What Bio BBs should I be buying?

[EDcase]

Thanks for that.

It makes me wonder how biodegradable these Bio BBs really are.

 

I suspect that manufacturers realised that true bios had swelling problems from absorbing moisture in the air etc so they changed the formula to be higher percentage plastic or whatever the composition is.

So now they're probably no more degradable than normal BBs

 

Next test would be to bury 10 or each for a year and then compare them

[Ropeyshep]

7 minutes ago, EDcase said:

Thanks for that.

It makes me wonder how biodegradable these Bio BBs really are.

 

I suspect that manufacturers realised that true bios had swelling problems from absorbing moisture in the air etc so they changed the formula to be higher percentage plastic or whatever the composition is.

 

That would be a much longer study 😂 But I do wonder myself, has the tech improved or have manufacturers found the formula that gets them as close as possible to being able to claim biodegradability while being as shape retaining as possible?

 

I heard a podcast discussing the subject a wee while ago and I think that almost all BBs, whether Bio or not, are made in the same factory, the podcast mentioned HPA BBs as being particularly good and made in a different way but that's a nightmare of a search term so I can't find any sources for them in the UK to have a blat with.

 

The one trend that is fairly visible on the measurements is that the measured diameter has consistently reduced (though within the error of the measuring system), this could indicate a softening of the BB shell and, if that is the case, there could be some increase in the deposits left in barrels? This is a ridiculously extended test though, if anyone had BBs they'd left in a bottle of water for three weeks and put them through a mag, I doubt barrel cleanliness is high on their concerns.

[Ad_]

I've been doing some comparisons of the bio BBs I have over the past week or so as well - ASG Open Blasters, BioSphere, Nuprol RZR Bio, all in 0.2 & 0.25g.

 

On paper these should be identical - they're all supposed to be 5.95mm with 0.01mm tolerance either way - and while they all perform adequately enough at 0.2g in my experience from shooting them prior to the lockdown the ASG Open Blasters seemed to the best of the three, and the Nuprols had a habit of double-feeding sometimes. I haven't used the .25g BBs enough to have any idea which of those three shoots the best though.

 

20 of each BB were weighed and measured and they were broken apart to check for air bubbles. When measuring a BB's diameter I rotated it and re-measured to check the variation in diameter around it & get an idea of its "roundness", noting the min, max and average diameter.

 

Some were measured then soaked some in water for >24h (was generally around 40h-ish) and then re-measured to check for any swelling due to water absorption.

 

There are some caveats to keep in mind:

• The scales I used only have a 0.01g resolution which isn't really precise enough (and they're cheap, so they're not exactly top quality either) however they should at least be sufficient to show up any significant discrepancies between the specified weight and actual weight. They're also sensitive enough that things like airflow around them can skew the result. To attempt to compensate for these to some extent I weighed each BB repeatedly and used the most frequent result.
• Similarly, my digital calipers (Facom 1300EA) have a resolution of 0.01mm so borderline values might read either way, but again this should be enough to show any significant variation at least.
• Just because I didn't find any air bubbles in a BB doesn't necessarily mean that there weren't any; there could have been some in the parts of the BB that were not exposed or they may have been too small to see with the naked eye.
• Also, 20 BBs is a small sample size

So this isn't exactly a rigorous, in-depth look & you shouldn't take the results as entirely accurate. Also they're likely to vary from batch to batch, with some being better or worse than others. But it should at least provide some interesting information & comparison between these three brands of BB beyond merely shooting with them

 

 

Nuprol RZR Bio 0.20g:

Weight: Typically 0.20g, 3 measured 0.21g
Size range: 5.92 - 5.95mm; 11 measured within tolerance.
Roundness: 13 measured with max variation of up to 0.01mm, 4 with 0.02mm, 3 with 0.03mm
There was no sign of swelling after soaking in water.

 

Nuprol's BBs have a consistent weight but their measured size was outside of specification on almost half of the BBs tested - minimum measurements of 5.93mm were not uncommon and a few were even as low as 5.92mm. None measured above 5.95mm.

