The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: Bolt, Lever, and Pump Action

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 31, 2012, 10:12 AM   #51
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,512
In theory, if you can shoot 100, you can shoot 1000. In reality, the wind and mirage are what makes the two light years apart. Its not just holding the rifle and squeezing the trigger; its knowing WHERE to hold the rifle.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old December 31, 2012, 10:52 AM   #52
tobnpr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2010
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 3,218
Agreed, but..
Natch, even the slightest error due form (such as trigger control) becomes magnified by a factor of 10...
So a "pull" to the side of the trigger that costs you 1/4 minute- and is barely noticeable at 100 becomes 2-1/2" at 1000.

Depending on the size of your target, that could be the difference between a hit, and a splash in the dirt.
tobnpr is offline  
Old December 31, 2012, 10:55 AM   #53
emcon5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 1999
Location: High Desert NV
Posts: 1,681
Quote:
I saw another post about saying something to the effect of why get a .22 when you are going to end up with a long range rifle. I'd say get a .22 to learn the fundamentals, once you've gotten those down, move up to the bigger rifle. You can learn about bullet drop, wind, scope adjustments for pennies a shot instead of whatever higher powered ammo might cost
It is also a great way of learning to read the wind. A .22LR bullet is effected by the wind the same way as any other, but due to the crappy BCs of the bullets and low velocities it is much more evident at closer ranges.

A Federal 40gr Match bullet at 1080 FPS in a 10 MPH full value wind has about 5 MOA of wind at 100 yards, which is roughly the same as my LR 6.5-06 at 600 yards. At 200 yards it has about 9 min, which matches my LR rig at about 950 yards.

Lots more people have access to 100 and 200 yard ranges that may not have access to a 1000 yard range.
emcon5 is offline  
Old December 31, 2012, 02:09 PM   #54
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 11,829
I find it rather amusing, actually. Including some of the answers. Thanks to the internet, we all shoot tiny tiny one hole groups at 1,00yds, and nothing you already have in your gun closet is good enough to make a 1,000 yd shot.

The common question is "what do I need for 1,000 yd shooting?", or some variation. And sadly, the common answers are "you need XXX, XXX< & XX" nothing else is good enough, or some variant of that.

All you NEED for 1,000 yard shooting is some place to shoot 1,000 yards, and a rifle. That's it. That's all. Everything else is something to make it easier for you to hit, or more likely to be competitive.

120 years ago they were shooting 1,000 yard matches with iron sighted .45-70s. And making hits. In fact, the winning groups from that era are around 10 inches. I think 8inches was world record for some time. Think on that.

No scopes. No high BC bullets. LOW SPEED (compared to today). And they still got hits! Don't tell me (or the new folks asking the questions) that they NEED a $6k custom rifle set up to hit a long range target, they don't.

All they need is a rifle, the range, and practice. Lots of practice.

That being said, wining a 1,000yd shooting match is a different animal. THERE your high end, high dollar equipment can make the difference between you, and the other guy, providing, of course, that you have the skill to actaully make the fullest use of your hardware.

When the question comes off like "Hi, I just got my lerner's permit, and I need to know what to use to win Formula One races...?" well, in honesty, we tell them, "to win a Formula One race, you need a Formula One race car, and....."

But you don't put someone just learning to drive in a Formula One race, even though they can steer the car....
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old January 1, 2013, 02:48 PM   #55
tobnpr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2010
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 3,218
With all due respect, Mod...I'm partially disagreeing with you on this, for the same reasons I stated above.

The Formula One example isn't an analogy.

I wholeheartedly agree that you don't need a 5K stick to shoot long range.

In fact, Team Savage consistently competes competitively- and they WON the World Championship F-Class (F-TR) a few years ago, with bone-stock Model 12's...

We all know it's more about the shooter than the stick.

But buying an accurate platform (and, it can be a $2K Savage setup, or a more expensive custom or semi-custom)- in a long-range CAPABLE caliber, increases the odds of success.

I've read threads here where a new shooter says he wants to shoot long range, and .223's are recommended.

Now, I've only been at this game for a few years, and I'm a decent marksman. But the skill necessary to achieve any level of success at long-range with a .223 is exponential compared to other choices.

I've always been a believer in having the "right tool for the job". Whether in construction, or shooting, not having the right tool usually leads to frustration.

And while a .45/70 might be able to send a bullet that far, doesn't mean it would be a proper selection.

