Folks! Sorry i wasn’t more clear about my “shotgun” reference: I meant my shotgun with a rifled barrel shooting sabot slugs. It’ll hold about a 2” ES for a 5 shot group at 50 yards. Acceptable for hunting the woods in the east, but not a go-to for anyplace where a shot over 100 yards might happen.
My smooth bore use to max out at 40 yards with rifle slugs back in the 1990s. When Remington redesigned their slugs I can now stretch it out to 50 yards. And I can fire 2 to 3 shot groups for sighting in instead of 3 to 5. No more crazy flyers with the new style slugs.
Has Hornady done an in depth study on free floating a barrel compared to non floated barrels. A pod cast on the subject backed up by scientific test data would be interesting. Your other pod casts on bulletology, your groups are too small, barrels and barrel twist were very enlightening and even put to rest some long held myths. If you think it's a worthy subject I would love to see a pod cast on free floating barrels
The quick quick explanation of gain twist rifling . Lower pressure near the chamber. Higher pressure near the muzzle IF the engraving on the bullet doesn't allow blow by and starts gas cutting . A gain twist polygonal bore would be the best bet for preventing blow by. A diagram would be really helpful for this comment to show how has the rifling rate increases it increases the size of the engraving mark ,leaving decreasing bearing surface to retain the growing pressure. If you have a piece of clay or playdough, roll it flat. Take a pencil or straw or any other straight parallel sided object and lay it across the surface of the clay and press it slightly into the surface to leave a mark. Now holding the center point of the pencil (or whatever object), rotate it 20°-30° . Notice how the clay that touches the pencil or object goes from having contact with the entire length on both sides ,to becoming half sized contact zones with a triangular shape? It's even worse with a curved object instead of a straight one like a pencil . all the pressure is concentrating against those peaks.
I got Jeff's book and was reading the introduction and saw that Scott & Marie helped him out with the book. I know Scott & Marie from years and years ago when they use to shoot Service Rifle. Scott is a Dist. Rifleman. Small world.
Again, excellent podcast. Thank you guys for the wonderful, factual info. Please, keep it up. You're not the only ones but, you're one of the major people making the difference. Excellent podcast, excellent info. Be sure your boss keeps this going. By the way, I use primarily Hornady projectiles as do many other folks I know & where I come from, Hornady projectiles are the cheapest & best projectiles for reloaders &, the most effective to boot. Thank you for the podcast. Excellent.
Oh an early release! Very nice. Going to get started on this now. Videos usually drop at 6am my time, as an early riser it's nice to see one earlier (it's about 3:10am here) Edit: definitely need that load development episode!
30:00 you explained why tuners work, so that's good! The barrel gets longer from heat/pressure, so a tuner would be turned INWARD to make the overall barrel length "the same" as it was when cold. That's how tuners work.
The tuner cannot make the bore length the same as when it was cold since the tuner is on the outside of the barrel, not the inside. No one really knows how the tuner affects the performance, just that it does. Just adding a weight to a barrel will affect its repeatability, and a variable position weight will have some effect on the myriad other things happening at the same time.
@@ewathoughts8476 lmao, never said anything about the BORE, I said BARREL. I'm telling you how to follow your tune, because people one YT don't ever want to tell you how to use them. May want to re-read my comment and understand what quotes mean when used like I did.
Another excellent broadcast and I always look forward to them immensely. As a suggestion for the Hornady team I would love to see Seth and your subject matter experts review cartridge comparisons. I see so many RUclipsrs opine and unfairly compare cartridges due to the fact that they don't use equal sectional densities from caliber to caliber for a baseline. Rather they can skew their opinions and validate their choosing by changing bullit weights which in turns changes SD and BC's in their perceived favor. In my mind we need an apple to apple comparison in regards to equal sectional density. Once achieved we can then caliber up or down and or tweak our bullet weights to our liking . I see too many other RUclipsrs making unfair cartridge comparisons between intermediate, long, and extreme long cartridges. Btw , Im coming from an ethical hunting perspective that incorporates maximum point blank ranges. Thank you for your consideration on this.
