHERE to equal its silence by the way, not saying they don't exist, I just have never found one yet but when I DO, I will switch that very day and report my results to anyone. 

I am NOT close-minded and will test personally, anything that could imporve my marker for the purpose I use it.

SO, as I have said many times, don't believe me, fine, I could care less.  Want to know the truth for YOU in your own personal situation with your own speciffic set-up?

TEST IT YOURSELF (additional size in this instance does NOT represent "yelling" but shows the importance of the statement to the writer)

Do not be a sheep and listen to people who demand that you believe them because they "say so" or that resort to bashing others because they have found differing results than these few INSIST are the one-and-only truth.  You will find that most of the time they are dead wrong, as you and your 21" have shown Carl and I am shure as you can prove to others, on the spot, in real life (not because you READ it on some forum) over and over again with easily and consistently reporducable results.  I do not plan to throw away MY 21" because some ego-tripping-wanna-be-basher tells me that it is not quieter than a 14" barrel when he has not even heard it for himself and knows NOTHING about MY barrel, its porting, size or brand and NOTHING about my personal marker set-up.

My advice to anyone new to paintball?  Test things for yourself and stay away from "advice" from ANYONE who attempts to DEMAND that you listed to only their "facts".  They are the ones that are most often DEAD wrong.

If you ask a question and someone attempts to make you feel like a fool for asking or DEMANDS that you only listen to THEM because only THEY are right, then you didn't ask the wrong question, you asked the wrong person!

Um, I am curious exactly WHERE in my last post I mentioned snipers?  This discussion was about a barrel.

I only stated that if Carl DID have a 21" barrel and it was more accurate than the other barrels in his possetion then he should use it if he so desired in spite of some people telling him that he was wrong because "they said so".

As to why I use the 21" barrel, (like it is any of YOUR business anyway?) it is NOT for any accuracy increase(NEVER said it was), it is because it is THE MOST SILENT barrel I have ever used as well as the fact that the baracades and brush piles in my location make using the longer barrel a postitve factor as you can shoot through brush thick enough to completely protect you from incomming fire.  No need to expose any of yourself or your marker to shoot over or arround.  No need to give advance warning you are about to shoot by having to move to get the shot.  It is not right for everyone on every field, but it is the right choice for my style of play in the woods we play in.

No ammount of your name calling or bashing or "you are wrong because I said so" will change the fact that my barrel IS quieter than any barrel I have EVER seen on a 98C nor will it make it any harder for me to shoot through a brush pile thick enough to stop incomming paintballs.  For me the benifits far outweigh the added length.  It does NOT require more air to use and the length does NOT cause me any problems during play, in fact it is more confortable in the woods for me as it more closly matches the rifles I grew up hunting in the same woods with! (especially since I added the foregrip shroud so I can hold it more like a rifle giving me a more narural sight picture and a more solid grip).  The more comfortable you are with your marker the better your accuracy will become and the more confidence you will have.  I have yet to find a situation where the additional length caused me ANY problem at all!

So go ahead and take this post apart too, gratify yourselves and your childish egos with a little more name calling and bashing, hunt down my every post if that gets your freak on, but don't expect anyone to ever care what you have to say or to respect your opinions.  You only show your immaturity with bullying tacatics like that.  You give this forum and paintball players in general a bad name by doing so. 

How many new players have you insulted?

How many old players have you insulted?

How many people have you driven off of this forum because they didn't agree with your every word?

How many people have left this forum because they were tired of watching you abuse other people for your own personal gratification?

Is this YOUR forum? 

Do YOU pay for it?

So, You guys want to attempt to drive yet another person off the forum because they do not agree with everything YOU say IMMEDIATLY when you demand it?  Well you can just look elsewhere, your name calling and bashing will only continue to prove to the intelligent readers that you are only in it for the ego boost you seem to get from ATTEMPTING to make someone else feel bad while others are attempting to help people make thier own decisions about what will work best for them.  Go find someone your own childish age to bother and leave the adults alone.

Reddragon, I actually feel bad for making that joke after you made such a polite reply.

I would also feel bad though, if I lied and gave you the wrong information.

In my joke, the idea was that it was a high quality but long barrel vs a low quality but short barrel.

In reality, your experiment would have to be conducted using the same brand and model of barrel to be remotely accurate. Obviously a 21" freak will be more accurate than a 10" stock barrel because it is a higher quality barrel... length has nothing to do with it. To be a proper experiment for this, you must change the barrel length, not the barrel.

I understand about having a long barrel to poke through obstacles, and if that works for you, all power to ya.

It may be quieter but that has more to do with brand and model than length. If you think that it is your quietest barrel and that means alot to you, than use it, I am just saying that you are incorrect in believing that it is because of length.

Also, there is a giant difference between hunting and proper paintball play. Few principles are shared between the two.

In closing: If the barrel works for you, than you shouldn't give a crap what others think. Just don't expect people here who have had these arguments thousands of times to agree with you. Don't forget that many people, including me were on the opposite side of it at one point. We sided with the logic that made sense to us, you are free to your own opinion also.

Snake probably covered some of this while I was editing in Word, but since it's already done and it took a while, I'm going to post it anyways.