 

They are relatively soft though - I had to be very careful when measuring their size & shape as it was very easy to read lower measurements even with the small amount of force applied by the calipers.

I did not see any bubbles inside any of the BBs tested.

 

 

BioSphere 0.20g:

Weight: Typically 0.20g, 6 measured 0.19g
Size range: 5.94 - 5.96mm; all measured within tolerance.
Roundness: All measured with max variation of up to 0.01mm (15 did not vary to an extent I could measure with my calipers)
There was no sign of swelling after soaking in water.

 

BioSphere's BBs are quite consistent in weight (trending more towards the lighter side) and impressively consistent in size/shape, measuring 5.94-5.96mm with no more than 0.01mm variation in diameter around any given BB - all within the specified 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance.

 

They readily split into fragments when crushed, and unfortunately I found a bubble in every BB I tested. Here's a photo of one that I managed to crack open more or less cleanly showing the air bubble:

 

 

 

ASG Open Blaster 0.20g:

Weight: All measured 0.20g
Size range: 5.90 - 5.96mm; 6 measured within tolerance.
Roundness: 9 measured with max variation of up to 0.01mm, 7 with 0.02mm, 3 with 0.03mm, 1 with 0.04mm
There was no sign of swelling after soaking in water.

 

The Open Blasters had a very consistent weight with all of them measuring 0.2g, but their size and shape varied to a greater extent than the Nuprols, from 5.90mm to 5.96mm. One of the BBs tested varied between 5.92 and 5.96mm!

 

They seem to be of a similar material as the Nuprol BBs but a lot harder. I did not see any bubbles in any of the BBs tested.

 

 

Nuprol RZR Bio 0.25g:

Weight: All measured 0.25g

Size range: 5.91 - 5.95mm; 3 measured within tolerance.
Roundness: 15 measured with max variation of up to 0.01mm, 3 with 0.02mm, 2 with 0.03mm
There was no sign of swelling after soaking in water.

 

Unsurprisingly these are much like the 0.2g version - their weight is quite consistent while their size and shape is about as variable, though they seem to be a bit smaller on average and a couple measured as low as 5.91mm.

 

The 0.25g Nuprol RZR Bio BBs are significantly harder than the 0.20g version and didn't deform so readily. I did not see any bubbles inside any of the BBs tested.

 

 

BioSphere 0.25g:

Weight: Typically 0.25g, 9 measured 0.24g
Size range: 5.93 - 5.94mm; 16 measured within tolerance.
Roundness: All measured with max variation of up to 0.01mm (17 did not vary to an extent I could measure with my calipers)
There was no sign of swelling after soaking in water.

 

These varied a bit more in weight than their 0.2g version, and like their 0.2g version trended towards the lighter side. Their size and shape was very consistent too with none varying by more than 0.01mm, although they were slightly smaller than the 0.2g version with all of them measuring between 5.93mm and 5.94mm.

 

Unfortunately, just like the 0.2g version I found an air bubble in every one of these I inspected too. These were also much harder than the 0.2g version and they had a tendency to shatter suddenly once they started to crack but I did manage to break open cleanly for a photo:

 

 

 

ASG Open Blaster 0.25g:

Weight: Typically 0.25g, 6 measured 0.26g
Size range: 5.90 - 5.95mm; 1 measured within tolerance.
Roundness: 13 measured with max variation of up to 0.01mm, 4 with 0.02mm, 2 with 0.03mm, 1 with 0.05mm
There was no sign of swelling after soaking in water.

 

These seem to be slightly less consistent in weight than their 0.20g version, trending slightly towards the heavier side. Their size & shape is about as variable, ranging from 5.90 to 5.95mm and like the others these also trend slightly towards the smaller side.

 

I did not see any bubbles inside any of the BBs tested.

 

 

46 minutes ago, EDcase said:

It makes me wonder how biodegradable these Bio BBs really are.

 

I suspect that manufacturers realised that true bios had swelling problems from absorbing moisture in the air etc so they changed the formula to be higher percentage plastic or whatever the composition is.

