chownsy Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 They are far more likely to hear the whizz of the bb in "higer fps shots" anyway. aye but not many people can find a sniper from a whizz. Link to post Share on other sites
Schultz98 Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 none shall find me when i take them out with my RS svd, asuming I can find the right bb's to use to hit them haha Link to post Share on other sites
scar527 Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 aye but not many people can find a sniper from a whizz. well actually you can but.... Link to post Share on other sites
chownsy Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 well actually you can but.... not if your hidden well enough, they will know a rough direction but not the sniper Link to post Share on other sites
greg Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 They are far more likely to hear the whizz of the bb in "higer fps shots" anyway. Yup. Greg. Link to post Share on other sites
newcomer Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 As promised, I finally had the time to measure the weights of some bbs. Scale specs Make: SATRUE Model: SDM-1020 Series Country of origin: Taiwan Accuracy: +-0.001g Range: 0 - 20g WE .25 Match Grade 1).242 2).243 3).243 4).244 5).244 6).246 7).247 8).248 9).249 10).249 11).250 12).250 13).251 14).251 15).252 16).254 17).256 WE .3 Match Grade 1) WE .36 Sniper Grade 1).349 2).350 3).350 4).351 5).352 6).353 7).353 8).354 9).355 10).356 11).356 12).359 13).359 14).360 15).362 16).367 Golden Ball .2 1).196 2).196 3).199 4).199 5).199 6).200 7).200 8).200 9).200 10).200 11).202 12).202 13).203 14).205 15).207 16).207 17).207 18).209 19).211 SGM .29 1).281 2).282 3).283 4).284 5).284 6).284 7).285 8).285 9).286 10).286 11).287 12).287 13).288 14).288 15).288 16).289 17).289 18).293 19).295 Madbull .36 1).318 2).340 3).346 4).347 5).348 6).349 7).353 8).355 9).356 10).357 11).358 12).359 13).364 14).370 15).371 16).374 17).374 WE .25 Match Grade Mean Value (Average) = .248 Standard Deviation = Median Value = WE .3 Match Grade Mean Value (Average) = Standard Deviation = Median Value = WE .36 Sniper Grade Mean Value (Average) = Standard Deviation = Median Value = Golden Ball .2 Mean Value (Average) = Standard Deviation = Median Value = SGM .29 Mean Value (Average) = Standard Deviation = Median Value = Madbull .36 Mean Value (Average) = Standard Deviation = Median Value = I would appreciate if anyone can help me calculate the values? Link to post Share on other sites
greg Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 As promised, I finally had the time to measure the weights of some bbs. Scale specs Make: SATRUE Model: SDM-1020 Series Country of origin: Taiwan Accuracy: +-0.001g Range: 0 - 20g Good work. But, when measuring to that tolerance, did you take precautions against contamination? I would guess the moisture from your fingers could skew the figures some what. Greg. Link to post Share on other sites
chownsy Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 to work out the average its easy, the median is middle value E.g WE 0.25g = 0.249g Range = 0.242 - 0.256 = 0.014g Deviation = 0.250 - 0.242 = 0.008g 0.250 - 0.256 = 0.006g so average of the deviation is 0.007g Link to post Share on other sites
newcomer Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Chowsny I believe your formula is wrong. Correct me if I'm wrong. I am just simply too busy to sit down and punch all the numbers away, anyone who would be willing to do me a favor I owe you one lol. Edit: These are the bbs I had on hand when I took the measurements. If any of you would like me to make measurements you would have to mail me at least 20 rounds of your samples. I hope this little gesture of mine can contribute some to the airsoft community. Link to post Share on other sites
yee245 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 As I said i would over in the "Bioval .27 data" thread, here is my data from some measuring of the diameters of various BBs. I actually finished the measuring a couple days ago, but the data entry and processing took a little bit of time. As I don't want to post all of the actual measurements, since it would take up an absurd amount of space, I'm just posting the results. You will see that there is a considerable amount of data here, and then if you realize there are 125 measurements for each of the 20 types of BBs, that would take up more space than I care to take up. Also, I don't claim to have all that many types of BBs, though you will see the results from 20 types of BBs, so this is by no means a definitive list, especially since there are regional differences in availability of BBs. Just to explain my measuring procedure, I took 5 measurements on each BB after rotating them a bit between each measurement. Also, since I was making a lot of measurements, I made sure to check the zero every 5 BBs. Each