|May 14th, 2010, 18:33||#1|
0.28 Silica for sniping, test
Got my hand on some silica .28, was curious about how they would turn out in a sniper BA rifle,
Testing condition were:
TM L96 modified with:
PDI Palsonite VC Cylinder set
PDI 2nd Sear
PDI slotted end screw
L96 130 spring
TM L96 AWS 6.01 inner barrel
Firefly Hard Hop-up Rubber for Marui Hop system
King Arm silencer
Gun work done by Amos, hop up rigged for 0.28
Rated at 425-430 fps with 0.2
Target was at 120-130 fts
Condition outside were light to no wind, overcast.
First, the 0.28Silica do not have any oily residue on them (or not a noticeable one),
This would avoid having to wash 0.28S BB.
I empty a mag (40 rounds of each of the following ammo):
0.28 BB (not washed)
Target was about a 6’’ wide by 6" high column
Hits: 33/37 (89%)
Hits: 29/37 (78%)
1) 10% accuracy in favor of the standard BB
2) 0.28S are clear, so the target won t see where ist is coming from, but you get to see where they go with the scope;
3) I will do the same exercise at a longer range (150 ft), I feel that range may have been a bit short to see a significant difference
Disclaimer: I m no expert sniper
|May 14th, 2010, 18:44||#2|
When you were shooting, I assume that the rifle was either benched or you were using a bi pod?? Barf did the same type of testing with the silica BB (brand is irrelevant, as all silica BBs are manufactured in the same manner), but he found that there was a significant gain in the consistency of the grouping of the shots when using the silica BBs over standard styrene BBs. I will have to bug him to post his findings.
|May 14th, 2010, 18:49||#4|
LOL.....I assume that he did adjust it correctly as he has been around for a little while.....and as long as he didn't adjust it between switching the types of BBs used, it shouldn't make a noticeable difference at the distance the test was preformed at.
|May 14th, 2010, 19:05||#9|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tokushima, Japan
I was tagging people out to 200+ quite easily with washed BBB .28's
I'm pretty sure you're capable of making a BB go 300+... buuuut good luck hitting anything consistently at that range lol
|May 14th, 2010, 19:09||#11|
Le Roi des poissons d'avril
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Terrebonne, Québec
Shooting at 300fts is close to artilery work. Well, not that much, but you still have to hold over a lot, and compensate a lot for the wind.
Vérificateur d'âge: Terrebonne
|May 14th, 2010, 19:32||#12|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Northern Alberta
Buy a Kolpin gun vise and re-do your testing. Eliminate operator targetting errors completely. They cost about $50.
Testing from a bench with total operator control leads to wonky results.
Age verifier Northern Alberta
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep discussing what's for dinner.
Freedom is the wolves limping away while the sheep reloads.
Never confuse freedom with democracy.
|May 15th, 2010, 06:22||#13|
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Downtown Ottawa
In all honesty you would need to do the following before you could ever make a claim either way.
1. Obtain two (or more) identical rifles (upgraded or not is irrelevant as long as they where identical in every way) Also the hopup would have to be identically set.
2. Isolate environmental factors. Ie conduct the shoot inside in a temperature controlled environment with a consistent moisture concentration.
3. Have an exact fixed distance for each rifle from muzzle to target, and have each rifle mounted and fixed on a immovable vice. Both rifles must have the exact same deflection in relation to the targets. (range is almost irrelevant, however I suggest 75 to 100 feet to allow for the outliers to be more noticeable)
4. Both rifles would need to fire exactly the same number and brands. Ie .28 normal bb bastards and .28 silicas bb bastard. To obtain a proper statistical average you will need to have as much data as possible. But it is generally accepted that 500 to 1000 instances is sufficient for a head to head study. For clairification, each rifle must shoot 500 .28 normal and 500 .28 silica each minimum.
5. Properly document each and every shot. including the exact location of the strike relative to the desired location.
6. Identify and isolate all outliers and remove them using a line of best fit
7. Present data and conclusion together.
What you did is what is called a simple averaged statistical study and is generally considered completely worthless in terms of predicting a future outcome. All you told us with this data is how many times you struck a target using two different types of ammunition, thus your telling us what happened not what might happen.
Statistics is a pretty complex and generally ignored subset of math. Most people focus on Scientific maths such as Functions and Vectors or Calc and ignore Stats math and assume its as simple as averaging whatever data you collected. And if you actually read this far you will realize that very few people would ever even consider performing a test like this.
Last edited by Rugger_can; May 15th, 2010 at 06:28..
|May 15th, 2010, 09:31||#15|
Official ASC Bladesmith
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa, Ont.
I've often toyed with the idea of using my work's hanger as an indoor range for testing on a weekend, just never really went past that. Have an easy 300ft to play with for length though. Years ago I did my testing with a GBB and heavy BBs in one of our storage huts, 90ft distance and worked out well.
|Thread Tools||Search this Thread|