@@UnitedStatesOfGuns I just found this one. Very intriguing, Had read many years ago of .22 cal being tested by the DOD and I believe Roy Weatherby at 5,000 fps and having phenomenal penetration through steel. I don't recall mention of rifling. Just a large case full of slow(?) powder at very high pressure. As you described the challenges of leakage and stability, my first thought went to a slick plastic sabot with grooves on the outside molded into the plastic like the shotgun slug. at the speeds you are talking about, you would not need or want a high rate of twist. I feel the 30 cal bullet is good as you can buy 250 grain bullets.But then you will need a larger bore. There are so many cases that would lend themselves to this experimentation, however the .284 win case necked up to .40 so the sabot could carry a .30 cal bullet. considering that you want the combustion mainly in the case, you would maybe consider a smaller bore size (.375 or .35) or fatter case or both. It's beyond my current means, but if you or someone else pursues it I hope I get to read about it. The 700 action is impressive, but I wouldn't stand next to it when it is fired. I think strain gauges might help at least in a relative way, Oheler used to sell them I think.
Exceptional work sir, truly. You took a "I wonder if" thought I have had for a while and put much work, time and $$ towards it. I am a simple industrial engineer but this topic fascinates. I hope this is not the last we will see of it.
Brilliant sir....the reasons why the Russians and later the U.S. adopted smoothbore main gun tubes for full-sized heavy battle tanks. Projectiles fired from the main gun on a modern heavy battle tank, are moving so fast the twist of the rifling cannot be attained, which is what enables the gyroscopic/spin effect that results in stability. Retained velocities at great distances allow for accurate shot placement at extended ranges (3-4 kilometers with modern battle tanks) Additionally, smoothbores offer the gunner more options for ammunition types to be used on specific types of targets. projectiles fired from the main gun are not impeded nor enhanced in terms of mid-range trajectory and velocity. The only effect rifling would have on such extreme speed munition would be counterproductive to the purpose of rifling, which is to stabilize a specified group of projectiles designed for the groove twist pattern of the rifling. The pattern would be the number of lands and grooves rotating 360 degrees within so many inches to optimally stabilize projectiles of a certain length and weight, and still adequately stabilize a category of bullets of lesser characteristics. When dealing with centerfire rifles, sectional density and ballistic coefficient are very significant factors which can influence retained velocities and stability, and are therefore less vulnerable to harmonic vibrations that result in instability on impact as well as flight. The recessed tail, or boat-tail bullet is another example of mitigating the risk of instability by reducing turbulence in flight causing great gains in distance potential. Another way to contribute to the stability of any bullet is the use of a heavy, and often very thick barrel. Many match rifle shooters own rifles with conspicuously thick and heavy barrels, with a twist rate designed to stabilize a category of bullets from 300 to 800 yards.
Fascinating and thoroughly intriguing! Thanks for sharing as much as you did, I can appreciate your reluctance to go into excessive detail. Very interesting subject.
The corporations and governments know so much more than I do, and my methods are primitive - but I really enjoy this type of thing. Have a Merry Christmas!
@@UnitedStatesOfGuns yes, you would think various militaries would have done extensive research in this area but I guess it's not something talked much about in public. Thanks, and a merry Christmas to you too!
Thank you for making my head do as it should. Not many things I see or hear are as thought inducing as when I watch your videos. I enjoy the way you think and relay the thoughts. Once again, many thanks. I only wish I was able to meet you. I could chat for hours and learn so much from you.
Sir. You continue to astound me. This is of profound interest to me. You remind me of Elmer Kieth looking into stuff just cause he wanted to know, and sharing with everybody. Thank you.
Wow, that was very informative. Thanks for taking the time to explain all that! I know an old man who told me about a magazine article where an author used a 264 win mag loaded with pistol powder and light pistol bullets to achieve velocities over 5,000fps. He lost the magazine decades ago and I can not find the article online. Id really like to read it and give it to him a copy. People are constantly trying to get more velocity, the 250-3000 Savage was revolutionary in its day. Today 3,000fps is normal. I wonder what kinds of things will be normal in 50 more years.
Hi Jake! That is fantastic. I'll look for the article. The fellow was right on track - I just added the smooth bore to get rid of friction and drag - since accuracy was no an initial concern. If you ever find the article please send. Thank you so much!
Have you ever calculated the rpm on a fired bullet? Muzzle velocity x(12/twist rate in inches)x 60= Rpm That's a whole lot of wasted energy when your goal is high velocity. To achieve stabilization I believe that using the new projectiles for the Franklin Armory Reformation would be a good start. They could be placed in a sabot for use in your 308. And if I ever do find the article I will certainly send it to you.
Thank you Mike, I absolutely loved this video. Great info & experimental effort. I remember reading about or watching something about bullet damage and how it affected bullet flight. Amazed to find out that damage to the pointy end had less affect than to the tail end. I enjoy your videos
Hi Robert - It was interesting and fun; although not as scientific as it could have been. I still think about the velocities from time to time. Maybe I'll get back to it one of these days. Viewers have sent much advice and better science. All the best.
Just now catching up on your video from some time ago, and I must say that you have put forth some terrific ideas in your fantastic experiment. The whole rail gun concept is fascinating, and this is not far removed. My thanks for an educational and eye-opening video. Very entertaining.
Rumour has it,whilst digging around in the vault,one of the booby traps went of whilst swinging across a pit full of spikes,using his whip..this mans videos and his appreciation for the art of gunsmiths is brilliant..TY..🇬🇧
Wow, this has been one of the most interesting presentations you've given. A hyper-velocity, un-rifled 308 custom Remington... Congratulations, that's one you don't see every day. The idea about an extra fast 308 makes me wonder what the results would be from a 220-Swift or some other already super fast round. DaVinci once wrote that many of his initial questions, thoughts, and ideas were so hard to find answers for because each one would open up yet many other ideas and questions. I'm sure the same thought has occurred to you by now. Great video, now I'm wondering about some "what if's"...
Hi Paul, The whole process of the rifle with no rifling experiment was a revelation - I had little idea materials collapsed to quickly when hit by projectiles travelling so fast. I remain confident that the theory is sound and small arms, especially for military sniper and anti material use, can be reduced in cal. and can be effective far beyond what is now thought. On another level - the one you mention - I realize, over and over how little I know, and how we all, live in the shadow of creation - which we we will never really understand and there is no need to. Still, I always liked turning over stones in the shallows at the beach; to see what is there. : )
USOG - Well, keep looking under those stones on the beach. I'm pretty sure Mr Browning and Mr Mauser didn't find everything of value during their beach treks. Again, a very good idea and video - take care!
Another thought, without the rifling resistance, as the pressure builds from burning, and the bullet has little pressure to push against, it gets pushed out of the barrel before much pressure developes, resulting in low velocity. Depending on the hardness of the bullet, if it is soft enough, it could still obturate and seal the bore but still have low velocity due to lack of rifling resistance, and be pushed out the barrel before the pressure builds very high.
Good thoughts and true. Therefore, powder with higher burn rates are necessary to generate pressure in the chamber. Also, the bullets does seal the bore more than one expects, even without rifling. The initial "bump" of gas pressure is more significant than I thought. Interesting area for sure.
@@UnitedStatesOfGuns I like your videos, we have similar tastes in firearms. I especially like that you are quite knowledgeable, but don't act like a know it all. Many people think they know more than they actually do, and act like they do know. The truth being, no one knows it all, we can all learn. But you talk in a nice friendly manner, express facts, and also express your opinion, but express it as your opinion, and openly admit things that you aren't completely sure of or maybe don't know. Nothing like talking with an intelligent man who speaks openly and honestly. Thank you. Keep up your videos. On a personal note, I particularly like your win 88 with the dark colored, I assume custom stock. Beautiful rifle! I am also a fan of the model 70. My personal favorite is a super grade with a pretty feather crotch stock. A good shooter too. Also, I like the classic style single shots. The ruger number 1 is a favorite, but I kinda prefer the new 1885 action over it. Problem with the miroku winchester 1885 is the top tang and the necessitated straight gripped stock. The top tang and straight grip are nice if it is a 45-70, 38-55, or something similar, that you would put a tang mounted sight on, but it your rifle is chambered to a more modern cartridge that would benefit from a scope, I prefer the pistol grip stock. Just my opinion. A few years ago, they made a limited run of miroku built B78's, that incorporated the newer 1885 action, but minus the top tang, and sporting the B78 style, pistol grip stock. I was fortunate enough to pick up one in 30-06 (my favorite cartridge), but it had a beautiful brown feather crotch stock, and a 24 inch barrel, making it an attractive, well balanced, full performance, but compact hunting rifle. One of my favorites. They also had another one in 300 winchester mag with a 26 inch barrel, and a more blonde colored stock with beautiful extensive fiddle back throughout. I was ready to take both, but foolishly talked myself out of the 300 mag. In my opinion, it was perfect in that caliber, the 26 inch barrel well suited to the 300, while making a nice relatively compact hunting rifle. I've regretted that decision, many times. I would love to have another such rifle, the 1885 action with pistol grip stock, with the 28 inch barrel, chambered to a cartridge like the 257 weatherby magnum, or 270 win, or other similar caliber. The 28 inch barreled rifle not being overly long with a fast, flat, easy shooting cartridge, ideal for deer, antelope, and maybe up to elk sized game, and the long barrel making the most of the cartridges performance. It would also have to have a beautiful, highly figured, wood stock. I also like the miroku built 1885 low wall. I still have one in 243, and had one in 22-250, with a 24 inch barrel, and a plain pistol grip stock. I was seriously thinking of having the barrel bored out to 25-06, and restocking it with some real pretty wood, but foolishly talked myself out of that too. I think it would have made a very nice, light, slim, compact and elegant hunting rifle for deer/antelope. Especially if the receiver and lever were also color case hardened. I also like the Haghn (spelling?) Single shot rifles and one of the smaller framed versions with a 24 inch barrel and pistol grip stock, chambered in 30-40 krag, would make a wonderful hunting rifle. Of course it would have to have fancy wood, color case hardening, etc. :) But the price...... :( I am contemplating such a build on a miroku built 1885. Nothing like dreams and plans! Keep the videos coming, love the variety of firearms you show. I like all types but lean more to old school hunting firearms than the new AR style, and you seem to show more of the old school, which I like. Also the unique ones like the falling block, double barrel, etc, are very interesting. Love savage 99's also, i think they are very elegant also and look especially nice, all fixed up!! :) Looking forward to future videos. Thanks again.
