Living Legends 8 bans First Strike Rounds

[Pump Scout]

My son's got a divot in his head because of FSR's a few years back at Legends. I'm a supporter of "No FSR". They're a neat idea, but I wonder if maybe they're not THE answer to longer range and better accuracy.

Good thing I've got my Apex. And Stella. And the Inception Apex adapter tip for the Stella.

[Simon]

I had no plans to shoot them, but I do understand why many people are upset finding this out so close to the event.

I need to go back and check the ASTM regs, but clearly they are actually frangible or there would be no point in using them

I guess they simply aren't "spherical" enough.

[Pump Scout]

Oof. Larry Cossio is pissed. I can't say I blame him.

[TierOneJeff]

I had no plans to shoot them, but I do understand why many people are upset finding this out so close to the event.

I need to go back and check the ASTM regs, but clearly they are actually frangible or there would be no point in using them

I guess they simply aren't "spherical" enough.

The UK case revolved around them not being frangible 'enough' but was a pretty vague statement beyond that.

[AndrewTheWookie]

Sounds like it's not that they're straight up banned by insurance companies, it's that the cost to have a company insure their use is prohibitively expensive.

[PBSteve]

Sounds like it's not that they're straight up banned by insurance companies, it's that the cost to have a company insure their use is prohibitively expensive.

Same difference. Insurance companies are the market equivalent of state regulation, and that's how they do it.

[ironyusa]

Well I mean that's why people like them, isn't it? They're better projectiles, which means they maintain a higher velocity further out which means increased range.

Meh, the way other countries regulate it is by muzzle energy/ max joules. The velocity part doesn't really seem to mean much. The breakability (not a word...) is more concerning. I thought it was basically more shell material and would be pretty thin. Depending on their manufacturing methods, a designed fail-zone could allow them to satisfy the concern.

It doesn't really affect me anyway, because I'm not an OEM nor do I shoot them.

[PBSteve]

This is insurance, not regulation. They base prices on their best estimate of risk, and when a projectile holds velocity further, the risk of injury goes up.

[ironyusa]

Lol.

[pbjosh]

and when a projectile holds velocity further...

But... the velocity at close range would be no different. It doesn't speed up, nor does it weight more, right?

It may have a higher impact compared to a OEM .68cal ball at distance, but at 50ft they should be very comparable, and maybe 150ft on a FS is like 100ft of .68.

But nothing is over 300fps...

I suspect the argument has NEVER been had at the insurance company level.

I found with our production insurance (about $10k a year, nearly half of what industry companies were charging) they really had no clue what was even involved in the parts of a paintball gun, what pressures involved, and in the end didn't even really care. We sent them ANSI specs and related and they cared more about our fire extinguishers.

Is the FS ANSI spec? If not, then they make it too expensive to use to CYA. Problem solved.