24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
Originally Posted by DigitalDan
Yep, wind flags....learned about that at a 200 yd BP match in Cody about 10 years back. Full value L-R 10G20. Those puffs will get ya dang near every time.


Yep!

Which is exactly why, as Jim Carmichel pointed out years ago, the majority of half-inch rifles "if I do my part" are judged on a single 3-shot group.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
BP-B2

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,127
G
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
G
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,127
I have worked with cartridges of similar size but different shapes and am sort of convinced that case shape doesn't mean a lot but some cartridges are certainly more consistently accurate than others.
One group of cartridges were all 30 calibers (sort of). The 308 Winchester, the 303 British, the 30/40 Krag and the 300 savage. All are about the same size. One has a real long neck (30/40) and one a real short neck (300 Savage). The Savage cases was smallest but the other three were very close. Close enough that the brand of the brass would change the ranking. All of them were built as accuracy rifles though the rimmed case rifles were a little less conventional. The 308 and the 300 Savage liked 4895 and 150 grain bullets with the 300 using a couple of grain s less. Both cartridges were used in a Remington 40xBR and used the same Hart Barrel. Both would shoot right at 1/4 moa and both produced the occasional group under .2. I was never able to manage a .250 aggregate with either one because of fatigue, I suspect. This was a 10 1/2 pound rifle and recoil was a factor.
The 30/40 was built on a Ruger 77 and the 303 on a considerably modified P14. I shot 168's in the 30/40 and 174's in the 303. Both rifles seemed to be capable of shooting right at the .300 moa level with the occasional group under 1/4. They also both liked 4895. That the rifles did not shoot quite as well as the 40X is less indicative of any shortcoming as far as cartridge design is concerned than it is indicative that the 40X is a better platform than the Ruger 77 or the P14. By the way, both the Ruger and Enfield used three-lever, 2 oz triggers; a Canjar on the Ruger and a homemade unit on the Enfield. The rimless cartridges seemed to be easier to work with and brass was a bit better.
The other cartridges were the 6x47 Remington and the 6PPC. The 6x47 was built on a 40XBR and I used it a lot, wearing out three barrels. It shot very well and I was able to agg under 1/4 moa whenever conditions and my brain would let me. I won a lot of stuff with that rifle but it was a little bit fussy. I built my first PPC in 1980 and while it didn't shoot an awful lot better, it was so easy to develop a load for, it was almost hard to decide on which components to use. In this particular example, I think there is no question the PPC is better than the 6x47. So is the 6 BR. Whether this is because the cases are short and fat, or because they have 30 degree shoulders, or because they can be loaded hotter without dropping the primer, I can't say but, there it is.
When I started shooting "F" class, I shot a 6.5x55 and had pretty good success with it. I built a few 260's and they worked fine too. Nonetheless, I think the Creedmoor might be better than either one. A lot of this may be due to closer dimensional consistency of reamers and brass.
In the end, I can say that most cartridges seem to work just fine and the rifle is more important than is the cartridge. GD

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
D
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
D
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
Always loved the 300 Savage. That case was ahead of it's time. The only thing that is questionable is that short neck.

Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 600
C
Campfire Regular
Online Content
Campfire Regular
C
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 600
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
... using wind-flags AT the range ... demonstrated exactly how much even tiny wind variations (even on just one flag) can matter ...


I could not agree more with you, John.

I dicovered it myself the only time I have shot in a 100 meter indoor gallery where my usual five shot groups with that gun were consistently reduced a 40%.

Alvaro

Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 19,179
J
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
J
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 19,179
Pardon Me --- Bears Repeating !