As soon as you used the word launch my ears perked up like a bluetick hound chasing a possum. The velocities which you were experimenting, if similar to the in velocities that you mentioned, caused me to consider the possibilities of using projectile design alone as a stabilizing force in which rifling would no longer be a necessary component in the development and deployment of hyper velocity projectiles. I can actually visualize a projectile designed to operate on Bernoulli‘s aerodynamic principle to turn a projectile into a self-contained gyroscopically stabilized missile without the need of rifling. This sounds really cool
Hi Thom - I think someone will come up with something one of these days. Rifling is such a nuisance and deforms the bullet; causes bore friction and slows the bullet down. I like your ideas.
USOG You and I have very similar interests! A couple months ago I downloaded a paper called “The Guns of Nasa”. They did tests up to 24,000 fps using projectiles from .17 to 1 inch using a variety of propellants including gunpowder and gases. It’s only an 8 page pdf, but quite interesting. I found it from a google search, but if you would like I can send you the file if you’re interested.
Incredibly interesting Sir, you posed questions that have never entered mind for the forty plus years that I have been involved with firearms. I really enjoy your videos, and the time/effort that you put into each one. Thank you and please keep up the great work!!
I am new to your channel ,and wow a breath of fresh air ,,you sir are hypnotic to listen to .You are the William F Buckly of firearms ..Very well done i am hooked.
Very interesting 🧐 I’ve wondered about the results of weight forward bullets and the additional friction of rifling. I was glad to see these experiments.
This was very interesting video and gives a new approach to what people might see as inherently insane, but nonetheless very interesting. When you said or rather thought of ways to create the gas seal I immediately thought of either paper patched bullets to engage the barrel to create a seal or something akin to a lead minie bullet where the back of the lead could deform to the size the rifleless barrel. But then it struck me after the statement of machined bullets and no longer needing to conform to typical bullet lengths you could use a long projectile made of aluminum with lead lined grooves on the back or body of the projectile (like Grease grooves but with enough lead to sit snug in the barrel) Although I'm probably wrong it's not far from impossible to do and to test. Best of luck, a fellow fan of the show.
USOG I was just texting a friend about this video and his take is a sabot with just enough straight rifling to creat enough friction to maintain a seal for max velocity. He believes that a perfect balance of friction and seal will enable the accuracy you are looking for while maintaining the amazing velocities. All a bit over my head. But his IQ is so high that I sumit he is just a lab accident away from becoming a super villian like in the DC comic books. Hahaha.
Hahahaha - love that description of your friend. Good idea, although straight rifling won't impart any spin on the projectile. Please ask your friend to send a message - even if it is long. I'm listening. Thank you and have a nice Sunday.
Just wanted to tell you, I picked up a Savage 99E in .308 win, with diopter sights. I would love to see a video from you on the history and application of diopters or "peep" sights. You really are the most thorough and well spoken firearm RUclipsr. You are absolutely brilliant sir and really want to see what you have too say about open iron sights, more specifically diopters. Thank you for everything you do for the firearm community in these challenging times
Ash, your words humble me. Thank you so much. Your idea is excellent! I will cover those very fine sights and appreciate the suggestion. The very best to you.
I enjoyed this video immensely. Maybe 25 yrs ago I read an Inspector general report that detailed a process where the DOD was attempting to replace gunpowder with chemicals that were safe to transport until the mixture in the bore was achieved. Ignition timing was the problem. The concept was abandoned when they couldn't achieve acceptable rates of fire without destroying the canon.
@@UnitedStatesOfGuns I was told by a retired tank commander some 30 years ago that the development time for weapons, primarily the rounds we know of today is 10 to 15 years. Having viewed some of DARPA'S requests and solicitations for information on Fed Biz Ops I've found this to be true in a general sense.
USOG, Fascinating analysis Sir, I remember from My time as an Artillery Man that We adjusted Our range with elevation adjustments and increasing Our powder charge, We could only get so far with this, to obtain Our maximum effective range of 23 miles, We used a rocket assisted projectile. I only got to fire these once on a training operation. Essentially Our M198 Howitzer was just a huge rifle, but I have always thought of this, in regards to firearms, but I think the cost and recoil would be too much great to apply this same technology to hand held firearms. Great video Sir, I love all the thought that was put into it.
Thanks Rick. I learned a lot from your words on the M198 - and that lead me to read more. BTW - I know I've said this before but wherever you live is just beautiful.
I suppose most people leave it to governments and corporations; and the science is probably well known. Still, sometimes I do things out of interest - fully aware it has all been done before and better by governments and militaries long ago. I learned a lot.
@@UnitedStatesOfGuns I can't tell you how much I wish I had friends with such interests, and that were as intellectually inclined as yourself. Such subjects are lost on most of my peers! I thought of this super high velocity projectiles from rifles above what is generally talked about even with wildcat cartridges. As with your research I was led to the tank artillery ect. I'm still enthralled by the fact that you were able to get as far as you did experimenting. Maybe it's just different where you live, more machinist, gunsmiths and access to Brownells store/website. Here in Canada, my foray into this super high velocity experimentation would have ended at trying to get a rifle barrel made to such specifications here. They'd probably think I was trying to make an "untraceable sniper death ray". I can still make all kinds of stuff with parts and what I can make with a welder and common shop tools. Someday maybe a small cnc and milling lathe!
A Russian fellow informed me they have something along what I have in mind already. If Russian snipers toss their 12.7mm massive sniper and switch to a 2000 mps VHV round - this is about 6500 fps - no one could touch them.
You were very close, but you missed a building block or two in your line of thinking. The two building blocks you missed are related and combine to achieve the outcome you're looking for. You obviously know a lot about the subject of firearms, so I have to assume that you've studied firearms design engineering. That would include, of course, interior and exterior ballistics. If you haven't studied this you should because you would enjoy it to no end! The math is not important in this, the concepts are. I enjoyed following your line of thinking very much. It was fascinating for me to watch you try to reinvent the wheel. Don't take this as an insult to you in any way. You're thinking was brilliant! As always, I'm stunned by your focus on the very broad subject of firearms overall, and the resources you devote to it.
Thank you so much! Your thoughts are so meaningful to me and I understand and respect your words. I know....that you know....which is the honor among colleagues; although I may be too bold. As in all things, I try to do my best; many times I realize I am reaching into the dark. That is okay...because it is in my nature. : ) The very best to you.
What everybody forgets most of the time, me especially, is that the energy needed to accelerate a bullet down a barrel is a function of pressure acting on the surface of the base of the bullet. YOU ALREADY KNEW THAT. If you increase the area of the base of a bullet of a given weight, you don't need higher pressure to make it to go faster. Sabot. So, if you take a 200 grain bullet of say .30" diameter, and push it down a barrel with a pressure of say 50,000psi, you get 50,000psi times the area at the base of the bullet (π r²) worth of energy acting to accelerate the bullet. (not doing the math, I have a headache) But if you take a 200 grain bullet of say .50" diameter, and push it down a barrel with that same 50,000psi, the area of the bullet base is a lot bigger, so the bullet will go lots faster with the same amount of pressure. To use 50,000psi on a .30" 200 grain projectile, but give it the acceleration and speed of a .50" 200 grain projectile driven with 50,000psi, you use a sabot. As you know. The point of this is to use the sabot to get the ballistic coefficient, and terminal ballistics of the smaller diameter projectile driven at a very high velocity without increasing chamber pressure. All stuff you already knew. Lastly, this technology in small arms came out commercially, and on a massive scale, some 50 years ago, and is still available today (was re-introduced I think). See link: www.midwayusa.com/product/220009/remington-express-ammunition-30-06-springfield-accelerator-55-grain-pointed-soft-point-box-of-20 I'm sure you knew that too. This type of thing happens all the time. I was reading about it the other day. It's called the "Invisible Gorilla" phenomenon. Look it up when you have a few seconds, you'll be stunned. I did not see the gorilla. Maybe this enplanes why I'm a terrible driver and keep crashing into things.
USOG, I'd like to hear your take on my post with the formula that gives you the answer to your velocity problem. I've edited the post down (now starts with "What everybody") because it's original length may have put you off reading it.
Hello, I had over a hundred items to respond to and am excited to read and respond to yours. I can't find it. Please send again to unitedstatesofguns@gmail.com Thank you.
There is a natural frontier to achieve high muzzle volocities. It depends on the speed of sound in the combusted propellant. It is the same speed of shock waves, which propells the bullet. No bullet could travel faster than this shockwave. The speed of sound itself depends on the temperature, pressure and molecular weight of the gas inside the chamber. For rifle propellants this maximum speed is 2300m/s up to 2500m/s, obtainable velocities are lower. The ultra high velocities could only be reached by a two step or multiple step chamber where a piston is driven by normal propellants against a chamber with a light gas (hydrogen or helium). Since the speed of sound is much higher in this media, you could achieve velocities above 14000m/s and more. To increase rifle velocities, the propellant has to burn at lower temperatures, higher pressures and lower molecular weight of of the gas. It's a tricky thing to achieve all points. In WW 2 there were some studies about "kalte Pulver" (cold powders) for artillery use. Another result is the light gas gun or Leichtgaskanone, which is used by NASA for re-entry and impact research. Greetings from Germany!
Excellent video, it's always nice to see an intelligent breakdown of an uncommon subject. One day, I'd hope that you would put this down in writing as a case study. I completely understand keeping things vague to prevent people from doing something silly and hurting themselves, but it'd be nice to see some new ideas in terms of firearms innovation that isn't just a new model number of the same gun every few years or so.
I have thought about this for years, and it may be prior art, but spin the gun! Envision a cylindrical action and a smooth bore barrel rotating at a calculated rpm. This would not be a practical portable weapon, but the design could be used for ship weapons or ground artillery. I'm thinking maybe a test chamber/barrel in a high speed lathe spindle. It would be interesting to try. Food for thought.
Just into a very early pre war Model 52 via auction... What a classic. I am happy I will be abke to give her a little tlc and an appreciative new owner!
Will do Sir - as soon as I have the rifle in hand... Thanks so much Sir. Quick question - what do you typically use to "clean" rifles that have been neglected for years - I have been very pleased with two "good old" classic household cleaners (especially on really gunked up metal) with no visible ill effect. Of course I am very careful when I use them. I would value your opinion please.
I wonder if a very slow twist rate would work. Have it rifled at say 1 in 50 or 60. You might be able get a seal in the bore plus stabilize the projectile.
Very fun video. Reminds me of the HK G11, nasa guns, and shooting 22 blanks with a pellet as a projectile . Maybe try the diabolo shape or adding a stabilizing fin to the projectile? Fascinating video I hope you revisit the subject!
Did you say you got around 2,000fps more than a regular 308? Or am I hearing things? Either way that’s remarkable. Very interesting and a well done video.
Hi Drew - Extremely high velocity - I think even faster than that but dangerous and out of control due to poor experimental conditions. For sure VHV is there but how to control it and why - I could not find the answers. Thanks for writing.