So now they're probably no more degradable than normal BBs

 

Next test would be to bury 10 or each for a year and then compare them

 

As I posted earlier in this thread, AFAIK most are made from PLA & as such I wouldn't expect them to biodegrade very quickly in the environment.

[Ad_]

I tested a few more brands of bio BB recently. Same caveats with limitations in equipment & methods apply as before:

 

Tokyo Marui 'Perfect Hit' Bio 0.20g:

These are quite pricey at £6 for 1600. The .25s weren't in stock when I ordered these so I didn't get any to test, but those are way more expensive at £11 for only 1300 BBs! They come in a sealed, vacuum-packed bag with some silica gel thrown in to protect them from humidity.

 

Unfortunately I found a few in the pack with some surface defects. They weren't very big or deep & probably aren't rough enough to cause any damage, but they would most likely affect performance.

 

I tested 20 BBs that did not have any visible defects.

 

Weight: All measured 0.20g
Size range: 5.93 - 5.96mm; 18 were within tolerance
Roundness: 6 measured 0.00mm variation, 14 measured with max variation of 0.01mm
There was no sign of swelling after soaking in water.

 

Easily the most consistent so far, and I didn't find any air bubbles, although not all of them were within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance (however readings of 5.93 could be borderline 5.94). Just a shame about their high price and the QC fails with some of them.

 

 

Ares Amoeba "Diamond Precision" / "Match Grade" Bio BBs 0.25g:

Before even opening the bag I could see these were off to a great start:

 

 

I found a number of other BBs in the pack with surface defects, most of those merely had one or more slightly dented and/or scratched surfaces but some were spectacularly bad - especially this one:

 

 

(it's even worse than it looks here but my crappy phone camera can't capture it well enough)

 

They almost look like they've already been fired once then picked up and repackaged. Using BBs with surface defects like these have will cause increased wear on the gun's hop rubber or may even damage it and/or cause jams. It's possible these were simply from a "bad batch", but IMO there's no excuse for any BBs with such glaring external defects as these to go unnoticed.

 

The bag was "sealed", but it has some air holes punched into it so ingress of humidity and/or dust/dirt is likely and could result in magazines, hop units and/or barrels getting fouled with whatever the BBs have picked up in storage, transit etc. - I did find some particles of dust/general debris floating about inside the bag with the BBs.

 

I picked out 20 to measure and made sure that they didn't have any visible surface defects.

 

Weight: Typically 0.25g, 5 measured 0.26g
Size range: 5.92 - 5.96mm; 11 were within tolerance
Roundness: 11 measured with max variation of up to 0.01mm, 6 with 0.02mm, 2 with 0.03mm, 1 with 0.04mm
I didn't bother soaking any of these in water

 

In addition to the massive QC fails in the pack, the consistency of these isn't all that great either. I did not find air bubbles in any of the BBs I crushed open.

 

 

G&G 'Competition Grade' Bio BBs 0.25g:

These come in a fully sealed bag similar to the one the Tokyo Marui BBs come in (and also includes a pack of silica gel like Marui's BBs), except larger & not vacuum packed. On the back is information about the BB indicating that they are made from PLA, and claims about decomposition times in different environments.

 

I shook the bag & checked for any BBs with obvious defects a few times after opening the pack and as I took BBs out to test as I did for the others but couldn't see any.

 

Weight: All measured 0.25g
Size range: 5.92 - 5.96mm; 12 were within tolerance
Roundness: 10 measured with max variation of up to 0.01mm, 10 with 0.02mm
There was no sign of swelling after soaking in water.

 

These BBs are reasonably consistent in terms of roundness; unfortunately a fair few were outside of the specified 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance and I found air bubbles of varying sizes in 8 of the 20 BBs I broke apart.

[Lollingsgrad]

On 01/04/2020 at 10:55, EDcase said:

The problem with bios is they are hygroscopic meaning they absorb water even from the atmosphere.  This will make them swell and jam in the gun.  Yes, a gun can be damaged by BB's getting stuck or shattering inside.

 

 

I've been using Geoffs Bio BBs more or less since I started airsoft which has included long breaks and using BBs that were several months old and I've never had this problem. In fact I've never had a jam on Geoffs, period.

