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
Shoulder Design Discussion?
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="Ken Howell" data-source="post: 22102" data-attributes="member: 23"><p>My comment about the 30° shoulder is based on bad experience (mine and others') with the 40° shoulder. I have no experience with a 35° shoulder, which seems to me not distinct enough from either the 30° or the 40° to be worth talking about.</p><p></p><p>Case life ended abruptly, sometimes with the first loading of fire-formed cases, when the cases "turtle-necked" with difficult bullet-seating -- a liability of the 40° shoulder. (The necks didn't accept the bullets but instead collapsed back inside the case bodies -- reversing the shoulders.)</p><p></p><p>The virtues of the 40° shoulder were born in conjecture that ignored some of the basic physics of expanding high-pressure gas, and through the sanctity of print, shooters adopted this conjecture as proven theory. I studied all this when it was new, and fell for it for a while. Pioneer ballistician Homer Powley explained the fallacies of it -- but the explanations are much too long for this post. So I'm satisfied to simply ignore the 40° shoulder altogether and let those who remain enamored of it continue to enjoy their fantasies regarding it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ken Howell, post: 22102, member: 23"] My comment about the 30° shoulder is based on bad experience (mine and others') with the 40° shoulder. I have no experience with a 35° shoulder, which seems to me not distinct enough from either the 30° or the 40° to be worth talking about. Case life ended abruptly, sometimes with the first loading of fire-formed cases, when the cases "turtle-necked" with difficult bullet-seating -- a liability of the 40° shoulder. (The necks didn't accept the bullets but instead collapsed back inside the case bodies -- reversing the shoulders.) The virtues of the 40° shoulder were born in conjecture that ignored some of the basic physics of expanding high-pressure gas, and through the sanctity of print, shooters adopted this conjecture as proven theory. I studied all this when it was new, and fell for it for a while. Pioneer ballistician Homer Powley explained the fallacies of it -- but the explanations are much too long for this post. So I'm satisfied to simply ignore the 40° shoulder altogether and let those who remain enamored of it continue to enjoy their fantasies regarding it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Shoulder Design Discussion?
Top