USOG i was thinking maybe if you were less concerned over the bullet weight perhaps you could try making a finned dart thats loaded with a plug behind it more like a shotgun would so you get a better seal and maybe it would have some more stability down range
Awesome. This is a topic that interests me greatly, thank you for sharing your findings. I really appreciate this vid. The hot 22's have always fascinated me, the energy obtained from such small projectiles is impressive . I think when you get to those speeds its more about materials than anything else, ceramics, tungsten etc. and the design of the projectile. Love your thoughts on this especially how to stabilise the projectile, great vid thank you, cheers.
Great idea, spinning the projectile makes up for error in density, concentricity of the projectile, and the barrel plus muzzle shape - if we have the manufacturing capability to get the projectiles almost perfect, using polymers to obturate, the shape to stabilize and by maybe sort of magnaporting the barrel or integrally suppress it to send it out the barrel without much pressure the musket becomes interesting again. I would love to get more detail on the experiment, this might be the next evolution of small arms!
Hi Ragnar - there is something to it - the experiment - but more and greater minds are needed. I see almost no limits to velocity if stability can be achieved; if some of my assumptions are correct - projectiles would not be restricted by the "launcher" - which for now is the rifles barrel etc...
USOG - hi there mate Romeo from Australia here big fan of your channel and the videos you made very rich in information, just wanted your opinion on wach rifel of the 2 I should pick The Blasr R8 or The Merkel RX Helex. You're opinion much appreciated and really it means allot for me.
Hi Romeo - great name! Where you are I'd take the R8. A little less sensitive to sand and dust and heat. I always remember Breaker Morant. "Australia forEver Amen" and "rule .303" Spent a lot of time your way Romeo - loved every second. Best of luck mate.
USOG can u please make a video about pressure and strenght of actions,for example the max pressure of black powder and why a shotgun works with lower pressures then a a pistol and what barrel thickness is minimum and how strong actions need to be in terms of recoil and such,that would be very very very intresting.
I think I watched this some time ago. I think you’re onto something I’ve thought about. I would like to develop a sabot that could deliver some type of stabilized projectile. You are correct that the stability is improved for a sabot with the weight at the front of the projectile. This is opposite from gyro stabilized projectiles where the weight needs to be toward or at the base. Your working in the same development processes that the engineers who developed the main gun for the M1 tank have done. You’re correct that you have to lighten the projectile because you are now using the kinetic energy of speed where weight is almost, not totally, irrelevant. The cartridges for the M1, which I have handled and fired, are a moderately hard steel alloy. Steel is an alloy anyway, but you know what I mean. Those armor piercing high velocity sabots, are fired at extremely high velocities in the range of FPS you mentioned as maximum. Even without riflings the barrels of those 120mm guns does burn out very quickly. You can fire any of the other projectiles for much longer duration, but those rounds do create extreme wear, extremely quickly, even in a smooth bore. Curiously the British counterpart has a rifled 120 mm main gun that actually has a longer effective range that our gun. The M1 has, for the most part, a 3500 meter effective range, and the Brits main gun has an effective range in excess of 5000 meters. Interesting isn’t it, that when reaching out to longer ranges the heavier projectile becomes more effective. It is just like the battle of balance between weight and velocity of our hunting rifles at long ranges. Double the weight, double the energy at a given velocity. Double the velocity, quadrupole the energy at a given weight. Round and round it goes. These are the challenges I love to work at.
So interesting. It took me awhile to figure out what was going on with no rifling and no bore sealing; the bullet can be any length and just about any shape so long as it fits. I'll have to return to this one day. I should have tried a stronger lathe turned steel case and more pressure in the chamber - but at the time it felt like I had gone far enough. The sabots you mention are the way to go - very long and very thin and extreme velocity; now only that nasty stability issue. Cheers.
Did you try and cut spiral channels into the projectile it self like a foster slug for a smooth bore shotgun? Their has to be a way to to make the projectile it self spin without any rifling to achieve stability. This would be revolutionary for firearms. Cartridge velocity and barrel life would sky rocket. This was an absolutely fascinating video and experiment. Thank you for sharing this. Have a nice day.
Thanks Avery - good thinking - I tried everything; the velocities are so high the air is compressed too much by the bullet for air stream deflection through grooves to create spin; so I went to internal stabilization - or tried to. You could come up with something though - I'm sure there is much I missed.
I had the same thought of making a smoothbore rifle using pistol powder that would fire darts with flights to get a spin happening. Possibly also use a sabot to protect the slender shape of the dart from deforming during firing. I never had the spare money to throw at the idea so I shelved it. I hope you persist with the concept and maybe even do a call out to viewers to build some concept projectiles and you could make a video of you testing them at a range. Thanks.
Excellent presentation Matt, very concise and accurate. If I may add, and in no particular order. It is true about steel cases not fireforming to the chamber, however steel cases do tend to stick in the chamber making extraction difficult.This is not a factor of being steel but rather due to the lacquered finish on the surface of the case. Neat idea to get a non rifled M - 700, you say it's for .308. I assume you mean .30 caliber using .308 diameter trifling. But the remark of shooting 7.62 × 39mm is confusing. This round is not .308 dia. but rather a .311 diameter. As to finding a means to gas seal the bullet in your smooth bore M-700, it brings to mind the same predicament shooters experienced prior to the Civil War. And as we know a Frenchman solved this problem with his design of the Minnie Ball. The hollow base of the soft lead projectile expanded under gas pressure to form a skirt that would create a seal and allow a build up of pressure that allowed higher velocity and improved accuracy. Your estimations of muzzle velocity exceeding 7000 fps for tank rounds is not untrue, but there are factors to consider when speaking of such things. The powders used in tanks main gun are different and do not compare with rifle powders. The burning rate and pressure curve are radically different. Depending on the era and caliber of gun being used the round may be self contained or it may be loaded as components. It may also be a discarding sabot type which would be considered as sub caliber to the bore. One must also decide one the " type " of main gun, is it smooth bore or is it rifled. Also consider that as a tank round it my make use of a driving band on the projectile, something no rifle round will have. Another factor to bare in mind with trying to attain higher velocities than standard for a given cartridge of a specific caliber is that the commercially manufactured ammo and projectiles available are all using a gilding metal of a uniform thickness, and are extremely soft and fragile. And even though bonded to the core, unless the type of bullet is of a monolithic solid construction you will most certainly experience core separation and shedding once velocities exceed beyond the rated construction of the projectile. And this will occur more as a product of spin than velocity itself. As it would not happen if it were possible to reach these velocities out of a smooth bore barell. This is an intriguing discussion as it relates to interior and exterior ballistics. It also goes hand in hand with the old and never ending debate over the two schools of thought on " heavy and slow " vs " light and fast ". Which is the better big game round, the 900gn .700 caliber projectile going 1200 fps ? Or the 150gn .30 caliber projectile going 3800 fps ? Of course there are trade offs, but which gets the job done " better "? A last point. When discussing shotgun slugs, it must be remembered the ongoing measures that manufacturers have taken to obtain a better gas seal, higher velocities and a flatter trajectory out to 75, 100 and then 125 yards. With the exception of the Paradox type of barells we will keep to smoothbores. And we will exclude fully rifled bores and sabot ammo. We first see the introduction of the Forster type of slug with its hollow base, and then imprinted rifling. Next is the Dynamitt Nobel style with a flat base and a type of thick felt wad attached to the base, providing a gas seal of sorts. There are other attempts at similar methods, but most offer little in improvement. Then we have what I find to be the best of the breed, the hourglass shaped, wasp waisted slugs found in ammo by Litchfield. A well thought out design that actually shows an improvement in the areas we are dealing with. Most notably a heavy slug, traveling at higher than average velocity, well stabilized, with improved range, muzzle energy and accuracy. But as with most things in life there is a price to be paid when you go down this road. Winchester and Remington found thjis out long ago in the early 60's. Pushing cartridges like the .220 Swift and the .22 - 250 Rem to velocities hovering around the 4,000 fps mark made for great marketing and enthusiastic customers..... for a time. Then the reality set in. At these velocities chamber throat erosion was a big problem. But more importantly was that a barells useable life was now being measured in a few hundreds of rounds instead of the average 4 - 6,000 or so. A huge difference. Some stainless steel barells were used to help Improve things, but working with this type of steel was very difficult to work with at the time. The bottom line was, to stay cost effective ammo velocity was scaled back, and if memory serves me correctly, 3,400 fps was the top speed. Again, a GREAT study on your part and an excellent experience and experiment to discuss here. Lots of fun!!! Thanks. Be safe and be healthy.
Hi Steve - I guess my ideas were not very sophisticated but it was very interesting. Some people wrote me with similar things that they had done - which was even more interesting.
I remember seeing an article years ago that mentioned seating bullets backward in a .243 to be used for turkeys. I can’t remember how that worked out but it was the first time I had seen this done.
As with early artillery development, you need to have long barrels. smooth bores are easier for longevity. Smooth bore requires, as you know, some type of external fletching as in a sabot projectile. Always finding a crossover example is the British 120mm rifled tank barrels. They are in opposition to the rest being smooth. The British main guns do have a substantially longer range of accuracy. Very well done fact based research. Duplex and triplex powder loads are the answer for high velocities in shorter barrels as in the 454 Casule. The “best”, as a word, is my 5 inch 460 S&W. A 225 grain bullet at just under 2400 fps. It’s has a tremendous muzzle blast, but isn’t as harsh in recoil as people say. My last project was conceived by my uncle and mentor in 1981 or 1982. This was just after he developed the original 264 Improved. Someone made another years later, but with a different shoulder. And a very nice 6.5-240 Weatherby. He got around to it again in 1990 and I took over development of the cartridge and rifles in 1992. We named it the 6.5 Dakota. After getting my hands on and case forming the 300 Ultra Mag., and the introduction of US869, the cartridge was finished. The rifles model 70 actions and bolts were finely machined, modified and fitted with 29 1/2 inch Heart barrels. The barrels have a 1 in 8 twist even with high velocities. I purchased an Ohler 35 with a printer to provide documented proof of my results. 142 grain Sierra bullets were test fired on 98 to 100 degree still days, at just under 300 feet elevation. With the pre ignition conditions of a hot day, I produced velocities over 4000 fps., with a 16 fps deviation on the final test loads. Now being studied as you are, you know I just said a mouth full. I was contacted by the R&D supervisor for Dakota Arms as they have many of their own product line of cartridges based on the 404 Jeffery’s case. A world class and most likely best American gun smith Randy “The Real Gunsmith” in Wyoming developed those cartridges. Long story short, they were not interested in my cartridge. Humorously, Nosler introduced their 26 Nosler 24 years after our 6.5 Dakota. It is simply our cartridge with a longer body. I explained, and Dakota was aware, if my case was lengthened, they would start receiving diminishing returns. I enjoyed listening to your ideas, as I do all those who do their own research and development. Most all innovation comes from people like us and many others who think outside the box. There is a couple in Australia who develop shoot and showcase their work on RUclips. It is called Sam and Mark after work I believe. I hope I didn’t mess their names up. They are really fantastic couple to watch. Their learned knowledge is right in line with what me and my family have done. Sorry this was so long. I could talk for days about this passion we share with growing numbers. I am really very happy to see it is continuing properly.
