Ballisticly speaking for 22lr - Page 2 - RimfireCentral.com Forums

Go Back   RimfireCentral.com Forums > >

Notices

Join Team RFC to remove these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 07-16-2020, 11:33 PM
JGR_LV
Law Enforcement Officer NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Sep 2006
Location: 
Las Vegas
Posts: 
211
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
How long is a piece of rope?



Log in to see fewer ads
A question like this, as you may have figured out by now, is meaningless unless you say what you plan to do with the rifle. Are you using iron sights or putting a scope on it? Are you shooting targets or what? What ranges do you plan to shoot? If you include that sort of information, you'll probably get better answers that are helpful.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-17-2020, 01:19 AM
bob_nj

Join Date: 
May 2020
Location: 
New Jersey
Posts: 
41
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Arrow Interesting Observations

This may be a question for another thread, but;

Quote:
ammo, quality barrel & shooter means more in the end
What is it exactly that makes one brand of ammunition more accurate than another in a particular firearm?
I've read it and it sounds realistic, but what is?

Thanks for any ideas
Bob
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-17-2020, 04:34 AM
rc.

Join Date: 
Feb 2003
Location: 
ca
Posts: 
4,044
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
I think that one of the things that long barrels can contribute nobody mentioned is a lower exit pressure behind the bullet that may minimize deformation of the soft slug during exit. Those old 25 inch barrels usually shoot very well for being standard weight barrels with sporter chambers. Having said that I like short barrels just because they are more handy getting into and out of vehicles and are generally lighter to carry. If you are going with a fat target barrel go short. Lopping 6 inches can take a half pound off a typical sporter barrel.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-17-2020, 06:50 AM
jaia
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2014
Posts: 
6,653
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
What is it exactly that makes one brand of ammunition more accurate than another in a particular firearm?

Wishful thinking?

As to what can actually produce better results rifle to rifle, with rimfire:

1) A specific muzzle velocity can produce an exit timing that best fits the barrel harmonics.

2) A specific bullet weight that, again, works well with the harmonics.

3) Better quality/uniformity of components that produces tight mv's and similar trajectories.

4) Specific cartridge length/dimensions that best fits the chamber and alignment to the leade.

5) Careful handing/storage of the cartridges on the assembly line, factory floor and during shipping.


No rifle can produce consistent trajectories from poorly made ammunition.
Asymmetric bullets will not fly a predictable trajectory.
Irregularities in the transition from bullet nose to drive bands, deformed drive bands,
uneven or tilted bullet seating and any variations to the heel of the bullet
will cause wandering of the bullets off from the intended line of aim.
MV differences causes vertical spread.

In reality, ammo quality is what y'er chasing, not brand.
The best made cartridges with the tightest mv's, is what is necessary for consistent accuracy.

Last edited by jaia; 07-17-2020 at 06:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-17-2020, 07:17 AM
flangster

Join Date: 
Feb 2013
Posts: 
4,784
TPC Rating: 
100% (34)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaia View Post
What is it exactly that makes one brand of ammunition more accurate than another in a particular firearm?

Wishful thinking?

[. . .snip. . .]

In reality, ammo quality is what y'er chasing, not brand.
The best made cartridges with the tightest mv's, is what is necessary for consistent accuracy.
Just thinking out loud here, but do you think you could buy, say a box of bulk cartridges, disassemble them into their component parts (primed case, powder, bullet) and then reassemble them after weighing and sizing the bullets into something with actual quality control?

I am not disagreeing with a thing jaia wrote above, I am just musing about the process I go through with centerfire rounds to get repeatable performance out of a .222 Remington or .223 cartridge and "applying" it to rimfire. What if we could substitute the lack of factory quality control with our own? I imagine that out of a box of 500 bulk cartridges, if you could pull the bullets and weigh them the weights would distribute on a nice bell curve. Weighing the powder wouldn't be too much of a problem. Reforming the bullets and getting them seated might, though.

Now I know what jaia's going to write: "Sounds like we've got ourselves a volunteer!" No, no nope! Just wondering out loud is all . . .which, after all, don't cost nothin'.
__________________
============
n00by is now flangster on RFC -- still a newbie though
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-17-2020, 07:33 AM
jaia
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2014
Posts: 
6,653
TPC Rating: 
100% (2)
Awwwww, c'mon flangster, ya' know ya' want to....

Not going to reload rimfire...not ever.
Too many finicky bits to deal with in too small a package.
I'd rather play with a 22 hornet than deal with hand priming cupped brass for rimfire.
Can you imagine hand swaging those beat up bulk bullets, then trying to correctly seat them?

