320: You're Wrong About Twist Rate 

It was an honor and a pleasure to be on your show Ron! Thanks again for the opportunity!

John I like your strategically placed 2ID/4ID display box. You earned, it so here you go. Thank you for your Servings.

Lapua has some helpful content on their website on the matter. The issue with an over stabilized bullet is that it is flying nose up and not in line with the trajectory. I think this explains nicely the anecdotal penetration issue as the bullet impacts with a cross section rather than the pointy end

I think that the "old Kynoch bullets" and "round nose" are the pertinent points. The Guest also mentioned that the PH switched from old-style round nosed bullet to flat nosed. This is very important. A large flat nose ( 65+% diameter is often mentioned) tends to travel through tissue in a straight line. Round nose designs and those with very small flat noses are much more likely to yaw. If you look at high-speed photos, almost many bullets yaw significantly immediately after leaving the muzzle. It often takes well over 100 yards for a bullet to "go to sleep". The flat-based bullets favored by short-range benchrest shooters yaw less, but have lower BC, which is why they are only used for relatively short ranges. FWIW, in WWI, the British noted that their 303 bullets penetrated sandbags best at about 200 yards. This implies significant yaw up till that point. It is of note that "fleet yaw" in military 5.56x45 ammo was noted as an issue for its lethality. For the FMJ bullets that depend on yawing for damaging tissue, a very small yaw of several degrees turned out to be very important. Bullets that hit the target perfectly end-on tended to punch straight through and cause little damage. A lot of work has been done to ensure that modern military bullets will yaw rapidly.

Back in the 80’s and 90’s, I had problems losing deer on very close shots but awesome performance past 100 yards. I wonder if this may explain the issue I was having. I switched to a .243 and eliminated the problem. The past few years,, I have switched back to the 270 without the issues I had back in the 80/90s.

Awesome 2 legends together on a podcast awesome thanks so much for Great information

In testing for the 8.6 blackout, they did test 1:1 twist rates. They only reason they settled on 1:3 was because of barrel life, not terminal performance. They found 1:1 to be better.

Was the cartridge hand loaded? Was the bullet defective? Was it seated off-center in the neck? Was it off-center in the throat? How much free-bore did the barrel have? What was the throat diameter ratio?

Most cartridge designs have been around for decades; the loads are tried and true (and safe). Here's a novel idea! Instead of trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, why not establish a goal for speed or accuracy and find a standard barrel, cartridge, bullet and load that do so without unacceptable risk? For some reason sites like this one seem to be a magnet for guys who want to be the first to break a record. I'm glad that Mr Spomer preaches a safe and sane approach.

The required twist rate is determined by the LENGTH of the bullet, NOT THE WEIGHT. Longer bullets REQUIRE higher twist rates. We only see over-stabilization when the twist rate exceeds what is required by the length. Like it or not, needle-like bullets at higher twist rates are the future. The reason we have not had them before now has nothing to do with accuracy. If that were the case, the faster twist-rate rifles would be less accurate, and we do not see any indication of that. We have not had higher twist rates due to bullet construction and cost. Higher twist rates wear out buttons faster, and lead can only hold up to a specific RPM, depending on the thickness of the copper jacket. However, with the advancement of solid copper bullets, we can now move beyond what would typically blow a lead bullet apart in flight.

The topic that needs to be discussed with a big channel like you is how slow twist rate guns can shoot long high b.c. bullets. For example my 1in10 twist 270 Win shoots the 165 ABLR incredibly accurate. I have tested it out to 800 yards. The 270 Win will also shoot the 170 gr EOL extremely well. I also have a couple of friends with 270 WSM rifles that shoot the 165 ABLR at much lower elevation than me with great success.

You also have to remember that a faster twist rate equates to higher chamber pressure and also slower velocities.

what about the ricochet effect because of angle of impact,bone density etc?

