Fast Twist- where are we?
- Thread starter FromMyColdDeadHand
- Start date
No truer words, Dude. Prior to the existence of Vudoo and while all the foundational work was being completed, I was asked numerous times, "what's the market for something like that?" I answered a question with a question by countering, "who gives a sh*t?" The issues that occur when the mindset becomes "decision-by-committee" is where things truly come off the rails and the product-grim-reaper does his best work. Designing to a price point becomes the product and not the product itself.
Successful product design is driven by guys such as yourself, no different than the 40X Mafia driving me in a direction that ultimately led to the existence of Vudoo. The day things like this are forgotten is the day things go awry and the community loses. In the upside-down world, accountants are the undoing of what it means to truly accomplish the next thing....
By no means is the fast twist project going away....
MB
Last edited:
Interesting thread 
. Having done alot of testing with Rim-fire I can tell you it works. I think for the average guy no messing around get a 1-12. You will have less vertical and better BC. I have not had opportunity to test a 1-9 at this point although I would love to.
The calculations I did say a 1-10 is needed to fully stabilize a 22lr I find it interesting that @RAVAGE88 calculated a 1-9 for full BC. I was skeptical when he first started making "wild" claims till I did my own testing at long range.
When I started down this path of testing I intended to share my findings and data with people to help our community of long range rimfire guys improve. It will not happen anymore and I've basically stopped sharing anything on the matter. In order for people to gain anything or trust the data they need to have a understanding of to many other things to make it worth the frustration of sharing. So few guys actually understand shooting groups at 200+ yards with a 22lr that anything you say regarding testing "so far away" gets disregarded. "You need a tunnel" is a common one. A tunnel environment can create false conclusions because you never have a cross wind. Cross wind can cause thing that a dead calm will not. But seriously a 22lr is capable of repeatedly shooting statistically simular groups at 200 yards. No different then a CF doing testing at 1000 yards.
If you change something and in real world testing you can not see a difference whether or not it actually helped then that change doesnt matter. But with fast twist there is a difference that is obvious in real world testing.
I see no loss of performance at 50 yards with a faster twist.
Also I'd like to add Mike B I really appreciate your posts on many topics. I understand why you are "vague" with your fast twist posts. I'm going to argue you haven't quite shared all the answers in your many many vague fast twist posts. Maybe all the factors... I've been trying to piece together what to order to get started on the right foot testing
. But you have shared enough that people who kinda grasp whats what and understand testing its vaguely informative
Keep up the good work. No I'm not a fan boy I like greener pastures
but appreciate what I've observed over in your pasture.
. Having done alot of testing with Rim-fire I can tell you it works. I think for the average guy no messing around get a 1-12. You will have less vertical and better BC. I have not had opportunity to test a 1-9 at this point although I would love to.The calculations I did say a 1-10 is needed to fully stabilize a 22lr I find it interesting that @RAVAGE88 calculated a 1-9 for full BC. I was skeptical when he first started making "wild" claims till I did my own testing at long range.
When I started down this path of testing I intended to share my findings and data with people to help our community of long range rimfire guys improve. It will not happen anymore and I've basically stopped sharing anything on the matter. In order for people to gain anything or trust the data they need to have a understanding of to many other things to make it worth the frustration of sharing. So few guys actually understand shooting groups at 200+ yards with a 22lr that anything you say regarding testing "so far away" gets disregarded. "You need a tunnel" is a common one. A tunnel environment can create false conclusions because you never have a cross wind. Cross wind can cause thing that a dead calm will not. But seriously a 22lr is capable of repeatedly shooting statistically simular groups at 200 yards. No different then a CF doing testing at 1000 yards.
If you change something and in real world testing you can not see a difference whether or not it actually helped then that change doesnt matter. But with fast twist there is a difference that is obvious in real world testing.
I see no loss of performance at 50 yards with a faster twist.
Also I'd like to add Mike B I really appreciate your posts on many topics. I understand why you are "vague" with your fast twist posts. I'm going to argue you haven't quite shared all the answers in your many many vague fast twist posts. Maybe all the factors... I've been trying to piece together what to order to get started on the right foot testing
. But you have shared enough that people who kinda grasp whats what and understand testing its vaguely informative Keep up the good work. No I'm not a fan boy I like greener pastures
but appreciate what I've observed over in your pasture.Well we dropped her 26 clicks and pulled her back 8 left for the wind from 200 the other day. We shot 5 consecutive groups with 5 different lots at 50 yards with no foul shots this barrel likes alot but the SKHV might be deadly from 300-400 with that extra fps , but the plus shot best for variable wind and heat.