No way José.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-17-2020, 08:00 AM
blades

Join Date: 
Aug 2005
Posts: 
145
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
long time ago in a land far far away someone started slicing 1" at a time off a 27" barrel checking velocity each time with various ammo. this person was also checking group sizes- but we do not need that some what iffy info. at any rate it was found that apx 19-20 inches to be apx optimum barrel length below 19" velocity stated falling off. While it may be true that the powder is consumed prior or by 14" the gas generated is still expanding. I think this test was printed in shooting times and maybe somewhere else. Anschutz repeated the test in their labs. they installed a hollow tube on the shorter barrels for iron sight radius so the sights would still be x clicks per . ( rise of the bloop tube). took place back in the 80's.
Some where along the line this all got confused with the minimum barrel length for a rifle 16".
I have a win 52c with a apx 19.5" heavy barrel set up for silly wet it does very well, stick it in a more conventional stock and it will hold it's own at a 50 meter bench shoot. I use standard velocity in both these shoots.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-20-2020, 03:17 PM
Penage Guy's Avatar
Penage Guy

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Ontario, Canada
Posts: 
4,464
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAcharlie View Post
is there any benefit to a barrel over 16" ?
What follows is not intended to provoke contention. It's an opinion given by noted and sometimes controversial BR rifle builder Bill Calfee and is presented here simply as food for thought.

He says there isn't a difference in the accuracy "potential" between a 16 inch barrel and a 26 inch barrel. If it were possible to have two barrels that were identical except in stiffness, the stiffer barrel would produce better accuracy.

He adds this caveat:

A 16 inch, 22 rimfire barrel's accuracy, all else being equal, is totally dependent on the uniformity of the ammo.....since the peak pressure of the 22 long rifle cartridge occurs roughly at about this length.....

A 26 inch, 22 rimfire barrel, since the exit of the crown is several inches down stream from the peak pressure of the 22 long rifle cartridge, allows the quality of the barrel, itself, to play a role in the barrel's accuracy.


The term "peak pressure" is my way of describing the end of the useful pressure, exerted on the bullet, to increase velocity in the barrel. After this point is reached, the velocity starts slowing down in the barrel.

http://www.wwaccuracy.com/showthread...-barrel-length
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-20-2020, 08:58 PM
ghgs's Avatar
ghgs

Join Date: 
Mar 2012
Location: 
Wi. Just South of the Frozen Tundra
Posts: 
894
TPC Rating: 
100% (18)
Penage Guy
Thank you for posting the link, and I would hope that all the folks that posted on this thread take a moment to go to the link and read it in it's entirety. And possibly buy a copy of Bill's book, "The Art of Rimfire Accuracy".
A lifetime accumulation of good information.
Also for what it's worth, in the last 6 months, two different Calfee rifles have set new world records.
Glen H
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-20-2020, 09:01 PM
BadgerJack's Avatar
BadgerJack
US Army Veteran NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Feb 2018
Location: 
Nawthern Virginia
Posts: 
180
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Not entirely correct, unless you never shoot past 50~100 yards.

Over the years there have been NUMEROUS tests where they started with a long barrel- depending on caliber, out to 30"- fired a group over a chronograph, cut one inch off, and repeated, until it was down to 14"~16", depending on caliber/cartridge.

As the barrel length decreased so did accuracy, to a noticeable extent.

The velocity decrease was dependent upon the burning characteristics of the powder, but, in most cases it was noticeable, often as much as 100 FPS- or more- per inch of barrel loss, to the point that you have un-burnt powder exiting the barrel behind the bullet.

The hard part is to determine how LONG the barrel should be to give you OPTIMUM ballistics, not how short it can be to still give you ACCEPTABLE ballistics.

I may be off a little here, but in most medium caliber not magnum [.280~.338] centerfire 18"~24", magnums 22"~26", large bore [.40~.50] 28"~32". Rimfire .22/.22 Mag will generally give you best accuracy/ballistics at 18"~22".

The trend today for shorter barrels on rimfires stems from the use ultra fast burning powders used with very light bullets, and the perceived desire for every owner to put a can on it, which will not garner you very good accuracy or ballistics at any decent range... and do not let me get started on those .17 pea-shooters...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-21-2020, 12:57 AM
Pivot

Join Date: 
Jun 2020
Posts: 
20
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadgerJack View Post
Not entirely correct, unless you never shoot past 50~100 yards.

Over the years there have been NUMEROUS tests where they started with a long barrel- depending on caliber, out to 30"- fired a group over a chronograph, cut one inch off, and repeated, until it was down to 14"~16", depending on caliber/cartridge.

As the barrel length decreased so did accuracy, to a noticeable extent.

The velocity decrease was dependent upon the burning characteristics of the powder, but, in most cases it was noticeable, often as much as 100 FPS- or more- per inch of barrel loss, to the point that you have un-burnt powder exiting the barrel behind the bullet.

The hard part is to determine how LONG the barrel should be to give you OPTIMUM ballistics, not how short it can be to still give you ACCEPTABLE ballistics.

I may be off a little here, but in most medium caliber not magnum [.280~.338] centerfire 18"~24", magnums 22"~26", large bore [.40~.50] 28"~32". Rimfire .22/.22 Mag will generally give you best accuracy/ballistics at 18"~22".