I happen to have nearly 1000 rounds worth of data for rounds fired with or without sorting bullets by length, and I can say confidently (at least with the top tier brand match hollow points I shoot) that sorting by length is beneficial. I have a gunsmith built match barrelled 6.5 Grendel AR-15. I developed a target load with a good match hollow point bullet, Lapua brass, CCI primer and Vihtavuori N135 powder. I shot about 500 rounds of that prior to bullet length sorting and the average group was 0.74 with a best of 0.68. When I heard sorting bullets by length might be beneficial, I decided to test it. I had a fresh 500 box of bullets and sorted them all by length, ended up with 5 buckets with +/- a thou variance within each bucket. I loaded 50 rounds with the same length bullets, and another 50 with an equal number of bullets of each length and sorted those into ten round groups that each had 2 of each bullet length. I shot them all on the same day under the same conditions, round robin style in ten shot groups with a barrel cleaning and 10 shot foul in half way through. The aggregate for the mixed length groups was 0.76, the aggregate for the same length groups was 0.71. I've sorted all my match grade hollow point rifle bullets by length from then on. In the nearly 400 of those rounds I've fired since, the average is 0.69 and my best is 0.62. I've not tried sorting tipped bullets by length, but I'm almost out of the match hollows I shoot in my 6.5 Creedmoor and want to try the new flat tipped 140gr ELD-Ms. I might buy a box of 500, sort them by length, and after I develop a load shoot a series of 20rd vs 20rd test groups between same length and varying length bullets to see if there's a difference there as well
Oo im about to drive 1.5 hour in car now, im about to get a new gun in 223 for the fox😂. I will listening to this. Thanks for keeping Jeff siewert on. 😊
I'd love to hear more about polygonal barrel rifling. In his first podcast he mentioned that there was a 10ish % preformance increase over traditional rifling. I wonder if we had a sinusoidal gain twist if that would give it more preference
First, Mr. Siewert, congratulations on your remarkable achievement in receiving The Chinn Award, elevating you to a distinguished cohort of esteemed individuals. Second, is there a possibility that the Gain Twist presentation will be made available on the Bulletology website.
I've personally discovered some interesting properties in shotguns, that affect the dispersion drastically, consistently, and repeatably. Call it "forced vibrations" or "harmonics" or whatever.... The graphs of the dispersion are in a painfully obvious waveform as the independent variable changes. From what I've gathered, no one in the scatter gat world has ever seen anything like this before. The only problem is, no one cares about scatter gats, so no one cares about ground breaking discoveries in them, even if the principles illustrated may directly have applications in precision shooting....
Hah, I did a ballistics program for ... reasons a while ago, and the 80 miles for the 120mm DU long rod is the same I got. Mostly used it for guided mortar round trajectory development, but things I found out with it were interesting.
Interesting consideration for F class etc, for a 10% differendce the statistical 95% confidence interval number of shots (~300) are a significant percentage of barrel life. I understand that things like chrome bore is seen like an accuracy detriment, but does extending bore life enough for more testing matter? Do we need to start looking at tantalum liners or even barrels so barrels last long enough for adequate testing?
@22:39 The measurement can be taken farther out. 300 yards, a better balance would mean tighter groups. Yes, you need 200 rounds, but studying the groups gives actual results for a long range shootability.
Realizing that Jeff's books are avail from Amazon and etc in the normal book dist circuits, has Hornady ever thought of making them avail thru the dist system they use for their manuals, to get them into the gunshops, places actually related to guns?
So if I understand your thought process here you would be able to make better barrels with a different gain twist for a lower cost than retrying to make them straighter?
On paper I cannot see a difference in my gain twist barrel (probably due to small sample size) over my fixed twist that has the same finish rate. But I swear that gain twist barrel has made some impacts I clearly was not on plate when the trigger released the firing pin.
Hey! Sorry for the late reply, just saw this comment. Quite a bit has been learned over the past 3 years or so since the book was sent to the publisher. I'll have to see if I can talk myself into funding another update.