time, it turned out to be within .001mm of the zero, so I assume the measurements are fairly accurate. One thing I did begin to think about is the potential reliability of the overall results, not necessarily related to deviation between different brands, but deviation from the "true" measurements. Since I am using a digital micrometer that relies on contact to make a measurement, and since there is relatively high precision in the measurements involved, it is possible that the micrometer is compressing the BB at the points of contact, resulting in potentially lower diameters than they would be if you measured with a device that did not use contact. Since all the measurements were taken the same way and "squeezed" the same amount, they should all be consistent with each other, which should be good enough for a potential comparison. There are going to be two sets of results. The first set will be the results from the raw data. For the second set, while it may not necessarily be all that scientific a method, I chose to "improve" the results of the SGMs by removing 3 outliers, since I noticed that there were 3 BBs in the group of 25 that were "clearly" out of place. These 3 BBs, for which there were 15 measurements, contained the 15 lowest values of the 125 total measurements. Because I took 3 BBs out of the data set, I figured I would see how it would affect all the other results, and so there will be two lists, each sorted by standard deviation. I only really consider this removal as not scientific, since the number was arbitrarily chosen based off the results of one type. Since the worst two types of BBs were .12g BBs (just to see how they would compare), and since they were actually so inconsistently bad, I didn't bother figuring out which 3 BBs were actual outliers, so there are no results from them in the second list. I also don't claim that the results here have enough data to be "correctly" done in terms of perper statistics, but it is meant more to give an idea of how BBs compare to each other. Anyway, here are the results (and hopefully they look right on your screen): Brand Weight Average Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum Difference Goldenball (Tracer) 0.20g 5.9282 0.00345 5.916 5.938 0.022 Inertia 0.20g 5.9406 0.00634 5.923 5.955 0.032 Maruzen 0.29g 5.9635 0.00747 5.940 5.974 0.034 Bioval 0.27g 5.8908 0.00802 5.874 5.908 0.034 Vanaras (Tracer) 0.25g 5.8942 0.00876 5.873 5.915 0.042 PHX 0.23g 5.9520 0.00876 5.929 5.970 0.041 Airsoft Elite 0.23g 5.9294 0.00892 5.909 5.945 0.036 Madbull 0.43g 5.9325 0.00924 5.903 5.952 0.049 P Force 0.30g 5.9453 0.00933 5.917 5.970 0.053 PHX 0.28g 5.9612 0.00949 5.928 5.976 0.048 Airsoft Elite 0.25g 5.9364 0.01010 5.903 5.957 0.054 Airsoft Elite 0.20g 5.9393 0.01271 5.905 5.966 0.061 Excel Bio 0.20g 5.8495 0.01364 5.818 5.890 0.072 Vanaras 0.36g 5.9284 0.01538 5.876 5.949 0.073 KSC 0.25g 5.9154 0.01692 5.882 5.960 0.078 Excel Bio (Tracer) 0.20g 5.8552 0.01729 5.795 5.887 0.092 Tokyo Marui (Tracer)* 0.20g 5.9340 0.02359 5.875 5.981 0.106 Stealth 0.25g 5.8815 0.02907 5.805 5.975 0.170 Crosman (Tracer) 0.12g 5.9184 0.03663 5.835 5.983 0.148 Walther (Tracer) 0.12g 5.9865 0.04316 5.825 6.077 0.252 With 3 outliers removed from each brand... Brand Weight Average Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum Difference Goldenball (Tracer) 0.20g 5.9283 0.00302 5.922 5.935 0.013 Maruzen 0.29g 5.9659 0.00398 5.957 5.974 0.017 Inertia 0.20g 5.9414 0.00558 5.930 5.955 0.025 Bioval 0.27g 5.8925 0.00678 5.875 5.908 0.033 Vanaras (Tracer) 0.25g 5.8939 0.00741 5.877 5.913 0.036 Madbull 0.43g 5.9344 0.00752 5.916 5.952 0.036 P Force 0.30g 5.9459 0.00767 5.932 5.970 0.038 PHX 0.28g 5.9632 0.00769 5.945 5.976 0.031 PHX 0.23g 5.9528 0.00776 5.933 5.970 0.037 Airsoft Elite 0.23g 5.9298 0.00835 5.911 5.945 0.034 Airsoft Elite 0.25g 5.9373 0.00883 5.920 5.957 0.037 Airsoft Elite 0.20g 5.9405 0.01028 5.915 5.966 0.051 Excel Bio 0.20g 5.8507 0.01030 5.830 5.881 0.051 Vanaras 0.36g 5.9311 0.01220 5.885 5.949 0.064 Excel Bio (Tracer) 0.20g 5.8585 0.01269 5.832 5.885 0.053 KSC 0.25g 5.9129 0.01517 5.882 5.956 0.074 Tokyo Marui (Tracer)* 0.20g 5.9350 0.02183 5.900 5.977 0.077 Stealth 0.25g 5.8826 0.02538 5.818 5.950 0.132 The reason for the asterisk on the TM tracer rounds is that it was from the little packet of tracer rounds that came with the TM tracer unit. It seemed rather odd that they would have such poor quality when 4 years ago, their tracer rounds were much better according to the Airsoft Mechanics comparison review. I do have some of the new and old TM tracer rounds, but have not opened them yet, so the results may "change." Link to post Share on other sites