[EDcase]

4 hours ago, Lollingsgrad said:

 

I've been using Geoffs Bio BBs more or less since I started airsoft which has included long breaks and using BBs that were several months old and I've never had this problem. In fact I've never had a jam on Geoffs, period.

That's very good to hear.  Hopefully the days of swelling BBs are gone 

[Nick G]

20 hours ago, Lollingsgrad said:

 

I've been using Geoffs Bio BBs more or less since I started airsoft which has included long breaks and using BBs that were several months old and I've never had this problem. In fact I've never had a jam on Geoffs, period.

I generally use Geoffs too, never once had an issue with them.

[Ad_]

Done some more tests, same caveats as before, didn't bother soaking any in water this time:

 

'Xtreme Precision' 0.25g Bio BBs:

 

Interestingly, these are supposed to be slightly larger and with tighter tolerances than standard - 5.96 +/- 0.005mm as opposed to the usual 5.95 +/- 0.01mm.

 

These come in a bag with some air holes punched in to it near the top so clearly they're not worried about humidity causing problems. This could result in dust or so finding its way into the bag though and then into your gun's hop unit/barrel.

 

I didn't see any BBs with any obvious defects.

 

Weight: 17 measured 0.25g, 3 measured 0.26g
Size range: 5.92 - 5.95mm; none were within 5.96 +/- 0.005mm tolerance, 3 were within the standard 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance
Roundness: 1 measured 0mm variation all around, 6 measured with max variation of up to 0.01mm, 12 with 0.02mm, 1 with 0.03mm

 

The advertised 5.96 +/- 0.005mm tolerance is beyond the ability of my calipers to measure, but I'd at least expect to see much tighter results than I did for other BBs; however none of them even met 5.96 +/- 0.01mm and only 3 of them measured within the standard 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance.

 

These were also quite soft and easily deformed/easy to crush compared to the other 0.25g BBs I've tested which raises concerns about their performance if used in midcap magazines - especially higher capacity mags with stronger springs.

 

Most of the BBs tested appeared to be free of air bubbles, but I did find a small air bubble in one of them.

 

 

 

Geoffs 'Super Natural Precision' 0.25g Bio BBs:

 

I've seen Geoffs BBs being recommended by a lot of people and had been meaning to buy some for a while, but since I wasn't going to place an order just for a single bag of BBs it had to wait until there were some other things I wanted to order.

 

These also come in a bag with some air holes punched in it near the top to potentially allow crap to get inside. The BBs themselves all looked fine, with no visible defects. Like most other brands of BB these are supposed to be 5.95 +/- 0.01mm.

 

Weight: All measured 0.25g (leaning towards the heavier side as my scales wavered a bit between 0.25 and 0.26 for most of them before settling on 0.25)
Size range: 5.91 - 5.95mm; 1 measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance (most were 5.93mm+ at least)
Roundness: 2 measured 0mm variation, 10 measured with max variation up to 0.01mm, 7 with 0.02mm, 1 with 0.03mm

 

These generally didn't measure within the specified 5.95 +/- 0.01mm range on my calipers - trending towards the smaller side - but their weight and roundness seems quite consistent with only one varying by more than 0.02mm, and I didn't find any air bubbles in the ones I broke open.

[Ad_]

Summary of 0.25g results, sorted by average variation/roundness:

 

Brand			Avg. weight	| # 5.94mm+	| # 5.93mm+	| avg. variation	| # varying > 0.02mm	| Notes
BioSphere		0.2455g		| 16		| 20		| 0.0015mm		| 0			| Air bubbles found in all
Nuprol			0.2505g		| 3		| 13		| 0.011mm		| 2			|
Geoffs			0.25g		| 1		| 16		| 0.0135mm		| 1			|
G&G			0.25g		| 12		| 19		| 0.015mm		| 0			| Air bubbles found in some
ASG Open Blaster	0.253g		| 1		| 10		| 0.016mm		| 3			|
Xtreme Precision	0.2515g		| 3		| 19		| 0.0165mm		| 1			| Air bubbles found in some, soft/easy to deform
Ares Amoeba		0.2525g		| 11		| 18		| 0.0165mm		| 3			| Found a bunch of fucked up BBs in the pack that could potentially cause damage

 

None of the BBs tested are perfect, but Geoffs and (surprisingly) Nuprol seem to be the better choices in 0.25g, followed by ASG Open Blasters. The Ares Amoeba BBs are easily the worst purely due to the shockingly bad & potentially damaging defects I found, although their consistency otherwise isn't too impressive either.

