300wm twist

Hatrick said:
So if I am reading this right the same bullets arriving at the same velocity but from different twist the tighter twist will cause more soft tissue damage.
Click to expand...
More than likely yes. In our theoretical comparison we are firing x bullet at 3000fps from a 10" twist resulting in an sg of 1.3. Then we fire the same bullet from a 9" twist barrel at 3000fps resulting in an sg of 1.7. Defiantly yes the bullet with higher sg will preform better consistently.

Steve
 
RockyMtnMT said:
Terminal=soft tissue damage leading to the termination of life.

Best I could come up with.:)

Steve
Click to expand...

Well OK, I thought thats probably what you meant.
Now lets look at the term (consensus).
That word could be defined as a group of people who agree on something.
Pinhead professor types, especially those puffing on pipes, would be apt to be taken more seriously of coarse.
Even if what they agree on cant be validated by facts, It still qualifies as a consensus, and who would dare question it?
The same can be said for the term (opinion).
No need for any hard earned facts, or even any experience, to offer an opinion.
We now have people who never even sold newspapers telling others how to run a business.
Used to be you had to hang out in bars for this type stuff. lol
Fact is some information might be legitimate, and some wont, probably even most wont.
Best thing for the OP to do would be to take his gun someplace where he can find out some facts for himself.
That someplace could also start with a conversation with well experienced gun builder who also hunts long range.
 
yobuck said:
Well OK, I thought thats probably what you meant.
Now lets look at the term (consensus).
That word could be defined as a group of people who agree on something.
Pinhead professor types, especially those puffing on pipes, would be apt to be taken more seriously of coarse.
Even if what they agree on cant be validated by facts, It still qualifies as a consensus, and who would dare question it?
The same can be said for the term (opinion).
No need for any hard earned facts, or even any experience, to offer an opinion.
We now have people who never even sold newspapers telling others how to run a business.
Used to be you had to hang out in bars for this type stuff. lol
Fact is some information might be legitimate, and some wont, probably even most wont.
Best thing for the OP to do would be to take his gun someplace where he can find out some facts for himself.
That someplace could also start with a conversation with well experienced gun builder who also hunts long range.
Click to expand...
I read This a couple times and I think what you are saying is that my conclusions from testing are most likely not valid. If so, please back yourself up with something other than your opinion. What have you discovered from impact testing bullets? Also if I am using the wrong terminology please correct me.

Steve
 
Last edited:
RockyMtnMT said:
Seems like most bullets now are much better made than years ago. Used to be guys would talk about over stabilizing a bullet. Too fast a twist would cause asymmetrical bullets to not stay true in flight. Not so sure about this, but remember reading about it. More likely could be a problem of jacket core separation in flight. This should not be a problem with well made bullets particularly bonded bullets. If you are running mono's like ours it is never a problem. It is being proven by the elr guys that long range accuracy is aided by faster twist. Several years ago Nemo was installing 8" twist barrels on their 300wm not because they wanted to run extra long bullets but because they found better accuracy at 1000y and beyond.

From our testing, and as hunters, the faster twist will aid in proper terminal performance. In years past I hunted with marginal stability bullets because I wanted the higher bc. Accuracy was good so I never thought twice about it. Saw some questionable terminal performance and just chalked it up to poor bullet performance. I think many of the poor bullet performance issues that we hear about are due to marginal stability. Between marginal stability, hollow points plugged with tips, and tiny 1mm hollow points, it is a crap shoot whether the bullet will perform properly. When it comes to terminal performance it is more about the rpm's of the bullet vs the stability factor. We have found that an sg of 1.5 or higher calculated at sea level will result in better terminal performance. If you think of the bullet as a top spinning it will make more sense. A fast spinning top spins true for a long time if nothing touches it. As soon as friction is added to the top by touching it the rpm's degrade rapidly causing the top to wobble. The more rpm's the top has the more interference it can take before it starts to wobble. If a bullet is flying with yaw due to marginal stability, it can be very accurate, but the angel created by the yaw makes it harder for the hydraulics needed for expansion to get into the nose of the bullet. The more angle the bullet has the smaller the hollow point gets. In flight there almost no degradation of the rpm's. Once it impacts the rpm's rapidly degrade. As the rpm's degrade the bullet will try to tumble. This will cause the bullet to stop deforming properly and increase the risk of the bullet not tracking in a straight line. The higher the rpm's the longer the bullet stays point forward as it passes through the animal.