The trend today for shorter barrels on rimfires stems from the use ultra fast burning powders used with very light bullets, and the perceived desire for every owner to put a can on it, which will not garner you very good accuracy or ballistics at any decent range... and do not let me get started on those .17 pea-shooters...

This is a good general insight, but the argument would be more powerful if it included references.

For example, you mention cutting the barrels of diff cal. inch-by-inch... what caliber was it, what was the barrel profile, twist, ammo, crown, ...? Doesn’t heavy/fluted barrel in 308 have different sweet spot to pencil barrel in .22?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-21-2020, 07:07 AM
Smoothtrigger's Avatar
Smoothtrigger
NRA Member - Click Here To Join! Appleseed Member Appleseed Rifleman

Join Date: 
Oct 2011
Location: 
WA
Posts: 
5,843
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzy View Post
Anschutz makes all their BR gins with a barrel length of 18 1/2" long for a reason. They found it to be the most accurate with match ammo.

Now, a squirrel rifle with a 16 1/2" barrel would be nice if the stock was not so long it looked odd. Usually, faster ammo shoots better in a short barrel. I said Usually, not always.
Not one single factory Anschutz Benchrest rifle (or any of their Target rifles for that matter) comes with an 18.5 inch barrel. At least has far as I know; maybe I missed something.

The factory does produce several field rifles with short (less than 19 inch) barrels, and some of those are even threaded.
Occasionally ANA will chop down a barrel on a field rifle, but I don't recall ever seeing them do that to a Benchrest rifle.

Smooth

Last edited by Smoothtrigger; 07-21-2020 at 03:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-21-2020, 09:11 AM
ghgs's Avatar
ghgs

Join Date: 
Mar 2012
Location: 
Wi. Just South of the Frozen Tundra
Posts: 
894
TPC Rating: 
100% (18)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAcharlie View Post
All my rim rifles are from '60s on back. So long bbld & heavy. The only light and handy is a rem24 shooting shorts. I like it but open sights and 70 yrs old eyes don't work well. And I won't scope that little beauty.
So gonna buy a 10/22 (my 1st) and keep it as small as possible. Funny as I bought an Axiom stock but not the rifle yet. Think I'll get that compact with the 16.125" bbl. I shoot std & sub in LR and like those 710mv Quiet out of my Sears m25. So figure the 10/22 should do well with the newer 835mv Quiet SA and the federal AE at 970mv.
Just for plinking! The only time I shoot at a target is at sighting in. But I do enjoy steel, bells & wiz bang action shooting.LOL
Thanks for the replies guys.
SAcharlie
With this information that you added it makes it easier to answer your original question.
In your application I do not feel that a shorter barrel will be significantly less accurate for your needs. Weight and or balance in your case may be more important.
For another person with other needs, cutting a crown at the tightest and roundest spot may be more important than most length considerations.
A correct answer to the length issue may be perfect for one application but not for another. That is why you may receive differing opinions. Really up to you to decide what is best for you.
Stay safe,
Glen H
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-23-2020, 07:35 AM
NIB's Avatar
NIB
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Mar 2009
Posts: 
3,685
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penage Guy View Post
A 16 inch, 22 rimfire barrel's accuracy, all else being equal, is totally dependent on the uniformity of the ammo.....since the peak pressure of the 22 long rifle cartridge occurs roughly at about this length.....

A 26 inch, 22 rimfire barrel, since the exit of the crown is several inches down stream from the peak pressure of the 22 long rifle cartridge, allows the quality of the barrel, itself, to play a role in the barrel's accuracy.


http://www.wwaccuracy.com/showthread...-barrel-length
Not bantering for heated debate here, but I sure wish Bill would have gone into more detail over his above statement.

As in what is the longer barrel with reduced pressure adding that the shorter barrel is not? Would this be increased bullet stability simply because of less bullet base pressure at muzzle/crown upon it just leaving the barrel?

Bill did mention "Ultimate accuracy Potential" of 16 vs 26 being the same but he seems to somewhat contradict himself talking about the reduced pressure of the longer barrel?

Quote:
Bill Calfee, Quote.....There is absolutely no difference in the ultimate accuracy "potential" between a 16 inch barrel and a 26 inch barrel....
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-23-2020, 07:06 PM
Penage Guy's Avatar
Penage Guy

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Ontario, Canada
Posts: 
4,464
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by NIB View Post
Not bantering for heated debate here, but I sure wish Bill would have gone into more detail over his above statement.

As in what is the longer barrel with reduced pressure adding that the shorter barrel is not? Would this be increased bullet stability simply because of less bullet base pressure at muzzle/crown upon it just leaving the barrel?

Bill did mention "Ultimate accuracy Potential" of 16 vs 26 being the same but he seems to somewhat contradict himself talking about the reduced pressure of the longer barrel?
More detail would indeed have been helpful to understand what he was getting at. I don't pretend to know his point of view. Perhaps there is more to be gleaned here http://wwaccuracy.com/showthread.php...s-shoot-better
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:57 AM.

Privacy Policy

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©2000-2018 RimfireCentral.com
x