[Ad_]

I bought some more Geoffs bio BBs, this time in 0.28g. These are 'Super Natural Precision' in white and black and 'Natural Precision' tracer BBs (they don't do tracer versions of the former - I'm not entirely sure what the difference is supposed to be between 'Super Natural Precision' and 'Natural Precision' as it doesn't seem to be stated anywhere; both are supposed to be 5.95 +/- 0.01mm).

 

The packaging for these is just like the 0.25g BBs I bought before - self-seal bags with air holes punched into them near the top (I only bought small bags of the black & tracer version). They all looked fine except for a single tracer BB that had some kind of scuff mark on it.

 

Of these three, only the white ones seem decent enough - about on par with the 0.25g version I tested before. The black and tracer versions seem like they're best avoided.

 

 

Geoffs 'Super Natural Precision' 0.28g Bio BBs:

 

Weight: All measured 0.28g except for one measuring 0.29g. Like the 0.25g version these seem to lean towards the heavier side.
Size range: 5.93 - 5.96mm; 4 measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance, the rest were 5.93mm minimum
Roundness: 1 measured 0mm variation all around, 9 measured with max variation up to 0.01mm, 8 with 0.02mm, 2 with 0.03mm

 

These are pretty similar to the 0.25g version, generally not being within the specified 5.95 +/- 0.01mm range (trending towards the smaller side).

 

They're a little softer than their 0.25g counterparts but more difficult to break apart as they had a tendency to flatten out & I had to twist them apart after initially splitting them. I didn't see any signs of air bubbles.

 

 

Geoffs 'Super Natural Precision' 0.28g Bio BBs (black):

 

Weight: All measured 0.28g, again seeming to trend more towards the heavier side.
Size range: 5.92 - 5.97mm; 15 measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance. 3 were 5.93mm minimum, 1 was 5.92mm minimum, 1 was 5.96mm minimum (and that one had an upper measurement of 5.97mm)
Roundness: 13 measured 0.01mm variation all around, 6 measured with max variation up to 0.02mm, 1 with 0.03mm

 

These have similar consistency to the white BBs but with a larger size range (although this could just be down to the small sample sizes).

 

However they are also much softer and easier to break apart than the white version so it would probably be best not to use these in midcap mags or GBBRs, as their softness will make them prone to getting deformed/flattened or chewed up. In addition to this I found an air bubble in one of the 20 BBs I broke apart.

 

 

Geoffs 'Natural Precision' 0.28g Bio BBs (tracer):

 

Weight: All measured 0.28g except for one weighing 0.29g.
Size range: 5.87 - 5.95mm; None measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance. 1 was 5.87mm minimum, 3 were 5.88mm minimum, 4 were 5.89mm minimum, 6 were 5.90mm minimum, 5 were 5.91mm minimum, 1 was 5.92mm minimum
Roundness: 6 measured 0.02mm variation all around, 7 measured with max variation up to 0.03mm, 4 with 0.04mm, 3 with 0.05mm

 

Surprisingly these are far less consistent than the others, and a fair bit undersized. Despite their smaller size they're still around 0.28g though, even leaning towards the heavier side.

 

These are about as soft as the black ones but a lot more brittle; it didn't take much force to crack them open and they readily split into multiple fragments. I really wouldn't recommend trying to use these in midcap mags or GBBRs (or at all; loading a few into my HK416A5 AEG resulted in some double feeds/misfeeds and pre-shattered rounds exiting the barrel on firing). On the plus side I didn't find any air bubbles in the ones I broke apart.