Jeff great job …. Again.. however I’m slow. Went to a public school in NY. 😂 is there any chance you could really dumb your info down? Thank you Jeff,,,💪💪💪💪
Is the true dispersion number in that equation for how much your group will walk the size of the group you shot? Example. .8” / 5 shots= how much my group will walk?
The true dispersion is the average standard deviation. It'll take maybe 4-5 five shot groups, but you need to count the impacts of all the shots to get that info. I'm using "OnTarget" software to gather that info.
Be nice to get some “crayon” logic explanation about all the different twist gains. Love the guests but it’s sometimes to technical for us newbies trying to learn this stuff. Just my 2 cents
You are changing the engraving angle on the bullet the entire time, down the length of the barrel with gain twist barrels. I never understood how making the overall engraving on the bullet larger, would ever help with accuracy. Is it just gradual pressure increase that makes the accuracy, and the engraving doesn't mean much for accuracy? Just goes against everything I've learned in the past.
While the benefits include reducing torque at peak pressure and this means a gentler acceleration curve... but it means the engraving changes, which means the bullet takes more surface trauma over time which might effect gas blow by. It really depends on how much twist we're talking and how much it changes. And I can't help but think this might change based on rifling type and bullet type. A cup and core deforms to fit the barrel, at those pressures it easily "flows" to fit a shape, however, the deeper, sharper or more complex of am engraving shape might cause the jacket skin to resist sharp angle changes whoch invites blow by. However a solid copper bullet really punishes rifling because they don't deform easily, however if they're designed with bands then the bands can allow the sides to receive precise cuts from the rifling which allows for a precise piston like fit to the barrel. But they don't "reform", its a nearly irreversible process... material only leaves the bands and enters the gutters between them. The material doesn't return to the bands... unlike some lead core bullets that cam actually fill gaps, like the white box hollow base 357 magnum 110 gr semi jacketed bullet. So hypothetically you could "over engrave" and ruin your gas seal. But I don't have any experimental proof to prove anything, just saying from a practical perspective.
This study looked only at the effect of reducing the in-bore spin on the dynamic deflection of the bullet in-bore. There is a potential additional dispersion reduction benefit of gain twist in that changing the rifling angle during the in-bore travel continually introduces new jacket material to the barrel land top, helping to keep the bullet axis more closely aligned with the bore axis. This effect was not covered in the analysis.
@@ravissary79 Thanks for taking my simple comment saying exactly what you did and making it complex. Should help readers understand, I just didn't want to take the time.
If you feel the need to sort bullets from a bullet maker for better performance, then I highly suggest that you buy bullets from s different bullet maker instead. All top bullet makers today, should make bullets of such quality that sorting them is total waste of time. If your results on the targets are not as you want them to be, it is VERY much likely other reasons for that than the bullets needed to be sorted. This is a total red herring that should be totally ignored. I know it is very easy to blame something else than yourself when your score is not perfect, but usually it is the one pulling the trigger that is the reason for that.
In a 5.56/223 AR, there is never a reason to have a twist faster than 1:8 unless you're getting into custom/ modified mags.... There are NO bullets on the market from ANY manufacturer that will fit mag length and require anything faster than a 1:8. The longest bullet available that will fit in a standard AR mag is about 1.125" OAL.
Unless you are one of a large number of people shooting service rifle competition that shoots a slow fire stage at 600 yards and the ammo is single fed.
Calculate a 75gr bthp at -25C @2630.. 1/7 is the way to go if you shoot longer distances that benefit from 70gr weight class, in elevation and especially in wind. 1/8 works for shorter distances and up to 70gr weight class. But you overgeneralizing the issue is not really helping it. Also, a quality 1/7 and 1/8 are practically indistinguishable so why waste the potential if you are not sure what you are going to shoot out of it?
@@justinutley5184 Yeah if you want to single feed, then nothing matters but the lands. 1% of 1% of shooters is not a large number of people. Service rifle competition shooting is a niche custom category.