RedDragon1313 wrote: carl_the_sniper wrote: Zomg my 21" freak barrel is more accurate than my 10" stock barrel cause of the length, I have done tests.   You should not bother Carl man, there is no reason for YOU to get bashed too!  It seems YOUR PERSONAL experiences are not valid to some people and as a result the results you personally experience with your set-up are meaningless to these few people who have made it thier personal task to drive anyone who disagrees with them off the forum by following them and picking apart thier every post, bashing them relentlessly.  Please turn on your sarcasm detector.  Carl was making a joke and I was (in my own sarcastic way) acknowledging the improvement in Carl’s humor during his tenure on the forum.  It was, in essence, a compliment. It seems that these few paintball masters (or so they believe) are GREAT at referencing supposed scientiffic facts, tests and theories even when they state NONE of the ACTUAL references or equations involved or misquote them or apply them to TOTALY different circumstances.  Okay: The “spike pressure” (amount of pressure actually interacting with the paintball when the trigger is pulled) of paintball markers is divided into low and high categories.  Low is defined as in the 50-75 PSI range and high is defined as in the 75-100 PSI range.  Spike pressures below 50 PSI produce insufficient pressure to reach minimal effective velocities (250 fps) while those over 100 PSI tends to cause the ball to “explode” in the barrel.  High spike pressure markers are referred to as “poppers” because they accelerate the paintball quickly with a short burst of gas while markers with lower spike pressures can be called “pushers” because they get the ball up to speed slower with a gas release of longer duration.  Because each of these valve types accelerate the paintball in a different manner, different barrel lengths are most effective with each.  Poppers work best with 6 to 10 inch barrels, while pushers work better with 9 to 13 inch barrels. The reason for this is that the ball stops accelerating the moment it leaves the barrel.  The marker can only affect the paintball up to this point.  Under ideal circumstances the ball should be still accelerating as it leaves the muzzle as this provides a slight range advantage over balls that are already decelerating as they leave the barrel.  Too short a barrel fails to provide directional stability much beyond 50 yards and due to the higher spike pressure required for acceleration up to playing velocity is both inefficient and tends to break more paint. Too long a barrel creates added friction which requires additional spike pressure to overcome.  This is also gas inefficient and can result in breaks.  Additionally, when the barrel is to long for the marker’s valve, there is a tendency for erratic velocities and, because the ball is already slowing down when it leaves the marker, reduced range. These problems can be overcome by selecting a slightly larger or smaller than needed bore size if one just has to have an extra long or short barrel, but intentionally selecting a bore size that is slightly off in either direction from the paint being used brings along its own set of problems that must be dealt with (i.e. accuracy, efficiency, friction, breakage). The above information was from the article “High Tech Barrel Theory” by R. Maynard.  It was originally published in APG and was reprinted in Ultimate Guide to Paintball. Additional opinions on barrel length: Information provided by Otter’s Customs lists the optimum barrel length as 10 to 14 inches. According to About.com, barrels over 14 inches generally tend to hurt marker performance. The barrel theory article from “The Paintball Times” recommends an optimum barrel length of 12 to 13 inches. Just the application of some of these supposed "facts" to PAINTBALLS adds so many additional variables to the equations that they are no longer valid under the circumstances.  Translation:  If someone provides facts, then they are too complicated to be correct. Attempting to apply scientiffic principals written and tested on perfectly spherical SOLID objects with an unchanging shape and consistant surface texture, weight and internal composition to PAINTBALLS is just a gross misrepresentation of facts (NONE of which have EVER been accuratly stated by the way). Translation:  I refuse to acknowledge expert opinions and scientific tests. It also seems that the fact that every situation adds additional variables and that these differences in equipment will yeald different results is beyond them as well.  Translation:  It’s too complicated because there are so many variables so the right combination of different equipment must provide for something that isn’t supported or expected given the science and theory that already exists. McReply:  If that is so, then why would your personal opinions and experience be any more valid.  Additionally, why would you pass them off as gospel since, given the possible number of variables in your theory, the odds of them applying to anyone else are nil.  I’ll stick with the experts and science thank you. They believe if someone posted it in a forum somewhere it must be true for everyone everywhere no matter what marker or set-up they use. Translation:  The laws of physics don’t apply if you just believe hard enough. (IF they agree with the statement in the first place that is, if they do NOT agree with it then it is summarily ignored no matter how many people report the results) Translation:  I don’t like being disagreed with. Carl man, if your 21" is more accurate on YOUR marker, shown through simple, easily reproducable scientiffic tests where the ONLY variable changed is the barrel.  Then use it and leave these guys to their ego trip. Translation:  Good advice.  McReply:  If anyone (including RedDragon) is happy with their set up, then they should continue to use it and not worry about the opinions of others.  However, no matter how happy someone is with their equipment, they should not expect to be able to voice their opinions without realizing that there are others who disagree and will voice their opinions as well.  Nor should they expect those others to refrain from posting both their arguments and their supporting evidence.    As to MY tests, did ANYONE say that MY tests were NOT conducted in a scientiffic manner or with proper scientiffic methods?  NO.   Given that you have never, in numerous posts in several topics, explained the controls of your test, or even specified (as was pointed out earlier) the differences/similarities between the barrels tested or the equipment used to conduct the tests, it is a reasonable assumption.  Furthermore, your apparent acceptance of Carl’s humorous comparison between 21” Freak and a 10 inch stock barrel as “proof” casts additional doubt on your understanding of scientific/controlled testing. They were by the way and are easily reproducable, on the spot, as they have been for several others who doubted the results and NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON has EVER left with ANY doubt that the results were accurate. Translation: Unverifiable/undocumented anecdotes. The difference in sound level in each of the 5 barrels we have tested was so great that the human ear could EASILY differentiate between them, even blindfolded.  Translation:  The human ear is an adequate substitute for a decibel meter. The 21", ported for silence, reduced the forward projecting muzzle noise so greatly that the sound the paintball made moving through the air was LOUDER at 30ft.  Translation:  Further unverifiable/undocumented anecdotes which include possible evidence of an incomplete understanding of sound waves because of the assertions regarding “forward projecting muzzle noise.” Also the accuracy increased with each additional length increase up to 16".  Translation:  Credibility reducing claim considering the cited evidence which was presented earlier.  Also begs the question of how these measurable accuracy increases were measured/detected.  Also fails to mention the starting point of barrel lengths used in the test or the  incremental lengths used in testing.  I.e.  I tested a 2 inch barrel and a 16 inch barrel and " . . . accuracy increased with each additional length increase up to 16." Over that the only difference was the decrease in forward projecting muzzle noise.  If someone EVER produces a barrel in my presence that reduces the forward sound as much or more than the 21" I currently use, I WILL test it myself on MY marker to see if the results will be the same for me. I have yet to find ANY barrel ANYWHERE to equal its silence by the way, not saying they don't exist, I just have never found one yet but when I DO, I will switch that very day and report my results to anyone.  Translation:  Despite the fact that facts and expert opinions that counter mine have been demonstrated I will never change my mind unless personally forced to. I am NOT close-minded and will test personally, anything that could imporve my marker for the purpose I use it. Translation:  By stating that I am not close-minded, I get to infer indirectly that everyone who disagrees with me is.  SO, as I have said many times, don't believe me, fine, I could care less.  Then why do you keep ranting about it? Want to know the truth for YOU in your own personal situation with your own speciffic set-up? TEST IT YOURSELF (additional size in this instance does NOT represent "yelling" but shows the importance of the statement to the writer) Accepted that this was not meant as yelling.  For further reference be aware that the vast majority of the internet community does interpret larger print as shouting. Do not be a sheep and listen to people who demand that you believe them because they "say so" or that resort to bashing others because they have found differing results than these few INSIST are the one-and-only truth.  Translation:  Good advice.  Don’t listen to people who demand you believe them because they “say so,” listen to those that provide logical arguments supported by documented evidence.  Don’t listen to those who resort to bashing others (like calling them “sheep” and inferring that they are close-minded) because those are mere distractions as opposed to the use of logical, coherent arguments supported by evidence. You will find that most of the time they are dead wrong, as you and your 21" have shown Carl and I am shure as you can prove to others, on the spot, in real life (not because you READ it on some forum) over and over again with easily and consistently reporducable results.  Translation:  I mistook your humor for fact despite the glaring lack of any basis in science, but my opinion should still prevail.  I do not plan to throw away MY 21" because some ego-tripping-wanna-be-basher tells me that it is not quieter than a 14" barrel when he has not even heard it for himself and knows NOTHING about MY barrel, its porting, size or brand and NOTHING about my personal marker set-up. If you like your barrel, keep it.  No one is insisting that you throw it away.  What is happening is that others consider the information you are offering to be incorrect and are offering countering opinions.  Just as you are free to post your opinion, others are free to counter it.  Contrary to what some may believe, there is no winner or loser in this equation.  What there is, are opposing opinions for those uninvolved in the debate to consider and judge based on the presentation and support of each one.  Having debates such as these provides opposing opinions for others to consider and accept or disregard based upon their own judgement.  My advice to anyone new to paintball?  Test things for yourself and stay away from "advice" from ANYONE who attempts to DEMAND that you listed to only their "facts".  They are the ones that are most often DEAD wrong. Not bad advice, but not entirely correct either:  Testing for oneself can get very expensive very quickly given the vast number of choices available for paintball players.  Better advice would be to research, narrow down options, then find people who are already using those options and ask for both their opinions and an opportunity to borrow their equipment before spending ones own money.  If you ask a question and someone attempts to make you feel like a fool for asking or DEMANDS that you only listen to THEM because only THEY are right, then you didn't ask the wrong question, you asked the wrong person! I agree, someone should not be made to feel like a fool for merely asking a question.  I should also point out that although some immediately jumped into this thread with “sniper bashing,” the thread starter did receive a few upgrade suggestions as well.  Additionally no one here besides you is demanding that they be listened to.  They are however offering logical arguments and support for those arguments beyond the level of “this is what I saw and have to say.”