Great video. I will rewatch to absorb as much as I can. All new for me. In the California desert doing photo work till the end of the month. All the best! 😃😃😃🌵🌵🌵
Hi Rick - that's nice - the desert I mean. Not sure if you're a wine man but some nice sources not far away - I'd love to see your photo work if that's possible. Stay safe and best of luck with the shoot.
USOG - thank you for yet another very unique and informative video Sir. I learned something new today... Please remind your subscribers (me) of the wax/polish you utilize on your rifle stocks. If I remember correctly - it may have been made in England? Thanks so much!!!
Hi USOG, love your vids, just bought myself an R8 professional success after seeing your videos on the blaser action. Have you thought about engraving a recessed spiral into the projectile, I would think that should get it spinning?
I wish I'd found this video sooner. In the 1980s I used polymer bullets, a Remington made 1903-A3, and a smooth bore Shilen barrel. The bullets were about 110 grains, and wouldn't hold together for more than about 50 yards. I ended up ruining the rifle action because of the pressures. I turned the bullets out of UHMW plastic. They were over 2 inches long. I no longer have the notes to give you accurate data.
A thought about target effects...if you are using a small projectile, with similar energy, the energy is concentrated into a smaller "contact patch" for a .3" vs .5" the ratio of "pressure" would be about 2.8x , so, based on that, alone, a very different penetration level...there may also be some effect of heat generation, or shock wave in the 'backstop' materials...good fun! My background is fairly broad, but a lot of my experience is in test & measurement, which, in the electronics fields, gets into nanoseconds pretty quickly. So, for example, I've never seen any documentation of the so-called "barrel harmonics", and no documentation at all on the actual deflection of the muzzle, over time, and correlated to bullet exit... have you, in your years of interest in the subjects, seen such? Interesting, too, getting a fast enough burning "powder" without getting into a high enough brisance to cause shock damage to the steel, and other materials in the system... ammonium nitrate + ...hmmmm
I've noticed some of the early squirrel rifles only had rifling for part of the length of the barrel..they were manually rifled...and being one of the earlier divergents from the musket...partial rifling might be an avenue worth walking...?
absolutely fascinating! Hyper velocity, no deformation of the projectile from rifleing, potentially vastly different bullet shape, length, weight...!!! Tell us more!
3572 fps is the speed (admitted) of the SR71 Blackbird. That fact always floored me. VHV has always fascinated me regardless of the projectiles. I've heard of artillery going 7000 fps. Don't the kinetic energy rounds, sabot for anti-tank use go that fast? I know the military admitted the old ones went 5500 fps. After the invasion of Iraq they upgraded the guns and rounds.
I think a small correction is in order regarding shotgun slugs. yes, the eight is forward, but I think they are loaded with plastic jackets, or sabots, that are finned, to spin the slug even without rifling. I don't think they are stable without that, because I see non-sabot slugs that state they are for rifled shotgun barrels only. I would also have said that the reason for rifling has always been stabilization of the projectile. The police's ability to match a bullet to a gun by the rifling marks is incidental.
Hi Worsel, Great comment and interesting subject - thanks for writing. I tried many different slugs over the years. A few people sent me their custom slugs made in molds they had perfected. The full size non-sabot slugs (they are not enclosed or carried by a sabot) sometimes have rifling on the outside of the slug and sometimes don't. After seeing all the results it seems the slugs stay on track due to their weight forward design only. The presence or absence of grooves, spirals, rifling, holes and such seems to have little effect - but people like to see something on the outside so most manufacturers have some kind of profiling on their slugs. The most accurate I tested were Brenneke style with attached wad and smooth slug body with no rifling. The sabot slugs are caused to rotate in a rifled shotgun barrel by the rifling - just like a rifle - except the slug is held within a sabot - a usually plastic enclosure although I shot some old ones that used wood. I was told by viewers that "sabot" as you likely know is French for boot which makes sense as the slug is in a "boot" which falls away once the slug exits the barrel at some point. Some sabot slugs are super accurate - but I still like the original, simple Foster type slugs with no rifling - I find they react to choke the least and are most accurate - at least for me. Here is a pic of a nice, clean slug - these fellow are up so something else but the slug is good.www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/foster-slugs-in-smoothbore.115790/ All the best to you.
There are some self stabilizing slugs that may work, not sure you can get them up to the same velocity levels but still would love to see what you could get the pressure of a smooth bore shotgun up to with custom loads
Just wondering if smoothbore-rifled bore combination design (Like in FX airguns) has been used with a jacketed but obturating projectile (jacketed minie ball !) from a centre-fire rifle? Have not been able to find any information on the subject ( it's probably out there but I'm just not putting the right questions into Google) !
Hi Ashley, There were Paradox guns built by the British that had smooth bores to a point and then rifling - worked okay - I had a couple of these over the years. thebiggamehuntingblog.com/what-is-a-paradox-gun/ Rifles with jacketed bullets at high velocity or even modest velocity will hit that rifling hard and likely not react much to the "engraving" and turning effect of rifling further down the bore. The forward momentum is so great that it is most likely that the jacketed bullet would just blast and scrape right through the rifled section of the bore without rotation. I'm not certain of this but it seems to me that I remember either trying something like this myself or I knew someone who did a long time ago. Good idea though. In general - the closer the bullet is to the rifling in front of the chamber the better. Even the Weatherby jump - or freebore - does allow for initial velocity gain but there is a risk of bullet deformation - which Weatherby seems to have mastered - or they abandoned freebore - I'm not sure. Hope this helps.
trajectory? gravity? velocity? was it Newton? Einstein? Kepler?.....assignment for tomorrow! Here is where I had an inkling of an answer to something puzzling you describe, with reference to projectile velocity inside the barrel, is that in physics there are various types of friction. and once there is a gas cushion between smooth barrel wall and projectile there is probably a mix of situations going on, the friction in the very initial acceleration is probably different from the friction when v max is reached and there are things like possibly metal perhaps liquefying for a tiny amount of time and in a tiny portion of the surface area of the projectle, different metals reacting differently, then you mentioned that the barrel remains cool at high velocity, well that might point to a gas cushion where the projectile doesnt even touch the barrel and I know you had these thoughts years ago already. But I am totally absorbed by the large number of variables in these scenarios and what might suddenly be the next craze or fad in the marketplace. I wish you success with a few patents!
Thank you - So much changed once rifling was out of the equation. I think you are right - the bullet was floating more-or-less, after a point. The whole experiment became so complex and I couldn't keep up with the changing variables. So interesting though and I return to it from time to time.
Pistons achieve seal with piston rings. Bullets with weight forward with a stabilizer tail, projected through a smooth bore with discardable rings or sabot can achieve super-high velocity. Been done before.The reasons it is not popular in rifles is that it is not needed to kill (huntingly or militarily). It is used mainly for armor-piercing.
Reduce the engraving depth of the rifling and calculate the velocity to twist ratio, i.e. faster velocities work with slower twists. Like a 1:24 twist instead of a 10 twist.
That is very cool. I wonder how it might work out with only the last few inces of barrel rifled. Kind of like a rifled choke for shotgun slugs. Maybe if the barrel was 4"-6" longer, and only rifled in that last 4"-6". I doubt it would have slowed it down. Maybe starting with a rifled barrel with the lands reamed out to the grooves except the last 4", and polished?
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
This kind of "experimentation" and high quality of firearms IS the reason I subscribed to your channel!
You MUST expand on this hypervelocity experiment. The engineer in me is most interested!
Its amazing. Your videos are so good. Plus after watching your videos for awhile your such a gentleman and mellow. Keep up the good work.
Hello Dxp, Kind words are like water to me. Thank you.
Now this is a video to watch twice.
Very interesting “experimentation”.
Thanks Mad!
This is exactly the kind of tinkering video I was hoping you would make. This was a blast to take in. Keep up the excellent content!
Thanks Seth!
@@UnitedStatesOfGuns I just found this one. Very intriguing, Had read many years ago of .22 cal being tested by the DOD and I believe Roy Weatherby at 5,000 fps and having phenomenal penetration through steel. I don't recall mention of rifling. Just a large case full of slow(?) powder at very high pressure. As you described the challenges of leakage and stability, my first thought went to a slick plastic sabot with grooves on the outside molded into the plastic like the shotgun slug. at the speeds you are talking about, you would not need or want a high rate of twist. I feel the 30 cal bullet is good as you can buy 250 grain bullets.But then you will need a larger bore. There are so many cases that would lend themselves to this experimentation, however the .284 win case necked up to .40 so the sabot could carry a .30 cal bullet. considering that you want the combustion mainly in the case, you would maybe consider a smaller bore size (.375 or .35) or fatter case or both. It's beyond my current means, but if you or someone else pursues it I hope I get to read about it. The 700 action is impressive, but I wouldn't stand next to it when it is fired. I think strain gauges might help at least in a relative way, Oheler used to sell them I think.
Exceptional work sir, truly. You took a "I wonder if" thought I have had for a while and put much work, time and $$ towards it. I am a simple industrial engineer but this topic fascinates. I hope this is not the last we will see of it.
Thank you ZH - I hope to do more, and more informed work on this - just finding the time is tricky. So interesting though. Best to you.
Extremely interesting. Thank you.
Now this is freaking AWESOME!!! Thanks so much for sharing.
Thanks Jim!
I'm just happy you came away unscathed by your experiments!
Me too : )
Brilliant sir....the reasons why the Russians and later the U.S. adopted smoothbore main gun tubes for full-sized heavy battle tanks. Projectiles fired from the main gun on a modern heavy battle tank, are moving so fast the twist of the rifling cannot be attained, which is what enables the gyroscopic/spin effect that results in stability. Retained velocities at great distances allow for accurate shot placement at extended ranges (3-4 kilometers with modern battle tanks) Additionally, smoothbores offer the gunner more options for ammunition types to be used on specific types of targets. projectiles fired from the main gun are not impeded nor enhanced in terms of mid-range trajectory and velocity. The only effect rifling would have on such extreme speed munition would be counterproductive to the purpose of rifling, which is to stabilize a specified group of projectiles designed for the groove twist pattern of the rifling. The pattern would be the number of lands and grooves rotating 360 degrees within so many inches to optimally stabilize projectiles of a certain length and weight, and still adequately stabilize a category of bullets of lesser characteristics. When dealing with centerfire rifles, sectional density and ballistic coefficient are very significant factors which can influence retained velocities and stability, and are therefore less vulnerable to harmonic vibrations that result in instability on impact as well as flight. The recessed tail, or boat-tail bullet is another example of mitigating the risk of instability by reducing turbulence in flight causing great gains in distance potential. Another way to contribute to the stability of any bullet is the use of a heavy, and often very thick barrel. Many match rifle shooters own rifles with conspicuously thick and heavy barrels, with a twist rate designed to stabilize a category of bullets from 300 to 800 yards.
