Functional Difference between '95 palma and 2011 fulbore reamers?

[mao0720]

Can anyone explain to me what the functional difference between the '95 palma reamer and the 2011 fullbore reamers? THey both have the same freebore, which should suit the same (155gr) equally well, but what difference would I see between the different neck diameters and other chamber dimensions that the two reamers have?
Thanks,
Mason

 

[rminut]

I don't know what print you looked at but they don't have the same freebore. The 2011 is slightly longer (about .020")and I believe is .0005 larger in diameter. The 2011 is designed to meet the International pressure standard, meaning it lowers pressure in the chamber. the biggest functional difference though is that the freebore is longer allowing the bullet to be seated out further, which matters with these newer longer, higher BC 155's.

 

[mao0720]

The drawings up on bullets.com each reamer, both prints showed a .050 freebore. Ill call PTG and see what the specs are.

 

[rminut]

now that i've looked at the prints it seems the 2011 has a .344 neck instead of .342 and the leade angle is 1'45 vs. 1'30. I guess they felt these two small changes bled enough pressure to pass the ammo test. I think it's the Gamboa reamer that has the longer freebore and I know the Bisley 150 has a longer freebore, .075 roughly. These are all small changes in order to comply with international rules. if you are not on the US traveling team I don't see the importance of a fullbore reamer. If you want to run something a little heavier than 155's the Bisley is a really good choice. My '95 works great with Berger 168 Hybrids and it's a long bullet.

 

[stgw77]

Try to find article from this thread: http://forum.accurateshooter.com/index.php?topic=3751116.0