Attachments
Every post like this just raises more questions. Here I’ve been weighing contacting abandon factory owners, warehouse owners, even blimp hanger owners to attempt to acquire a “controlled testing environment” for long range rimfire.Interesting thread
The calculations I did say a 1-10 is needed to fully stabilize a 22lr I find it interesting that @RAVAGE88 calculated a 1-9 for full BC. I was skeptical when he first started making "wild" claims till I did my own testing at long range.
When I started down this path of testing I intended to share my findings and data with people to help our community of long range rimfire guys improve. It will not happen anymore and I've basically stopped sharing anything on the matter. In order for people to gain anything or trust the data they need to have a understanding of to many other things to make it worth the frustration of sharing. So few guys actually understand shooting groups at 200+ yards with a 22lr that anything you say regarding testing "so far away" gets disregarded. "You need a tunnel" is a common one. A tunnel environment can create false conclusions because you never have a cross wind. Cross wind can cause thing that a dead calm will not. But seriously a 22lr is capable of repeatedly shooting statistically simular groups at 200 yards. No different then a CF doing testing at 1000 yards.
If you change something and in real world testing you can not see a difference whether or not it actually helped then that change doesnt matter. But with fast twist there is a difference that is obvious in real world testing.
I see no loss of performance at 50 yards with a faster twist.
Also I'd like to add Mike B I really appreciate your posts on many topics. I understand why you are "vague" with your fast twist posts. I'm going to argue you haven't quite shared all the answers in your many many vague fast twist posts. Maybe all the factors... I've been trying to piece together what to order to get started on the right foot testing
Keep up the good work. No I'm not a fan boy I like greener pastures
Latest question, perhaps for Mike B, when he mentioned how bad the 18” 9 twist performed, did he test examples in more than one barrel profile? There’s not a lot of “off the shelf” options out there for an experimenter, and even fewer longer than 18”.
Barrel profile has no bearing on how a barrel stabilizes a projectile. In addition, and in general, barrel profile has nothing to do with overall barrel performance....
MB
Last edited:
I know you've experimented alot , you proably would be close to a millionaire for all the barrels you've cut up like myself. On my latest barrel I delved into what would be considered a transitional chamber throat , sometimes referred to as a free bore but a semi free bore. The rational was to curb spike pressures derived from primer variance in rimfire cartridges. Alot of designers vary lead angle. The design I worked out was a conical semi free bore the projectile is engaged in the lands .001 per side .050 forward of the case lip. From there the radius goes forward .750 to the minor land diameter. This in theory lessen's spike pressure while increasing land pressure to maintain stability. I wont be able to determine this till I hit 2000 rounds to compare it to 2 other chamber designs that were 1° and 2° that I ran a brick ES on what are your thoughts Mike?
Yessir, I sure have and I really like the direction you're going with what you're doing. I was on a similar path with the design/development of the 22LR RAVAGE chamber, but the outcome I was looking for was very specific, as I needed to control variation. Apparently, unbeknownst to some, it is possible to develop a rimfire chamber that favors a specific ammo (no different than centerfire); and in the case of the RAVAGE chamber, Lapua, but that doesn't mean, nor has it meant that other ammo won't work in that chamber as long as that ammo is within confined quality parameters (sorry CCI, you don't make the cut). What you're doing is very much along the same lines but on path for a slightly different outcome. I have chamber designs other than the RAVAGE chamber, but I've not pursued validation or performance data for them....yet.
It would be interesting to build a pressure test barrel with your chamber and plot the pressure in comparison to other well-known-performing chambers to test the theory behind the design. In turn, plot this info against downrange performance to gauge overall technical feasibility. I know the ones reading this, "at their level," would never be able to test this way, but I suppose its best to discover comfort in ambiguity and not be confused by the true science behind the process. There are some comments that I'm working to wrap my head around to qualify as usable data, like, "land pressure," but in theory, everything you're saying has merit.
Keep up the good work, Dude.
MB
That would be awesome if you could do that. It might be interesting.
Comment on that is people really worry about wind etc affecting the results. I shoot in my back yard its all open so I have wind almost all the time. So I tested for myself shooting groups at 200 yards. I record all POI in a group I then shot groups in 10 mpr winds and in varying winds 5-10 mpr. I could have groups 16" wide but the vertical stays statistically the same as in little to no wind conditions.
There are so many other factors at play. Going to a faster twist and increased stability it reduces many of these factors and combined make a big difference.
But in one ammo I tested it did not have a increase in BC or reduction in vertical down range over a 16. maybe in something faster it would? Cheap ammo wont have improvements cause its a crap shoot to begin with.