I do everything I can to maximize the accuracy of the platform (including the optic), and the ammo. The rest is up to me. Doesn't have to be a Formula One, but I sure don't want a 100 horsepower Yaris...

I can see NO disadvantage in a brand new shooter starting out with a high-end GAP custom if he can afford it. In fact, it will increase the odds of success, increase confidence, and as he/she learns, he won't need to upgrade because the rifle will always shoot better than he can.
tobnpr is offline  
Old January 1, 2013, 08:57 PM   #56
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 5,409
tobnpr, it is not more about the shooter than the stick.

Sorry, but "We all know it's more about the shooter than the stick." is one of the most misused, incorrect and oft stated string of words in the shooting sports, especially in the competitive disciplines.

Simple proof is I don't know that because I know otherwise. Regardless of the size of an area on a target one can aim fire his rifle into, the larger the area on target his shots will be distributed in because the rifle and ammo inaccuracies add to the area one can fire a rifle into.

More important, the more accurate the hardware is, the better the feedback to the shooter is. The shooter will learn faster with an accurate representation of what he's doing in aiming, pulling the trigger and judging corrections for wind. Poor accuracy with the rifle and bullet tell far too many lies on how the shooter's doing.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 153
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master

Last edited by Bart B.; January 1, 2013 at 09:22 PM.
Bart B. is offline  
Old January 1, 2013, 10:19 PM   #57
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,512
I think one myth in rifles is that "expensive = accurate." There are smiths out there who build rifles as accurate as the big names that dont charge an arm and leg for their work. You have to have a good scope, but you can compete and win with an economical rifle.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old January 1, 2013, 10:37 PM   #58
Rainbow Demon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2012
Posts: 397
I'm not a 1,000 yard shooter. To find that much open space here you'd have to shoot from one mountain top to another, across a lake, or down the median strip of the interstate.
A friend who's a pretty fair gunsmith, who used to build countersniper and entry weapons for LEO, got into long range shooting in a big way. I learned a bit about the subject from listening and studying the custom long range rifles he was building.
A great barrel in a suitable chambering will do you no good if the ammo isn't suited to the purpose. Bullet design being the first factor.
Low drag bullets, boat tails in particular, allow the bullet to remain supersonic all the way to the target, this avoids transonic buffering or at least minimizes its affect, and reduces affect of cross winds.
Flat base bullets may and often are, more accurate at closer ranges (600 yards or less) than a boat tail of the same weight.

On the otherhand.
The old timers of pre WW1 did some excellent long range shooting with long heavy flat based round nosed bullets that most wouldn't consider suited to the purpose these days, and at rather modest velocities barely breaking 2K fps at the muzzle.
The 168 gr .30-06 AP bullet was considered pretty darn accurate at any range. The core was boat tailed but enclosed in a copper alloy cap seated in the base so it was effectively a flat base bullet, the steel core and copper plug did make this bullet much longer for its weight than other bullets in its class.

Still low drag boat tails at jacked up velocities seem to win out. With recent interest in 1,200 yard matches these are almost manditory.

There are boat loads of suitable actions out there, if properly set up.
My friend liked to "blue print" actions. Major work done was in using a diamond coated wheel mounted in a bushing that mimicked the barrel shank, my friend used actual cut off barrel shanks from shot out barrels, to true up the locking lug seats in the receiver ring. The bolt lugs were then hand smoked and stoned for equal bearing and lapped in place. First proof round then finished up the mating of those surfaces. This seldom required removal of more than one thousandth of an inch from either surface, not enough to compromise a properly carburized layer.

There are a number of factors governing flight of the bullet, which are seldom noticed at shorter ranges.
Spin Drift is an example.
The bullet spins at very nearly the same rpm at one thousand yards as it did at the muzzle, but because velocity has now fallen off greatly the effect of spin drift increases the further out the target.
A prime example of this effect is the .30-06 fired from the 1903 Springfield.
A little understood phenomena was discovered. When the bullet left the muzzle there was a very slight but measurable jump to the left of the bore line.
Since the Springfield rifling has a right hand twist spin drift worked to off set this jump by guiding the bullet ever so gently to the right.
Bullet path and bore line converged at around 600 yards, after which spindrift guided the bullet more and more to the right of the bore line. So spin drift had only a beneficial affect up to six hundred yards.