@@ImNoBSINGTell me you don't know anything about ballistics, without telling me that you don't know anything about ballistics.... Sure, if you're shooting grandma loads in extreme cold weather, at long range, then you need to compensate for velocity with twist. Drop at distance has to do mostly with velocity for a given bullet, so the only place that twist is relevant there is aerodynamic jump, and a 1:7 makes that worse. If you don't know enough about ballistics and shooting, and/ or don't have enough skills in those subjects, then here's a few free tips: 1: Try pushing the bullets faster than your current flea fart loads. It'll flatten the trajectory and compensate for your severe lack of knowledge and skills. 2: In stead of running your mouth about things that you don't know about, try doing some research and self education on the above topics. Then go out and practice what you learned. As far as windage, spin drift is worse with a 1:7, and the reaction to the wind itself has more to do with velocity of a given bullet. Not including the 100 people world wide that shoot 223/5.56 grandma loads, at long range, in extreme cold weather, and don't understand ballistics, is not overgeneralizing. Precision testing has shown that 1:7 and 1:8 are not the practically indistinguishable, again highlighting that you're running your mouth about stuff that you know nothing about. A little free education for the slow kid: No bullets are perfect. Faster twist rates highlight these imperfections. This concept can be most easily observed with an out of balance tire or washing machine. The faster it spins, the more "wobble" it has. In the world of shooting, this leads to larger group sizes and more "fliers". The goal with twist is to stabilize without highlighting the flaws in the bullets. In a 5.56/223 AR, assuming normal or higher velocities and a requirement to feed from a standard mag, 1:8 is the sweet spot, with 1:7 overly highlighting the flaws in the bullets, and 1:9 not stabilizing the upper weight classes of bullets for the cartridge.
The answer given for the question asking why there could be different points of impact between different lot numbers war utter BS. Be honest Hornady. You got caught with your pants down regarding 7 PRC a few months ago and have still not learned to be honest about it. Different lots of 7 PRC ammo have been proven to have different kinds of powders in them and it is also proven that you have not gotten the same velocities as your first lots did and far from what you still have on your boxes. And it is EXTREMELY obvious that two very different velocities with the same bullet can result in VERY different points of impact. It is a VERY well known fact that you ALWAYS should test if the ammo you just bought with a different lot number from what you used before, have the same point of impact. And the reason for that is that the ammo maker do NOT always use the same powder for that ammo. Just like the case has been for Hornady's 7 PRC ammo where Hornady have used minimum 3 different powders for the exact same ammo within the same year of production. I also find it hilarious to suggest that people should lack a big enough sample size, and that is because they are wrong about having a different point of impact. An extremely arrogant answer that suggest that you think people are crap shots or have crap guns. There are plenty of times I have experienced both 2 and even as much as a 4 inch shift in poi at 100 yards and this from extremely accurate rifles/barrels that I have used for competition shooting with hundreds and at times thousands of shots as sample sizes for each lot. And I shoot minimum 5000 shots a year with the same rifle. But I guess those sample sizes are to small as well...
At about 47:45, Seth states ":..and throw in the the fact that it might have a different lot number of propellant or a different propellant altogether" , followed by Jayden agreeing with that statement by saying: "Absolutely, absolutely ". Maybe you did not hear that part?
Folks! Sorry i wasn’t more clear about my “shotgun” reference: I meant my shotgun with a rifled barrel shooting sabot slugs. It’ll hold about a 2” ES for a 5 shot group at 50 yards. Acceptable for hunting the woods in the east, but not a go-to for anyplace where a shot over 100 yards might happen.
My smooth bore use to max out at 40 yards with rifle slugs back in the 1990s. When Remington redesigned their slugs I can now stretch it out to 50 yards. And I can fire 2 to 3 shot groups for sighting in instead of 3 to 5. No more crazy flyers with the new style slugs.
Try a Savage 220 then. 200 yards is average
This is the gold I was looking for when I asked y'all to cover gain twist, thanks.