This kind of content is exactly what I like best . What if ? Wonderful !
Fascinating and thoroughly intriguing! Thanks for sharing as much as you did, I can appreciate your reluctance to go into excessive detail. Very interesting subject.
The corporations and governments know so much more than I do, and my methods are primitive - but I really enjoy this type of thing. Have a Merry Christmas!
@@UnitedStatesOfGuns yes, you would think various militaries would have done extensive research in this area but I guess it's not something talked much about in public. Thanks, and a merry Christmas to you too!
Now THIS is what I tune into your channel for!
Thank you for making my head do as it should. Not many things I see or hear are as thought inducing as when I watch your videos. I enjoy the way you think and relay the thoughts.
Once again, many thanks. I only wish I was able to meet you. I could chat for hours and learn so much from you.
Thank you so much for your kind words; they mean the world to me. I hope to meet you one day too. I wish you the very best.
Sir. You continue to astound me. This is of profound interest to me. You remind me of Elmer Kieth looking into stuff just cause he wanted to know, and sharing with everybody. Thank you.
Wow, that was very informative. Thanks for taking the time to explain all that! I know an old man who told me about a magazine article where an author used a 264 win mag loaded with pistol powder and light pistol bullets to achieve velocities over 5,000fps. He lost the magazine decades ago and I can not find the article online. Id really like to read it and give it to him a copy. People are constantly trying to get more velocity, the 250-3000 Savage was revolutionary in its day. Today 3,000fps is normal. I wonder what kinds of things will be normal in 50 more years.
Hi Jake! That is fantastic. I'll look for the article. The fellow was right on track - I just added the smooth bore to get rid of friction and drag - since accuracy was no an initial concern. If you ever find the article please send. Thank you so much!
Have you ever calculated the rpm on a fired bullet? Muzzle velocity x(12/twist rate in inches)x 60= Rpm That's a whole lot of wasted energy when your goal is high velocity. To achieve stabilization I believe that using the new projectiles for the Franklin Armory Reformation would be a good start. They could be placed in a sabot for use in your 308. And if I ever do find the article I will certainly send it to you.
Thanks Jake!
Thank you Mike, I absolutely loved this video. Great info & experimental effort. I remember reading about or watching something about bullet damage and how it affected bullet flight. Amazed to find out that damage to the pointy end had less affect than to the tail end. I enjoy your videos
Great episode! Thanks so much for discussing this very unique subject.
Hi Robert - It was interesting and fun; although not as scientific as it could have been. I still think about the velocities from time to time. Maybe I'll get back to it one of these days. Viewers have sent much advice and better science. All the best.
Just now catching up on your video from some time ago, and I must say that you have put forth some terrific ideas in your fantastic experiment. The whole rail gun concept is fascinating, and this is not far removed. My thanks for an educational and eye-opening video. Very entertaining.
Thank you Timothy!
This type of video is exactly why I watch your channel.
Thanks Jordan!
Rumour has it,whilst digging around in the vault,one of the booby traps went of whilst swinging across a pit full of spikes,using his whip..this mans videos and his appreciation for the art of gunsmiths is brilliant..TY..🇬🇧
😂😂 Thanks Mark - guns and gun people : the best.
This type of thing is exactly why I watch your channel 🤣
this is exactly why i watch your channel sir, keep up the good work.
Thank you Zechnar!
Wow, this has been one of the most interesting presentations you've given. A hyper-velocity, un-rifled 308 custom Remington... Congratulations, that's one you don't see every day.
The idea about an extra fast 308 makes me wonder what the results would be from a 220-Swift or some other already super fast round.
DaVinci once wrote that many of his initial questions, thoughts, and ideas were so hard to find answers for because each one would open up yet many other ideas and questions. I'm sure the same thought has occurred to you by now.
Great video, now I'm wondering about some "what if's"...
Hi Paul, The whole process of the rifle with no rifling experiment was a revelation - I had little idea materials collapsed to quickly when hit by projectiles travelling so fast. I remain confident that the theory is sound and small arms, especially for military sniper and anti material use, can be reduced in cal. and can be effective far beyond what is now thought. On another level - the one you mention - I realize, over and over how little I know, and how we all, live in the shadow of creation - which we we will never really understand and there is no need to. Still, I always liked turning over stones in the shallows at the beach; to see what is there. : )
USOG - Well, keep looking under those stones on the beach. I'm pretty sure Mr Browning and Mr Mauser didn't find everything of value during their beach treks. Again, a very good idea and video - take care!
Another thought, without the rifling resistance, as the pressure builds from burning, and the bullet has little pressure to push against, it gets pushed out of the barrel before much pressure developes, resulting in low velocity. Depending on the hardness of the bullet, if it is soft enough, it could still obturate and seal the bore but still have low velocity due to lack of rifling resistance, and be pushed out the barrel before the pressure builds very high.
Good thoughts and true. Therefore, powder with higher burn rates are necessary to generate pressure in the chamber. Also, the bullets does seal the bore more than one expects, even without rifling. The initial "bump" of gas pressure is more significant than I thought. Interesting area for sure.
@@UnitedStatesOfGuns I like your videos, we have similar tastes in firearms. I especially like that you are quite knowledgeable, but don't act like a know it all. Many people think they know more than they actually do, and act like they do know. The truth being, no one knows it all, we can all learn. But you talk in a nice friendly manner, express facts, and also express your opinion, but express it as your opinion, and openly admit things that you aren't completely sure of or maybe don't know. Nothing like talking with an intelligent man who speaks openly and honestly. Thank you. Keep up your videos. On a personal note, I particularly like your win 88 with the dark colored, I assume custom stock. Beautiful rifle! I am also a fan of the model 70. My personal favorite is a super grade with a pretty feather crotch stock. A good shooter too. Also, I like the classic style single shots. The ruger number 1 is a favorite, but I kinda prefer the new 1885 action over it. Problem with the miroku winchester 1885 is the top tang and the necessitated straight gripped stock. The top tang and straight grip are nice if it is a 45-70, 38-55, or something similar, that you would put a tang mounted sight on, but it your rifle is chambered to a more modern cartridge that would benefit from a scope, I prefer the pistol grip stock. Just my opinion. A few years ago, they made a limited run of miroku built B78's, that incorporated the newer 1885 action, but minus the top tang, and sporting the B78 style, pistol grip stock. I was fortunate enough to pick up one in 30-06 (my favorite cartridge), but it had a beautiful brown feather crotch stock, and a 24 inch barrel, making it an attractive, well balanced, full performance, but compact hunting rifle. One of my favorites. They also had another one in 300 winchester mag with a 26 inch barrel, and a more blonde colored stock with beautiful extensive fiddle back throughout. I was ready to take both, but foolishly talked myself out of the 300 mag. In my opinion, it was perfect in that caliber, the 26 inch barrel well suited to the 300, while making a nice relatively compact hunting rifle. I've regretted that decision, many times. I would love to have another such rifle, the 1885 action with pistol grip stock, with the 28 inch barrel, chambered to a cartridge like the 257 weatherby magnum, or 270 win, or other similar caliber. The 28 inch barreled rifle not being overly long with a fast, flat, easy shooting cartridge, ideal for deer, antelope, and maybe up to elk sized game, and the long barrel making the most of the cartridges performance. It would also have to have a beautiful, highly figured, wood stock. I also like the miroku built 1885 low wall. I still have one in 243, and had one in 22-250, with a 24 inch barrel, and a plain pistol grip stock. I was seriously thinking of having the barrel bored out to 25-06, and restocking it with some real pretty wood, but foolishly talked myself out of that too. I think it would have made a very nice, light, slim, compact and elegant hunting rifle for deer/antelope. Especially if the receiver and lever were also color case hardened. I also like the Haghn (spelling?) Single shot rifles and one of the smaller framed versions with a 24 inch barrel and pistol grip stock, chambered in 30-40 krag, would make a wonderful hunting rifle. Of course it would have to have fancy wood, color case hardening, etc. :) But the price...... :( I am contemplating such a build on a miroku built 1885. Nothing like dreams and plans! Keep the videos coming, love the variety of firearms you show. I like all types but lean more to old school hunting firearms than the new AR style, and you seem to show more of the old school, which I like. Also the unique ones like the falling block, double barrel, etc, are very interesting. Love savage 99's also, i think they are very elegant also and look especially nice, all fixed up!! :) Looking forward to future videos. Thanks again.
This is a brilliant experiment that deserves further investigation.
As soon as you used the word launch my ears perked up like a bluetick hound chasing a possum. The velocities which you were experimenting, if similar to the in velocities that you mentioned, caused me to consider the possibilities of using projectile design alone as a stabilizing force in which rifling would no longer be a necessary component in the development and deployment of hyper velocity projectiles. I can actually visualize a projectile designed to operate on Bernoulli‘s aerodynamic principle to turn a projectile into a self-contained gyroscopically stabilized missile without the need of rifling. This sounds really cool
Hi Thom - I think someone will come up with something one of these days. Rifling is such a nuisance and deforms the bullet; causes bore friction and slows the bullet down. I like your ideas.
USOG You and I have very similar interests! A couple months ago I downloaded a paper called “The Guns of Nasa”. They did tests up to 24,000 fps using projectiles from .17 to 1 inch using a variety of propellants including gunpowder and gases. It’s only an 8 page pdf, but quite interesting. I found it from a google search, but if you would like I can send you the file if you’re interested.
I think I found it - amazing. Thanks!
Proper spelling of the elided word "you're" is forbidden on YT, especially for firearms videos.
@@frankmiller95 Your sure?
Love this. Thank you. I do tune into your channel for this type of thing.I find high velocity projectiles very interesting. Much appreciated. Cheers.
Thank you - it can all be done : ) but I ran out of steam ...maybe someone smarter will do something.
Super interesting...love these discussions.
Thanks Christian. I try.
Incredibly interesting Sir, you posed questions that have never entered mind for the forty plus years that I have been involved with firearms. I really enjoy your videos, and the time/effort that you put into each one. Thank you and please keep up the great work!!
Thank you so much. I'll keep going.
I am new to your channel ,and wow a breath of fresh air ,,you sir are hypnotic to listen to .You are the William F Buckly of firearms ..Very well done i am hooked.
Thank you George - I am humbled by your words. I try.
Very interesting 🧐 I’ve wondered about the results of weight forward bullets and the additional friction of rifling. I was glad to see these experiments.