Regarding the original discussion as to barrel additional barrel length providing additional silencing effect:

Several facts to consider:

• Everyone here seems to agree that the report from the firing of a paintball marker is the result of still pressurized excess gas escaping from the barrel as the paintball departs the muzzle.
• The longest accepted barrel length before efficiency is affected is approximately 14” (as demonstrated by sources cited above).
• Once efficiency is affected, additional propellant is required to ensure that the ball departs the barrel at the desired velocity.
• If this propellant is not added, velocity and range will decrease.
• Adding this propellant will maintain velocity, but doing so also increases the amount of gas propelling the ball.
• This means that at a certain point (approximately 14” as mentioned above) further barrel length does not equal less gas pressure behind the ball.
• This additional initial pressure also increases the chance for balls to “explode” in the barrel as cited above.
• Combined with the additional friction from a longer barrel this could have negative consequences.
• These consequences could be avoided with a larger bore, but then efficiency, velocity and range are reduced further and compensation is needed for this as well.
• Conclusion regarding barrel lengths in excess of approximately 14 inches:
• They can increase the “silencing” effect as long as decreased velocity is not compensated for.
• This means the shooter can be quieter, but at the expense of having less range.
• The same effect can be achieved by using a shorter barrel and turning the velocity down on markers that use spring tension to control velocity.
• If the shooter wants to maintain an effective velocity, then any barrel length in excess of approximately 14 inches does not provide an advantage because of the additional propellant required to maintain velocity.  (In other words, the ball must always have a certain amount of gas behind it to leave at an adequate velocity and this amount of gas will always produce the same report despite additional length.)
  
• Disadvantages of such barrels include:
• Increased risk of breakage.
• Decreased gas efficiency.
• Potential for decreased range.
• Can be compensated for at the price of increased volume.
• Awkward in tight situations.
• Advantage – handy for poking through thick brush and firing from relative safety.

RedDragon1313 wrote: Um, I am curious exactly WHERE in my last post I mentioned snipers?  This discussion was about a barrel. Post before last. I only stated that if Carl DID have a 21" barrel and it was more accurate than the other barrels in his possetion then he should use it if he so desired in spite of some people telling him that he was wrong because "they said so". That was not how it came across, but if you say so, so be it. As to why I use the 21" barrel, (like it is any of YOUR business anyway?) it is NOT for any accuracy increase(NEVER said it was), it is because it is THE MOST SILENT barrel I have ever used as well as the fact that the baracades and brush piles in my location make using the longer barrel a postitve factor as you can shoot through brush thick enough to completely protect you from incomming fire.  No need to expose any of yourself or your marker to shoot over or arround.  No need to give advance warning you are about to shoot by having to move to get the shot.  It is not right for everyone on every field, but it is the right choice for my style of play in the woods we play in. The part I bolded for emphasis is probably the best statement Red has made.  Everyone should use what works best for them.  However, the decision before obtaining gear is what this discussion is about.  We are not necessarily telling Red that he has the wrong equipment so much as offering supported alternatives to what many consider to be incorrect information.  As a restatement, I consider any barrel length beyond approximately 14 inches to have negligible sound-dampening capabilities and significant disadvantages. Red does rightly point out, as I did above, that their are specific cover-related advantages to the longer barrel as well. No ammount of your name calling or bashing or "you are wrong because I said so" will change the fact that my barrel IS quieter than any barrel I have EVER seen on a 98C . . . I've tried to avoid name calling; I don't believe I've used the terms "fools" or "sheep" once. My sarcasm could be taken as "bashing," but it's just what I do.  (Sarcasm - just another of the many services I offer.)  If my sarcasm is the worst thing one encounters on the net, they should consider themselves lucky. Your barrel being quieter is your opinion, not a fact. Until you have compared it to every barrel ever made it will remain an opinion. . . . nor will it make it any harder for me to shoot through a brush pile thick enough to stop incomming paintballs . . . Which I recognize as the main advantage of extra long barrels. For me the benifits far outweigh the added length.  Then by all means, you should continue to use it. It does NOT require more air to use . . . Facts, and the logic extrapolated from those facts, say different. . . . and the length does NOT cause me any problems during play, . . . Glad to hear it. . . . in fact it is more confortable in the woods for me as it more closly matches the rifles I grew up hunting in the same woods with! (especially since I added the foregrip shroud so I can hold it more like a rifle giving me a more narural sight picture and a more solid grip). Good. Don't change your set-up.  No one has asked you to anyway. The more comfortable you are with your marker the better your accuracy will become and the more confidence you will have.  I agree. I have yet to find a situation where the additional length caused me ANY problem at all! You said this before. So go ahead and take this post apart too, . . . I'm not, I'm showing you the courtesy of answering you on a point by point basis.  If I have missed/combined points, I apologize, but would ask that in the future you separate them into the sections you wish considered as single points with included support for each one. . . . gratify yourselves and your childish egos with a little more name calling and bashing, hunt down my every post if that gets your freak on, . . . Weren't you just complaining about insults/bashing? . . . but don't expect anyone to ever care what you have to say or to respect your opinions.  I don't expect everyone to respect or believe my opinions every time. However, I do try to state and support my opinions in a manner that makes them both understandable and credible.  How each separate individual feels about them is up to each one of those individuals.  I'm sure that if others on this forum disagreed with my opinions and the logic behind them they would let me know. You only show your immaturity with bullying tacatics like that.  Supported logical refutation is just effective debating, not bullying. You give this forum and paintball players in general a bad name by doing so. Wow, all by myself? How many new players have you insulted? None, as I normally don't result to name-calling.  How many have been offended by either my natural sarcasm or upset by their inability to successfully refute my assertions is something that I don't know. No one has ever mentioned it to me, so if you do feel insulted, please let me know and explain exactly why you feel this way. How many old players have you insulted? See above. How many people have you driven off of this forum because they didn't agree with your every word? None.  It is an open paintball community.  It's not like I can collect the villagers, arm them with torches and pitchforks, and storm the castle.  If someone leaves because of something I said on here, then that is a maturity issue that they have to deal with themselves. How many people have left this forum because they were tired of watching you abuse other people for your own personal gratification? See above. Including ". . . for your own personal gratification." is an error of assumption in that you state your assumption as if it was a proven fact as opposed to merely your opinion. Is this YOUR forum? Not at all, I'm just a member of it like everyone else; including you. Do YOU pay for it? I'm fairly certain we both paid exactly the same entrance fee. So, You guys want to attempt to drive yet another person off the forum because they do not agree with everything YOU say IMMEDIATLY when you demand it?  I have no desire to drive anyone off of the forum. If someone wishes to state a position, then argue that position as fact, that is fine.  Everyone else however does have the right to state their counter-opinions and argue them as well. If someone is feeling "driven off" by this interaction it may be that they are more upset by their inability to successfully argue their position than by the specific actions of those they are interacting with. I don't believe anyone has ever demanded that you agree with them, they have merely provided arguments to counter yours. Well you can just look elsewhere, your name calling and bashing . . . Having not used the terms "sheep," "fools," or "childish" (see below) I plead not guilty. . . . will only continue to prove to the intelligent readers that you are only in it for the ego boost you seem to get from ATTEMPTING to make someone else feel bad while others are attempting to help people make thier own decisions about what will work best for them.  The intelligent readers, being intelligent, will make up their own minds based both on their currently held beliefs and their evaluation of the arguments offered on either side of the issue being discussed. The problem with your statement regarding "attempting to make their own decisions" is that no alternatives were offered until others chose to dispute some of your assertions. Go find someone your own childish age to bother and leave the adults alone. Weren't you complaining about name calling throughout this post?  I believe "childish" falls under that category as well. I believe I will continue to post where ever I want thank you very much.