PS
I believe the slight jump to the left was due to less support on the right hand side of the receiver due to the clearance for ejection to the right.
This sort of flex is far more noticable with bolt actions that have rear lock up, usually cured by a front sight base off set to the left. When rear lock up and left hand twist are combined, with muzzle jump (bullet throw) and spin drift working together to send the bullet to the left of the bore line, as with the Lee Enfields, the off set of the front sight base is very noticeable.

So I'd suggest only right hand twist barrels, unless you are using a lefthand action with ejection to the left.
Rainbow Demon is offline  
Old January 2, 2013, 11:33 AM   #59
tobnpr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2010
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 3,218
You're right Bart- gotta stop using that adage. Poor way of saying that an accurate platform can't make a marksman out of a lousy shooter.

It's just logical that being able to rule out the "hardware" when interpreting shooting data/results leaves the shooter. When you've got two or more variables, like anything else in statistical analysis, you're screwed.
tobnpr is offline  
Old January 2, 2013, 12:17 PM   #60
sc928porsche
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2008
Location: now living in alabama
Posts: 2,433
You don't have to be a race driver to enjoy driving a Ferrari, and you don't have to have a sports car to learn how to drive in competition but it helps. If the kid wants to be able to score at 1000 he might as well have the right equipment.
__________________
No such thing as a stupid question. What is stupid is not asking it.
sc928porsche is offline  
Old January 2, 2013, 08:08 PM   #61
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,512
When one of my rifles is giving me trouble, the first thing I do is hand it to another shooter and tell him "shoot it for group." If his group and my group look the same, its a hardware issue. The "this is my rifle and no one else touches it" mentality causes heartache for many shooters. Some days I just cant shoot.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old January 2, 2013, 08:30 PM   #62
Rebel9793
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 11, 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 134
More people need to be raised in the sense that the father figure buys a .22 at the age 10 and teaches the child to shoot cans an such instead of people just immediately jumping into larger calibers cause they seen it in a video game..
Rebel9793 is offline  
Old January 2, 2013, 08:34 PM   #63
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,512
Video games teach poor shooting skills anyway. I learned how to shoot with a bb gun.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old January 3, 2013, 02:43 AM   #64
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 11,829
Quote:
And while a .45/70 might be able to send a bullet that far, doesn't mean it would be a proper selection.
Proper is entirely in the opinion of the guy shooting. There are still people today shooting 1,000yd matches with the .45-70, period style rifles, and blackpowder. For that game, its an entirely proper choice.

For a different game, its not. Sure.

Understand there is a difference between what one ought to use (providing they can afford it) and what is needed, at a minimum to get a bullet on target that far away.

As I said, winning a match is much different from just being able to hit the target. Quite different things. You can git hits on a 1,000yd target with a muzzleloader, a .45-70, or a .50BMG. People have done it. Theory says someone ought to be able to do it with a .22 short. Haven't heard of anyone actually doing that, but who knows? Maybe we need a new game?

i think the race car analogy is fairly apt (not perfect, analogies seldom are), but I accidently left out the last part. What I meant to say was,

you don't put someone just learning to drive in a Formula One race, even though they can steer the car....and expect them to win

Likewise you could run the Indy 500 in your Ford F250 (assuming the rules allowed it). And I think you could be pretty confident of finishing the 500 miles (hitting the target), but I seriously doubt you would win the race!

Everything you do, from custom loading to all the work done on the rifle, optics, etc, is all done to increase your odds. Its not needed to hit, but it sure makes things easier, comparitively speaking.

I'm not a thousand yard shooter (choice and opportunity) but I have shot to 600, and I feel quite confidant that if I wanted to be a thousand yard shooter, I could, eventually make hits with any of the rifles in my collection, from the antiques to the most modern ones.

Saying that, I will gladly admit that with a less "suitable" rifle and cartridge the learning curve will be much much steeper.

And I'm not saying that a begining shooter should use inferior equipment, only that it can be done with less than the "accepted" minimums.

I can go out there with an SMLE and tangent sight and bang away. Your high end rig and optics will, no doubt shoot rings around me. But when I get it figured out, I will make some hits of my own, too. And that's all I was saying, really.

