That is either some of the best sarcasm ever penned, or WTF ! LOL

i have no problems being wrong

if im wrong, state where im wrong at

show where im wrong at

or are you just messing with me?

I'm out. Not gonna play the game.

Bigtrout - good luck finding your new weapon. Hope you enjoy whatever it is you end up with and that it shoots true for you. Cheers,

RH,

Which action would you believe to be more stiff,short or long?

Would a stiffer action help accuracy or hinder it?

Semi autos suck at accuracy.




Two separate 3-round groups @ 100 yards, with a scope adjustment made between the two groups.

Barrel, bullet, load, glass, shooter. Not necessarily in that order.

im not sure honestly... as action has nothing to do with it when the round is locked in the pipe... action also doesnt do anything when the bullet is flying down range...

that all becomes bullet design, flight characteristics, weight, and speed...

why do i say that?

stock Model 700, action decent, fairly accurate out of the box...

savage model 10/110, 11/111 ect, bolt is sloppy, more accurate out of the box than said 700...

difficult to say...

Why do I keep coming back to this thread ?

Redhook, you seem like a decent guy, but it would be easier to stay in a discussion with you if you would seek knowledge rather than try to invent it.




When the round is "locked in the pipe", the action IS the lock. When the round is fired the action is subjected to quite a bit of stress, the recoil lug and to a lesser degree (in a rifle with proper bedding) the action screws, transmit energy to the stock, which then transmits the energy to the shooter. Think of all of these as spokes in a wheel, or links in a chain, all potential places for variations to enter the equasion. The is an article from years ago about the Remington M700 that is good reading for guys interested in accurate rifles, I'm not sure of the author off the top of my head, but Gale McMillan was part of it, I am sure if you google Gale McMillan Remington 700 you could locate it.

Nice groups, that's gotta be some kind of an AR platform...?

I have had a few ar's, but never could get used to the alignment of the scope/stock/cheek weld. I guess I wanted the ar to feel like a 700 too much. Amazing accuracy potential though with the right parts...as you obviously know.

if i seek knowledge, i get called a know it all, and that i googled it, if i give my opinion, well, you see....

i thought he was talking about the bolt being sloppy or not, obviously it has to be locked in tight when closed, or the gun would be a peice of sh!t...

what i was saying, in my opinion, is that when the bullet starts to make its way down the tube, its not so much about action anymore, its about bullet design, well now we have rifling, crown, ect... once it exits the tube, action has nothing to do with it...

so,

tight action, yes i suppose that would contribute to how accurate a rifle is...

bolt throw/length, has nothing to do with accuracy...

again, pickle juice...

16" bull barreled match grade Oly Arms ML-2 AR-15. Factory built gun, not a kit or franken gun. Inexpensive BSA 4-16x44 "catseye" scope. 55gr nosler moly coated ballistic tips, 27.5 grains TAC, 2.260" COAL, LC case trimmed to .223 length, WSRP primer, Lee factory crimp die. Loaded progessively on my Dillon 650.

Trigger job in a match grade rifle is an unspoken requirement. All of my AR's have either had trigger jobs (as in done by competent gunsmiths) or they have a Jard, Timney, or other equivalent NM trigger group in them.

I'll try to seek some to set an example. So in the post where I went on about sectional density and was acused of not saying anything. I think I get what youre saying by not addressing the starting line. Its because once the bullet enters the animal it changes shape, mass, and speed as it goes through the body. Therefore the sectional density of the projectile changes while inside the critter. If the projectile comes apart, it becomes more projectiles, slows way down, and sectional density decreases rapidly and wont penetrate as far. If it stays together and holds its mass then the sectional density wont change as rapidly and will penetrate deeper. I think what I said before was true until the point of impact. Is this closer?

I think it is closer, and I think if a discussion of terminal performance has to end at the instant of impact, then it isn't really a discussion of anything.

I don't know why more people aren't interested in the effect of the wind, assuming you have and accurate rifle and ammo, a lazer rangefinder, and some system of compensating for bullet drop, the only variables are shooter and wind (shooter's ability to read and compensate). Shooting a high B.C. bullet at a high velocity puts as much in your corner as you can get. Sure you can kill ______________with a .22 Hornet or an '06.........if you can hit it. How many days, in the fall, have you been up in the mountains and not had enough of a breeze to keep the bugs down ? Go to JBMballistics and plug in the data for your hunting load, and see how much a ten mph, full value, breeze will do to you at 500 yards. I like to think I will be able to guess the wind within 50% accuracy, but I'm not saying I can do it.

I need to dig out my collection of recovered bullets. Sectional density doesn't mean too much on a bullet that disintegrates on impact. A bullet that expands to twice its diameter and travels through 30"+ of animal and loses 3 grains of weight matters much more.

We could dismiss a large part of the question by indicating a bullet that expands and retains it's weight/integrity.

How will we decide how much of this ft/lbs is enough ? We probably know more is better...to a point, but what trade-offs to make ?

I am far more concerned with making a good shot than with thinking the bullet will run out of gas between the hide and the vitals.

The trade-off is friction and hydraulic shock. Larger surface area means more friction which relates loss in velocipy. But, a large surface area is also going to relate to more hydraulic shock because the ft-lbs are distributed over a larger surface area. I think the right balance has come with the solid copper or copper alloy bullets. They get a nice increase in size and the X's make that nice flower pattern which actually is less surface area than the traditional coveted mushroom. So the flower petals cut more than push and retain their weight and velocipy better. Just an awesome bullet imo.

The two deer I have killed with X's. One was an ill advised shot where I hit him square in the back of knee and it just exploded his knee. F'er bled out in a hurry, I mean a real hury. This years deer was a perfect shot presentation and a perfect shot through the vitals. A hole about the size of my pinky on the entrance and a hole about the size of my thumb on the exit. Inside the vital region was nothing but pink liquified goo. Never recovered the bullet just the critter. The one thing I don't like is that I haven't quite achieved the accuracy I know I capable of with them. I think I need play with seating depth more than I have.

Put that into comparison with the one I shot with NosBT's (90's version). Took three shots, some chasing around, and I F'd up some meat in the process. I'll never do that again.

I would rather not see stories of gruesome injuries and lingering deaths of game animals on the internet. It seems an experience like that would motivate a guy to get some practice with his rifle. Practice does not mean burning powder with a rifle bolted down to a lead sled, or from a bench rest, but actually shooting the rifle. All this talk of ballistics and terminal performance is a joke if we can't accurately place the bullet to begin with. (starting line).

I agree but its hard to practice for "sh1t happens".

Well, it isn't very hard to edit replies on PiscatorialPursuits.com...