Nice long post there mach, way to pick apat a post so completely for no other reason than to make someone else feel bad, did it make you feel powerfull?

Well, enough of that.

you want facts here are a few.

Care to know WHY a longer barrel would have a lower sound footprint in almost every situation?  It is simple physics.

FACT: a compressed gas released through a hollow tube will produce a sound.  Look it up.

FACT: The FREQUENCY of that sound will be determined by the diameter of the tube, its length and the thickness and type of material it is constructred from as well as the volume of gas passing through the tube as well as the pressure of the gas.  Look it up.

FACT: if all factors remain constant and length is added to the tube the frequency of the sound produced will be lower.  Look it up.

FACT: a lower frequency produced by the same volume of gas will produce a lower amplitude (loudness of the sound in this case).  A lower frequency requires a larger volume of gas to be moved to produce the same amplitude as a higher frequency.  (This is why a 1" pezio-electric speaker can produce a sound as loud as an 8" sub-woofer). Look it up.

FACT: Air is a poor conductor of sound waves.  As the frequency of a sound is lowered the sound will begin to loose cohesion more rapidly and disperce into the surrounding air.  A high frequency sound will maintain its properties far longer than a low frequency sound. (This is the reason bats use high frequency sound for echo-location, the high frequency sounds travel further and retain thier properties even after bouncing off of objects.)  Low Frequency sounds loose cohesion rapidly and the sound does not travel as far.  Look it up.

FACT: The human ear has more trouble gaining directional location as frequency is lowered while the source of higher frequency sounds are more easily detected.  (This is why the placement of the sub-woofer in your surround-sound system is irrelvant, the lower frequency sounds are more omni-directional and thier source is less detectable while the speakers producing the higher frequency sounds are aimed and thier distance input into the system to accuratly reproduce the movie sounds.)  Look it up.

Simple physics.

You lower the frequency by adding length to the barrel.  The lower frequency will be harder to gain a directional pinpoint on due to the physics of sound.  The sound produced will be lower due to the same volume of gas producing a lower frequency sound.  The lower frequency sound will disperce more rapidly and be quieter as you add distance from the source due to the physics of sound.

Now if you place a meter extremely near the source you will not register much difference (aka those "tests"?) but as you add distance the sound reduction will increase exponentially.  Look it up.

• This is true.
• However, we are discussing the sudden release of pressurized gas from behind a paintball once the ball exits the barrel of the marker, not the controlled release of air through a tube such as is found in musical instruments.
• Anyone who has played with a balloon knows the following:
• When releasing the air through the neck of the balloon, different sounds can be obtained by controlling both the shape of the opening and its size.  This is similar to a musical instrument.
• When the air is released by popping the balloon, the only factor that controls the sound made is how much air was in the balloon.  This is similar to the air behind a paintball decompressing rapidly as it exits the barrel.
• The entire hypothesis and remaining facts do not apply to the discussion at hand.

•     It started as a statement that all longer barrels were quieter based on the fact that I have an unspecified 21" barrel that is quieter than my 14 inch Progressive. This was supported by the statement that "the sound reduction qiality of a well ported barrel increases as length increases as the ports on the barrel allow the sound to escape a little at a time, in all directions, as the ball passes the ports" and "effective forward sound is reduced" which contains several obvious errors.
• Sound doesn't escape through ports, propellant does.  (Granted this may result in some sound.)
• All sound travels in all directions unless blocked and this includes the report from rapid gaseous release at the end of the barrel.  (If this wasn't true, only the people behind us would know when we passed gas.)
  
• When that didn't work, it became I did scientific tests and these other guys are just jerks.  Further reading reduced the credibility of the posters science skills based on his mistaking a joke as a scientifically proven fact and his calibrated instruments were human ears.
• Now, since the second approach failed as well, the argument has changed yet again.  The debate principal in use here seems to be if I keep forgetting about the unsuccessful approaches and keep trying new tactics, maybe something will work.
  