What can physically do the job is all you need. Everything else above that is gravy. Boiled potatoes are enough to keep from starving, but are so much more enjoyable with gravy...and butter...and chives...and...STEAK..
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old January 3, 2013, 06:56 PM   #65
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 5,409
Mythbustin some points, applauding others on Rainbow Demon's post. . . . .
Quote:
A great barrel in a suitable chambering will do you no good if the ammo isn't suited to the purpose. Bullet design being the first factor. Low drag bullets, boat tails in particular, allow the bullet to remain supersonic all the way to the target, this avoids transonic buffering or at least minimizes its affect, and reduces affect of cross winds. Flat base bullets may (be) and often are, more accurate at closer ranges (600 yards or less) than a boat tail of the same weight.
Applause, but with conditionss.

Any bullet fired fast enough will remain supersonic through 1000 yards. Boattailed ones of the same diameter, fundamental shape, construction and weight can do so with a bit less muzzle velocity.

Quote:
On the other hand. The old timers of pre WW1 did some excellent long range shooting with long heavy flat based round nosed bullets that most wouldn't consider suited to the purpose these days, and at rather modest velocities barely breaking 2K fps at the muzzle.
Applause, but more conditions.

The 40 to 45 caliber long black powder cartridges were popular in the late 1800's, but so were the .303 and .30-40 Krag in early Palma matches; both won their share of the medals. But the Palma match targets were huge; 3-foot square bullseye was worth 5 points and 10 feet wide overall. It was later changed to a round bullseye but still 36 inches, the 4 ring at 54 inches, the 3 point 72 inch square had 2 point 24 inch by 72 inch “wings” on each side. With the decreased wind drift of the 173-gr. FMJBT bullet, the 2-point rings were removed making targets only 6-feet wide enabling more firing points on a given range. And the 173's better accuracy caused so many unbreakable ties a tie-breaker ring, a 20" V ring was put inside the 36" 5 ring. This military “C” target was the NRA long range target until the early 1970's when changed to a 10 inch X ring, 20 inch 10 ring, 30 inch 9 ring, 44 inch bullseye 8 ring.... due to the increased numbers of unbreakable ties caused by .308's and .30-.338's used in long range matches.

Quote:
The 168 gr .30-06 AP bullet was considered pretty darn accurate at any range. The core was boat tailed but enclosed in a copper alloy cap seated in the base so it was effectively a flat base bullet, the steel core and copper plug did make this bullet much longer for its weight than other bullets in its class.
Applause...

Before the 30 caliber AP, tests at Daytona Beach (small arms ammo, not racing cars, but the same beach) in the 19-teens showed a new 30 caliber bullet was great at the longer ranges for accuracy and machine gun fire; it was a 173-gr. FMJBT bullet that went through a few shape changes. Standardized in the mid 1920 as the 30 caliber M1 bullet. Same bullet was used in match ammo starting in 1922 made by 2 or 3 arsenals and did very well indeed. The 1924 ammunition was one of the most accurate match cartridges ever made, giving a 600-yard mean radius of only 2.26 inches, a record that would last until 1962.

After WWII when the NRA and DCM resumed service rifle matches, military teams used good lots of 30 caliber AP ammo for competition. It shot more accurate at all ranges than the 150-gr. M2 ball bullet. However, some lots of AP were pretty bad; their steel cores were way off center. 30 caliber match ammo production with the 173-gr. FMJBT bullet did not resume until the late 1950's. Meanwhile, commercial match ammo from Winchester and Remington with 180, 190 and 200 grain boattail bullets were giving the arsenal match ammo a run for its money.

Quote:
There are boat loads of suitable actions out there, if properly set up. My friend liked to "blue print" actions. Major work done was in using a diamond coated wheel mounted in a bushing that mimicked the barrel shank, my friend used actual cut off barrel shanks from shot out barrels, to true up the locking lug seats in the receiver ring. The bolt lugs were then hand smoked and stoned for equal bearing and lapped in place. First proof round then finished up the mating of those surfaces. This seldom required removal of more than one thousandth of an inch from either surface, not enough to compromise a properly carburized layer.
Moderate mythbusting. . .

Most blueprinting of actions is a waste of time. But some folks believe it has to be done if best accuracy’s the objective. None of that total blueprinting’s been able to better what a pre-‘64 Win. 70 action, sloppy bolt fit and all, that only had its face squared up with the barrel tenon threads, bolt face squared up the the tenon thread axis and bolt lugs lapped to full contact. Many modern actions may equal it, but none’s bettered it as far as I know. As long as the action's parts are back in the same position for every shot, tight fit and near zero tolerance ain't needed.