But the more people who seriously test this the more people will get on board the fast twist and that will help push development forward. And that is a good thing!!
Generally 2 of the top 3 guys in my local matches are running faster twists. For all of them there was a marked improvement over 16s. This is multiple brands of barrels too. So go do it!
Keep the info coming guys. Im in Australia and very keen to test a fast twist on my Three60. The 16T 20in MTU shoots well but Im going to get a new barrel done up for shooting 200 Fly comps aswell as PRS stuff.
Mike, you said contour has no bearing on accuracy, why do you think the 18in 9T didnt work but 22in did?? Im debating what length to go for my faster twist and its somewhere between my current 20in MTU to a 24in.
Also, has anyone seen a increase in Eley BC compared to Lap/SK?
Again, keep the info coming. Im soaking it up!!!
Mike, you said contour has no bearing on accuracy, why do you think the 18in 9T didnt work but 22in did?? Im debating what length to go for my faster twist and its somewhere between my current 20in MTU to a 24in.
Also, has anyone seen a increase in Eley BC compared to Lap/SK?
Again, keep the info coming. Im soaking it up!!!
I talked to someone who did a lot of fast twist testing. He said 9T had crazy wild flyers, maybe because of the inconsistency of 22LR bullets. 12T was a good middle ground he said.
A short while back, my nephew sent me a video of a group of Air Force guys on the range "testing" suppressors. In the video, I didn't see any indications that the "tests" were being conducted in a controlled manner, no data logging, no microphones, nothing. It was just a line of guys blasting away and having a good time, no different than most backyards in Alabama. When I asked what exactly they were testing, he really had no idea, but jeez-o-peet, after the testing, he seemed to know a lot about suppressors and he told me which one was the better suppressor. However, he couldn't tell me why it was better but became defensive because I was skeptical and he said, "we did a lot of testing."
I promise I'm not sharing the above event to be a smarta** but instead, to draw attention to what constitutes qualified testing. I've mentioned the 18" fast twist rifle that was built in St George and I've been asked about it in a few recent posts above. It just so happens that the 18" nine twist barrel with muzzle threads on that rifle produced crazy fliers and it was enough for those involved to draw conclusions about nine twist performance. That rifle went to the range once and had maybe 200 rounds fired through it, but, to those involved, they "did a lot of testing."
MB
I see basically same BC lapua or Eley EPS (tenex) yes both gain with fast twist the same amount.
The testing he is referring too was carefully done and documented fairly well. The goal of the testing was to find what was a twist rate that gave gains yet was not picky or could cause "issues" for the general public. Multiple barrel lengths where used.
It was not done to see what the limits of best could be. The focus was largely on mid-grade ammo.
No I was not involved personally.
Testing looking for limits of possibility makes doing things a very specific way perfectly ok. That very thing for the masses might not be worth the frustration.
RAVAGE88 said:
“ There are some comments that I'm working to wrap my head around to qualify as usable data, like, "land pressure," but in theory, everything you're saying has merit. “
Sir if this referenced a question I had, I didn’t voice it well.
I had been wondering if the fast twist added an increase resistance to movement of the slug, possibly giving the powder a more complete burn earlier, and the remaining bore allowed pressures to have a better chance at equalizing (shot to shot) for better consistency?
“ There are some comments that I'm working to wrap my head around to qualify as usable data, like, "land pressure," but in theory, everything you're saying has merit. “
Sir if this referenced a question I had, I didn’t voice it well.
I had been wondering if the fast twist added an increase resistance to movement of the slug, possibly giving the powder a more complete burn earlier, and the remaining bore allowed pressures to have a better chance at equalizing (shot to shot) for better consistency?
Think this theory in conjunction with barrel length is part of what is going on,(time in rifling after the powder is burnt)
The benchrest guys commonly use longer barrels for 22lr & I think part of the reason for that is the barrel length could help with consistency of speed or even having the projectile leave in a more uniform shape from the longer dwell time in the barrel/more rifling to go through.
Just theory's/gut feelings on my part so far but the urge to start buying barrels to see for myself is getting stronger.
There is a barrel manufacturer within an hour from me who has already done 1-9 22lr barrels that are reported to show promise.
You are certainly one of or could very well be the foremost authority on fast twist 22 data. I stay vague because the folks involved are in the industry also and face the same scepticism you do from the “we have always done it this way” crowd.
Hey Dude, I don't completely remember the context of the question, but what I do recall was me thinking about how land pressure would be qualified in testing, i.e., answering the question effectively about what the bullet "feels" due to an increase in angular velocity.