Thanks Bilge - I guess I could improve the science - hope to find the time one of these days : )
This was very interesting video and gives a new approach to what people might see as inherently insane, but nonetheless very interesting. When you said or rather thought of ways to create the gas seal I immediately thought of either paper patched bullets to engage the barrel to create a seal or something akin to a lead minie bullet where the back of the lead could deform to the size the rifleless barrel. But then it struck me after the statement of machined bullets and no longer needing to conform to typical bullet lengths you could use a long projectile made of aluminum with lead lined grooves on the back or body of the projectile (like Grease grooves but with enough lead to sit snug in the barrel) Although I'm probably wrong it's not far from impossible to do and to test. Best of luck, a fellow fan of the show.
This is a great post i really like to give this order of thought a lot of consideration.Well done MIKE.
Thank you Martin.
Another great video on the more obscure rifles. High velocities are so interesting when you dig into them.
When those slivers I sent slipped through steel and concrete and steel without a hesitation, I realized more than ever, how little I know.
USOG I was just texting a friend about this video and his take is a sabot with just enough straight rifling to creat enough friction to maintain a seal for max velocity. He believes that a perfect balance of friction and seal will enable the accuracy you are looking for while maintaining the amazing velocities. All a bit over my head. But his IQ is so high that I sumit he is just a lab accident away from becoming a super villian like in the DC comic books. Hahaha.
Hahahaha - love that description of your friend. Good idea, although straight rifling won't impart any spin on the projectile. Please ask your friend to send a message - even if it is long. I'm listening. Thank you and have a nice Sunday.
Just wanted to tell you, I picked up a Savage 99E in .308 win, with diopter sights. I would love to see a video from you on the history and application of diopters or "peep" sights. You really are the most thorough and well spoken firearm RUclipsr. You are absolutely brilliant sir and really want to see what you have too say about open iron sights, more specifically diopters. Thank you for everything you do for the firearm community in these challenging times
Ash, your words humble me. Thank you so much. Your idea is excellent! I will cover those very fine sights and appreciate the suggestion. The very best to you.
That 99E with diopter sights - as good as it gets.
I enjoyed this video immensely. Maybe 25 yrs ago I read an Inspector general report that detailed a process where the DOD was attempting to replace gunpowder with chemicals that were safe to transport until the mixture in the bore was achieved. Ignition timing was the problem. The concept was abandoned when they couldn't achieve acceptable rates of fire without destroying the canon.
Very interesting! I'll have to read more on that. Thanks for writing.
@@UnitedStatesOfGuns I was told by a retired tank commander some 30 years ago that the development time for weapons, primarily the rounds we know of today is 10 to 15 years. Having viewed some of DARPA'S requests and solicitations for information on Fed Biz Ops I've found this to be true in a general sense.
In WWI they reloaded bullets backwards to try to punch through the armor of the first tanks.
The knowledge builds for me - thank you Ventris!
USOG, Fascinating analysis Sir, I remember from My time as an Artillery Man that We adjusted Our range with elevation adjustments and increasing Our powder charge, We could only get so far with this, to obtain Our maximum effective range of 23 miles, We used a rocket assisted projectile. I only got to fire these once on a training operation. Essentially Our M198 Howitzer was just a huge rifle, but I have always thought of this, in regards to firearms, but I think the cost and recoil would be too much great to apply this same technology to hand held firearms. Great video Sir, I love all the thought that was put into it.
Thanks Rick. I learned a lot from your words on the M198 - and that lead me to read more. BTW - I know I've said this before but wherever you live is just beautiful.
USOG Thank You Sir, I am in East Texas, not far from the Louisiana boarder.
Ok this still amazes me... I keep coming back to this video. Not much other info out there on the Internet about this subject applied to rifles.
I suppose most people leave it to governments and corporations; and the science is probably well known. Still, sometimes I do things out of interest - fully aware it has all been done before and better by governments and militaries long ago. I learned a lot.
@@UnitedStatesOfGuns
I can't tell you how much I wish I had friends with such interests, and that were as intellectually inclined as yourself.
Such subjects are lost on most of my peers!
I thought of this super high velocity projectiles from rifles above what is generally talked about even with wildcat cartridges. As with your research I was led to the tank artillery ect.
I'm still enthralled by the fact that you were able to get as far as you did experimenting. Maybe it's just different where you live, more machinist, gunsmiths and access to Brownells store/website.
Here in Canada, my foray into this super high velocity experimentation would have ended at trying to get a rifle barrel made to such specifications here. They'd probably think I was trying to make an "untraceable sniper death ray".
I can still make all kinds of stuff with parts and what I can make with a welder and common shop tools. Someday maybe a small cnc and milling lathe!
Russians have some new civillain cartridges based on the x39 and 354R case with Metford rifling , 10 point something millimeter now .
A Russian fellow informed me they have something along what I have in mind already. If Russian snipers toss their 12.7mm massive sniper and switch to a 2000 mps VHV round - this is about 6500 fps - no one could touch them.
Not Metford, Lancaster twisted oval barrel.
Lovely as usual
You were very close, but you missed a building block or two in your line of thinking. The two building blocks you missed are related and combine to achieve the outcome you're looking for. You obviously know a lot about the subject of firearms, so I have to assume that you've studied firearms design engineering. That would include, of course, interior and exterior ballistics. If you haven't studied this you should because you would enjoy it to no end! The math is not important in this, the concepts are.
I enjoyed following your line of thinking very much. It was fascinating for me to watch you try to reinvent the wheel. Don't take this as an insult to you in any way. You're thinking was brilliant!
As always, I'm stunned by your focus on the very broad subject of firearms overall, and the resources you devote to it.
Thank you so much! Your thoughts are so meaningful to me and I understand and respect your words. I know....that you know....which is the honor among colleagues; although I may be too bold. As in all things, I try to do my best; many times I realize I am reaching into the dark. That is okay...because it is in my nature. : ) The very best to you.
What everybody forgets most of the time, me especially, is that the energy needed to accelerate a bullet down a barrel is a function of pressure acting on the surface of the base of the bullet.
YOU ALREADY KNEW THAT.
If you increase the area of the base of a bullet of a given weight, you don't need higher pressure to make it to go faster.
Sabot.
So, if you take a 200 grain bullet of say .30" diameter, and push it down a barrel with a pressure of say 50,000psi, you get 50,000psi times the area at the base of the bullet (π r²) worth of energy acting to accelerate the bullet. (not doing the math, I have a headache)
But if you take a 200 grain bullet of say .50" diameter, and push it down a barrel with that same 50,000psi, the area of the bullet base is a lot bigger, so the bullet will go lots faster with the same amount of pressure.
To use 50,000psi on a .30" 200 grain projectile, but give it the acceleration and speed of a .50" 200 grain projectile driven with 50,000psi, you use a sabot. As you know.
The point of this is to use the sabot to get the ballistic coefficient, and terminal ballistics of the smaller diameter projectile driven at a very high velocity without increasing chamber pressure.
All stuff you already knew.
Lastly, this technology in small arms came out commercially, and on a massive scale, some 50 years ago, and is still available today (was re-introduced I think). See link: www.midwayusa.com/product/220009/remington-express-ammunition-30-06-springfield-accelerator-55-grain-pointed-soft-point-box-of-20
I'm sure you knew that too.
This type of thing happens all the time. I was reading about it the other day. It's called the "Invisible Gorilla" phenomenon. Look it up when you have a few seconds, you'll be stunned. I did not see the gorilla. Maybe this enplanes why I'm a terrible driver and keep crashing into things.
USOG, I'd like to hear your take on my post with the formula that gives you the answer to your velocity problem. I've edited the post down (now starts with "What everybody") because it's original length may have put you off reading it.
Hello, I had over a hundred items to respond to and am excited to read and respond to yours. I can't find it. Please send again to
unitedstatesofguns@gmail.com
Thank you.
Hi again - I'll dig out my Remington accelerator ammo - it was an is an interesting idea. I wonder what the chamber pressure is.
There is a natural frontier to achieve high muzzle volocities. It depends on the speed of sound in the combusted propellant. It is the same speed of shock waves, which propells the bullet. No bullet could travel faster than this shockwave. The speed of sound itself depends on the temperature, pressure and molecular weight of the gas inside the chamber. For rifle propellants this maximum speed is 2300m/s up to 2500m/s, obtainable velocities are lower. The ultra high velocities could only be reached by a two step or multiple step chamber where a piston is driven by normal propellants against a chamber with a light gas (hydrogen or helium). Since the speed of sound is much higher in this media, you could achieve velocities above 14000m/s and more. To increase rifle velocities, the propellant has to burn at lower temperatures, higher pressures and lower molecular weight of of the gas. It's a tricky thing to achieve all points. In WW 2 there were some studies about "kalte Pulver" (cold powders) for artillery use. Another result is the light gas gun or Leichtgaskanone, which is used by NASA for re-entry and impact research. Greetings from Germany!
Fascinating topic! I'm really enjoying your channel!
Excellent video, it's always nice to see an intelligent breakdown of an uncommon subject. One day, I'd hope that you would put this down in writing as a case study. I completely understand keeping things vague to prevent people from doing something silly and hurting themselves, but it'd be nice to see some new ideas in terms of firearms innovation that isn't just a new model number of the same gun every few years or so.
Oh yes I do tune into your channel. I actually like what you have to say and experiment with
I have thought about this for years, and it may be prior art, but spin the gun! Envision a cylindrical action and a smooth bore barrel rotating at a calculated rpm. This would not be a practical portable weapon, but the design could be used for ship weapons or ground artillery. I'm thinking maybe a test chamber/barrel in a high speed lathe spindle. It would be interesting to try. Food for thought.
Mike....Mike.....do it! And thank you.
That's a very interesting idea!
bullets spin at many thousand RPM dont think your idea would work.
Hi Sanch - I'll think about that - good comment - with no rifling though - the bullet doesn't spin; and thus is inaccurate. Thanks for writing.
Great video! Very interesting. Love all your videos!
Thanks Vinnie!
Just into a very early pre war Model 52 via auction... What a classic. I am happy I will be abke to give her a little tlc and an appreciative new owner!
Lucky, lucky, - exc. please send a pic or 2.
Will do Sir - as soon as I have the rifle in hand... Thanks so much Sir. Quick question - what do you typically use to "clean" rifles that have been neglected for years - I have been very pleased with two "good old" classic household cleaners (especially on really gunked up metal) with no visible ill effect. Of course I am very careful when I use them. I would value your opinion please.
I wonder if a very slow twist rate would work. Have it rifled at say 1 in 50 or 60. You might be able get a seal in the bore plus stabilize the projectile.
That's a good idea - I'll try.
Very fun video. Reminds me of the HK G11, nasa guns, and shooting 22 blanks with a pellet as a projectile . Maybe try the diabolo shape or adding a stabilizing fin to the projectile? Fascinating video I hope you revisit the subject!