Quote:
There are a number of factors governing flight of the bullet, which are seldom noticed at shorter ranges. Spin Drift is an example. The bullet spins at very nearly the same rpm at one thousand yards as it did at the muzzle, but because velocity has now fallen off greatly the effect of spin drift increases the further out the target.
Applause and mythbusting. . .

Yes, bullets have spin drift. But that doesn’t effect their accuracy. If the group’s 1 MOA to the right of the vertical bore axis, big deal; adjust your sights. Same thing if a constant wind’s blowing the group 2 MOA to the left; correct for it and shoot.

Quote:
A prime example of this effect is the .30-06 fired from the 1903 Springfield. A little understood phenomena was discovered. When the bullet left the muzzle there was a very slight but measurable jump to the left of the bore line. Since the Springfield rifling has a right hand twist spin drift worked to off set this jump by guiding the bullet ever so gently to the right.
Bullet path and bore line converged at around 600 yards, after which spindrift guided the bullet more and more to the right of the bore line. So spin drift had only a beneficial affect up to six hundred yards.
Probably mythbusting. . . .

I’ve never heard of a bullet jumping to the left caused by the rifling twist. And it's not traveled far enough for any spin drift to change its course. It’ll jump to the right if the heavy side of the bullet is at its top as the bullet exits; centrifugal forces work this way. They’ll go to the left if that heavy parts at the bottom on exit.

The .30-06's 173-gr. FMJBT bullet drifts about 8 inches at 1000 yards. So if the rifle’s zeroed at 600 yards, the bullets will be left of the LOS a few inches at about 400 yards and a few inches to the right at 1000 yards. Therefore the beneficial affect is good way past 600 yards. Doesn’t it apply if the bullets also to the right of the LOS?

Quote:
I believe the slight jump to the left was due to less support on the right hand side of the receiver due to the clearance for ejection to the right. This sort of flex is far more noticable with bolt actions that have rear lock up, usually cured by a front sight base off set to the left. When rear lock up and left hand twist are combined, with muzzle jump (bullet throw) and spin drift working together to send the bullet to the left of the bore line, as with the Lee Enfields, the off set of the front sight base is very noticeable. So I'd suggest only right hand twist barrels, unless you are using a lefthand action with ejection to the left.
More mythbusting. . .

This is news to me. Never heard of such a thing. But Creighton Audette proved some years ago that out of square case heads caused horizontal shot dispersion moreso than vertical with bolt actions with locking lugs in the vertical axis when in battery.

.303 SMLE’s and Metfords rear locking actions were such that they caused more barrel whip vertically than horizontally. Which is why they were favorites for long range matches. Slower bullets left when the bore axis was at a higher angle than faster ones that left at lower angles. At ranges past 600 yards, that compensated for the 80 fps muzzle velocity spread that cordite-loaded ammo had. This was proved over a hundred years ago.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 153
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master

Last edited by Bart B.; January 3, 2013 at 07:46 PM.
Bart B. is offline  
Old January 3, 2013, 09:03 PM   #66
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,512
Bart, I 100% agree that the "blue printed" and custom actions provide little if any accuracy improvements. It has always been my opinion and experience that the only thing that matters is the locking lugs and whats in front of them. I really do not even think a bent action would affect accuracy so long as you could get the bolt face perfectly square to the bore and the lugs to 100% contact.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old January 3, 2013, 10:05 PM   #67
tobnpr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2010
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 3,218
Your point is one of common discussion.
Some argue that single-shot target actions (due to the lack of a magwell cutout) are stiffer, flex less under recoil forces, and are therefore more consistent (accurate)..
Same goes for long vs. short action....short, = stiffer, less flex...

I have seen more than one discussion where a home "smith" wrecked an action by over-torquing with an action wrench in an attempt to remove a stubborn barrel and visibly bent it out of shape- and then "straightened" it back out with supposedly no ill effects...

There's no end to the hair-splitting, down to whether corncob or walnut media gives the shiniest brass (who really cares) in our hobby. Oh well, what else do we have to talk about?
tobnpr is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 09:37 AM   #68
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 5,409
reynold's comment:
Quote:
I really do not even think a bent action would affect accuracy so long as you could get the bolt face perfectly square to the bore and the lugs to 100% contact.
This reminds me of an incident some years ago in California. A pre-'64 Win. 70 bolted receiver had passed through several top 'smiths hands trying to get it to shoot really good with Hart barrels chambered for the .308 Win. Never happened. Excellent bolt lug lapping, face squaring as well as receiver face squaring. All the right stuff that others had done that made them shoot great.

