Things learned in the test tunnel

[DonkeyHote]

Would be curious to know how barrel diameter changes accuracy.
Long time ago barrels were made with smaller diameters, nowadays everyone seems to shoot heavier larger diameter barreled rifles.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

@gunsandgunsmithing might be able to help out with this question.
You would think that a bullet that left the barrel at the same time and speed travels
farther would be on the same path, assuming no other factors to change it's flight
would use the same tune.
Your using the same ammo, same speed, how would the bullet know it's going to 100yds
and not 50yds. Makes me think that the 50yd tune wasn't quite as good as it should have been.
Maybe at a farther distance the slightly out of tune at 50yd is amplified showing up more
at 100yds.

But the ammo isn't going the same speed, esepeically with rimfire. Might see 30 or even 40fps variation within a single lot of $30/box premium stuff(said loosely).

For starters, when discussing PC, we first must agree that tuners don't create PC. It has been there all along and the long range guys' ladder tests prove that, way before tuners were prevalent in cf, much less long range cf.

 

[PWNolan]

Would be curious to know how barrel diameter changes accuracy.
Long time ago barrels were made with smaller diameters, nowadays everyone seems to shoot heavier larger diameter barreled rifles.

What diameter has "everyone" gone to?

 

[js2013]

How well do you maintain you barrel? What kind of barrel? How good is your chamber? How fast does your chamber build a carbon ring? Do you shoot a gun where you can actually tell the difference?
Like I said…..every box.

That’s why I’d like to see someone run a test in a controlled environment rather than someone said this or that. Granted it’s going to change based on variables changing (ammo, rifling, chamber etc)but I’d still like to see just one controlled study. I’m sure that data is available somewhere but I haven’t seen it. Whidden has the setup to do it but he’s probably has better things to do.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

There's an assumption that tunnels make for perfect conditions. They don't. Lots of reasons that are less than obvious, so it's easy to understand why people make that assumption but it's not true. Whiddens tunnel might be one of the best but it needs a lot of controlled air movement to negate several issues with most tunnels.the cfm of moving air required is pretty massive

 

[DonkeyHote]

What diameter has "everyone" gone to?

Well, my older Remington's 540t is around .8in, 10/22 Kidd is .915 and lot of the newer vudoo, rimx rifles shooting in our club matches, mainly to 200 meters, bench-rest silhouette using heavy barrels over 1.0in diameter up to 1.2in.
I have a lilja starts at 1.250 at chamber than steps down to .9in.for full length of 25in. I see a lot of bench-rest style rimfires around 7/8. so basically from 7/8in to 1.2 inches

 

[Knotwild]

Interesting. Five people thanked Mr. Whidden and 15 discussed tuners and cleaning. If he were to share any more observations, they should be well buried in this thread.

 

[Ranger188]

49 people so far liked his post..
I agree with his barrel fouling numbers.
I don't disagree with anything he's posted, I'm sure most feel the same way. I want more info so I can understand how, why and what causes somethings to happen.
One world class champion F shooter (everyone knows his name) has said that a bullet in flight will
stay on the same path, so a good load @600 yds and that same load will be good @1000 yd, but a few top
benchrest shooters say that you need two different loads, one at 600 and possibly a different one
at 1000 yds. Who's right or wrong and why?
Only way to learn.

 

[Tim Slater]

Well, my older Remington's 540t is around .8in,

If I remember correctly, the 540T is a junior/beginner smallbore (prone/position) rifle. As such, weight was a consideration, and that limited barrel profile. Contemporary top end smallbore rifles had noticeably heavier barrels: 1.12in to .875in over 29in for the early BSA Internationals, .97in straight x 29.5in for the M55 Finnish Lion.

 

[grauhanen]

I agree with his barrel fouling numbers.

One world class champion F shooter (everyone knows his name) has said that a bullet in flight will
stay on the same path, so a good load @600 yds and that same load will be good @1000 yd, but a few top
benchrest shooters say that you need two different loads, one at 600 and possibly a different one
at 1000 yds. Who's right or wrong and why?
Only way to learn.

Fouling numbers can vary from one barrel to the next. Suffice it to say, however, that the number of rounds required for the best accuracy performance is not the 100s or even a thousand, as an often-cited article by Gregory J Roman insists (see https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/a-guide-to-22lr-barrel-care-for-the-precision-rimfire-shooter/).

A bore cleaned to bare metal will usually require about 15 foulers, give or take a few, to season the bore. A bore cleaned with a couple of patches between cards or targets will usually be good to go with fewer than half-a-dozen.

Regarding a bullet in flight, it seems clear the reference is to centerfire rather than .22LR. With a .22LR bullet, however, it will stay on a predictable path that can be calculated with a ballistics calculator under at least two very unlikely circumstances.

One is that there is a complete absence of air movement between the shooter and the target. The other is that the bullet itself is perfectly formed, with a perfectly shaped heel and a perfect center of gravity. Without these characteristics the trajectory of the bullet will be affected and the POI unpredictable.