[Lollingsgrad]

Just as a counter point I've been using Geoffs natural (and super) BBs in my midcaps and gas guns since I started playing. I've never had one shatter or jam inside either. This isn't to discount your testing, I could believe they're more fragile than other brands, but perhaps not enough to cause actual issues.

[Cannonfodder]

I've been using the Tippmann bio bbs sold at my regular site for a few months now and haven't had any problems

[Ad_]

12 hours ago, Lollingsgrad said:

Just as a counter point I've been using Geoffs natural (and super) BBs in my midcaps and gas guns since I started playing. I've never had one shatter or jam inside either. This isn't to discount your testing, I could believe they're more fragile than other brands, but perhaps not enough to cause actual issues.

 

The regular white versions do seem to be pretty decent (in both 0.25g and 0.28g at least) and I've not had any issues shooting with them so far & intend to continue buying them.

 

It's just the black and tracer versions that seem to be be a bit dodgy for whatever reason - perhaps the addition of black dye/GITD material compromises the strength of the BB making them softer/more brittle, maybe there's poorer QC standards applied on those specific kinds of BB, or perhaps I was just unlucky & got sent some from bad batches. Given how far out of spec the tracer BBs were I'm pretty shocked that those made it through QC though, given that they're supposed to be 5.95 +/- 0.01mm.

Edited August 10, 2021 by Ad_

[Lollingsgrad]

On 10/08/2021 at 12:57, Ad_ said:

It's just the black and tracer versions that seem to be be a bit dodgy for whatever reason

 

Ah sorry, I glossed over this. I've used the black but not the tracers because I couldn't source any bio ones.

[Ad_]

More Geoffs bio BBs, this time in 0.30g. Only white + tracer versions this time.

 

 

Geoffs 'Super Natural Precision' 0.30g Bio BBs

 

Weight: All measured 0.30g
Size range: 5.91 - 5.95mm; 0 measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance. 1 was 5.91mm minimum, 7 were 5.92mm minimum, 12 were 5.93mm minimum.
Roundness: 12 measured 0.01mm variation all around, 7 measured with max variation up to 0.02mm, 1 with 0.03mm

 

These trend slightly more towards the smaller side like the other versions - they're especially similar to the 0.25g version. None measured within tolerance, but many were at least 5.93mm minimum which could be borderline/within measurement error due to the limitations of my calipers. Like most of the other Geoffs BBs I've tested they do seem to have good consistency though.

 

These are very similar in softness to the 0.28g version, flattening out rather than fragmenting & needing to be twisted apart. I found air bubbles in one of the BBs.

 

 

Geoffs 'Natural Precision' 0.30g Bio BBs (tracer)

 

Weight: All measured 0.30g except for one weighing 0.31g.
Size range: 5.90 - 5.95mm; 2 measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance. 1 was 5.90mm minimum, 1 was 5.91mm minimum, 8 were 5.92mm minimum, 8 were 5.93mm minimum, 2 were 5.94mm minimum
Roundness: 3 measured 0.01mm variation all around, 15 measured with max variation up to 0.02mm, 1 with 0.03mm, 1 with 0.05mm

 

These seem much better than the 0.28g version, being closer to the specified tolerances and having greater consistency (although still not quite as good as the white versions, but at least these aren't too far off).

 

These felt a bit harder to break apart than the 0.28g version but were slightly more brittle. I found air bubbles in one of them.

 

 

On 12/08/2021 at 10:25, Lollingsgrad said:

Ah sorry, I glossed over this. I've used the black but not the tracers because I couldn't source any bio ones.

 

Forgot to reply to this before - they are available from https://outdoorandtactical.co.uk

[Shamal]

1 hour ago, Ad_ said:

More Geoffs bio BBs, this time in 0.30g. Only white + tracer versions this time.