I bought a tikka t3x in .243. I wanted to shoot deer/pronghorn with 100gr norma, Hornaday soft point ammo. At 100yds, I was moa but at 300 yds, I was almost off paper - even 90gr eld-x. The tikka comes with 1 in 10 twist (the original 1955 twist rate). After a lot frustration and ammo, I put a new pac nor barrel on the gun with a 1 in 8 twist and the problems went away. Could it be that manufacturers need to rethink twist rate with all the new bullet designs?

Would love some info on gain twist rifling, I have heard varying things about it, mostly good.

All the new PRC caliber rifles have faster than our usual twist rates to accommodate the also new longer and heavier for caliber bullets for longer range competition and hunting. Im sure that standard for caliber bullets will no longer be effective in the PRC cartridges.

I watched a Reloading video about the .22 Creedmoor where long heavy bullets were properly stabilized with fast twist rates, but lighter shorter bullets were going into the target sideways and breaking apart with those same twist rates. We all know that the .22 Creed makes some very high velocities with lighter bullets. I came away from that with a better understanding about too fast twist rates with lighter bullets for caliber and cartridge.

How many older cartridges would benefit from more research, twist changes, and higher BC bullets?

These issues of destabilization can be caused by damage to the mouth of the firearm. A chipped muzzle can cause pressure to exit earlier on one side and push the bullet out of balance. This could perhaps, as you say, correct itself in flight after a certain number of yards. That is one issue that I do not hear mentioned in your conversation. The old .505 Giggs's spitting hole may have been damage in its long travels.

Potential explanation. The bullet might have a small void that's unseen that changes the center of mass and or the center of gravity.

Yea theres a lot of factors in this weight shape powder and twist rate of ammo its why u test to see what ammo works best for ur guns and me in my 30-06 i oil my barrel before going out to get a smooth straight long range shots.

Velocity I believe is more of a matter with overall pressure, bore/bullet friction and the pressure curve.... length of barrel too. A twisting bullet might delay the movement of the bullet, too. So I'm sure it's also a factor... but not as much.

I like your first question Ron ,,,,, so this is a twist rate problem ,,, if happened as described could have been a number of things caused it ,,,, referring to the bullet on the elephant tongue

Thanks

If you stay with mid. weight slugs likely be ok . I think some rifles send the slug yawing at close range , but they stabilize at longer range. This could be why some miss close shots , like charging bears etc.

I have already added a comment, but to clarify one point I really enjoy listening to both of these guys. They are very knowledgeable but to me things have gotten off track a little bit., Everyone talks about BC bullets and shooting 600+ yards, the average hunter doesn’t do that, and that type of shooting hurts a lot of animals , and they suffer terrible death and many are never found by the hunter or should I say, shooter, my definition of hunting and shooting long-distance is two different things !

It wouldn't be the first time that a bone in an animal would deflect a bullet, within an animal too.

This sounds more of a terminal affect ie peneration n expansion based on RPM or Twist Rater.. Wonder if anybody has done gel test with different bullets n weight calibers etc n twist rates.

Ron's opening line about bullet stabilization is correct. Full metal jacket bullets tend to tumble after impact and do not follow a straight path through the target. It is related more to the shape of bullet than to the rate of spin. All rotating objects become more stable the faster they are rotated. The only exception to that is if they are rotated fast enough to cause them to lose their shape or come apart due to centrifugal force and heat. Fort Scott ammunition sells bullets based on the design of the bullet cause them to tumble after impact. Any bullet that tumbles after impact is going to have its ability to penetrate changed. The story about bullets going to sleep is an old Goofy, not based in fact, fairy tale.

Bryan Litz: "When my drill turns slow, the drill bit struggles to go into wood." That 8.6 BLK spins fast, maybe 25m to 150m it works well. Now, how do we fast twist that 300WSM concept. Or do we neck the 416RM down so that you can 400grains with twist rate. Just a thought. The drill needs to spin that 400grain weight fast enough between 25m to 200m

Storied professional Don Heath was a professional's professional who used the 9.3x62 for everything, including some combat work. One of his observations was that the 375 H&H did not perform as well as his 9.3, notwithstanding the superior numbers that it generates. Some of this would probably be due to periods when poor bullets were often the only choice, however, this interesting data on twist rate may also suggest some answers.