[quote=greydog]I have worked with cartridges of similar size but different shapes and am sort of convinced that case shape doesn't mean a lot but some cartridges are certainly more consistently accurate than others.
One group of cartridges were all 30 calibers (sort of). The 308 Winchester, the 303 British, the 30/40 Krag and the 300 savage. All are about the same size. One has a real long neck (30/40) and one a real short neck (300 Savage). The Savage cases was smallest but the other three were very close. Close enough that the brand of the brass would change the ranking. All of them were built as accuracy rifles though the rimmed case rifles were a little less conventional. The 308 and the 300 Savage liked 4895 and 150 grain bullets with the 300 using a couple of grain s less. Both cartridges were used in a Remington 40xBR and used the same Hart Barrel. Both would shoot right at 1/4 moa and both produced the occasional group under .2. I was never able to manage a .250 aggregate with either one because of fatigue, I suspect. This was a 10 1/2 pound rifle and recoil was a factor.
The 30/40 was built on a Ruger 77 and the 303 on a considerably modified P14. I shot 168's in the 30/40 and 174's in the 303. Both rifles seemed to be capable of shooting right at the .300 moa level with the occasional group under 1/4. They also both liked 4895. That the rifles did not shoot quite as well as the 40X is less indicative of any shortcoming as far as cartridge design is concerned than it is indicative that the 40X is a better platform than the Ruger 77 or the P14. By the way, both the Ruger and Enfield used three-lever, 2 oz triggers; a Canjar on the Ruger and a homemade unit on the Enfield. The rimless cartridges seemed to be easier to work with and brass was a bit better.
The other cartridges were the 6x47 Remington and the 6PPC. The 6x47 was built on a 40XBR and I used it a lot, wearing out three barrels. It shot very well and I was able to agg under 1/4 moa whenever conditions and my brain would let me. I won a lot of stuff with that rifle but it was a little bit fussy. I built my first PPC in 1980 and while it didn't shoot an awful lot better, it was so easy to develop a load for, it was almost hard to decide on which components to use. In this particular example, I think there is no question the PPC is better than the 6x47. So is the 6 BR. Whether this is because the cases are short and fat, or because they have 30 degree shoulders, or because they can be loaded hotter without dropping the primer, I can't say but, there it is.
When I started shooting "F" class, I shot a 6.5x55 and had pretty good success with it. I built a few 260's and they worked fine too. Nonetheless, I think the Creedmoor might be better than either one. A lot of this may be due to closer dimensional consistency of reamers and brass.
In the end, I can say that most cartridges seem to work just fine and the rifle is more important than is the cartridge.
GD

-------------------------------------------------------
THANK YOU !

Jerry


jwall- *** 3100 guy***

A Flat Trajectory is Never a Handicap

Speed is Trajectory's Friend !!
IC B2

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,127
G
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
G
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,127
Originally Posted by dogcatcher223
Always loved the 300 Savage. That case was ahead of it's time. The only thing that is questionable is that short neck.


I always thought the 300 savage formed from 308 brass with the neck left long would be perfect. I guess that would be a 30 Creedmoor. I like longer necks and would like to have seen the 6.5 Creedmoor made with full length 308 brass so the neck would be longer. It gives greater latitude when seating bullets of different lengths. The 264 Win Mag would have been vastly better with a neck which was 1/8 inch longer. The 30/06 is perfect, shoulder angle notwithstanding. GD

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,710
M
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
M
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,710
I think that would have been counter productive to one design goal of the Creedmoor which was to allow for long ogive VLD style bullets to be seated so they fit in a 2.8" magazine without their ogives getting down into the case mouth.

Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,179
J
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
J
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,179
After JB repeatedly over the years harped about wind flags, I am but a recent convert and proponent. Boy was he spot on the money. Small, variable wind issues show up big time when using them. It's really eye opening to say the least.


It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
D
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
D
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 17,527
What are you using for wind flags?

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 16,966
S
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
S
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 16,966

The short answer is yes - there is a balance factor of how the shape, size, and materials perform together to result in less ES variation.

IC B3

Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,195
K
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
K
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,195
Wind flags are a real eye opener....

A simple 1/4" steel rod, 42" long.

Sharpen one end, drill a hole to accommodate a bent bycycle spoke with a 24" piece of 1/2" red yarn on it. Very, very good wind flag.

Put one up at 15 yards, and the other in front of the target.

You will wonder why it took you so long to learn to use this very simple and cheap tool. They you start looking at your groups, and realize how much you have shot trying to work up a load when it was the wind changing.

Each rifle range will usually have a predominate wind, which you will figure out.

This is no where near rocket science, and the flags will translate to better field shooting also.

I did not find surveyors tape tied on a stick to be very effective, but it is better than nothing at all. I piece of syrveyors tape on your target is practically nothing at all.

Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 571
O
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
O
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 571
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
DigitalDan and gnoahhh,

Thanks--I think!

Perhaps the two biggest "accuracy factors" I've found when testing rifles are (1) making sure bullets are seated straight, and (2) using wind-flags AT the range.

"Discovered" both about the same time three decades ago. The guy who started me with wind flags was the late Mickey Coleman, a very good benchrest gunsmith, who at a get-together at a West Virginia hunting club where Melvin Forbes was a member, had me shoot one of his superbly accurate rifles (a 6mm PPC) at 100 yards, with several wind flags between the bench and target. This demonstrated exactly how much even tiny wind variations (even on just one flag) can matter when shooting a rifle capable of putting 5 shots into one hole.