One 'smith just happened to notice one strange thing after he had put a threaded mandrel into the barrel tenon threads, fit both ends of the mandrel to dead centers on his lathe then spun it at low speeds. The back end of the receiver made a bigger than normal arc spinning around the mandrel. He then put a bolt way gauge in the receiver (tight fit rod with a 1/16th inch hole through it), threaded a shanked barrel into the receiver's front end, then looked through the bolt wat gauge. The gauge's tiny hole well misaligned with the barrel's bore axis. It's barrel tenon threads were way out of whack. The bolt way axis at its back end was at least 3/16ths inch off center to the barrel's bore axis.

After rethreading the receiver's barrel tenon threads to a bit larger diameter such that they aligned with the bolt way and resquaring the receiver face, it did just fine. But subsequent barrels needed a 1-1/16ths inch diamter tenon at 16 tpi; standard barrels for that receiver have a 1 inch diameter tenon.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 153
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master
Bart B. is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 04:13 PM   #69
Erno86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 22, 2012
Location: Marriottsville, Maryland
Posts: 595
Rainbow Demon --- I believe your P.S. is at least partially correct --- for a less than heavyweight target rifle. {pardon me... since I don't know how to bring your P.S. quote to my post} --- You have a straight line force in in the direction opposite to the travel of the projectile and powder gas. It contributes the major component of recoil.

You have a rotational force or torque opposite the direction spin is imparted to the bullet. It contributes the minor part of recoil, a rotational recoil. Both effects are recoil, and combined are the total recoil. A heavyweight target rifle, could possibly overcome the effect of minor rotational recoil.

Source: Rifle torque

Last edited by Erno86; January 4, 2013 at 04:19 PM.
Erno86 is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 05:37 PM   #70
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 5,409
Erno86, having worn out 3.5 30 caliber magnum barrels and each one's had 60% of the rounds through them fired using a scope, I can clearly see the outside edges of the recicule twist as the round fires. Isn't very much, but it can be seen with 13+ pounds of rifle and scope after firing a 200 grain bullet out at 2950 fps.

That torque coupled with the reward recoil that causes the muzzle to rise all contribute and the whole rifle moving about a bit while the bullet's going down the barrel is what makes magnums harder to shoot accurately off the shoulder.
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 153
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master
Bart B. is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 10:02 PM   #71
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,512
Bart, I have a winchester 64 .264 win mag that probably has a similar condition. If you bore sight it and if you mount a scope that is centered, the bore sight (confirmed by a shot) is 26" left of point of aim from the scope at 100 yards. At first I thought it was drilled for the bases crooked (have a Mark 5 WBY that is) but this rifle is drilled true. I have never took the time to really diagnose what is wrong with that rifle because it is a sub minute rifle if you give it about 10 minutes between shots. I took a bit of the windage problem out with the bases and the rest with the scope. It annoys me just knowing there is a problem. What is crazy is if you stick a bore sighter in this rifle right now with the scope zeroed, the center wire of the scope is almost completely off the boresighter. In my mind, it completely defies logic.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 11:23 PM   #72
Dan Newberry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Wytheville, VA
Posts: 215
sounds like the barrel is bent... it happens.
__________________
www.BANGSTEEL.com
Practical Long Range Rifle Courses...
Optimal Charge Weight handload consulting
Dan Newberry is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 11:33 PM   #73
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,512
As far as we can tell, Its not a bent barrel. Its a tack driver for a light weight .264 win mag, something is just out of alignment. I really think the threads in the action were cut off center, but Winchester would have had to work extra hard to do that. My friend says he will be take it apart and we can find out for sure what is wrong, but I have the feeling that fixing it will cost more than the rifle is worth to me. New barrel, rethreading the action, and Im in over the price of a WBY V2.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 11:47 PM   #74
solocam72
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 221
The guys at benchmark barrels showed me a few bent barrels that had come off customers rifles, by holding the barrel up and looking through you could see the bend by the light shining through, I was told by the owner that he had seen a few barrels over the years that were bent fairly bad but shot really good! Look benchmark barrels up on the net, they build custom barrels and hold some records, small bore I believe? Bent barrels are more common than one might think
solocam72 is offline  
Old January 5, 2013, 12:01 AM   #75
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 2,512
I will look them up. For the most part I use Shilen but might try something else.
reynolds357 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14398 seconds with 7 queries