Did you say you got around 2,000fps more than a regular 308? Or am I hearing things? Either way that’s remarkable. Very interesting and a well done video.
Hi Drew - Extremely high velocity - I think even faster than that but dangerous and out of control due to poor experimental conditions. For sure VHV is there but how to control it and why - I could not find the answers. Thanks for writing.
I would very much enjoy another video on this subject if you ever take up the experiments again
Hi Philip - I'll do it! Good idea.
USOG i was thinking maybe if you were less concerned over the bullet weight perhaps you could try making a finned dart thats loaded with a plug behind it more like a shotgun would so you get a better seal and maybe it would have some more stability down range
Awesome. This is a topic that interests me greatly, thank you for sharing your findings. I really appreciate this vid. The hot 22's have always fascinated me, the energy obtained from such small projectiles is impressive . I think when you get to those speeds its more about materials than anything else, ceramics, tungsten etc. and the design of the projectile. Love your thoughts on this especially how to stabilise the projectile, great vid thank you, cheers.
Thank you!
Try a sabot like the shotgun slug sabots. You can induce spin by having fins on the base that will spin by charge pushing it.
Great idea, spinning the projectile makes up for error in density, concentricity of the projectile, and the barrel plus muzzle shape - if we have the manufacturing capability to get the projectiles almost perfect, using polymers to obturate, the shape to stabilize and by maybe sort of magnaporting the barrel or integrally suppress it to send it out the barrel without much pressure the musket becomes interesting again. I would love to get more detail on the experiment, this might be the next evolution of small arms!
Hi Ragnar - there is something to it - the experiment - but more and greater minds are needed. I see almost no limits to velocity if stability can be achieved; if some of my assumptions are correct - projectiles would not be restricted by the "launcher" - which for now is the rifles barrel etc...
USOG - hi there mate Romeo from Australia here big fan of your channel and the videos you made very rich in information, just wanted your opinion on wach rifel of the 2 I should pick The Blasr R8 or The Merkel RX Helex. You're opinion much appreciated and really it means allot for me.
Hi Romeo - great name! Where you are I'd take the R8. A little less sensitive to sand and dust and heat. I always remember Breaker Morant. "Australia forEver Amen" and "rule .303"
Spent a lot of time your way Romeo - loved every second. Best of luck mate.
USOG thank you very much for your opinion and much appreciat your advice and I'm going for the R8 thanks again for taking the time to write for me .
I enjoyed this!
USOG can u please make a video about pressure and strenght of actions,for example the max pressure of black powder and why a shotgun works with lower pressures then a a pistol and what barrel thickness is minimum and how strong actions need to be in terms of recoil and such,that would be very very very intresting.
Hi Ben - excellent idea - will do. Thanks.
I wish you were my neighbor! Whole lotta interesting fun to be had!
I think I watched this some time ago. I think you’re onto something I’ve thought about. I would like to develop a sabot that could deliver some type of stabilized projectile. You are correct that the stability is improved for a sabot with the weight at the front of the projectile. This is opposite from gyro stabilized projectiles where the weight needs to be toward or at the base. Your working in the same development processes that the engineers who developed the main gun for the M1 tank have done. You’re correct that you have to lighten the projectile because you are now using the kinetic energy of speed where weight is almost, not totally, irrelevant. The cartridges for the M1, which I have handled and fired, are a moderately hard steel alloy. Steel is an alloy anyway, but you know what I mean. Those armor piercing high velocity sabots, are fired at extremely high velocities in the range of FPS you mentioned as maximum. Even without riflings the barrels of those 120mm guns does burn out very quickly. You can fire any of the other projectiles for much longer duration, but those rounds do create extreme wear, extremely quickly, even in a smooth bore. Curiously the British counterpart has a rifled 120 mm main gun that actually has a longer effective range that our gun. The M1 has, for the most part, a 3500 meter effective range, and the Brits main gun has an effective range in excess of 5000 meters. Interesting isn’t it, that when reaching out to longer ranges the heavier projectile becomes more effective. It is just like the battle of balance between weight and velocity of our hunting rifles at long ranges. Double the weight, double the energy at a given velocity. Double the velocity, quadrupole the energy at a given weight. Round and round it goes. These are the challenges I love to work at.
So interesting. It took me awhile to figure out what was going on with no rifling and no bore sealing; the bullet can be any length and just about any shape so long as it fits. I'll have to return to this one day. I should have tried a stronger lathe turned steel case and more pressure in the chamber - but at the time it felt like I had gone far enough. The sabots you mention are the way to go - very long and very thin and extreme velocity; now only that nasty stability issue. Cheers.
Did you try and cut spiral channels into the projectile it self like a foster slug for a smooth bore shotgun? Their has to be a way to to make the projectile it self spin without any rifling to achieve stability. This would be revolutionary for firearms. Cartridge velocity and barrel life would sky rocket. This was an absolutely fascinating video and experiment. Thank you for sharing this. Have a nice day.
Thanks Avery - good thinking - I tried everything; the velocities are so high the air is compressed too much by the bullet for air stream deflection through grooves to create spin; so I went to internal stabilization - or tried to. You could come up with something though - I'm sure there is much I missed.
I had the same thought of making a smoothbore rifle using pistol powder that would fire darts with flights to get a spin happening. Possibly also use a sabot to protect the slender shape of the dart from deforming during firing. I never had the spare money to throw at the idea so I shelved it. I hope you persist with the concept and maybe even do a call out to viewers to build some concept projectiles and you could make a video of you testing them at a range. Thanks.
Excellent presentation Matt, very concise and accurate. If I may add, and in no particular order. It is true about steel cases not fireforming to the chamber, however steel cases do tend to stick in the chamber making extraction difficult.This is not a factor of being steel but rather due to the lacquered finish on the surface of the case. Neat idea to get a non rifled M - 700, you say it's for .308. I assume you mean .30 caliber using .308 diameter trifling. But the remark of shooting 7.62 × 39mm is confusing. This round is not .308 dia. but rather a .311 diameter. As to finding a means to gas seal the bullet in your smooth bore M-700, it brings to mind the same predicament shooters experienced prior to the Civil War. And as we know a Frenchman solved this problem with his design of the Minnie Ball. The hollow base of the soft lead projectile expanded under gas pressure to form a skirt that would create a seal and allow a build up of pressure that allowed higher velocity and improved accuracy.
Your estimations of muzzle velocity exceeding 7000 fps for tank rounds is not untrue, but there are factors to consider when speaking of such things. The powders used in tanks main gun are different and do not compare with rifle powders. The burning rate and pressure curve are radically different. Depending on the era and caliber of gun being used the round may be self contained or it may be loaded as components. It may also be a discarding sabot type which would be considered as sub caliber to the bore. One must also decide one the " type " of main gun, is it smooth bore or is it rifled. Also consider that as a tank round it my make use of a driving band on the projectile, something no rifle round will have.
Another factor to bare in mind with trying to attain higher velocities than standard for a given cartridge of a specific caliber is that the commercially manufactured ammo and projectiles available are all using a gilding metal of a uniform thickness, and are extremely soft and fragile. And even though bonded to the core, unless the type of bullet is of a monolithic solid construction you will most certainly experience core separation and shedding once velocities exceed beyond the rated construction of the projectile. And this will occur more as a product of spin than velocity itself. As it would not happen if it were possible to reach these velocities out of a smooth bore barell.
This is an intriguing discussion as it relates to interior and exterior ballistics. It also goes hand in hand with the old and never ending debate over the two schools of thought on " heavy and slow " vs " light and fast ". Which is the better big game round, the 900gn .700 caliber projectile going 1200 fps ? Or the 150gn .30 caliber projectile going 3800 fps ? Of course there are trade offs, but which gets the job done " better "?
A last point. When discussing shotgun slugs, it must be remembered the ongoing measures that manufacturers have taken to obtain a better gas seal, higher velocities and a flatter trajectory out to 75, 100 and then 125 yards. With the exception of the Paradox type of barells we will keep to smoothbores. And we will exclude fully rifled bores and sabot ammo. We first see the introduction of the Forster type of slug with its hollow base, and then imprinted rifling. Next is the Dynamitt Nobel style with a flat base and a type of thick felt wad attached to the base, providing a gas seal of sorts. There are other attempts at similar methods, but most offer little in improvement. Then we have what I find to be the best of the breed, the hourglass shaped, wasp waisted slugs found in ammo by Litchfield. A well thought out design that actually shows an improvement in the areas we are dealing with. Most notably a heavy slug, traveling at higher than average velocity, well stabilized, with improved range, muzzle energy and accuracy.
But as with most things in life there is a price to be paid when you go down this road. Winchester and Remington found thjis out long ago in the early 60's. Pushing cartridges like the .220 Swift and the .22 - 250 Rem to velocities hovering around the 4,000 fps mark made for great marketing and enthusiastic customers..... for a time. Then the reality set in. At these velocities chamber throat erosion was a big problem. But more importantly was that a barells useable life was now being measured in a few hundreds of rounds instead of the average 4 - 6,000 or so. A huge difference. Some stainless steel barells were used to help Improve things, but working with this type of steel was very difficult to work with at the time. The bottom line was, to stay cost effective ammo velocity was scaled back, and if memory serves me correctly, 3,400 fps was the top speed.
Again, a GREAT study on your part and an excellent experience and experiment to discuss here. Lots of fun!!! Thanks. Be safe and be healthy.
Enjoyed this, thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Hi Steve - I guess my ideas were not very sophisticated but it was very interesting. Some people wrote me with similar things that they had done - which was even more interesting.
I remember seeing an article years ago that mentioned seating bullets backward in a .243 to be used for turkeys. I can’t remember how that worked out but it was the first time I had seen this done.
It works very well - I have done this many times - for various reasons.
Very interesting topic, thank you for the video.
What is your take on Polygonal rifling?
Awesome, I have thought about how the smooth bore tank rounds work. Fin stabilized and discarding sabots.
I should do more and smarter work on this subject - thanks for the note.
Excellent and very informative video! I appreciate your work buddy! 🥰🇨🇦🤙🏼
As with early artillery development, you need to have long barrels. smooth bores are easier for longevity. Smooth bore requires, as you know, some type of external fletching as in a sabot projectile. Always finding a crossover example is the British 120mm rifled tank barrels. They are in opposition to the rest being smooth. The British main guns do have a substantially longer range of accuracy.
Very well done fact based research. Duplex and triplex powder loads are the answer for high velocities in shorter barrels as in the 454 Casule. The “best”, as a word, is my 5 inch 460 S&W. A 225 grain bullet at just under 2400 fps. It’s has a tremendous muzzle blast, but isn’t as harsh in recoil as people say.