Has Hornady done an in depth study on free floating a barrel compared to non floated barrels. A pod cast on the subject backed up by scientific test data would be interesting. Your other pod casts on bulletology, your groups are too small, barrels and barrel twist were very enlightening and even put to rest some long held myths. If you think it's a worthy subject I would love to see a pod cast on free floating barrels
American whitetail 60gr opener morning in missouri just got me my first buck, genuinely appreciate what yall do for us
The quick quick explanation of gain twist rifling . Lower pressure near the chamber. Higher pressure near the muzzle IF the engraving on the bullet doesn't allow blow by and starts gas cutting . A gain twist polygonal bore would be the best bet for preventing blow by. A diagram would be really helpful for this comment to show how has the rifling rate increases it increases the size of the engraving mark ,leaving decreasing bearing surface to retain the growing pressure. If you have a piece of clay or playdough, roll it flat. Take a pencil or straw or any other straight parallel sided object and lay it across the surface of the clay and press it slightly into the surface to leave a mark. Now holding the center point of the pencil (or whatever object), rotate it 20°-30° . Notice how the clay that touches the pencil or object goes from having contact with the entire length on both sides ,to becoming half sized contact zones with a triangular shape? It's even worse with a curved object instead of a straight one like a pencil . all the pressure is concentrating against those peaks.
I got Jeff's book and was reading the introduction and saw that Scott & Marie helped him out with the book. I know Scott & Marie from years and years ago when they use to shoot Service Rifle. Scott is a Dist. Rifleman. Small world.
Again, excellent podcast.
Thank you guys for the wonderful, factual info.
Please, keep it up. You're not the only ones but, you're one of the major people making the difference.
Excellent podcast, excellent info.
Be sure your boss keeps this going.
By the way, I use primarily Hornady projectiles as do many other folks I know & where I come from, Hornady projectiles are the cheapest & best projectiles for reloaders &, the most effective to boot.
Thank you for the podcast.
Excellent.
Oh an early release! Very nice. Going to get started on this now. Videos usually drop at 6am my time, as an early riser it's nice to see one earlier (it's about 3:10am here)
Edit: definitely need that load development episode!
30:00 you explained why tuners work, so that's good! The barrel gets longer from heat/pressure, so a tuner would be turned INWARD to make the overall barrel length "the same" as it was when cold. That's how tuners work.
The tuner cannot make the bore length the same as when it was cold since the tuner is on the outside of the barrel, not the inside. No one really knows how the tuner affects the performance, just that it does. Just adding a weight to a barrel will affect its repeatability, and a variable position weight will have some effect on the myriad other things happening at the same time.
@@ewathoughts8476 lmao, never said anything about the BORE, I said BARREL. I'm telling you how to follow your tune, because people one YT don't ever want to tell you how to use them. May want to re-read my comment and understand what quotes mean when used like I did.
Stupendous podcast, fellas, more like this please!
Ah yes, Mr. Seward. The man. Thank you all for the video.👍
Pure gold. I love this stuff. Thank you.
Glad you enjoy it!
1st comment. Thanks to this pidcast I got into long range shootings and want to go hunting here in Canada 🇨🇦
I really enjoy the deep dive into ballistics. I’m also excited to try the 45 cal bore drivers when they release.
Another excellent broadcast and I always look forward to them immensely. As a suggestion for the Hornady team I would love to see Seth and your subject matter experts review cartridge comparisons. I see so many RUclipsrs opine and unfairly compare cartridges due to the fact that they don't use equal sectional densities from caliber to caliber for a baseline. Rather they can skew their opinions and validate their choosing by changing bullit weights which in turns changes SD and BC's in their perceived favor. In my mind we need an apple to apple comparison in regards to equal sectional density. Once achieved we can then caliber up or down and or tweak our bullet weights to our liking . I see too many other RUclipsrs making unfair cartridge comparisons between intermediate, long, and extreme long cartridges. Btw , Im coming from an ethical hunting perspective that incorporates maximum point blank ranges. Thank you for your consideration on this.
I happen to have nearly 1000 rounds worth of data for rounds fired with or without sorting bullets by length, and I can say confidently (at least with the top tier brand match hollow points I shoot) that sorting by length is beneficial.
