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
I'm not finding any data
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="Brent" data-source="post: 32969" data-attributes="member: 99"><p><strong>Re: I\'m not finding any data</strong></p><p></p><p>More recoil equals more overall muzzle movement before the bullet exits. So, this is easy for me to understand why a cartridge producing less recoil will have the barrel nearer to the same location when the bullet exits each time, less prone, or more forgiving to changes in hold or rest type etc. To me, this says nothing of its actual accuracy capability, but rather the practical accuracy capability without a machine rest. So, if you shoot a big boomer, or some setup with lots of recoil, seems it'll be less forgiving to variables in technique, but it may well be equally inherantly accurate as another smaller BR cartridge when both are fired from a machine rest.</p><p></p><p>I think this would be quite easy to test and prove, but wouldn't it take 30 barrels coming off the line from one manufacturer all lapped and chambered to the same specs for each cartridge being tested? Something like firing 5 match loads through each barrel with 30 round groups, measuring group size after 3, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 rounds. Test would gather data at 100, 300, 500, 800, and 1000 yards by way of multiple acoustic targets at each interval. </p><p></p><p>I have a bunch more ideas to follow this test too, so who's going to pony up the money for the barrels and warehouse facility to get this ball rollin? I envision a multimillion dollar facility that begins to answer all of our questions and take all the fun right out of it. <img src="http://images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> </p><p></p><p>Really, it quite amazing that nobody has not went to the exteme of testing all of our cartridges inherant accuracy, specific barrel steels, barrel contours, lengths, barrel thread type and diameter, stock densities, scope mounts, lock time, etc, etc, etc.... Competitions seems to be the only place "so called" testing is done, but just take one look at all the variables in thi "sort" of testing and it's enough to make any methodical scientific type just puke. <img src="http://images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> Sure we learn, but how slow have we, what have we overlooked in the process, and what misconceptions have resulted as well... <img src="http://images/icons/confused.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> Certainly keeps things interesting!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Brent, post: 32969, member: 99"] [b]Re: I\'m not finding any data[/b] More recoil equals more overall muzzle movement before the bullet exits. So, this is easy for me to understand why a cartridge producing less recoil will have the barrel nearer to the same location when the bullet exits each time, less prone, or more forgiving to changes in hold or rest type etc. To me, this says nothing of its actual accuracy capability, but rather the practical accuracy capability without a machine rest. So, if you shoot a big boomer, or some setup with lots of recoil, seems it'll be less forgiving to variables in technique, but it may well be equally inherantly accurate as another smaller BR cartridge when both are fired from a machine rest. I think this would be quite easy to test and prove, but wouldn't it take 30 barrels coming off the line from one manufacturer all lapped and chambered to the same specs for each cartridge being tested? Something like firing 5 match loads through each barrel with 30 round groups, measuring group size after 3, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 rounds. Test would gather data at 100, 300, 500, 800, and 1000 yards by way of multiple acoustic targets at each interval. I have a bunch more ideas to follow this test too, so who's going to pony up the money for the barrels and warehouse facility to get this ball rollin? I envision a multimillion dollar facility that begins to answer all of our questions and take all the fun right out of it. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] Really, it quite amazing that nobody has not went to the exteme of testing all of our cartridges inherant accuracy, specific barrel steels, barrel contours, lengths, barrel thread type and diameter, stock densities, scope mounts, lock time, etc, etc, etc.... Competitions seems to be the only place "so called" testing is done, but just take one look at all the variables in thi "sort" of testing and it's enough to make any methodical scientific type just puke. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] Sure we learn, but how slow have we, what have we overlooked in the process, and what misconceptions have resulted as well... [img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img] Certainly keeps things interesting! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
I'm not finding any data
Top