RedDragon1313 wrote: It seems that these few paintball masters (or so they believe) are GREAT at referencing supposed scientiffic facts, tests and theories even when they state NONE of the ACTUAL references or equations involved or misquote them or apply them to TOTALY different circumstances.

RedDragon1313 wrote: . . . get a mid sized bore on your barrel to give you the best all around "fit" and the fewest breakes.  REmember, too big is better than too small, THAT can cause more breaks and a loss in accuracy until you can clean your barrle out!

RedDragon1313 wrote: The extra length wil not give you any additional accuracy (the good fit between barrle and paint does that) but the LONG barle, prted for silence will make your marker a LOT quieter!!!!

RedDragon1313 wrote: As to needing more gas (making more noise?!?!) to push the balls out at the same speed?  THAT is the most bogus statement I have heard for a while.  The speed difference between a 14" and a 21" barrel of the same size is less than 10-15fps.  I wouldn't even adjust it up for that!

RedDragon1313 wrote: . . . if you place a meter extremely near the source you will not register much difference (aka those "tests"?) but as you add distance the sound reduction will increase exponentially.  Look it up.

Mack wrote: Regarding the facts listed above: RedDragon1313 wrote: . . . get a mid sized bore on your barrel to give you the best all around "fit" and the fewest breakes.  REmember, too big is better than too small, THAT can cause more breaks and a loss in accuracy until you can clean your barrle out! Obviously incorrect. I invite anyone who agrees with the above statement to explain their position.

I will play devil's advocate and defend his statement. For clarification I think he means it is better to have a larger bore size than the paint that you use.

While using a tight paint to bore match will be the most accurate, if a ball breaks in the barrel you will have a tremendous decrease in accuracy. If your barrel has a larger bore than the paint you will be able to shoot through the break easier, or at least continue playing with a lesser decrease in accuracy.

Of course I would prefer the better match, increased accuracy, and just using a squeegie for a bad break that effects how accurate my shots are.

Mack wrote: However, we are discussing the sudden release of pressurized gas from behind a paintball once the ball exits the barrel of the marker, not the controlled release of air through a tube such as is found in musical instruments.

No one mentioned musicial instruments mack, your ATTEMPT at misdirection and misquotation of facts will not work here.  It it is a simple scientific FACT that ANY volume of gas released through a tube at ANY pressure WILL produce a sound of a speciffic frequency and the longer the tube (with volume and pressure of gas remaining the exact same) the lower the frequency and the lower the amplitued(loudness of the sound).  It is simple physics no matter WHAT the volume or pressure of the gas is.  Care to make a little test?  Go get yourself a .22 pistol and a .22 rifle (or ANY pistol/rifel combo that will fire the same ammunition).  Get a decible meeter if you desire (although you will not need it considering the VAST difference of sound you will experience)  Purchase a box ammunition and load one in each weapon.  They WILL produce the EXACT same ammount of expanding gas and expel the exact same projectile through a barrel of the exact same diameter.  Test the sound made!  The pistol WILL produce a higher pitch and VASTLY louder sound than the rifle.  It is simple physics.  The difference?  LONGER BARREL.

Mack wrote: Anyone who has played with a balloon knows the following: When releasing the air through the neck of the balloon, different sounds can be obtained by controlling both the shape of the opening and its size.  This is similar to a musical instrument. When the air is released by popping the balloon, the only factor that controls the sound made is how much air was in the balloon.  This is similar to the air behind a paintball decompressing rapidly as it exits the barrel. The entire hypothesis and remaining facts do not apply to the discussion at hand.

You are RIGHT, the "example" of a balloon popping does NOT apply to the duscussion here!!!!  Your second attempt at misdirection and your misquotation of facts will not work here either!   YOUR "example" of a balloon popping is so filled with holes it simply won't hold air at all.  It is no wonder you are so confused.  First of all, a balloon poping is NOTHING like forcing compressed gas through a tube.  Second, the frequency of the sound of a balloon poping is NOT regulated ONLY by the ammount of gas in it!!!! (How sad for you if you believe this) Assuming that the exact same volume of air is used the frequency and volume of the sound is changed by the size of the balloon, the thickness of the balloon's walls, the pressure of the gas inside at the speciffic volume,  even the temprature of the balloon's material and atmosphereic pressure where you pop it will make a difference and YES IT IS ALSO changed by the SHAPE of the balloon.  That is a LOT more factors than your "the only factor that controls the sound made is how much air was in the balloon".  It is a simple fact of physics that almost any 6 year old who had played with balloons could tell you.  The same ammount of gas in a larger balloon will produce a quieter lower pitch "pop" than a smaller balloon with the same ammount of gas.   

It seems you wish to pull ONE varriable from an equation and base an arguement on it TOTALLY disreguarding every other factor.  As a result your logic is flawed. Again.

Mack wrote:   It started as a statement that all longer barrels were quieter

I NEVER said ALL longer barrells were quieter, but that a longer barrel that was ported for silence will be quieter than a shorter barrel with the same porting or a barrel that is not ported with silence as the desired result. My statement was that a longer barrel barrel, well ported for silence, will produce less sound than one that does not posses these qualities.  That statment is true. I have a 14" progressive barrel (of the same brand and bore by the way, I NEVER said it was NOT the same brand, you just assumed that).  It is NOT ported with silence in mind and it is a full 7" shorter and as a result of these TWO properties it produces EXTREMELY more sound than the 21" barrel.  NO "meeter" is needed when the difference is this great.  That is like saying you need a meeter to tell what is louder, a .22 rifle or a .357 magnum pistol.  If your hearing is so bad that you can not tell the difference between the level of sound produced by two vastly different lengths of barrels you may need a hearing aid. 

Mack wrote: Sound doesn't escape through ports, propellant does.  (Granted this may result in some sound.)

So what IS is Mack?  Sound dosen't escape or some sound DOES escape?  AGAIN with the misquotation of "fact"?  Not to mention the FACT that if propellant is escapeing through the ports then there is less propellant escaping from the muzzel end of the marker therfore producing less SOUND.  And if there IS sound escapeing then there is less sound to escape from the muzzel of the marker.

Mack wrote: All sound travels in all directions unless blocked and this includes the report from rapid gaseous release at the end of the barrel.  (If this wasn't true, only the people behind us would know when we passed gas.)