In thinking about it as you just posed, yes, there is an increase in the resistance based on the increased angular velocity, but, what is this level of resistance in comparison to what the bullet "feels" relative to slower twist rates? More importantly, in the grand scheme of things, does this really matter? I don't know....but, the side benefits are in fact a higher level of ballistic efficiency (more complete powder burn). I've looked at this by way of what's residually in the barrel after firing a fixed number of shots starting with two clean barrels (a 16 and a nine). The residue in a 16 twist barrel was heavier than in the nine twist barrel.
Does this improve consistency? I believe it does....
MB
Dude, I get it 100% and I truly appreciate what you're saying. Again, I promise I wasn't calling you out, I would just like for everyone to remain in a place that promotes relevance to know what it means to avoid the "we've always done it this way" black hole and using arbitrary comments like, "the bullet goes to sleep" as some qualified measurement that‘s typically defended with blind conviction on the internet.
MB
Last edited:
I love and admire good sound open discussions ! One would simply review some of the best Pro or Collage Quarter backs over history and ask why does his pass of 80 yards have a perfect sprial ? The answere it leaves the throwers hand (ie) barrel with the most stable spin for the dynamic shape of the profile repeatedly at the velocity best suited for the distance. Some Quater backs throw the ball as hard and tight at 30 yards as they do at 80. Most rimfire shooters throw their bullets at 50 not concerned about 300-400 others look for a consistent thrower at all ranges or one that's better at the long game.
you ever here the saying if I can it it way out up close is a gime?
you ever here the saying if I can it it way out up close is a gime?
Could be, but most are overthinking this thing. Primarily, what I look at is actually what I can see....Time of flight is measurable, quantifiable and based on really old technology....the clock. Buford validated this on his range and I'm planning to be back on the range with Buford in early August.
MB
Question if I may. Barrel length is something I have been working on looking if there are advantages. Unfortunately the barrel manufacture I was getting barrels from has decided that long 22lr barrels dont shoot so will not make me a long tube anymore.
Longest I have is a 26" in 1-16 the rest are all shorter.
I use Eley so I dont have the velocity loss that Lapua sees in long barrels so maybe this changes things?
I'm more interested in velocity spread then groups at this point. Maybe thats a wrong approach? My interest is long range not 50 yd groups.
I was going to cut the 1-16 from 26" to 24 and 22 and test velocitys and groups but then I got a 1-12 and it shot so much better I have let the 16 sit for now.
But from your experiance.
In the past you have said long barrels for 22lr dont give gains. (This would have been with 1-16) If the longer barrel is good or even nessisary for 1-9 thinking of velocity consistency wouldn't a longer barrel have the same effect on a 16? Would it be possible that the length has to be longer say 27" vs say 24" in a 9?
I guess questions... I noticed your velocitys 16 vs longer length 9 were simular. I assumed you got a tighter bore for the 9 but are you suggesting it actually has to do with a more efficient burn in a 9?
Anything lately on fast twist. This summer was crazy with travel and family stuff, only got out to the range a few times. My fast twist and tuned lilja needs to have its full potential tested
Gain Twist is better than just going fast,
It really depends on the bullet to determine how "fast" you can go, if you are supposed to 10 twist going to 9 is where most are going, but still, some will go 8, but in my experience, that is too fast for anything with decent speed.
You can have a fast twist, but not speed, if you have the speed you have to measure twist correctly and you want to err on the side of a little slower
It really depends on the bullet to determine how "fast" you can go, if you are supposed to 10 twist going to 9 is where most are going, but still, some will go 8, but in my experience, that is too fast for anything with decent speed.
You can have a fast twist, but not speed, if you have the speed you have to measure twist correctly and you want to err on the side of a little slower
Several have,
You can do a lot to a solid, and it will survive; I had solids from Noel C that were in a 5 to 13 gain twist for a 338, but that was a year ago.
I really wish Patriot Valley / Warner would load some of their solids in a factory-style offering.
I think some of the smaller solids have merit, the price holds them back for most
You can do a lot to a solid, and it will survive; I had solids from Noel C that were in a 5 to 13 gain twist for a 338, but that was a year ago.
I really wish Patriot Valley / Warner would load some of their solids in a factory-style offering.
I think some of the smaller solids have merit, the price holds them back for most
Even shooting a 100rd match. My wife using factory lead is $30-40 depending on which she’s shouting. With solids I’m at $55-60. The difference barely buys lunch.
The cost scares them from loading them into a factory offering
Solids will never be widely accepted, and the industry will never really move forward until Solids become a permanent part of our ammo considerations.
People cry about $3 differences in ammo costs so they are gunshy
Solids will never be widely accepted, and the industry will never really move forward until Solids become a permanent part of our ammo considerations.
