Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy
Most of this thread on BBBMAX is based on assumptions, speculation and attributing special powers to a bb and even a manufacturer (BB Bastard) who is using all his daily strength to try and defame the BBBMAX. LOL.
...
The funny thing is that the only "evidence" presented such as pictures, citations to Levante Labs or even balistic science papers are judged as unapplicable, controversial, unacceptable bla bla.
|
Excuse me, but you and Levante Labs blatantly misused the equation stated earlier in that ballistics paper I referenced. I'll say it once again:
Ed = Cv * V is applicable to PENETRATING WOUNDS
While it probably applies perfectly well to the clay test in the LL study, in airsoft, your BBs should never penetrate other players, therefore, the equation is entirely irrelevant. If you don't believe me, please go read about inelastic processes vs. elastic processes on Wikipedia. If the BB bounces back, then some energy is conserved and must, at the very least be subtracted as such:
Ed = (Cv * V) - Er (where Er is retained energy)
But as we have no source for such a equation, it would have to be experimentally verified.
I don't appreciate that you are implying there exists some kind of bias amongst us asking questions about the BBBMAX. The bottom line is that these BBs are significantly different from what has traditionally been used in our sport and some of us believe that it is worthwhile to examine the safety, especially since there is an absence of any credible information. Note that other people are discussing carrying out real tests in the future to determine whether these BBs are truly as safe as the unsourced, unreferenced Levante Labs report would have us believe.
My personal interest in this discussion: I run a airsoft review blog. I want to write accurate articles that are interesting and relevant to my readers.
In any case, I'm done trying to reason with you for the night.