AGAIN with the misquotation of FACT and misapplication of a principal!  FIRST OF ALL the barrel its self blocks the sound from every direction except the front!  If ALL sound were TOTALLY omnidirectional no matter the source then how does echo-location work?  You AGAIN pull ONE factor out of context and ATTEMPT to appy it to unrelated circumstances. AND AGAIN, this is simple scientific FACT that you can prove EASILY at home!  Get yourself a firearm.  Stand beside the shooter(a good 5-10 feet away), as far forward as you can go WITHOUT getting in FRONT of the shooter!(NEVER, EVER, EVER place yourself in FRONT of a live firearm, EVER)  Have them fire off a few rounds and then move BEHIND the shooter (again a good 5-10 feet behind, the same distance as you use before).  You will notice a VAST difference in the sound produced!  Do this with your paintball marker as well where you CAN stand in front of it, have your buddy shoot a few shots past your head from 10 feet away and then have him turn around and fire off a few from the same distance away from you (get a meeter of your hearing is bad enough you need that hearing-aid).  Get BEHIND your buddies old junker car, the one that backfires all the time.  Have him pop one off, then stand in front of the car. Head down to your local fire depertment and beg the guys to sound the siren for you, get in front of the engine and then get behing it.   Turn your sterio speakers around backward, or just put it in the middle of the room and walk arround it.  The list goes on and on but this has to be one of the most foolish attempts at misquotation of fact yet.  Not even bringing in the fact that the directional quality of sound changes as FREQUENCY changes.  Simple physics of sound.  

Mack wrote: calibrated instruments were human ears.

Note: when almost all of the scientiffic principals of the physics of sound were written the ONLY instruments available were HUMAN EARS.  When the difference in decible levels are so great that the different sounds are EASILY identifiable, even BLINDFOLDED and the results are CONSISTANTLY reproducable a "meeter" is not needed unless you are just one of those people that MUST know EXACTLY how vast the difference is.  For this discussion, if the difference is OBVOUSLY noticable to the human ear CONSISTANTLY then the benifits will be noticable on the field (where the ony instruments reading the sounds will BE HUMAN EARS)  Wwe are not dealing with tenths of decibles but tens of decibles. Also, see above reference to hearing aids.

Mack wrote: RedDragon1313 wrote: It seems that these few paintball masters (or so they believe) are GREAT at referencing supposed scientiffic facts, tests and theories even when they state NONE of the ACTUAL references or equations involved or misquote them or apply them to TOTALY different circumstances.

AGAIN in this post you repeatedly attempt to misquote science or apply principals to totally incorrect circumstances to confuse people and make yourself SEEM right reguardless of actual fact.  The above statement seems valid to me.

Mack wrote: RedDragon1313 wrote: . . . get a mid sized bore on your barrel to give you the best all around "fit" and the fewest breakes.  REmember, too big is better than too small, THAT can cause more breaks and a loss in accuracy until you can clean your barrle out! Obviously incorrect. I invite anyone who agrees with the above statement to explain their position.

I believe AGAIN you attempt to misquote, ME this time.  As explained above by the devil's advocate, HE at least took the time to read the post to understand it'e meaning before posting about it, Thank you for that man, it is appreciated).  If you are unable to afford a kit or don't want to bother with changing inserts, getting a barrel with a slightly larger bore than the average diameter of paint you most often use will be better than getting one SMALLER than the average size of the paint you most often use (or can afford).  If your barrel is consistantly SMALLER than your paint you will have more breaks, decreasing your accuracy and requireing you to clean you barrel more often.  Also every ball that breaks in your barrel is one more that will NEVER have any CHANCE to hit your target, even if it is a little less accurate.  That information is COMPLETELY 100% correct.  I invite ANYONE to show me a flaw in this information.

Mack wrote: RedDragon1313 wrote: The extra length wil not give you any additional accuracy (the good fit between barrle and paint does that) but the LONG barle, prted for silence will make your marker a LOT quieter!!!! Previously explained as incorrect using a logical series of steps based on cited information on how markers operate. (Short version - once a certain barrel length is reached, additional gas must be added just to maintain velocity so the pressure behind the ball does not decrease beyond that barrel length which is commonly accepted to be approximately 14".)

Um, NOT explained as incorrect, in FACT EXPLAINED as CORRECT, TESTED in real life situations as correct with results that are consistantly and easily reproducable.  A longer barrel ported well for silence has been reported by EVERYONE to be quieter than a shorter one NOT ported for silence.  Your logic is flawed and your logical progression flawed as well.

Mack wrote: RedDragon1313 wrote: As to needing more gas (making more noise?!?!) to push the balls out at the same speed?  THAT is the most bogus statement I have heard for a while.  The speed difference between a 14" and a 21" barrel of the same size is less than 10-15fps.  I wouldn't even adjust it up for that! Admits that longer and quieter barrels suffers from efficiency and range issues.

Hmm, misquoted AGAIN, the statement represents the fact that the loss of fps at the same volume of gas from a barrel 7 INCHES LONGER is so miniscule that many marker have a variance from shot to shot that is LARGER.  Many co2 set-ups will show a difference of 10-15fps from shot to shot, not to mention the fact that simply shooting a different size of paint can create a difference of 10-20fps!  Again, the loss of fps is so small I wouldn't even adjust my marker up. (and YES I tested the fps difference with a meeter)

Mack wrote: RedDragon1313 wrote: . . . if you place a meter extremely near the source you will not register much difference (aka those "tests"?) but as you add distance the sound reduction will increase exponentially.  Look it up. Show us.  If you have this piece of paintball data available link to it or cite it so we can see it for ourselves.

OMG, this is not "paintball" data, it is simple physics of SOUND, LOOK IT UP.  Lower frequency sound disperces in the atmosphere MUCH more rapidly than higher frequency sound. (NOT EVEN MENTIONING THE TREES IN A WOODSBALL GAME) High frequency sound travels further through air, it is simple physics of sound.  Low frequency sound travels a shorter distance through the air.  It is simple fact.

If previous "tests" of the sound output on a speciffic marker using different lengths of barrel were conducted with the meeter within 3 feet of the marker the results would be VASTLY different if the meeter were at 20 feet and even more at 30 or 40 ft!!!!!!!  It is simple physics.

Edited Addition:

I realized I should add a few things.

Red accused me of misquoting his statement concerning the relationship between bore size and paint.  I did not; I quoted it word for word.  But, upon reviewing the original post, I do feel that I misinterpreted it.  The reread convinced me that Red was actually referring to bore size when he said bigger is better and I apologize for my mistake.

Red accuses me of misquoting a second time (shown immediately below this paragraph) and is again incorrect as my quote was word for word.  In this case, I believe that Red meant to say that I misinterpreted him.  In this case I will stick by my interpretation of his statement as lower velocity does result in less range and, as I cited earlier from the article by Maynard, too long a barrel can also result in erratic velocities which affect consistency and thus accuracy.

