So is there any science in the theory that short and fat provides better accuracy or is that BS too ? Is it just the small rifle primer ?
Guess the .222 wasn't short and fat and that was the king of benchrest for a long time.
Speaking for my self, I know where I'm standing, but I don't know if you would understand since it has nothing to do with sience. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
Our Lord Jesus said that as it was in the days of Noah and
also as it was in the days of Lot so it shall be in the days...
It's happening again!!! God sent to us His prophet, and His Word
to this generation and we once more are rejecting it as was prophesied!!! ---> As promised, God Sent His Prophet to us!
For any given cartridge the heavier the bullet the more recoil. Can you argue that? What I meant to come across is that in similar capacity cases the shorter fatter one will accelerate a smaller lighter powder plug for less time which will generate less recoil. I do not subscribe to your theory that all the powder ignites at once. Maybe in small capacity cases but when we are talking big magnum cartridges you can see powder exit the barrel. What are hang fires? Please explain.
Rather than get involved again in this debate, I decided to spend the morning inventing a nearly free Podloc for the Harris bipod. The total cost will be under a penny. Plus I am feeling so much better after venting my spleen on Silvertip for posting in the wrong section. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]