I was watching a video on the 8.6 Blackout on Garand Thumb and they were punching subsonic 338's through 4 feet... not inches, but feet of ballistic gel. 1-3" twist. Why?

Ron and/or John, can you comment on the new 8.6 Blackout and twist rate? There’s a video out showing the 8.6 with a really fast twist-maybe 1 turn in 3"- and they were claiming it makes a big difference on the terminal performance. Specifically, it makes a a much larger permanent wound cavity. Thoughts?

How does this equate with the 8.6 Blackout and a 1 in 3 twist?

Is there such thing as reversed/clockwise rifling?

It does seem to me that if the twist rate were absurdly high, it would lead to higher pressures as the bullet would have more resistance from the lands in the barrel. That higher pressure surely could affect accuracy.

I wonder how similar this is to the behavior of bullets in water, in the sense that larger bullets slow down faster vs. smaller bullets. I am thinking in terms of something like a fluid dynamics problem, or how space craft will bounce off the atmosphere if they hit at the wrong angle or a bullet will skip off water surface due to the water surface tension. That extra energy, is going somewhere as the bullet leaves the barrel, hits the air, and is pulling on the bullet in the wrong direction, creating drag like a wirlpool suction effect, to slow the bullet down, until it stabilizes. That is probably overly simplistic. Just a thought.

It’s interesting information but to me it really doesn’t make a difference when it comes to generalized hunting with the cartridges that we are most familiar with, I also found it interesting that Ron months ago talked about someone hunting in Africa years ago with a 7 mm Mauser killing so many elephants with one shot, and now it seems in conversation That more weapon is actually needed and why,

Over-stabilization becomes an issue at longer ranges. Bullet angle of attack vs ballistic trajectory.

Instead of a 375 H&H, use a “rifled barrel 12 gauge shotgun” with a 1-4, 1-6, 1-8, or 1-10(yes Vortex makes one) scope using “brennekeusa” Brenneke SLUGS for hunting African Water Buffalo or Grizzly protection.

👍👍👍👍👍

1in 8 is perfect for a 16” ar in 556

In my humble opinion it is much more about deflection at higher speeds. I had better penetration with reduced bullet speed in moose at close range with the same projectiles. The old rounds with speeds between 2200 and 2400 ft/sec penetrated like a charm, mostly in a straight line. Make them faster and every little tissue difference in the animal deflects the projectile from its original path! Initial shock is higher when you get closer to 3000 ft/sec, which is evident in the drastic dropping of many thin skinned species. Gel tests are in this respect misleading, since they do not offer the tissue variability found in animal muscle tissue including sinews and fatty areas. Twist rate is important regarding bullet length but has little to do with the discussed penetration problems. It all comes down to bullet speed.

We should be using a progressively faster twist rate barrel. It starts off with a very slow twist and ends with a very fast twist.

Who was that famous writer back in the 50tys and 60tys that hunted elephant with 270 .Elmer Keith?

I thought it was well known that light bullets don't like high twist rates.

After listening to this, I remain thoroughly unconvinced that you can overspin a bullet

Not only is the bullet affected by the twist rate, but it affects the barrel vibration too. Keep that in mind when thinking about the accuracy, and bullet yaw too...

So if these old style bullets had that problem in the 375,surely it would have reared its head more than twice in the more than 100 years of shooting large dangerous game in Africa with the 375 h h?! Huh?

I don't know that the original core problem was clearly confirmed here.....

It's all about balance ! Velocity and twist rate are linked. The faster a bullet spin the greater the wound channel: very useful for taking long shots when bullets drop below 1800fps it helps a great deal as expansion or fragmentation is minimal but too much spin is not that useful at close to "normal" hunting range as it can be very destructive on game. That's why you usually found the 7-08 with 9 to 9.1/4 twist rate and 7 RM with 9.5 to 10 twist, the later being a much faster cartridge !

