Originally Posted by
Larry Gibson
Eutectic
"Probably less response to Larry's theory because of the bug holes I've shot with my 6.5 Grendel at HV with WQ'ed bullets. In other words I'm not totally buying the theory. The bug holes I shot with the Finn 39 were with WQ'ed bullets. I've shot both kinds of bullets in my other three 6.5's with same results. It's not proven and from the shooting I've done, along with 45 2.1, and other's ..it's kind of unproven too."
There in lies the problem with some here. They talk of all the variables and how things don'e happen all the time. Joe even mentioned in a recent post that many have gotten away with things and something about it taking the right circumstances. Yet I did not state that WQ'd bullet always collapse or that they always collapsed unevenly. I also did not say it always happens. What I gave is the scenario for uneven collapse which happens often enough and is proveable. There are variables to most of what we do. The hard part is to control the variables in a positive way.
What is "good" to some perhaps is not so good to others. I'll give a simple example, both involving cast bullets at HV. I'm not looking for an argument here because the examples are "good" in their context. However, I did not consider them "good" in my context. The first is Joes targets he posted on the MAS semi auto. He and others though them "good". On the other hand they were not what I get or expect to get with that same bullet out of my rack M1A. With that rifle I expect 311314 to shoot into less than 3 moa on a regular basis at 2000+ fps without any magical or "dangerous" loading technique. I also shoot much better groups with 311466 at 2200+ fps simply because it has a 12" twist which helps control the RPM. It does not need any "technique" and they are proven loads loaded by most here all the time. The other example was BaBore's groups posted of his 22 Hornet loads at 2500+ fps (as I recall). They were basically 2 moa groups. BaBore considers that "good" and so did others. Perhaps it was if you are shooting PDs out to 150 yards or wood chucks. However, 2 moa is not "good" to me as I shoot picket pins (Columbia graound squirrels) with my 22 Hornet. When lying down they give a 1" tall target and when standing up that target isn't much more than 1" wide eighter. Thus a 1 moa load is pretty much maxed out at 100 yards and may give 70-80% hits out to 150 yards. A 2 moa group gets you maxed out at 75 yards. Thus "good" is relative, what is "good" to some is not "good" to others.
I also shoot 311466 into 10 shot 2 moa groups at 2600+ fps out of a 14" twist barrel with normal loads because the RPMs are controlled and below the RPM threshold. The first 5 shots almost always go into 1 moa. That is at 100 and 200 yards. To me that is "good". To Joe and a couple others it isn't worth mentioning. See what I meen about "good" being relative?
But back to the main point; Joe has his doubts and that is fine. After all, he is one who says there are no rules and yet doubts my "theory" because it doesn't happen all the time, i.e. a rule. It is not a rule nor is it theory, it is merely an explanation as to how set back or collapse happens when it happens. It is proven, you proved it with the .44 bullet. Glad you understand even if Joe doesn't.
Larry Gibson
Joe; this is all I'm saying on the subject here so say your piece and let's just let it go, you have your theories, I have mine...fair enough:-)