I have a gunsmith built match barrelled 6.5 Grendel AR-15. I developed a target load with a good match hollow point bullet, Lapua brass, CCI primer and Vihtavuori N135 powder. I shot about 500 rounds of that prior to bullet length sorting and the average group was 0.74 with a best of 0.68. When I heard sorting bullets by length might be beneficial, I decided to test it.
I had a fresh 500 box of bullets and sorted them all by length, ended up with 5 buckets with +/- a thou variance within each bucket. I loaded 50 rounds with the same length bullets, and another 50 with an equal number of bullets of each length and sorted those into ten round groups that each had 2 of each bullet length. I shot them all on the same day under the same conditions, round robin style in ten shot groups with a barrel cleaning and 10 shot foul in half way through. The aggregate for the mixed length groups was 0.76, the aggregate for the same length groups was 0.71. I've sorted all my match grade hollow point rifle bullets by length from then on. In the nearly 400 of those rounds I've fired since, the average is 0.69 and my best is 0.62.
I've not tried sorting tipped bullets by length, but I'm almost out of the match hollows I shoot in my 6.5 Creedmoor and want to try the new flat tipped 140gr ELD-Ms. I might buy a box of 500, sort them by length, and after I develop a load shoot a series of 20rd vs 20rd test groups between same length and varying length bullets to see if there's a difference there as well
Oo im about to drive 1.5 hour in car now, im about to get a new gun in 223 for the fox😂. I will listening to this. Thanks for keeping Jeff siewert on. 😊
I'd love to hear more about polygonal barrel rifling. In his first podcast he mentioned that there was a 10ish % preformance increase over traditional rifling. I wonder if we had a sinusoidal gain twist if that would give it more preference
Great talk, I could listen all day!
First, Mr. Siewert, congratulations on your remarkable achievement in receiving The Chinn Award, elevating you to a distinguished cohort of esteemed individuals. Second, is there a possibility that the Gain Twist presentation will be made available on the Bulletology website.
Hey! I’ll see if i can get that up on the website.. it might be a while.
Thanks for your comments RE. Chinn Award. Much appreciated,
Correlation and cause and effect are two different things. Correlation doesn’t mean there is cause and effect.
I've personally discovered some interesting properties in shotguns, that affect the dispersion drastically, consistently, and repeatably. Call it "forced vibrations" or "harmonics" or whatever.... The graphs of the dispersion are in a painfully obvious waveform as the independent variable changes. From what I've gathered, no one in the scatter gat world has ever seen anything like this before. The only problem is, no one cares about scatter gats, so no one cares about ground breaking discoveries in them, even if the principles illustrated may directly have applications in precision shooting....
Hah, I did a ballistics program for ... reasons a while ago, and the 80 miles for the 120mm DU long rod is the same I got. Mostly used it for guided mortar round trajectory development, but things I found out with it were interesting.
Interesting consideration for F class etc, for a 10% differendce the statistical 95% confidence interval number of shots (~300) are a significant percentage of barrel life. I understand that things like chrome bore is seen like an accuracy detriment, but does extending bore life enough for more testing matter? Do we need to start looking at tantalum liners or even barrels so barrels last long enough for adequate testing?
@22:39 The measurement can be taken farther out. 300 yards, a better balance would mean tighter groups. Yes, you need 200 rounds, but studying the groups gives actual results for a long range shootability.
Realizing that Jeff's books are avail from Amazon and etc in the normal book dist circuits, has Hornady ever thought of making them avail thru the dist system they use for their manuals, to get them into the gunshops, places actually related to guns?
So if I understand your thought process here you would be able to make better barrels with a different gain twist for a lower cost than retrying to make them straighter?
On paper I cannot see a difference in my gain twist barrel (probably due to small sample size) over my fixed twist that has the same finish rate. But I swear that gain twist barrel has made some impacts I clearly was not on plate when the trigger released the firing pin.
What are your thoughts on cartridges modified for "OKH", Gibbs front ignition.
What about increase in barrel life due to lower spikes in pressure? How much longer will say a 6mm or 22 creedmoor last?