That was a lot of "think" and just not a lot of "know"

A 300 GR bullet out of a 375 will not shoot but 2500 FPS i think that a 270 GR bullet might do better it will go 2700 FPS.

3rd I.D!!!

Why don't you talk about textured bullets and how it improves them in all aspects of ballistics?

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance dazzle them with bullshit!!!!

😢🎉😅😅😊😊 1:38

Love to hear about shooting elephants. Aren't they and most large game animals in Africa endangered or is that a myth? Ah "True Sports" Save the animals by shooting them? I'm not a "tree hugger". But what's the point of shooting an elephant maybe just "look what I did. Maybe study two books Applied Ballistics For Long Range Shooting by Brian Litz or Ammo & Ballistics by Bob Forker, I did.

This guy talks too much.

There iscno such thing as centrifugal force, do some research. Just ask ANY physicist.

Ballistics is such an interesting science. Bullet shape for and aft, density, pressure, combustion rates, twist rates, muzzle crown. I worry for anyone who wouldn't find it interesting.

Who spends thousands of dollars to go on a Safari and then shoots 50-year-old ammo. I don't have a lot of money for a Safari but I wouldn't even shoot 50-year-old ammo at a whitetail in my yard. A typical example of a bonehead with too much money and no regard for ethical hunting.

This guy has it backward. The tumbling at a closer range is a sign of not enough twist rate, not too much. I can prove it, too. I see the same thing shooting slugs from a PCP air rifle. I can give you a test to prove it. I bet he was using heavy-for-caliber bullets that are longer and with an older rifle with a slower twist rate. Given enough time downrange, the bullet will stabilize. However, up close, the bullet does not have enough distance to stabilize and is semi-keyholing. He is dead wrong, and it is easily provable.

When a youtuber with decades of reloading experience (not me) claims that cartridges like 6.5 CM or others with 1:8 twist, and using the really long bullets like the Accubond LR are very hard to load for, the question still is unanswered: Why? Not enough jump when seating the bullet? Too fast? Too high of twist rate? Maybe long range (1,000 yds) loaded cartridges don’t work optimally at close range with longer bullets? Maybe some slo-mo footage could shed some light on what’s really going on. Enquirin’ minds wanna know.

Some of this is due to bullet construction and velocity. If you fire a bowler ballistic tip at 3000 FPS out of a 7mm rem mag and shoot a bull elk at 15 feet you will get wayyyyyyyyyyy less penetration than you would at 400 yards. This has NOTHING to do with twist it is simply velocity being too high for that bullets construction on the very dense target that elk are. But if it is a case where you are shooting solids then yes it probably a stability issue. If the projectile doesn’t hit square to the trajectory path then it may rumble or curve in the target providing less penetration than at a slightly greater distance where the bullet is more concentric in flight. So yes there is a nice ideal twist rate for a given load. But this is probably way oversold especially for North American big game hunters. This is 99% a dangerous game issue. In that case definitely worth considering.

Perhaps this conversation Ron is having about twist rate. Maybe this is why 30-06 shooting "accelerators" they offer poor accuracy.

Anecdotal accounts of shooting elephants in the head, or cape buffalo in the nose, with 50-yr-old ammo? Talk about clickbait!

8.6 blackout enters the chat, 3.5in twist rate lolz. Honestly I have no interest i it for required bullet jacket for that fast twist. Fun podcast.

That is the reason why. In África they began yesting the Meplat point. Beca use, Round nos hitting heavy bone tend to to deform and Tumble... John said it... "very old"

I have had only one gun that seemed to have too high a twist rate, which was a puzzle at the time. I have a Dan Wesson 44 mag with an 8 inch barrel with a compensator with some copper plated bullets which was very accurate out to 25 Yds, but afterwards the bullets seemed to go wild. I also noted that when I did hit the target the bullet hole had a tail on it. The jacket seemed to be spinning off the bullet and making it unstable. Sometimes also keyholing. Luckily the Dan Wesson is designed to easily change barrels, and changing the barrel seemed to solve the problem. I suspect that the 8 inch barrel was meant for some specialty bullets. That side ported barrel also had huge muzzle blast, the shooters near me usually moved. Although as far as needing a powerful rifle to kil elephants. I beleive kiliminjaro bell took several hundred elephants with 7x57 but was an expert on bullet placement.

Why can't we compare slower cartridges like a shotgun. Let's say a sabot slug. Shotgun chokes are there to reduce the spin. Big ball slugs can be delivered through a smooth bore. Sabot slugs on the other hand have a front and tail heavy shape. Newer variations of sabot slugs are using more modern day pistol projectiles. We can also use even slower moving projectiles to determine this. Your typical archery arrow stabilizes the further down range it goes. The spin rate also increases. The most recent theory of archery arrows is F.o.c. (forward of center) balance. I believe bullet construction and shape determine the required twist rate. Longer b.c. bullets make more contact with the lands. The heavier bullets are also using increased pressure to excel them. I believe this is why each platform will perform different with different ammo and load. Some styles of rifling are more forgiving. 5R twist has more land surface area than a 6R. Again compare archery arrows. The short arrow stabilize sooner. And 4 feathers add more twist over a 3 feather construction. The energy with a heavier arrow or a light variations has completely different accuracy. Finally....there is no all around perfect combo. That's why it's called precision shooting. All factors for one specific target.

So the 375 that didn’t penetrate the buffalo skull at short range was solved by going with a longer, heavier bullet? To conclude that the root of the problem was too much gyroscopic stability makes no sense to me… By switching to a longer, heavier bullet… the dominant change is an obvious increase in sectional density… which increases penetration potential. IMO the solution to an inadequate penetration problem at short range is: 1) use bullets that retain most or all mass but have reliable controlled expansion. 2) choose longer, heavier bullets with a high sectional density… high sectional density yields greater penetration.

A common problem with the old Kynoch style solids is fish tailing which can cause a tumbling. Especially at close range and high velocity. Modern monolithic and modern flat point very sturdy bullets like Hornaday DGS don't do this. Riveting is also a problem in those old ones. The PMP 286gr. Brass solids were developed specifically for this issue for elephant culling in the Kruger park

In other words the idiot at the Banana Logistics that shoots gel at 10+ feet is no test at all as the bullets may not yet have gone to sleep? It sure looks like on the wood they are starting to tumble, however on steel a nice round hole....... I heard years ago, the round ball is the most stable thing there is, under fifty foot. So, now before I go 375, can you tell me that a 180 or even 150 grain out of a 300 WM between the eyes won't penetrate? Yes I understand shoulder to shoulder but I can't imagine a 300 WM or even 30-06 Howa won't brain straight on shot? Hornady or Winchester ballistic tip. Both are 26", the 300 WM is Browning 'A' Bolt with BOSS. Advise.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around going from unstable to stable. I believe something else in play here.

Is there a chance that there is a variance in projectile velocity large enough to cause this stability issue?? Idk, but that makes sense. But, also, there surely would be a noticeable difference in recoil that would be a tip-off to that being the reason.

Why does the 30-06 stabilize anything from 110 grain all the way up to 220 hr? Never mind you answered my question as I was watching?

Why are there Kamala Harris campaign adds running on your podcast Ron? I don’t think she would support your hunting/ammo or guns promotion show

I have wondered if high twist rate accuracy issues with lower weight bullets might have something to do with bullet quality. Bullets are typically considered homogeneous. But what if the center of mass is slightly off of the center axis of the bullet? Maybe from a small nick on the bullet casing. Would this slight rotating imbalance become increasingly noticeable at higher spin rates, similar to an automobile tire spinning faster on an axel? I don’t believe there are perfect bullets, but some are likely better than others. Increases in rotational speed above what is required for stability might worsen rotational imbalance issues. I have no factual data or reference to support my suspicions.

NOW 8.6 BLACKOUT WITH 1-3 TWIST HAS 500,000 RPM subsonic goes through 3 ballistic gel blocks ! Explain this?

Sounds like it's an issue with the difference between the material your bullet is traveling through. Bone will produce issues the flesh doesn't.

Physics state that the faster you rotate any object including a out of balance tire the more stable it becomes. You have to obey the speed limit when you're driving a car. If you kept rotating a tire fast enough the rotational velocity can exceed the acceleration outward due to a imbalance moment of inertia. When that happens a out of balance tire will become more stable but when it's on a car it has to obey speed limit or you get a ticket from the cops and cars can only spin wheels as fast as the car can go.

Hi Ron, love your show and testing my knowledge often and coming away with a new perspective that generally makes me feel I am better informed after your show than before. Why is twist rate so susceptible to different schools of thought? I used to believe it was about the mass of the projectile that required a faster twist rate to stabilize a heavier bullet. Listening to you for some time now and some additional research reveals that it’s the length of the projectile. Now your guest expert explains that it’s the weight that matters. Color me officially confused. Surely there must be empirical data to support one or the other. What should we believe? Thank you for keeping my knowledge ego in-check. Best, John B

BINGO! on bullet "length" being critical for a given twist rate. I first picked up on the "stability" issue shooting military matches using the Steyr AUG in 5.56 NATO, which uses a 62grain, composite cored bullet. (SS-109 / M855 / F1, etc.) The STANDARD twist for those rifles is a very fast 1:7" twist. This is NOT necessarily needed to stabilize the "ball" projectile, but to tame the ludicrously long L-110 / M856 TRACER bullet. The "SAW / LMG" companion, the FN Minimi / M249, had the same twist, stamped right there on the barrel, specifically to stabilize the tracer ammo. So, what was the "tell" on "over-stabilization"? Longer ranges. We were noticing weird group "blowout" at 500 yards. This from rifles that would put ten rounds into a palm-sized group at 300. The exception was that troops with the 16" CARBINE barrels were sweeping the pool at 500. Enter the concept of "over-stabilization". A the bullet leaves the muzzle, it is (hopefully) spinning. However, there is no such thing as a "perfect" barrel (or crown" and certainly no "perfect bullets. As noted in this video, bullets are KNOWN to "spiral" around the trajectory. The "boffin" term is "precession". The bullet will, eventually start to rotate around its OWN centre of mass, which may not be the physical center-line of the bullet However, this being, with any luck,the REAL world, there are a couple of "catches": Air resistance (drag) and GRAVITY. We will ignore the rotation of the planet in this case. Artillery folks DO NOT ignore it. The bullet is launched along the alignment of the last few inches of the barre and hopefully not "buffeted" too much by muzzle blast as it departs. It will be spinning at the requisite rate but it WILL have a "precession" component, like it or not As soon as the bullet emerges, it is subject ti the aforementioned drag and gravity. The drag starts to slow the bullet. In true Newtonian fashion, gravity acts to accelerate the bullet DOWNWARD at 32 feet per second squared.The net result is that the flight path "trajectory" is a close approximation of a PARABOLA, i.e., a constantly steepening curve. It is the AIR re stance that does the slowing down.At "some point in the trajectory, the bullet will be still pointing on the "line of departure" but it will be tracking the nominal parabola the drag in the shock-cone from the supersonic speed will be doing a bit of a dance with the gyroscopic forces of the spin and the bullet will "realign" (more-or-less), with the trajectory. IF the bullet is not spun fast enough, it will wander off quite a lot; If spun too fast, this takes longer and the "snap-back" is more violent and at greater intervals. As the bullet goes down-range, it's forward "speed" is steadily reduce by the drag. ROTATIONAL speed is fundamentally unaffected. So, in our example, the 16-inch carbines launched the SAME bullet at a couple of hundred FPS slower and with a commensurately reduced SPIN rate. Hence a marginally more "rainbow-like" trajectory, but with "correction" being smaller and occurring at shorter intervals. Thus, the better grouping out to 500yda. the shorter barrel also was effectively "stiffer" than the longer one and thus had less deflection on firing. Apparently there had been some experiments with 1:9 inch twist barrels, but the issue then became failure to stabilize the long tracer bullets. And, given the well-documented "effective use of rifle fire in the battlefield" being almost exclusively inside a 300 yd range, the problem "went away".

10 ads in 30 minutes...

It could be that a bullet, especially a longer bullet, flexes slightly when exiting the muzzle, just like an arrow does, and eventually stabilizes further on its trajectory. This could be caused by the rifling itself as it disengages from the bullet. First the frontal portion followed by the base.

A bullet leaving the barrel is akin to spinning a top. At the beginning of the spin the top makes a big ark or large concentric circles and eventually will stabilize in smaller tighter concentric circles. Same thing happens to your bullet flying through the air.

I call bs

How does this information apply to 5R rifling? Is that even a factor?

Enjoyed the discussion. It sounds like a damaged bullet because of the inconsistencies of the events.

You mentioned that this problem occurred with old kynoch style bullets. You did not mention how old the cartridge was. Could this be a problem with old powder going sour? We got a bad powder lot of 4895 in our powder bags in our 105 MM Howitzer that lost range erratically. When we researched it we found that the powder lot was created in 1943! The Army got rid of most of the powder at the end of WW II. However, when new lots come in the Regs say they should be rotated with newer ones but, it doesn't always happen. We drew this lot of powder from Dugway from an underground storage area and that's how it happened.

This would be Caused by bullet jump the bullet is Microscopically hitting the lands and grooves at a odd angle. manufacturer's specifications are on average smaller than most gun chambers, on Purpose for magazines feeding. I bet if one was to hand load that 375 to the tightest of tolerances that Initial Wobble would be minimized

Greatest collaboration video! Sounds like factory ammunition is more dependable than handloading

I've been loading for 40 years for hunting and competition. I've shot out the barrel in a .300 Weatherby,, it was used for a lot of long range shooting. Barrels are like tires on your car in a sense. It all depends on how you use it. I often hunt with a 54 year old 7mm Magnum, and a 60 year old .300 H&H, as well as a 70 year old .375 H&H. You take care of then, and don't abuse them, they'll out last you. After loading thousands of rounds over the years, I can honestly say I've had zero issues as far as the belt. Belted or beltless, makes no difference to me.

On pointed and round nose bullets, it doesn't take much of an angle to cause a projectile to alter its trajectory. There are documented cases of individuals being shot in the head with both hand hund and rifles where the projectile deflects slightly and follows the skull plate under the skin until it exists the skin on the back side without ever penetrating the skull. I suspect this is what is occurring when the bullets yaw points its axis more tangent to the surface at the moment of impact. This will be exaggerated with both larger diameter bullets, and older bullets that were not as consistent and uniform as what we have available today.

Thinking about this, the bullet spin and the expanding gases pushing on bullet as it leaves the rifled barrels need to be tuned to prevent spin yawing. Having a precise or geometric balance barrel crown would also help by allowing the bullet complete circumference area lose contact with barrel instantaneously and the expanding gases exiting the barrel uniformly flow around the bullet as it leaves the barrel.

I see the 3rd Infantry Division patch. We shall remain, sent me sir. 1st of the 15th Infantry. 1974-1976.

What is differance between 20inch barrel 1.8 twist and 26inch barrel 1.10 twist in same calibre ? 2.5 twists in 20 inch per barrel lenght anf 2.6 twist in 26 inch barrel..?

Why is there no emphasis on the Greenhill formula? It has helped me considerably in reloading my .30-06 and other smaller calibers.

The old Mausers had faster twist than some modern rifles. I think some pistols may have not enough twist with longer slugs . My old swede only one weight , 120 gr did I see keyhole the target.