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
Ballistic gelatin vs twist rate
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="FearNoWind" data-source="post: 987951" data-attributes="member: 50867"><p>Well, Rich, I spent a good part of my life investigating processes and analysing data. I wasn't questioning your input and I do apologize if you misunderstood the basis of my question. Maybe my professional experience got in the way.</p><p>I simply wanted to know the source of the information. You can find "official" test data all over the place but without knowing all the elements connected with the test and who actually did the testing and under what conditions it's unwise (IMO) to just swallow the data and repeat it.</p><p>For example, the M1 Carbine was manufactured with barrels having at least two different twist rates (1:16, 1:20) I won't assume they checked the twist rate of the barrel used in the testing. They may have just picked up a rifle, read the "general" technical manuals, and accepted that what they read there applied to the rifle they held in their hands. The technical bullet dimension for the 30 Carbine is 7.62 mm while the tech. data for the Garand is 7.8. Both fall within the .308 bullet category. My question to the testing authority would be which bullet was chosen, what was the target distance (velocity diminishes rapidly over distance) what were the comparative barrel lengths (the more time the bullet remains in the barrel the more effective the twist rate will be over a given distance) what was the twist decay rate over the distance fired, etc.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FearNoWind, post: 987951, member: 50867"] Well, Rich, I spent a good part of my life investigating processes and analysing data. I wasn't questioning your input and I do apologize if you misunderstood the basis of my question. Maybe my professional experience got in the way. I simply wanted to know the source of the information. You can find "official" test data all over the place but without knowing all the elements connected with the test and who actually did the testing and under what conditions it's unwise (IMO) to just swallow the data and repeat it. For example, the M1 Carbine was manufactured with barrels having at least two different twist rates (1:16, 1:20) I won't assume they checked the twist rate of the barrel used in the testing. They may have just picked up a rifle, read the "general" technical manuals, and accepted that what they read there applied to the rifle they held in their hands. The technical bullet dimension for the 30 Carbine is 7.62 mm while the tech. data for the Garand is 7.8. Both fall within the .308 bullet category. My question to the testing authority would be which bullet was chosen, what was the target distance (velocity diminishes rapidly over distance) what were the comparative barrel lengths (the more time the bullet remains in the barrel the more effective the twist rate will be over a given distance) what was the twist decay rate over the distance fired, etc. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Ballistic gelatin vs twist rate
Top