kojak Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Update: Just ordered 2 2000 round bottles of javelin .36 bb's, as well as 2 new mags for my tanaka, a king arms hopup rubber, and a new striker spring. I will get reeports in on quality(sorry i dont have a caliper so i cant do consistancy testing), and whether or not they are a rebrand of Madbull. However, they do not have .4's. I am curious to see if they might(big if)be digicon under a different name, or even a totally new company. Well i am hoping they will be here by next friday, so i will test them then. Scar I got some of these Spartan/Javelin .36s for my WE M4 as a weight/visibility upgrade from my beloved BBBMAX .27s. The color is a bright teal green but I still find them hard to see compared to white in most light. If they are the same as Madbulls, at least they're cheaper for us DM types that fire in bursts. For fun I tried them out in my USP and it was outranging my stock AK74! AEX also had the bright orange Javelin .43s in stock for around $.01 per BB. Link to post Share on other sites
chownsy Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Chowsny I believe your formula is wrong. Correct me if I'm wrong. I am just simply too busy to sit down and punch all the numbers away, anyone who would be willing to do me a favor I owe you one lol. Edit: These are the bbs I had on hand when I took the measurements. If any of you would like me to make measurements you would have to mail me at least 20 rounds of your samples. I hope this little gesture of mine can contribute some to the airsoft community. Which formula is wrong??? Average = mean Middle value of results = Median deviation might be wrong as it was a guess Link to post Share on other sites
newcomer Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Your calculation for standard deviation that is. Link to post Share on other sites
yee245 Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Spreadsheets make these sorts of calculations easy, since calculating standard deviation ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation ) by hand would be tedious. Also, was it just me or were you missing the WE .30g Match Grade BBs? These numbers should be right if I didn't make any mistakes copying over the numbers from Excel. WE .25 Match Grade Mean Value (Average) = 0.2482 Standard Deviation = 0.00408 Median Value = 0.249 WE .3 Match Grade Mean Value (Average) = Standard Deviation = Median Value = WE .36 Sniper Grade Mean Value (Average) = 0.3554 Standard Deviation = 0.00496 Median Value = 0.3545 Golden Ball .2 Mean Value (Average) = 0.2022 Standard Deviation = 0.00430 Median Value = 0.200 SGM .29 Mean Value (Average) = 0.2865 Standard Deviation = 0.00350 Median Value = 0.286 Madbull .36 Mean Value (Average) = 0.3552 Standard Deviation = 0.01401 Median Value = 0.356 Edit: I may go weigh some of my own SGMs to see how my results compare to these ones. Link to post Share on other sites
newcomer Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Thanks a million my friend! You're right about the we.3 match grade, I missed that out. Will try to do more weight comparisons when I've more time. Edit: Yee, weigh it and let us know the results! Now if someone could send me the much disputed Madbull vs Devil samples for weighing... Link to post Share on other sites
yee245 Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Here are the measurements I just got for my SGMs. I'm kind of worried that my standard deviation and total deviation are both about half of newcomer's results. Also, I don't know if a 0.0004g difference in our averages would be a good indication that the results are fairly similar. I was using tweezers to pick the BBs out of the bag. Weight (g) 1 0.286 2 0.287 3 0.288 4 0.287 5 0.287 6 0.290 7 0.289 8 0.284 9 0.285 10 0.286 11 0.289 12 0.285 13 0.288 14 0.283 15 0.287 16 0.288 17 0.288 18 0.288 19 0.287 20 0.290 21 0.288 22 0.288 23 0.287 24 0.286 25 0.288 26 0.288 27 0.285 28 0.287 29 0.286 30 0.283 average 0.2869 std. dev. 0.00178 median 0.287 min 0.283 max 0.290 difference 0.007 Also, completely coincidental, I believe, but if you play around with the numbers a bit (since spreadsheets do make it easy to play around with stuff and get instant calculations) and you take only the first 19 BBs that I measured and compare it to the results from all 30, you get almost identical numbers, and identical if you round. The difference is (number of BBs, average, std dev, median): (19, 0.28695, 0.001779, 0.287) vs (30, 0.28693, 0.001780, 0.287). The numbers do bounce around in between those two, but it was interesting, since I originally just checked what the results for the first 19 BBs was due to newcomer's data only have 19 values. At some point, I'd probably like to do more testing with a much larger sample to make pretty graphs and see distributions or something... Link to post Share on other sites