When discovering this in low vel testing of our bullets all of a sudden poor bullet performance from years gone by started to make sense. I am no longer willing to hunt with marginal stability and try to set my rifles up with what would be considered "over stabilized" bullets. Terminal performance is simply more dramatic on game. I will shorten my game for higher stability vs lengthening my game by using marginally stabilized bullets in order to get higher bc bullets. If shooting rocks or targets the only thing that matters is accuracy, so using altitude to calculate stability for external ballistics is all that is needed. Altitude adds stability for flight due to thinner air, but it does not add any rpm's to the bullet. So as soon as the bullet touches the animal and the rpm's degrade it allows the bullet to get off axis more quickly.

It is worth every hunters time to check this out. Our bullets are all listed with min twist rates for full stability at sea level or 1.5sg. This should be considered strongly for hunting.

Steve
Click to expand...

Agree with this 100% You actually see this a lot with a very short range cartrige, the 300 blackout. They're are a lot of barrel manufacturers that have 7 twist barrels because you don't have the rpm at subsonic velocity to stabilize the really long bullets.
There's 2 ways to get more rpm. Spin it faster with a faster twist rate, or give it more velocity. More rpm will also result in larger temporary cavity and more shock. Extreme rpm on a weaker constructed bullet gives spectacular results on varmints. The different effects that I listed above being caused by more rpm are caused by a faster twist rate, or higher velocity. With enough twist rate, you wouldn't need a hollow point to initiate expansion. Hydraulic shock into the hollow point just makes it easier.
 
I wish there was some way, other than RPM, to reference the spinning of a bullet.
 
RockyMtnMT said:
I read This a couple times and I think what you are saying is that my conclusions from testing are most likely not valid. If so, please back yourself up with something other than your opinion. What have you discovered from impact testing bullets? Also if I am using the wrong terminology please correct me.

Steve
Click to expand...
I reread these things starting with #1.
It's gotten kinda comical, and hopefully ive helped.
I do think the OP is smart enough to get it figured out though.
Sorry Steve, but im not very impressed with choice words in lieu of facts, and non of those were posted.
But in going back and re reading, I was struck by
(theoretical comparison), which I took to mean a computer model?
Cant we also use those to convince us we can make first round hits at 2000 yds ?
As for the gun builders, I did say (qualified), not just a brother of the barrel nut barrel changer. lol
As for bullets, thats what got the whole long range thing started before many reading this were born.
Maybe even before some of their fathers were born.
Fact is there were some great long range bullets 50 years ago, and lots of dead animals hanging at camps by guys using them.
As for what has become the byword for long range, that being BC, some bullets were actually better then than they are now.
What has changed, is more people have started making bullets, as well as other products, and they all want a seat in the front of the bus.
Thats why talking with experienced gun builders, and sitting on mountainsides shooting across wide valleys at targets is so important. You will have a far clearer view of things after doing so, and be more aware of what actually is and what actually aint.
 
I'm not quite sure what's being debated here. Weather using a faster twist helps with long range or if using a faster twist helps terminal performance? Maybe a new thread is in order
 
yobuck said:
I reread these things starting with #1.
It's gotten kinda comical, and hopefully ive helped.
I do think the OP is smart enough to get it figured out though.
Sorry Steve, but im not very impressed with choice words in lieu of facts, and non of those were posted.
But in going back and re reading, I was struck by
(theoretical comparison), which I took to mean a computer model?
Cant we also use those to convince us we can make first round hits at 2000 yds ?
As for the gun builders, I did say (qualified), not just a brother of the barrel nut barrel changer. lol
As for bullets, thats what got the whole long range thing started before many reading this were born.
Maybe even before some of their fathers were born.
Fact is there were some great long range bullets 50 years ago, and lots of dead animals hanging at camps by guys using them.
As for what has become the byword for long range, that being BC, some bullets were actually better then than they are now.
What has changed, is more people have started making bullets, as well as other products, and they all want a seat in the front of the bus.
Thats why talking with experienced gun builders, and sitting on mountainsides shooting across wide valleys at targets is so important. You will have a far clearer view of things after doing so, and be more aware of what actually is and what actually aint.
Click to expand...
It's alright i Don't think are really much interested in the topic. I will try one more time. Theoretical comparison has nothing to do with a computer. For that matter I don't have an ability to do computer bullet testing. All my testing is with real rifles, bullets, and gun powder.

Hope things go well for you.

Steve
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

entoptics
  • Poll
Fight night! Poll for 7RM vs 300WM. Read on for the "twist".
Replies
5
Views
898
MagnumManiac
M
L
700-300wm or 300wm
2 3
Replies
28
Views
3K
Broz
B
T
.300wm
Replies
6
Views
3K
liltank
liltank
T
.300wm
Replies
0
Views
1K
trazman
T
L
300WM
Replies
0
Views
1K
leslie naylor
L

Recent Posts

Top