I think the whole key here is CAN BE as accurate. With out a doubt there are skinny bbls out there that have shot some great groups.
The problem is the load has to be precisely tuned to the bbl. The skinny bbl WILL NOT shoot as good, day in and day out under varying temps and atmospheric conditions using the same load.
Could you tune the load for every condition? Sure you could, but who wants to have ump-teen different loads when you could just have a heavier bbl that will vibrate w/a much lower magnitude that will shoot the SAME LOAD into respectable groups under most all conditions. Now you still may have to have a summer and winter load, but 20-30 degrees won't make much difference.
I see that you have a new computer program,while I'm sure that it is a significant upgrade over your previous Inspector Gadget Lab. it is still no better than the information fed into it. it is obvious that you are very good talking with your computer but not so good feeding it correct information ,you are playing cyber gun guru but have you ever shot a real rifle (other than the Daisy Red Ryder you dand near put your eye out with last christmas).
Most of your idea's if not all have zero merit in the real world. I would love to see your remmy with a 6 foot barrel along with the target and 6 foot group on it but I'm sure I wont because it's all just BS. just out of curiosity just what numbers did you put into your computer to come up with a model70 being 3 times stronger eeerrr stiffer (dont want to mis quote you)than a remington. and how do you do your static and dynamic measureing on your computer game.
Dude it is time to do the right thing once in your life,just admit that you are a total fraud and lets move on before Len hits the NUKE button.
It takes 43 muscle's to frown and 17 to smile, but only 3 for proper trigger pull.
[ QUOTE ]
Centre Punch, increasing sight radius between front sight (or fore sight) and rear sight (or back sight) doesn't help aiming. The shooter sees the same angular error between line of sight and line to target for a given angular displacement regardless of the distance between the two sights. Increasing sight radius reduces the amount of impact change per click on the back sight and makes it easier to see for eyes that have degraded somewhat; that's all.
OK, now that I've said that, dozens, hundreds or thousands of folks will say I'm wrong. But if each one of these naysayers looks into an aperture rear sight through twelve front aperture sights all aligned in a straight line and 3 inches apart (the furthest one being 36 inches in front of the rear sight; typical of Palma rifles), they will notice that for a given amount of misalignment with the downrange target, each one of those twelve front sights have the same angular error relative to the target's bullseye and they'll all stay aligned with each other.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is not necessarily true.While the front sights do have the same angular error,the front sight is a further distance from the rear aperture than the one closest to it and is more accurately brought into the center of the aperture.This is nothing new,it is the same reason silouette pistol shooters prefer longer barrels and has nothing to do with aging eyes.A very short sight radius (front sight to rear sight) is much easier for aging eyes to bring into alignment with a given target but is hardly as accurate.
The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms -Samuel Adams
I am not sure how clear cut this is, firstly I use a fairly heavy profile barrel like 32mm dia, no taper for 28" and have found load development to be very easy - may be due to less magnitude of vibration. Now having said that in .22 BR they use long skinny barrels with tuners ( a lot has been written and proved by Calfee on that) but in .22 the ammunition is all factory fodder so you have to tune the barrel to the ammo. With centre fire you can tune the ammo to the barrel by altering COL length - change bullet seating, change the harmonics. I think some centre fire BR rules have changed to allow tuners, I guess it will take a few years to see if they become popular or not if so barrel profiles are likely to become longer and thinner.
In Rifle Shooter D.Tubb said he thought fat and heavy barrels were more accurate but has since changed his mind - the T2K profile being optimal.
Has anyone given any thought to what is meant by accuracy and duration of it, in other words if you want one 5 shot group a thin barrel may well be able to do that but a 20 shot group a heavy barrel is likely to change less - more steel to absorb more heat, less in bore dimension changes plus another advantage more resistant to torque.