Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Your input desired on design of barrel friction experiment with bullet coatings
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mikecr" data-source="post: 565551" data-attributes="member: 1521"><p>So it sounds like your objective to increase energy without increasing capacity, powder amount, recoil, or noise, or reducing barrel life -while also extending gains from longer barrels –by reducing bullet/barrel friction.. </p><p>Have you really thought this through?</p><p>Why do you think these things will result?</p><p>Is there basis to date from friction coatings already in use? </p><p></p><p>The only real gains I've heard of in this regard(velocity) is with sabots. </p><p>But nothing there is free of course.</p><p>We know that use of moly reduces MV(for a couple reasons).</p><p>We know that reducing friction in itself drops peak pressure by widening the peak, with a bullet further down the bore by that point.</p><p>And IMO barrel/bullet friction is not the cause of dropping velocity gain rates in longer barrels, but merely a matter of powder burn rates dropping, with pressures reducing, as applied to greater bore area of longer barrels.</p><p></p><p>Basically, friction/sealing/expansive area are basic factors with our powder burn rates and resultant muzzle velocities. And the price of affecting these(and each affects the others) is likely self defeating to your objectives, and of no gain to long range hunters(who need to hit what they're aiming at)..</p><p>I don't know, maybe the tactical bunch would buy into this kind of stuff.</p><p>I can't imagine anyone here taking this seriously</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mikecr, post: 565551, member: 1521"] So it sounds like your objective to increase energy without increasing capacity, powder amount, recoil, or noise, or reducing barrel life -while also extending gains from longer barrels –by reducing bullet/barrel friction.. Have you really thought this through? Why do you think these things will result? Is there basis to date from friction coatings already in use? The only real gains I’ve heard of in this regard(velocity) is with sabots. But nothing there is free of course. We know that use of moly reduces MV(for a couple reasons). We know that reducing friction in itself drops peak pressure by widening the peak, with a bullet further down the bore by that point. And IMO barrel/bullet friction is not the cause of dropping velocity gain rates in longer barrels, but merely a matter of powder burn rates dropping, with pressures reducing, as applied to greater bore area of longer barrels. Basically, friction/sealing/expansive area are basic factors with our powder burn rates and resultant muzzle velocities. And the price of affecting these(and each affects the others) is likely self defeating to your objectives, and of no gain to long range hunters(who need to hit what they’re aiming at).. I don’t know, maybe the tactical bunch would buy into this kind of stuff. I can't imagine anyone here taking this seriously [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Your input desired on design of barrel friction experiment with bullet coatings
Top