This was also confirmed about the same time by reading by Dick Wright's articles in Precision Shooter magazine. Dick is also a noted benchrest gunsmith, shooter, loading-tool maker, and long-time experimenter. He joined the Campfire a few years ago, but quit logging on a couple years back. His articles on shooting in PS always included "TAKE THE DAMN WIND FLAGS."

In the 30 years since have seen ONE other shooter put out wind-flags on a local public range--another Campfire member who knows who he is.


"not too grumpy"
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 571
O
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
O
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 571
Dick Wright passed away a year or so ago.


"not too grumpy"
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,910
Am very sorry to hear that. I suspected that might be what happened, but hadn't heard anything.

Thanks,
John


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 19,179
J
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
J
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 19,179
[quote=greydog]

I have worked with cartridges of similar size but different shapes and am sort of convinced that case shape doesn't mean a lot but some cartridges are certainly more consistently accurate than others.


One group of cartridges were all 30 calibers (sort of). The 308 Winchester, the 303 British, the 30/40 Krag and the 300 savage. All are about the same size. One has a real long neck (30/40) and one a real short neck (300 Savage). The Savage cases was smallest but the other three were very close. Close enough that the brand of the brass would change the ranking.

........ The 308 and the 300 Savage liked 4895 and 150 grain bullets with the 300 using a couple of grain s less.
Both cartridges were used in a Remington 40xBR and used the same Hart Barrel. Both would shoot right at 1/4 moa and both produced the occasional group under .2. I was never able to manage a .250 aggregate with either one because of fatigue, I suspect. This was a 10 1/2 pound rifle and recoil was a factor.


The 30/40 was built on a Ruger 77 and the 303 on a considerably modified P14. I shot 168's in the 30/40 and 174's in the 303. Both rifles seemed to be capable of shooting right at the .300 moa level with the occasional group under 1/4. They also both liked 4895.

That the rifles did not shoot quite as well as the 40X is less indicative of any shortcoming as far as cartridge design is concerned than

it is indicative that the 40X is a better platform than the Ruger 77 or the P14.
By the way, both the Ruger and Enfield used three-lever, 2 oz triggers; a Canjar on the Ruger and a homemade unit on the Enfield. The rimless cartridges seemed to be easier to work with and brass was a bit better.

The other cartridges were the 6x47 Remington and the 6PPC. The 6x47 was built on a 40XBR and I used it a lot, wearing out three barrels. It shot very well and I was able to agg under 1/4 moa whenever conditions and my brain would let me. I won a lot of stuff with that rifle but it was a little bit fussy. I built my first PPC in 1980 and while it didn't shoot an awful lot better, it was so easy to develop a load for, it was almost hard to decide on which components to use.

In this particular example, I think there is no question the PPC is better than the 6x47. So is the 6 BR. Whether this is because the cases are short and fat, or because they have 30 degree shoulders, or because they can be loaded hotter without dropping the primer, I can't say but, there it is.



In the end, I can say that most cartridges seem to work just fine and the rifle is more important than is the cartridge. GD

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

A LOT of Nuggets.
Food For Thot

Thanks Again

Jerry


jwall- *** 3100 guy***

A Flat Trajectory is Never a Handicap

Speed is Trajectory's Friend !!
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,710
M
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
M
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,710
Originally Posted by jwall
[quote=greydog]

I have worked with cartridges of similar size but different shapes and am sort of convinced that case shape doesn't mean a lot but some cartridges are certainly more consistently accurate than others.


One group of cartridges were all 30 calibers (sort of). The 308 Winchester, the 303 British, the 30/40 Krag and the 300 savage. All are about the same size. One has a real long neck (30/40) and one a real short neck (300 Savage). The Savage cases was smallest but the other three were very close. Close enough that the brand of the brass would change the ranking.

........ The 308 and the 300 Savage liked 4895 and 150 grain bullets with the 300 using a couple of grain s less.
Both cartridges were used in a Remington 40xBR and used the same Hart Barrel. Both would shoot right at 1/4 moa and both produced the occasional group under .2. I was never able to manage a .250 aggregate with either one because of fatigue, I suspect. This was a 10 1/2 pound rifle and recoil was a factor.


The 30/40 was built on a Ruger 77 and the 303 on a considerably modified P14. I shot 168's in the 30/40 and 174's in the 303. Both rifles seemed to be capable of shooting right at the .300 moa level with the occasional group under 1/4. They also both liked 4895.