RedDragon1313 wrote: Mack wrote: RedDragon1313 wrote: As to needing more gas (making more noise?!?!) to push the balls out at the same speed?  THAT is the most bogus statement I have heard for a while.  The speed difference between a 14" and a 21" barrel of the same size is less than 10-15fps.  I wouldn't even adjust it up for that! Admits that longer and quieter barrels suffer from efficiency and range issues. Hmm, misquoted AGAIN, the statement represents the fact that the loss of fps at the same volume of gas from a barrel 7 INCHES LONGER is so miniscule that many marker have a variance from shot to shot that is LARGER.  Many co2 set-ups will show a difference of 10-15fps from shot to shot, not to mention the fact that simply shooting a different size of paint can create a difference of 10-20fps!  Again, the loss of fps is so small I wouldn't even adjust my marker up. (and YES I tested the fps difference with a meeter)

Assuming a field limit of 280 fps, the 10 to 15 fps range difference that Red mentions above equates to a maximum range variation of approximately 4 feet when the marker is held level.  When the marker is elevated at a 31 degree angle (maximum effective elevation for additional range) the maximum range variation becomes approximately 9 feet.  At ranges of 50 feet or less, such variations or other factors that can decrease accuracy (unless extreme) have a minimal affect on accuracy, beyond that it increases in relation to range.

Facts and calculations used for the previous paragraph come from various pages of this http://home.comcast.net/%7Edyrgcmn/pball/paintball.html - website .

I also feel compelled to respond to the following statement:

RedDragon1313 wrote: Mack wrote: All sound travels in all directions unless blocked and this includes the report from rapid gaseous release at the end of the barrel. (If this wasn't true, only the people behind us would know when we passed gas.) AGAIN with the misquotation of FACT and misapplication of a principal!  FIRST OF ALL the barrel its self blocks the sound from every direction except the front!  If ALL sound were TOTALLY omnidirectional no matter the source then how does echo-location work?  You AGAIN pull ONE factor out of context and ATTEMPT to appy it to unrelated circumstances. AND AGAIN, this is simple scientific FACT that you can prove EASILY at home!  Get yourself a firearm.  Stand beside the shooter(a good 5-10 feet away), as far forward as you can go WITHOUT getting in FRONT of the shooter!(NEVER, EVER, EVER place yourself in FRONT of a live firearm, EVER)  Have them fire off a few rounds and then move BEHIND the shooter (again a good 5-10 feet behind, the same distance as you use before).  You will notice a VAST difference in the sound produced!  Do this with your paintball marker as well where you CAN stand in front of it, have your buddy shoot a few shots past your head from 10 feet away and then have him turn around and fire off a few from the same distance away from you (get a meeter of your hearing is bad enough you need that hearing-aid).  Get BEHIND your buddies old junker car, the one that backfires all the time.  Have him pop one off, then stand in front of the car. Head down to your local fire depertment and beg the guys to sound the siren for you, get in front of the engine and then get behing it.   Turn your sterio speakers around backward, or just put it in the middle of the room and walk arround it.  The list goes on and on but this has to be one of the most foolish attempts at misquotation of fact yet.  Not even bringing in the fact that the directional quality of sound changes as FREQUENCY changes.  Simple physics of sound.

I included the entire quote to both ensure accidental misquoting and to note that every example above contains uncontrolled factors of distance and shielding.  I add the following regarding the “omnidirectional” nature of sound:

“Sound waves, however, move in three dimensional space like a rapidly expanding balloon.  Sound waves are spherical waves that move outward from the source.”

Physical Science, seventh edition, by B. W. Tillery, copyright 2007.

Earlier in this discussion, I mentioned the point of diminishing returns in trading barrel length for silencing effect.  Part of the reason for this is that a certain air pressure is always necessary behind the ball to maintain velocity in the barrel; another part is because of the relationship between energy and sound.  Basically, significant changes in energy are required to achieve lesser changes in perceived sound. The below is also from Mr. Tillery.

“The relationship between perceived loudness and the intensity of a sound wave is not a linear relationship. In fact, a sound that is perceived as twice as loud requires ten times the intensity, and quadrupling the loudness requires a one-hundred-fold increase in intensity.”

Red, judging by some of the terminology he applies to those that disagree with him, seems to be taking this debate personally.  I felt that I should add the following in case some of my rejoinders/actions have been misunderstood.

Nobody, well at least not me as I can’t definitely speak for others, is saying that you don’t have a very quiet marker.  As I have never listened to your marker or the ones you compared it to, I would never make such an assertion.  Conversely, as you have only used your marker and compared its sound signature with a very small percentage of all the marker/barrel combinations that are possible, making a blanket statement about what works, such as the one quoted below does raise issues:

RedDragon1313 wrote: . . . get the LONGEST barrle you can stand to use . . . .  . . .  the LONG barle, prted for silence will make your marker a LOT quieter!!!!

Making an apparently all-encompassing statement of fact based on one’s personal observations, especially when those observations are not in necessarily in accordance with current theory, will, at least on this forum, result in a debate about those observations and theories.  During such a debate those involved will attempt to support their assertions, there is nothing personal about this, it is just the nature of debate. If someone demands facts/support then dismisses what is offered by the opposition without offering anything to counter it, while resorting to name-calling, then that someone will most likely be treated in a manner that they might find offensive.

Frankly, if you had stuck with just saying “this is my observation” as opposed to “this is what you need to do,” making it obvious that what you were posting was opinion/observation as opposed to fact, my participation in this thread would probably have been limited to asking you a few questions about your marker system. (I am not opposed to having every stealth advantage in the woods, I just have certain trade-offs I am not willing to make.  I.e.  I tend to move as opposed to remain stationary and my 12” barrel is sometimes a hindrance in the cover I play in so going much longer would have to provide a serious advantage with minimal disadvantages.)

I think Mack that we have just about reached a point where we can agree to disagree.

I believe tat the sound reduction provided by a longer barrel is worth the potential disadvantages and you believe that the sound reduction is not worth the potential disadvantages.

This is mainly due to style preferences and I would agree with that.  If a person does not want EVERY silence benifit you can get, there is no need to go over 12" unless other factores make a longer barrel desireable to you.  But it silence is your main goal, you should explore the option on YOUR set-up.  In practicle application, I and many others have experienced an EASILY and VERY noticable difference in additional length and porting with silence as its desired result.

My statement about getting the longest barrel you can stand to use was based on the assumption that the person is looking for every single decible of sound reduction they can squeak out ot their marker without cranking their gas adjustment WAY down (which would be not only foolish but counter productive). 