newcomer Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Here are the measurements I just got for my SGMs. I'm kind of worried that my standard deviation and total deviation are both about half of newcomer's results. Also, I don't know if a 0.0004g difference in our averages would be a good indication that the results are fairly similar. I was using tweezers to pick the BBs out of the bag. Weight (g) 1 0.286 2 0.287 3 0.288 4 0.287 5 0.287 6 0.290 7 0.289 8 0.284 9 0.285 10 0.286 11 0.289 12 0.285 13 0.288 14 0.283 15 0.287 16 0.288 17 0.288 18 0.288 19 0.287 20 0.290 21 0.288 22 0.288 23 0.287 24 0.286 25 0.288 26 0.288 27 0.285 28 0.287 29 0.286 30 0.283 average 0.2869 std. dev. 0.00178 median 0.287 min 0.283 max 0.290 difference 0.007 Also, completely coincidental, I believe, but if you play around with the numbers a bit (since spreadsheets do make it easy to play around with stuff and get instant calculations) and you take only the first 19 BBs that I measured and compare it to the results from all 30, you get almost identical numbers, and identical if you round. The difference is (number of BBs, average, std dev, median): (19, 0.28695, 0.001779, 0.287) vs (30, 0.28693, 0.001780, 0.287). The numbers do bounce around in between those two, but it was interesting, since I originally just checked what the results for the first 19 BBs was due to newcomer's data only have 19 values. At some point, I'd probably like to do more testing with a much larger sample to make pretty graphs and see distributions or something... Very interesting Yee! If you look back, mine has a difference of 0.014, yours is a difference of 0.007. I'll measure 30 SGMs again this weekend and we'll compare the results once more. In the meantime, can you email me that spreadsheet???? Edit: Btw, can you let us know the specs of your weigh? Edit1: Nvm I got the excel sheet running already. Link to post Share on other sites
Whudafxup Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Has anyone been able to confirm that washing the Madbull heavy weight bb's prevents them from leaving residue on the bucking? Link to post Share on other sites
newcomer Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 Like the .43? Link to post Share on other sites
Whudafxup Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 Preferrably the .4 or .36's Link to post Share on other sites
Wargasm Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 Washing them reduces the amount of residue by a small amount. Link to post Share on other sites
kojak Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 This is how weighing is done: Link to post Share on other sites
newcomer Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 Would you be as kind as weighing some SGMs to compare yee's and my results? Link to post Share on other sites
yee245 Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 Is there such a thing as being too accurate? Since I had some free time, I did some more measurements on the weights of SGMs. I don't claim that my results are necessarily accurate, since the scale I am using is a cheap one from China (http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.10515). It has a resolution of 1mg, but it isn't going to be anywhere near as accurate or reliable as a $1000 scale. Also, since I don't have a calibration set to compare things to, I can't be sure of how good it is. I was playing around with repeatability of measurement, and with the same BB (I was using an Excel bio tracer) over 12 measurements, I got a range of measurements: 0.186 0.188 0.187 0.187 0.189 0.187 0.187 0.189 0.190 0.188 0.188 0.188. The ±0.002g that it seemed to have in this small test really amounts to about a ±1%, which I think is fairly reasonable. I should try it with the SGMs to see if the ±0.002g applies or if ±1% does, not that the extra .3% of error makes all that much of a difference. If you'd like, I can try to put up a video of the test that I had done, which somewhat shows how I was doing my measurements, since I was doing it for a bunch of BBs. Anyway, back to the SGMs, I weighed 100 of them one at a time, and I weighed 200 of them ten at a time to see how the values for average weight would compare. I'm not sure, at the moment, how I'm going to use the results, whether it will be a weighted average of the two values, or if I will just have both values, each having their own merits. The values of the individual measurements: Average: 0.2849g Min: 0.278g Max: 0.289g St. Dev: 0.00199g The average of the BBs overall when weighed ten at a time was 0.2855g (which would get rounded down to 0.285g). So, if the 0.001 place is not necessarily accurate, the 0.01 place should be reasonably good, and so the average over the larger amount should be reasonably good. Anyway, since BBs do vary so much in terms of weight, by at least 10mg between the lightest and heaviest, having accuracy to a tenth of a milligram seems kind of pointless. Link to post Share on other sites
kojak Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 Is there such a thing as being too accurate? Nope. It's actually a $20K scale, and that's not tenths but thousandths of a milligram (μg, mcg, or microgram). Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.