Speedy Gonzalez
Has been shooting gain twist barrels in bench rest shoot for awhile..
And is there anything in the book “ammunition demystified” that needs to be updated as for as information contained goes?
Hey! Sorry for the late reply, just saw this comment. Quite a bit has been learned over the past 3 years or so since the book was sent to the publisher. I'll have to see if I can talk myself into funding another update.
@@jeffsiewert1258 that would be superb! Huge admirer. Learning more and more everyday!
Jeff great job …. Again.. however I’m slow. Went to a public school in NY. 😂 is there any chance you could really dumb your info down? Thank you Jeff,,,💪💪💪💪
Hmm.. I went to a public school in NY too.. I appreciate the feedback, I'll be mindful of that in the future. Thanks!
Is the true dispersion number in that equation for how much your group will walk the size of the group you shot? Example. .8” / 5 shots= how much my group will walk?
The true dispersion is the average standard deviation. It'll take maybe 4-5 five shot groups, but you need to count the impacts of all the shots to get that info. I'm using "OnTarget" software to gather that info.
Be nice to get some “crayon” logic explanation about all the different twist gains. Love the guests but it’s sometimes to technical for us newbies trying to learn this stuff. Just my 2 cents
You are changing the engraving angle on the bullet the entire time, down the length of the barrel with gain twist barrels. I never understood how making the overall engraving on the bullet larger, would ever help with accuracy. Is it just gradual pressure increase that makes the accuracy, and the engraving doesn't mean much for accuracy? Just goes against everything I've learned in the past.
Also, I always appreciate the graphs showing that nodes exist ;) Impossible to hit... maybe.. but they exist nonetheless.
While the benefits include reducing torque at peak pressure and this means a gentler acceleration curve... but it means the engraving changes, which means the bullet takes more surface trauma over time which might effect gas blow by. It really depends on how much twist we're talking and how much it changes.
And I can't help but think this might change based on rifling type and bullet type.
A cup and core deforms to fit the barrel, at those pressures it easily "flows" to fit a shape, however, the deeper, sharper or more complex of am engraving shape might cause the jacket skin to resist sharp angle changes whoch invites blow by.
However a solid copper bullet really punishes rifling because they don't deform easily, however if they're designed with bands then the bands can allow the sides to receive precise cuts from the rifling which allows for a precise piston like fit to the barrel. But they don't "reform", its a nearly irreversible process... material only leaves the bands and enters the gutters between them. The material doesn't return to the bands... unlike some lead core bullets that cam actually fill gaps, like the white box hollow base 357 magnum 110 gr semi jacketed bullet.
So hypothetically you could "over engrave" and ruin your gas seal.
But I don't have any experimental proof to prove anything, just saying from a practical perspective.
This study looked only at the effect of reducing the in-bore spin on the dynamic deflection of the bullet in-bore. There is a potential additional dispersion reduction benefit of gain twist in that changing the rifling angle during the in-bore travel continually introduces new jacket material to the barrel land top, helping to keep the bullet axis more closely aligned with the bore axis. This effect was not covered in the analysis.
@@ravissary79 Thanks for taking my simple comment saying exactly what you did and making it complex. Should help readers understand, I just didn't want to take the time.
@@jeffsiewert1258 We need a deeper dive if it's even possible. Find recovered bullets of different kinds and see what the engraving looks like.
If you feel the need to sort bullets from a bullet maker for better performance, then I highly suggest that you buy bullets from s different bullet maker instead.
All top bullet makers today, should make bullets of such quality that sorting them is total waste of time.
If your results on the targets are not as you want them to be, it is VERY much likely other reasons for that than the bullets needed to be sorted.
This is a total red herring that should be totally ignored.
I know it is very easy to blame something else than yourself when your score is not perfect, but usually it is the one pulling the trigger that is the reason for that.
In a 5.56/223 AR, there is never a reason to have a twist faster than 1:8 unless you're getting into custom/ modified mags.... There are NO bullets on the market from ANY manufacturer that will fit mag length and require anything faster than a 1:8. The longest bullet available that will fit in a standard AR mag is about 1.125" OAL.