That the rifles did not shoot quite as well as the 40X is less indicative of any shortcoming as far as cartridge design is concerned than

it is indicative that the 40X is a better platform than the Ruger 77 or the P14.
By the way, both the Ruger and Enfield used three-lever, 2 oz triggers; a Canjar on the Ruger and a homemade unit on the Enfield. The rimless cartridges seemed to be easier to work with and brass was a bit better.

The other cartridges were the 6x47 Remington and the 6PPC. The 6x47 was built on a 40XBR and I used it a lot, wearing out three barrels. It shot very well and I was able to agg under 1/4 moa whenever conditions and my brain would let me. I won a lot of stuff with that rifle but it was a little bit fussy. I built my first PPC in 1980 and while it didn't shoot an awful lot better, it was so easy to develop a load for, it was almost hard to decide on which components to use.

In this particular example, I think there is no question the PPC is better than the 6x47. So is the 6 BR. Whether this is because the cases are short and fat, or because they have 30 degree shoulders, or because they can be loaded hotter without dropping the primer, I can't say but, there it is.




In the end, I can say that most cartridges seem to work just fine and the rifle is more important than is the cartridge. GD

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

A LOT of Nuggets.
Food For Thot

Thanks Again

Jerry



Of course the rifle is most important. Given what you've set in bold it seems that's the idea you're strongly attached to. However that's not really the point when it comes to the existence (or not) of cartridge derived inherent accuracy. The evidence for/against that idea must come out of situations where other variables are controlled, variables such as rifle quality and shooter ability. I've highlighted in red what I see as the relevant passage.

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,836
A
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
A
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,836
Originally Posted by oldwoody2
Dick Wright passed away a year or so ago.


It will be two years in June. Dick went downhill rather quickly after he lost his beloved wife Glorya...

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,640
B
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
B
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,640
Originally Posted by dogcatcher223
What are you using for wind flags?


This is what I use I have 6 of them, they are green on one side and orange on the other, if you see a color change on one of your flags.......DON"T pull the trigger or you wont like your group!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
windflag

I always have a tail on them also that is not shown on the picture

Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 19,179
J
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
J
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 19,179
M M , you said above ^^^

"Of course the rifle is most important. Given what you've set in bold it seems that's the idea you're strongly attached to. However that's not really the point when it comes to the existence (or not) of cartridge derived inherent accuracy. The evidence for/against that idea must come out of situations where other variables are controlled, variables such as rifle quality and shooter ability."

I am not really arguing that there are no inherently accurate cartridges.
I am approaching this from the hunting/practicality standpoint.

ATST those inherently accurate cartridges are so NOT by great margins but REAL esp. in comp. shooting.

For Hunters greydog said,

" The 308 and the 300 Savage liked 4895 and 150 grain bullets with the 300 using a couple of grain s less.
Both cartridges were used in a Remington 40xBR and used the same Hart Barrel. Both would shoot right at 1/4 moa and both produced the occasional group under .2. I was never able to manage a .250 aggregate with either one because of fatigue, I suspect. This was a 10 1/2 pound rifle and recoil was a factor."

That's a pretty small diff.

also, "That the rifles did not shoot quite as well as the 40X is less indicative of any shortcoming as far as cartridge design is concerned than it is indicative that the 40X is a better platform than the Ruger 77 or the P14"

EDIT to ADD > "In this particular example, I think there is no question the PPC is better than the 6x47. So is the 6 BR"

"In the end, I can say that most cartridges seem to work just fine and the rifle is more important than is the cartridge."

I am agreeing about the 'platform' for hunting / hunters. I want to point out I'm talking HANDLOADING those cartridges
and not relying on factory ammo ONLY.

We are not that far apart on this subject.

Jerry





Last edited by jwall; 04/01/21.

jwall- *** 3100 guy***

A Flat Trajectory is Never a Handicap

Speed is Trajectory's Friend !!
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,340
B
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
B
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,340
Originally Posted by JGRaider
After JB repeatedly over the years harped about wind flags, I am but a recent convert and proponent. Boy was he spot on the money. Small, variable wind issues show up big time when using them. It's really eye opening to say the least.



Didn't know the wind blew in Lubbock!

Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
134 members (300_savage, 257 mag, 160user, 35, 6mmbrfan, 10Glocks, 14 invisible), 1,814 guests, and 811 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,728
Posts18,400,776
Members73,822
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.093s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.9120 MB (Peak: 1.0933 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-29 09:49:28 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS