Which is a better booster? Shrapnel, or classic?

[Audion]

Both types of cannons currently have large knockback "issues", but is one better than the other at propulsion?
First off, i wanted to know if one cannon was heavier than the other, as a lighter cannon could prove to be better for rockets
I built a crude scale, and tested them both.
In the first test, I put one of each type of cannon on either side
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=449490098
They appear to be equal, at least to the point which my scale can indicate.
To prove this scale actually works, i did a second test with two shrapnel cannons vs a single classic cannon, The scale tipped.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=449490327
Unfortunately, due to the slight randomized delay between cannons firing, I have yet to think of a way to accurately test their power, I will update when i have.
Good luck folks!

[Audion]

Update: I believe i have found the cannons to be equal by using this setup:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=449494122
Once i started the simulation, I fired both cannons, After both had actually fired, the device was not rotating and did not rotate until it hit the ground.

[FridayBiology]

cannon seems to be the more suited to boosting as shrapnel will damage your own structures.

[SilentCaay]

If you want to test raw propulsion power, why not make two identical cars with unpowered wheels and strap one of each canon to one can then race them? Even with mistimings you can judge based on distance.

[Loyalist George W. Burns]

i persoanly use the shrapnel, its a bit smaller so it takes less space and i like how its projectile is a burst and makes me think of an engine misifring