Unless you are one of a large number of people shooting service rifle competition that shoots a slow fire stage at 600 yards and the ammo is single fed.
Calculate a 75gr bthp at -25C @2630..
1/7 is the way to go if you shoot longer distances that benefit from 70gr weight class, in elevation and especially in wind.
1/8 works for shorter distances and up to 70gr weight class.
But you overgeneralizing the issue is not really helping it.
Also, a quality 1/7 and 1/8 are practically indistinguishable so why waste the potential if you are not sure what you are going to shoot out of it?
@@justinutley5184 Yeah if you want to single feed, then nothing matters but the lands. 1% of 1% of shooters is not a large number of people. Service rifle competition shooting is a niche custom category.
@@ImNoBSINGTell me you don't know anything about ballistics, without telling me that you don't know anything about ballistics....
Sure, if you're shooting grandma loads in extreme cold weather, at long range, then you need to compensate for velocity with twist.
Drop at distance has to do mostly with velocity for a given bullet, so the only place that twist is relevant there is aerodynamic jump, and a 1:7 makes that worse.
If you don't know enough about ballistics and shooting, and/ or don't have enough skills in those subjects, then here's a few free tips:
1: Try pushing the bullets faster than your current flea fart loads. It'll flatten the trajectory and compensate for your severe lack of knowledge and skills.
2: In stead of running your mouth about things that you don't know about, try doing some research and self education on the above topics. Then go out and practice what you learned.
As far as windage, spin drift is worse with a 1:7, and the reaction to the wind itself has more to do with velocity of a given bullet.
Not including the 100 people world wide that shoot 223/5.56 grandma loads, at long range, in extreme cold weather, and don't understand ballistics, is not overgeneralizing.
Precision testing has shown that 1:7 and 1:8 are not the practically indistinguishable, again highlighting that you're running your mouth about stuff that you know nothing about.
A little free education for the slow kid:
No bullets are perfect. Faster twist rates highlight these imperfections. This concept can be most easily observed with an out of balance tire or washing machine. The faster it spins, the more "wobble" it has. In the world of shooting, this leads to larger group sizes and more "fliers". The goal with twist is to stabilize without highlighting the flaws in the bullets. In a 5.56/223 AR, assuming normal or higher velocities and a requirement to feed from a standard mag, 1:8 is the sweet spot, with 1:7 overly highlighting the flaws in the bullets, and 1:9 not stabilizing the upper weight classes of bullets for the cartridge.
The answer given for the question asking why there could be different points of impact between different lot numbers war utter BS.
Be honest Hornady.
You got caught with your pants down regarding 7 PRC a few months ago and have still not learned to be honest about it.
Different lots of 7 PRC ammo have been proven to have different kinds of powders in them and it is also proven that you have not gotten the same velocities as your first lots did and far from what you still have on your boxes.
And it is EXTREMELY obvious that two very different velocities with the same bullet can result in VERY different points of impact.
It is a VERY well known fact that you ALWAYS should test if the ammo you just bought with a different lot number from what you used before, have the same point of impact.
And the reason for that is that the ammo maker do NOT always use the same powder for that ammo.
Just like the case has been for Hornady's 7 PRC ammo where Hornady have used minimum 3 different powders for the exact same ammo within the same year of production.
I also find it hilarious to suggest that people should lack a big enough sample size, and that is because they are wrong about having a different point of impact.
An extremely arrogant answer that suggest that you think people are crap shots or have crap guns.
There are plenty of times I have experienced both 2 and even as much as a 4 inch shift in poi at 100 yards and this from extremely accurate rifles/barrels that I have used for competition shooting with hundreds and at times thousands of shots as sample sizes for each lot.
And I shoot minimum 5000 shots a year with the same rifle.
But I guess those sample sizes are to small as well...
At about 47:45, Seth states ":..and throw in the the fact that it might have a different lot number of propellant or a different propellant altogether" , followed by Jayden agreeing with that statement by saying: "Absolutely, absolutely ". Maybe you did not hear that part?