I am sorry if I soudnd like I take a debate personally, but when I feel that facts are being misquoted or principals being misapplied I tend to make EVERY attempt to put forth opposing viewpoints and additional information.

Several times lately I have seen science misquoted, misapplied, or variables TOTALY left out to shift data in a arguement. I am not nessicarily talking about you here Mack, don't take THIS part personaly a LOT of people do it even when they do not mean to, they just dont think about the other factors involved when they read ONE varible being tested by an "expert".  MOST of the time people are quoting tests as "fact" and ignoring the fact that they were only testing ONE varriable in the total result (sometimes without conducting the tests in real life situations where added varriables make their "tests" inaccurate when applied in real life).  Most of the time statements like this are not only WRONG but have the exact OPPOSITE results or are meaningless when all the other variables in real life situations are added back into the equation.

One example is the often quoted "fact" added barrel length over 11" WILL NOT and CAN not add ANY accuracy to ANY paintball marker for ANYONE. 

(NOTE: I am NOT opening a debate about the topic HERE, but just inviting everyone to research and think about it one thier own.  I WILL NOT be replying to debate about this discussion HERE, I am mentioning it as an example of flawed logic resulting from pulling a SINGLE factor out of an equation and making that the basis for an argument about operations governed by MANY, MANY, MANY varriables, one being HUMAN involvement)

The quoted statement of FACT that is the basis for this statement(and I am NOT attempting to disagre with the fact here) is that the stability of the flight of a paintball is achieved with a barrel length of 11" and additional length will add no additional stability to the PROJECTILE.

SO, if you clamp a marker down in a vice where there are NO OTHER FACTORS involved AT ALL, there will be NO additional benifit in lengths over 11".

HERE is what people need to think about when quoting this fact in reference to accuracy.  The stability of the projectile is NOT EVEN CLOSE to the only factor in accuracy of a shot when the marker is fired by a person and different markers and total set-ups are involved. When you unclamp that marker and place it in the hands of a PERSON you add MANY, MANY, MANY additional factors and varriables that ALL affect accuracy.  You add the style of marker and the grip available due to its construction in concert with the physical make-up of the player and the stability they can achieve HOLDING the marker.  You add the weight of the marker, the movement of the internals of the marker during operation, the ballence of the total setup, the strength of the player, the skill level of the player, the comfort level of the player with the particular setup, the list goes on and on and is only limited by the number of different PEOPLE shooting a paintball marker multiplied by the total number of different markers and marker set-ups that possibly exist. 

The FACT is that where two barrels may offer the EXACT same stability in the projectile, one may offer a perticular person additional accuracy in practicle application due to other factors of the barrel combined with the particular marker they have and the set-up they currently use.  Added weight of a longer barrel may dampen recoil created by the internals or offer a better ballence on a marker without a drop-forward, INCREASING accuracy for the shoother on their set-up.  On the other hand, added length may make a marker with a drop-forward or a remote line VERY "nose heavy" and create added strain for the player REDUCING accuracy for the shooter.

The FACT of barrel length and how it affects accuracy will be a very personal thing and will depend on the player and the marker they use and how the have it set up, NOT ONLY by the stability it provides to the projectile.

Not many people have stated that additional barrel length adds additional stability to the paintball's flight, but MANY people have reported additional accuracy when switching to a longer barrle due to OTHER factors involved in the total set-up of their marker.  Even if they didn't understand WHY it added stability to their OPERATION of the MARKER (NOT the stability of the projectile).

Now before ANYONE goes off about long barrels and accuracy, I admit that MANY people have reported NO increase in accuracy with a barrel over 12" and some report increased accuracy when they moved to a shorter barrel.  As I said, MANY factors are involved, NOT just the stability of the paintball in flight (assuming the maximum stability has been reached and the barrel is over 11").  It is a PERSONAL thing and one that people will have to research for themselves and will depend on their set-up and the marker they use. 

My problem with this "statement" (or ANY similar statements based on a SINGLE fact where MANY are involved) is when people begin telling someone that a barrel over 11" WILL NOT and CAN NOT increase their accuracy in ANY way due to the ONE fact that additional length provides no additional stability to the flight of the paintball.  Accuracy, in practicle operation, is simply NOT regulated by a SINGLE fact like that. 

As I said, I just invite people to think about this EXAMPLE (not just about barrle length vs accuracy).  Think about what other factors are involved in the TOTAL operation being discussed and the practicle application of a system in REAL LIFE, BEFORE you INSIST that due to ONE fact or ONE varriable, a statment is ABSOLUTLY true for EVERYONE in EVERY situation.  Apply this progression of thought to your EVERY argument BEFORE you insist on making that quote of "fact" and telling someone it is the ONLY factor involved and NOTHING else could possibly affect the total end results.

I am not saying do not quote the fact or let people know about the tests, just do not make the assumption that you can take this ONE varriable or "test" and INSIST that due to this ONE fact that all other varriables have NO meaning in practicle application for EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE, in EVERY situation.

Wow.

Oh boohoo someone wants to be a sniper leave them to it.

I have yet to meet a new scenario player or a player who doesn't care about the physics and dictionary definitions of paintball and millitary terminology that hasn't said something about being a sniper. It's a word. It's the same as calling yourself a paintball god. You've all done it but of course your not really a god.

RedDragon1313 wrote: HERE is what people need to think about when quoting this fact in reference to accuracy.  The stability of the projectile is NOT EVEN CLOSE to the only factor in accuracy of a shot when the marker is fired by a person and different markers and total set-ups are involved. When you unclamp that marker and place it in the hands of a PERSON you add MANY, MANY, MANY additional factors and varriables that ALL affect accuracy.  You add the style of marker and the grip available due to its construction in concert with the physical make-up of the player and the stability they can achieve HOLDING the marker.  You add the weight of the marker, the movement of the internals of the marker during operation, the ballence of the total setup, the strength of the player, the skill level of the player, the comfort level of the player with the particular setup, the list goes on and on and is only limited by the number of different PEOPLE shooting a paintball marker multiplied by the total number of different markers and marker set-ups that possibly exist.

It is impossible to cater to all the variables you mentioned. The fact of the matter is, on a forum like this one, one cannot ask an individual whether his fat or short, weak or cross-eyed. The facts offered are for the variable being questioned e.g. barrels.

These facts need to be tested in a controlled environment. Or else everyone could call themselves a scientist, and this would be demeaning to the Einsteins and Newtons of the world.

However, you are right that every individual MUST keep an open-mind and assess the information given to him on this forum to cater to his own needs.

I must say, Red is the smartest sniper I have ever seen (or person defending snipers). I disagree with Snipers, however, I am not going to bother defending my opinion. Mack and Snake are doing a well enough job for me, and I dont feel like playing with pages full of copy pasta.