People cry about $3 differences in ammo costs so they are gunshy
Buying them factory loaded is pretty steep currently. Only one company loading them and it’s not the 50gr. With current primed brass, the advantage isn’t really that at nrl22 match distances. The gap widens the farther we go out. The same reason you don’t see factory ammo at elr match virtually at all. Only one guy I know of that shoots it and is competitive but he’s not winning. Plenty of guys shooting factory ammo at prs matches and doing well. Guys at the top in centerfire elr aren’t cutting corners to save a couple bucks. They use the best they can afford to be at the top. 22elr shouldn’t be any different
Last edited:
If I were considering copper solids, I’d move away from rimfire and go to one of the new micro centerfire offerings which are sadly lacking in quality platforms.
22TCM and 5.7/28 I’m sure could be handloaded to the low SD’s and ES’s required for ELR, plus would be pounced on by varminters and hunters near urban sprawl who need quieter, limited range cartridges.
22TCM and 5.7/28 I’m sure could be handloaded to the low SD’s and ES’s required for ELR, plus would be pounced on by varminters and hunters near urban sprawl who need quieter, limited range cartridges.
Well I stand corrected. Not trying to be an ass. I'll just skim past the aviation and motorcycle posts. Seriously, thanks for all you have contributed to the RF community.
Not at all how I took it Dude, I know you guys are serious about the fast twist prospect and most here are time limited and not casual perusers. Thank for the interest and I appreciate your words. I'll have more to report on the fast twist as I get a few things in place.
MB
As if it surprises anyone, still waiting on the centerfire bolt from PTG. Really wish I could get Zermatt to make a front bolt 1/2 for me, but, when asked a while ago, he wasn’t interested.
Sorry to hear that.
Just had a look at the Zermatt website, was it a Rim x action you had?
May end up needing to buy a bolt head from Zermatt & modify it yourself.
So how would you go about having a barrel custom rifled?
1:16 twist has been the standard forever, a lot of 16 twist barrels shoot incredible. Some guys are using 1:12 and getting great results. What about just a little more twist? How about starting at 1:18 and going to 1:14 at the muzzle?
Who could/would do it, and how much would it cost me?
1:16 twist has been the standard forever, a lot of 16 twist barrels shoot incredible. Some guys are using 1:12 and getting great results. What about just a little more twist? How about starting at 1:18 and going to 1:14 at the muzzle?
Who could/would do it, and how much would it cost me?
Not at all how I took it Dude, I know you guys are serious about the fast twist prospect and most here are time limited and not casual perusers. Thank for the interest and I appreciate your words. I'll have more to report on the fast twist as I get a few things in place.
MB
Any update on the fast twist saga?
Yessir, for starters, it isn't dead. In fact, in speaking with a number of accomplished practitioners at SHOT, the realization that there's more depth to the project than originally credited by those that lacked an ability to "know," is encouraging, motivating and quite refreshing. As I work on a few related parallel endeavors, heavy consideration for the advancement of fast twist barrels is part of the greater plan.
In an effort to avoid the use of a lot of words above without any usable detail, I'll say, the faster the twist, the more serious the shooter has to be about committing to a required and desired set of outcomes. Said differently, don't shoot a nine twist without understanding and accepting what it means to shoot a nine twist (which is my personally preferred rate of twist on a 22LR). If one shoots a nine twist, be well versed in what it means to read what is seen on the target at a distance and make qualified adjustments based on the level of required commitment. If one slows the twist down, but remains faster than 1:16, the knowledge base has to follow.
MB
Mike, I ordered in a Bartlein 1-9tw sendero blank, then put off getting started on fitting & chambering it after hearing some good reports from guys shooting 1-11tw IBI bbls. I do wish they weren't so far behind, or that I could get Krieger to do a faster twist 22RF blank - something in the 1-11 or 1-12 rate. It'd be nice to get two or three barrels in these twist rates all done up on the lathe at the same time so I could compare them with the ammo I currently have on hand. I do have some decent Lapua Biathlon ammo that would be useful during the remaining colder weather this winter, and depending on how windy it gets this spring, I should be able to find some time to test with ammo more suited for warmer temps. But getting faster twist bbls in a timely fashion doesn't seem likely anyway, so... Patience isn't one of my virtues...lol
is there an informative post or list of information, which gives the shooter a decent idea of "what it means to shoot "a 9 twist (or any other twist)
never having shot a 9 twist and looking to play around with a faster twist now that summer is approaching, id do some research to see what twist id find best fits my wants etc
thanks
I think ibi’s are only 8 weeks out, which isn’t terrible considering some.
And they do 16’s and 12 twists
Similar threads