 

 

Geoffs 'Super Natural Precision' 0.30g Bio BBs

 

Weight: All measured 0.30g
Size range: 5.91 - 5.95mm; 0 measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance. 1 was 5.91mm minimum, 7 were 5.92mm minimum, 12 were 5.93mm minimum.
Roundness: 12 measured 0.01mm variation all around, 7 measured with max variation up to 0.02mm, 1 with 0.03mm

 

These trend slightly more towards the smaller side like the other versions - they're especially similar to the 0.25g version. None measured within tolerance, but many were at least 5.93mm minimum which could be borderline/within measurement error due to the limitations of my calipers. Like most of the other Geoffs BBs I've tested they do seem to have good consistency though.

 

These are very similar in softness to the 0.28g version, flattening out rather than fragmenting & needing to be twisted apart. I found air bubbles in one of the BBs.

 

 

Geoffs 'Natural Precision' 0.30g Bio BBs (tracer)

 

Weight: All measured 0.30g except for one weighing 0.31g.
Size range: 5.90 - 5.95mm; 2 measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance. 1 was 5.90mm minimum, 1 was 5.91mm minimum, 8 were 5.92mm minimum, 8 were 5.93mm minimum, 2 were 5.94mm minimum
Roundness: 3 measured 0.01mm variation all around, 15 measured with max variation up to 0.02mm, 1 with 0.03mm, 1 with 0.05mm

 

These seem much better than the 0.28g version, being closer to the specified tolerances and having greater consistency (although still not quite as good as the white versions, but at least these aren't too far off).

 

These felt a bit harder to break apart than the 0.28g version but were slightly more brittle. I found air bubbles in one of them.

 

 

 

Forgot to reply to this before - they are available from https://outdoorandtactical.co.uk

Hey good shout on outdoors and tactical. Looks like they have a good selection of stuff.👍

 

Regards 

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

Good precise info!

 

I can't offer the same, but I can vouch for Blitz Bio BBs.  I accidently bought four or five bags a couple of years ago.  The boy left a couple of packets open and in sunlight.  Not his fault in part as the ziplock had come unglued.  But leabing them out of the drawer was bloody silly.

 

Anyhow, I found them again and used the incorrectly stored ones today.  Not a malfunction, jam in any of the RIFs used.  They shot as consistently as anything else too.  I had written them off after all the horror stories but they performed fine.  I didn't see one deformed/swollen BB at all.

[Lozart]

Just a quick note - don't buy Proball bio's. I lent my M4 and a few EPMs to a buddy last game and none of them fed properly. I never have any issues so I checked what ammo he'd bought and it was indeed Proball Bios. Dumped them out, replaced with whatever the fuck I was using (possibly Ares Amoeba Diamond Precision can't really recall) and it was faultless for the rest of the day!

[Druid799]

Amazing what you can find on the forum when you use THE FORUM SEARCH (and yes this snarky comment is directed at new members) am just about to run out of my humongous stock of ammo I bought a couple of yrs ago so I’m now making the change to bio and am exercising a bit of due diligence in to which to buy . So a big thank you Ad_ for the hard work you’ve put in over the past yr or so with your ongoing research , certainly helped me big time .

Cheers bud . 👍

[Panama]

 

[Lozart]

1 hour ago, Panama said:

 

 

 

TL:DR

 

Out of:

Longbow, Valken, ASG Open Blaster, Nuprol RZR, ARES, Geoff's, Psionic Upgrades, 6mm Ammo the best groupings at 20m were Ares and 6mm Ammo but they were all much of a muchness apart from the Valkens which seem to be a bit worse.

[Ad_]

3 hours ago, Panama said:

 

 

That's very interesting. I guess it's not that surprising that most BBs perform about the same, as from what I've seen with my testing they tend to have similar size ranges/variation & as they mentioned in the video many brands are probably made in the same factory anyway!

 

It would also be interesting to see how various BBs perform after being fully loaded into midcap mags (especially ones with particularly strong springs like the EPM1s) as some BBs are much softer than others and could end up being deformed & suffer reduced performance as a result.

 

The results for the Ares BBs are a little surprising as the ones I got were unimpressive, with the bag I got containing a bunch of badly deformed BBs (and the ones that looked ok didn't seem all that special either). Although the ones I looked at were the 0.25g version & it wouldn't surprise me if some weights are just more consistent/better made than others for whatever reason, as I've seen with other brands. It's also possible that I just got some from a bad batch but then I would've thought that any that were so visibly dodgy as the ones I found would've been picked up by QC, especially with them being visible through the packaging...

