Jump to content


BB Ballistic test by independant lab


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 hatetruck

hatetruck

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 59 posts
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 21 January 2009 - 05:34 PM

Came across this on my search for a better BB. A company named Bioval Technologies makes, what they claim to be, a superior BB. They contracted a swiss lab to conduct a BB ballistic test and included a rather large range of manufactures and BB weights. The most interesting parts of the report dealt with BB density consistency and spherical consistency.

Now taking everything with a grain of salt, and having learned long ago to not believe everything I read on the internet, I have to say the 50 page report appears to be quite competent and objective. And other than the fact that this Bioval company's BB scored highest or nearly highest in several categories, I found it interesting to see that the study came up with results that completely contradicted what I thought I knew about my favorite brands. Let's just say, I may not be buying anymore airsoft elites...

The density comparison chart is on page 22 and the spherical consistency chart a few pages down from that.

Levante Labs BB Ballistic Lab Report

I will be picking up a bag of the Bioval BBBMAX rounds in a week or so. They are VERY expensive, though they are imported from Europe. At $35 for a bag of 3700, I can't imagine these will become my primary BB. The MAX BB's come in .27 and, if you can believe it, are clear; totally transparent, as well as biodegradable. I'll also pick up a bag of the standard white .25's, which also scored in the top tier of the test and are more reasonable priced at about $22 for a bag of 4000 (also biodegradable). These, if they perform as advertised, may be a candidate for replacing my normal BB for skirmishing. You can buy them at airsoft extreme: here

I let you guys know what I think of them when they arrive.

#2 whiterabbit05

whiterabbit05

    Specialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 312 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 January 2009 - 06:25 PM

$35?!? O_O

talk about robbery

#3 Stealthmaster14

Stealthmaster14

    Specialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 423 posts
  • Location:here :D
  • Interests:airsoft DUH, guitar, Jesus, video games, sports...etc

Posted 21 January 2009 - 07:14 PM

View Postwhiterabbit05, on Jan 21 2009, 07:25 PM, said:

$35?!? O_O

talk about robbery

Yeah that's insanely expensive.  I thought bbs cost enough as it is.  

What ever happened to those bbs that looked like golf balls?

#4 hatetruck

hatetruck

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 59 posts
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 21 January 2009 - 08:22 PM

Yes 35 is too much. But the .25's at only a couple dollars more and roughly 1000rnds more than most other bio alternatives is not a bad deal. Especially if they are as accurate as some claim they are.

#5 WiN&LeGeNd

WiN&LeGeNd

    Resident Airsoft Geek

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 286 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 January 2009 - 06:55 AM

The question is, how valid are the tests? Most of us are using AEG's, the tests used a Gas gun which has different ballistic properties. Airsoft mechanics did a test on all the major brands and some of their findings were the exact opposite of what Bioval's 3rd party company found. There is quite a bit of contradiction between the two, airsoft mechanics was very thorough as well and covered all the major brands, look for their mega bb review. Its difficult to say who is correct or what other factors may have come into play such as a bad batch of bb's from a few companies or other issues.

#6 hatetruck

hatetruck

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 59 posts
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 22 January 2009 - 08:53 AM

View PostWiN&LeGeNd, on Jan 22 2009, 09:55 AM, said:

The question is, how valid are the tests? Most of us are using AEG's, the tests used a Gas gun which has different ballistic properties. Airsoft mechanics did a test on all the major brands and some of their findings were the exact opposite of what Bioval's 3rd party company found. There is quite a bit of contradiction between the two, airsoft mechanics was very thorough as well and covered all the major brands, look for their mega bb review. Its difficult to say who is correct or what other factors may have come into play such as a bad batch of bb's from a few companies or other issues.

I would have to disagree. The source of air, whether it be spring pneumatic or compressed air has no effect on the ballistic trajectories of a BB. That's like saying the brand of fire pin on a center fire rifle effects the ballistic properties of a .223, when in fact the only necessary consistency is to strike the primer with enough force to ignite the cartridge.

Now, I would agree the 500mm Teflon coated 6.01 barrel they used, along with the measured gas system is something more precise than many of us use, but think about the experiment for a second. The barrel was the control. The only variable to account for discrepancies in test results was simply the BB itself. It's the only thing that changed. Therefore, the ballistic characteristics of the BB are mutually exclusive to the conditions of the test environment; which means the result you get is entirely attributable to the BB used.

Also, citing who got what "batch" of BB is rather irrelevant simply because either tester could have gotten a particularly bad or particularly good "batch." And seeing as there is no way of substantiating such an occurrence for either test, I would discount the notion.

And finally, because Bioval initiated the test and scored so well, I'm most skeptic about their BB. So, like I said, I'm going to get some and conduct my own tests. If the Bioval's are crap or if I notice no improvement whatsoever, then I may consider this test BS. And as far as the validity of the test, assuming the report accurately describes everything done, read it... you tell me.

#7 whiterabbit05

whiterabbit05

    Specialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 312 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 February 2009 - 06:58 PM

Any updates on these Biovals?  I'm interested in their actual performance.

#8 hatetruck

hatetruck

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 59 posts
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 17 February 2009 - 06:01 AM

I have gotten a bag of them and I mentioned this somewhere else I think, but this was my initial impression: I was a little short on time, so I did not have a target set up, but from eyeball accuracy, I can say with confidence that the biovals appeared to preform better (accuracy-wise) than any bb I have previously used in my KWA. Now, I did install a madbull concave spacer before I tested anything. I used two different BB's; the Biovals and my normal skirmish BB, AE .25's. Shooting the AE's first (since most my mags were loaded from last week's skirmish) I noticed a marked improvement over the accuracy before I installed the concave nub. When I used the Biovals, for the first time, I was both pleased and disappointed. Firstly you can see the clear bb, but only if your looking down the sights. Even having your head a foot or more to either side of the gun and you lose the BB after a few feet upon it exiting the barrel. I personally think this is great. Accuracy, again using the eyball test method, was very consistent. BB's were only deviating a few inches at maximum range. However, range was the disappointment. The Bioval's were only traveling about 3/4 the distance of the AE's. I do know that the Biovals are much smaller in diameter than a normal BB. That and given the distance the BB actually went varied wildly (sometimes going 1/2 it's normal distance, sometimes 3/4, and even sometimes a little more). This leads me to believe air is escaping around the bb in the stock 6.05mm barrel. I'm in the process of trying to get an EDGI 6.01 but they are out of stock right now. Hopefully, the smaller bore will correct the problem I am having, and then allow me to do a proper test. As it stands though, if the accuracy they appear to provide carries through to the full performance with a 6.01mm then these BB's may actually live up to the hype, But we shall see.

Another interesting thing to note is despite my efforts to stabilize the Biovals with hop-up, it was almost totally ineffective. The hop up never appeared to have a direct effect on the BB's trajectory, maxed or otherwise. So I'll explore that as well.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users