Both circumstances are unlikely to exist. As a result the ultimate POI of a .22LR projectile becomes increasingly impossible to accurately predict as distance to target grows.

 

[jelenko]

has said that a bullet in flight will
stay on the same path, so a good load @600 yds and that same load will be good @1000 yd, but a few top
benchrest shooters say that you need two different loads, one at 600 and possibly a different one
at 1000 yds.

Yeah. This has always confused me also. My instinct is a good load is a good load. But, there's all that experience from long range competitors.

 

[TRSR8]

Well, my older Remington's 540t is around .8in, 10/22 Kidd is .915 and lot of the newer vudoo, rimx rifles shooting in our club matches, mainly to 200 meters, bench-rest silhouette using heavy barrels over 1.0in diameter up to 1.2in.
I have a lilja starts at 1.250 at chamber than steps down to .9in.for full length of 25in. I see a lot of bench-rest style rimfires around 7/8. so basically from 7/8in to 1.2 inches

Nobody is talking about older sporters or tapered barrels which are rarely seen on BR platforms. BR around 7/8? Not much.
the vast majority of BR barrels fall between .875”- .920” with most of those around .900 and that has been the case since the early 1990’s.
This, all for true RFBR platforms.

 

[TRSR8]

That’s why I’d like to see someone run a test in a controlled environment rather than someone said this or that. Granted it’s going to change based on variables changing (ammo, rifling, chamber etc)but I’d still like to see just one controlled study. I’m sure that data is available somewhere but I haven’t seen it. Whidden has the setup to do it but he’s probably has better things to do.

You haven‘t seen it because you have no idea where to look.
You can learn all you need to know by going to any decent sized RFBR match where the best precision RF rifles live and shoot the best ammo available, with the highest results and they do, exactly, what I told you, there are zero controlled studies other than the entire history of RFBR. You think they do this because it’s not well understood?
How tough do you need to make this?

 

[DonkeyHote]

Nobody is talking about older sporters or tapered barrels which are rarely seen on BR platforms. BR around 7/8? Not much.
the vast majority of BR barrels fall between .875”- .920” with most of those around .900 and that has been the case since the early 1990’s.
This, all for true RFBR platforms.

Well I was! Just curious ,It would be good to know if the newer heavy barrelled rifles are as accurate as a true rimfire rifles to 100 yards or meters and I'm sure they are sending rifles to test other than true RFBR platforms.

 

[MrG52D]

Nobody is talking about older sporters or tapered barrels which are rarely seen on BR platforms. BR around 7/8? Not much.
the vast majority of BR barrels fall between .875”- .920” with most of those around .900 and that has been the case since the early 1990’s.
This, all for true RFBR platforms.

Tim, this is not Benchrest Central, this is Accurate Shooter, a shooting forum, not everyone is a benchrest shooter and not all benchrest shooters on here are affiliated with IR or ARA, some attend non sanctioned matches and some just shoot by themselves, but still want to learn and understand the sport of RFBR. We all know you are a fountain of knowledge, with your vast experience of both RFBR and CFBR. Share with us about what you know.

 

[TRSR8]

Tim, this is not Benchrest Central, this is Accurate Shooter, a shooting forum, not everyone is a benchrest shooter and not all benchrest shooters on here are affiliated with IR or ARA, some attend non sanctioned matches and some just shoot by themselves, but still want to learn and understand the sport of RFBR. We all know you are a fountain of knowledge, with your vast experience of both RFBR and CFBR. Share with us about what you know.

George, the conversation seems concentrated on custom barrels, accuracy, tuners, testing, etc.
Rather than being snarky, is there something fundamentally incorrect stated here.
You shoot an OEM 52, God bless you, but that represents, what, about .5% of the precision demographic being discussed..
FWIW, kindly refrain from the “ we all know” BS. Unaware you represent any version of “ We”.

 

[tangocharlie]

The most entertaining statement I have found in this thread is the thought that ‘tuners work, really not sure why - or how’. It reminds me of the old cartoon of a professor with a chalkboard full of equations and about midway in the mathematical ramblings it says, “and then a miracle occurs”. There is no argument on my part that tuners work - I have three rifles bearing them. I appreciate Whidden sharing any and all information that is gleaned in his testing. Shooters and barrel makers alike should profit from this. Thank you very much.

 

[Knotwild]

I'm guessing Mr. Whidden won't be re-visiting this thread. A golden opportunity lost.

 

[Bottom Fodder]

I'm guessing Mr. Whidden won't be re-visiting this thread. A golden opportunity lost.

Just like a lot of thread someone come to share and gets blindside by a bunch of key board cowboys

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Interesting. Five people thanked Mr. Whidden and 15 discussed tuners and cleaning. If he were to share any more observations, they should be well buried in this thread.

What exactly is the problem? Tuners were part of the subject. Lots of people read this, some commented on different but related aspects of the thread, and some scrolled on by. One poster condemned people for discussing the thread subject matter. Thank you John Whidden for your testing and the services you offer to the sport..!
I just don't understand people not just scrolling on by, especially vs interjecting things like your post does. Sorry, but I just needed to say that. TIFWIW. Good night.