 

It's a shame they didn't test any BioSphere BBs as those are the closest to perfect BBs I've found so far in terms of size & roundness, but every one I broke apart had an air bubble; it would be interesting to see how much of an effect that has on their performance.

 

I'll definitely have to take a look at the 6mm Ammo BBs though, those sound very promising.

[Panama]

There is another favorable review of the 6mm Ammo BB's a year ago (a UK company, I believe?) https://airsoftdoorkicker.com/2020/08/23/6mm-ammo-bb-experiment/

[hitmanNo2]

I've used loads of 6mm Ammo BBs over the past few years.  Decently quality and no issues in mid caps or GBBs.  Though I haven't tried any since they moved to only bio BBs.  Always speedy order processing and postage too.

[Ad_]

I bought some 6mm Ammo BBs to test. Shipping was extremely quick; I placed my order late on Friday evening, received the shipping notice email on Saturday & they were delivered on Monday - this was with free delivery option too!

 

These are the 0.30g version, in both the regular and tracer versions. The regular BBs are supplied in a black coloured bag, while the tracers are supplied in a transparent bag. Both bags are completely sealed & resealable - there are no air holes that might allow in dust or any other contaminants from the environment.

 

6mm Ammo 0.30g Bio BBs

 

Just like my other tests the very first thing I did was sift through the BBs and inspect them for any obvious defects. Unfortunately I found a number of BBs in the pack that had significant surface defects, ranging from minor dimples to larger dents/scratches (and even a protrusion on one of them) - the latter potentially being a big problem as significant defects could damage the hop rubber an/or cause a jam in addition to compromising the performance of those particular BBs. Here are some of the worst ones I found (best photos I could get; my phone's camera isn't very good):

 

 

In addition to this, despite the pack having been sealed there were a few bits of dust/debris in the pack that had stuck to some of the BBs. I only noticed due to paying such close attention to them (and it's not as bad as I've seen in some other brands that don't come in fully sealed bags) so it's likely nothing to be concerned about but I think it's worth noting.

 

I measured only BBs that didn't have any obviously visible defects.

 

Weight: All but two were slightly overweight at 0.31g (my scales wavered a little between 0.30 and 0.31 on a few of them before settling on on 0.31)
Size range: 5.91 - 5.95mm; 4 measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance. 1 was 5.91mm minimum, 2 were 5.92mm minimum, 13 were 5.93mm minimum, 4 were 5.94mm minimum.
Roundness: 1 measured 0mm variation all around, 15 measured with max variation up to 0.01mm, 3 with 0.02mm, 1 with 0.03mm

 

Defective BBs aside these are among the better BBs for consistency and roundness, with 17 being 5.93mm+ and only one having more than 0.02mm variation, although they lean towards the heavier side.

 

These are harder and more brittle than the Geoffs 0.30s, breaking apart cleanly. I did not find any air bubbles in the ones I broke apart.

 

 

6mm Ammo 0.30g Bio BBs (tracer)

 

I did not find any BBs with any visible defects in this pack. I did see some kind of minor dust/debris in the bag though, again probably not significant enough to worry about but worth noting anyway.

 

Weight: 15 measured 0.30g, 5 measured 0.31g. My scales wavered between 0.30/0.31 before settling for most of the ones that weighed 0.30g so these all seem to lean towards the heavier side (though not to the same extent as the regular version)
Size range: 5.93 - 5.94mm; 2 measured within the 5.95 +/- 0.01mm tolerance. 18 were 5.93mm minimum, 2 were 5.94mm minimum.
Roundness: 7 measured 0mm variation all around, 13 measured with max variation up to 0.01mm.

 

These seem to have slightly better sizing and consistency than the regular version, with all measuring 5.93-5.94mm and only up to 0.01mm variation.

 

They are a bit softer and much less brittle than the regular version. I did not find any air bubbles in these either.