My last project was conceived by my uncle and mentor in 1981 or 1982. This was just after he developed the original 264 Improved. Someone made another years later, but with a different shoulder. And a very nice 6.5-240 Weatherby.
He got around to it again in 1990 and I took over development of the cartridge and rifles in 1992. We named it the 6.5 Dakota. After getting my hands on and case forming the 300 Ultra Mag., and the introduction of US869, the cartridge was finished. The rifles model 70 actions and bolts were finely machined, modified and fitted with 29 1/2 inch Heart barrels. The barrels have a 1 in 8 twist even with high velocities.
I purchased an Ohler 35 with a printer to provide documented proof of my results. 142 grain Sierra bullets were test fired on 98 to 100 degree still days, at just under 300 feet elevation. With the pre ignition conditions of a hot day, I produced velocities over 4000 fps., with a 16 fps deviation on the final test loads. Now being studied as you are, you know I just said a mouth full.
I was contacted by the R&D supervisor for Dakota Arms as they have many of their own product line of cartridges based on the 404 Jeffery’s case. A world class and most likely best American gun smith Randy “The Real Gunsmith” in Wyoming developed those cartridges.
Long story short, they were not interested in my cartridge. Humorously, Nosler introduced their 26 Nosler 24 years after our 6.5 Dakota. It is simply our cartridge with a longer body. I explained, and Dakota was aware, if my case was lengthened, they would start receiving diminishing returns.
I enjoyed listening to your ideas, as I do all those who do their own research and development. Most all innovation comes from people like us and many others who think outside the box.
There is a couple in Australia who develop shoot and showcase their work on RUclips. It is called Sam and Mark after work I believe. I hope I didn’t mess their names up. They are really fantastic couple to watch. Their learned knowledge is right in line with what me and my family have done.
Sorry this was so long. I could talk for days about this passion we share with growing numbers. I am really very happy to see it is continuing properly.
Aaron Buckmaster
I love to watch Mark and Sam after work, they are an incredible team
Great video. I will rewatch to absorb as much as I can. All new for me. In the California desert doing photo work till the end of the month. All the best! 😃😃😃🌵🌵🌵
Hi Rick - that's nice - the desert I mean. Not sure if you're a wine man but some nice sources not far away - I'd love to see your photo work if that's possible. Stay safe and best of luck with the shoot.
USOG - thank you for yet another very unique and informative video Sir. I learned something new today... Please remind your subscribers (me) of the wax/polish you utilize on your rifle stocks. If I remember correctly - it may have been made in England? Thanks so much!!!
Hello! Briwax is the ticket. Cheers.
Check out Sheffield custom rifle stocks if you want quality hand made English gun stocks
Hi USOG, love your vids, just bought myself an R8 professional success after seeing your videos on the blaser action. Have you thought about engraving a recessed spiral into the projectile, I would think that should get it spinning?
Hi Gareth - thank you! I like your idea and will give it a try. All the best.
I wish I'd found this video sooner. In the 1980s I used polymer bullets, a Remington made 1903-A3, and a smooth bore Shilen barrel. The bullets were about 110 grains, and wouldn't hold together for more than about 50 yards. I ended up ruining the rifle action because of the pressures. I turned the bullets out of UHMW plastic. They were over 2 inches long. I no longer have the notes to give you accurate data.
So interesting - plastic sabots. Smart.
A thought about target effects...if you are using a small projectile, with similar energy, the energy is concentrated into a smaller "contact patch" for a .3" vs .5" the ratio of "pressure" would be about 2.8x , so, based on that, alone, a very different penetration level...there may also be some effect of heat generation, or shock wave in the 'backstop' materials...good fun!
My background is fairly broad, but a lot of my experience is in test & measurement, which, in the electronics fields, gets into nanoseconds pretty quickly. So, for example, I've never seen any documentation of the so-called "barrel harmonics", and no documentation at all on the actual deflection of the muzzle, over time, and correlated to bullet exit... have you, in your years of interest in the subjects, seen such?
Interesting, too, getting a fast enough burning "powder" without getting into a high enough brisance to cause shock damage to the steel, and other materials in the system... ammonium nitrate + ...hmmmm
Thanks USOG... I have Briwax on order already. Thanks so much Sir!
My privilege.
I turn to you exactly for this type of thing. Good information. Thanks You
Really fascinating.
Thank you - I'm glad. Take care.
Electro magnetism... Turn the barrel into a stator and the bullet into rotor. That might spin up the bullet.
That is an interesting concept.
But that will give you heat ...
Bullets aren't magnetic
1lovesoni; they could be. I wonder if a steel core would work?
El Guero; I suppose but how much? Truth, this would be a rail gun expierment.
I've noticed some of the early squirrel rifles only had rifling for part of the length of the barrel..they were manually rifled...and being one of the earlier divergents from the musket...partial rifling might be an avenue worth walking...?
Wow! Very interesting!
absolutely fascinating! Hyper velocity, no deformation of the projectile from rifleing, potentially vastly different bullet shape, length, weight...!!! Tell us more!
You are an interesting cat for sure. I enjoy your channel.
Thanks Jameson
Are you still interested in hyper velocity smoothbore ‘rifles?’
How do I contact you?
Wayne
3572 fps is the speed (admitted) of the SR71 Blackbird. That fact always floored me. VHV has always fascinated me regardless of the projectiles. I've heard of artillery going 7000 fps. Don't the kinetic energy rounds, sabot for anti-tank use go that fast? I know the military admitted the old ones went 5500 fps. After the invasion of Iraq they upgraded the guns and rounds.
Hum... has me thinking... can you share the supplier of the barrel. I would like to add it to my expanding experiments with the AR10 platform.
Thanks for a great video very interesting .
Thanks Christopher
Good video, Interesting. The M1 Abrams Tank cannon is smooth bore and shoots projectile up to about 5,100 fps.
Thank you - I need one of those : )
I think a small correction is in order regarding shotgun slugs. yes, the eight is forward, but I think they are loaded with plastic jackets, or sabots, that are finned, to spin the slug even without rifling. I don't think they are stable without that, because I see non-sabot slugs that state they are for rifled shotgun barrels only. I would also have said that the reason for rifling has always been stabilization of the projectile. The police's ability to match a bullet to a gun by the rifling marks is incidental.
Hi Worsel, Great comment and interesting subject - thanks for writing. I tried many different slugs over the years. A few people sent me their custom slugs made in molds they had perfected. The full size non-sabot slugs (they are not enclosed or carried by a sabot) sometimes have rifling on the outside of the slug and sometimes don't. After seeing all the results it seems the slugs stay on track due to their weight forward design only. The presence or absence of grooves, spirals, rifling, holes and such seems to have little effect - but people like to see something on the outside so most manufacturers have some kind of profiling on their slugs. The most accurate I tested were Brenneke style with attached wad and smooth slug body with no rifling.
The sabot slugs are caused to rotate in a rifled shotgun barrel by the rifling - just like a rifle - except the slug is held within a sabot - a usually plastic enclosure although I shot some old ones that used wood. I was told by viewers that "sabot" as you likely know is French for boot which makes sense as the slug is in a "boot" which falls away once the slug exits the barrel at some point. Some sabot slugs are super accurate - but I still like the original, simple Foster type slugs with no rifling - I find they react to choke the least and are most accurate - at least for me. Here is a pic of a nice, clean slug - these fellow are up so something else but the slug is good.www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/foster-slugs-in-smoothbore.115790/
All the best to you.
There are some self stabilizing slugs that may work, not sure you can get them up to the same velocity levels but still would love to see what you could get the pressure of a smooth bore shotgun up to with custom loads
Good thought.
Just wondering if smoothbore-rifled bore combination design (Like in FX airguns) has been used with a jacketed but obturating projectile (jacketed minie ball !) from a centre-fire rifle? Have not been able to find any information on the subject ( it's probably out there but I'm just not putting the right questions into Google) !
Hi Ashley, There were Paradox guns built by the British that had smooth bores to a point and then rifling - worked okay - I had a couple of these over the years. thebiggamehuntingblog.com/what-is-a-paradox-gun/
Rifles with jacketed bullets at high velocity or even modest velocity will hit that rifling hard and likely not react much to the "engraving" and turning effect of rifling further down the bore. The forward momentum is so great that it is most likely that the jacketed bullet would just blast and scrape right through the rifled section of the bore without rotation. I'm not certain of this but it seems to me that I remember either trying something like this myself or I knew someone who did a long time ago. Good idea though. In general - the closer the bullet is to the rifling in front of the chamber the better. Even the Weatherby jump - or freebore - does allow for initial velocity gain but there is a risk of bullet deformation - which Weatherby seems to have mastered - or they abandoned freebore - I'm not sure. Hope this helps.
trajectory? gravity? velocity? was it Newton? Einstein? Kepler?.....assignment for tomorrow! Here is where I had an inkling of an answer to something puzzling you describe, with reference to projectile velocity inside the barrel, is that in physics there are various types of friction. and once there is a gas cushion between smooth barrel wall and projectile there is probably a mix of situations going on, the friction in the very initial acceleration is probably different from the friction when v max is reached and there are things like possibly metal perhaps liquefying for a tiny amount of time and in a tiny portion of the surface area of the projectle, different metals reacting differently, then you mentioned that the barrel remains cool at high velocity, well that might point to a gas cushion where the projectile doesnt even touch the barrel and I know you had these thoughts years ago already. But I am totally absorbed by the large number of variables in these scenarios and what might suddenly be the next craze or fad in the marketplace. I wish you success with a few patents!
Thank you - So much changed once rifling was out of the equation. I think you are right - the bullet was floating more-or-less, after a point. The whole experiment became so complex and I couldn't keep up with the changing variables. So interesting though and I return to it from time to time.
Would a longer barrel,or more severe rifling help..
Pistons achieve seal with piston rings. Bullets with weight forward with a stabilizer tail, projected through a smooth bore with discardable rings or sabot can achieve super-high velocity. Been done before.The reasons it is not popular in rifles is that it is not needed to kill (huntingly or militarily). It is used mainly for armor-piercing.
Hi Jean! That is so clear. Thank you!
Reduce the engraving depth of the rifling and calculate the velocity to twist ratio, i.e. faster velocities work with slower twists. Like a 1:24 twist instead of a 10 twist.
That is very cool. I wonder how it might work out with only the last few inces of barrel rifled. Kind of like a rifled choke for shotgun slugs. Maybe if the barrel was 4"-6" longer, and only rifled in that last 4"-6". I doubt it would have slowed it down.
Maybe starting with a rifled barrel with the lands reamed out to the grooves except the last 4", and polished?
Good thought Bryan - the British had Paradox barrels - but your idea would be for rifles. Thanks for sending.
USOG no, thank you
Mike have you heard of these new synthetic material cases apparently you get higher velocities with less powder because the cases don't stretch