Im a newb to the whole LR scene and pretty set on a 5r when I came across the remington target tactical. Comes with a bell & Carlson stock, tactical bolt knob and counter bore on top of the 5r rifling. For an extra $600 dollars this doesen't seem like a bad deal considering I pas planning on paying $200 to get the 5r duracoted. However I can't find any info on these triangle shaped barrels...weight is not a concern for me Im viewing this strictly from a accuracy stand poing, anybody have any experience/oppinions on these? It doesent seem like it could be too good for barrel harmonics.
Remington triangle barrels
- Thread starter Vanguard
- Start date
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Skip anything triangular. It's all hype IMHO. The 5R, on the other hand, is one of the best out-of-the-box rifles available.
Skip anything triangular. It's all hype IMHO. The 5R, on the other hand, is one of the best out-of-the-box rifles available.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
I HAD a VTR in 308. We locked it in one of those lead sled type rests that fired it for you. 200 yards shot a 4" 5 shot group.
YMMV
I HAD a VTR in 308. We locked it in one of those lead sled type rests that fired it for you. 200 yards shot a 4" 5 shot group.
YMMV
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Triangular barrel. Gimmick.
The idea is that a triangle has better stiffness than a barrel of the same WEIGHT. But a same-diameter cylindrical barrel will have better stiffness, just with a few extra ounces of material to do it with.
That would make sense IF the VTR was being used on hunting rifles. But its not available on any of the sporter/varmint versions so...
Its a gimmick.
When you are target shooting you have a lot more flexibility on a few ounces of weight in the barrel in order to increase the repeatability of the overall platform.
Triangular barrel. Gimmick.
The idea is that a triangle has better stiffness than a barrel of the same WEIGHT. But a same-diameter cylindrical barrel will have better stiffness, just with a few extra ounces of material to do it with.
That would make sense IF the VTR was being used on hunting rifles. But its not available on any of the sporter/varmint versions so...
Its a gimmick.
When you are target shooting you have a lot more flexibility on a few ounces of weight in the barrel in order to increase the repeatability of the overall platform.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
You are talking about the triangle barrel with 5R rifling and the B&C A5 stock right, not just the triangle barreled VTR? They charge a pretty penny for that model.
Both a friend and I had VTR's and they were shooters, would keep up with my 700P no problem but from what I have read we were both lucky as some don't shoot well. The triangle barrels are being replaced by Bartlien 5R 1:11.25 in M40/M24 contour and will be back within a week - I think these barrels will be just a bit better!
Worst thing about the VTR is the crappy stocks that come with them, can't believe Remington uses these things. The muzzle brake does work but it's a bit loud and not necessary on a .308.
You are talking about the triangle barrel with 5R rifling and the B&C A5 stock right, not just the triangle barreled VTR? They charge a pretty penny for that model.
Both a friend and I had VTR's and they were shooters, would keep up with my 700P no problem but from what I have read we were both lucky as some don't shoot well. The triangle barrels are being replaced by Bartlien 5R 1:11.25 in M40/M24 contour and will be back within a week - I think these barrels will be just a bit better!
Worst thing about the VTR is the crappy stocks that come with them, can't believe Remington uses these things. The muzzle brake does work but it's a bit loud and not necessary on a .308.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
go with the 5r and put the rest of the money saved on your optics.kill 2 birds with 1 stone,better rifle for cheaper.
go with the 5r and put the rest of the money saved on your optics.kill 2 birds with 1 stone,better rifle for cheaper.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
I have a Remington target tactical like the one you are talking about and I love it. It is accurate and has never let me down. If the triangle thing is a gimmick or not it has not effected the rifles shooting ability not one bit. Sure its not going to win a beauty contest but come on its a rifle.
Lots of folks here bash B&C stocks for some reason but in my experience they are just fine for my shooting tastes. I was in the same boat as you i was going to buy a 5R then swap out stocks but as you put it if I can get everything in one package for a few bucks more it was something i was willing to pay a premium for so that I don't have mess with sending off to someone to do it what if it came back not right and i would have to send it back and things get ugly. I understand everyone is human and make mistakes but if I could avoid all that mess altogether then I was going to.
While the rifle is not everyone's cup of tea I can respect that and to each his own this place would get boring if everyone liked the same thing
Here she is out at the range
I have a Remington target tactical like the one you are talking about and I love it. It is accurate and has never let me down. If the triangle thing is a gimmick or not it has not effected the rifles shooting ability not one bit. Sure its not going to win a beauty contest but come on its a rifle.
Lots of folks here bash B&C stocks for some reason but in my experience they are just fine for my shooting tastes. I was in the same boat as you i was going to buy a 5R then swap out stocks but as you put it if I can get everything in one package for a few bucks more it was something i was willing to pay a premium for so that I don't have mess with sending off to someone to do it what if it came back not right and i would have to send it back and things get ugly. I understand everyone is human and make mistakes but if I could avoid all that mess altogether then I was going to.
While the rifle is not everyone's cup of tea I can respect that and to each his own this place would get boring if everyone liked the same thing
Here she is out at the range
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Remington 5Rs are some of the most accurate rifles you can find for the money. I also really like their Target Tactical, and almost bought one. But found a Remington tactical 40-XB package deal that I just couldn't pass up.
The triangular barrel is not a gimmick, it cuts down on weight but maintains stiffness and torsional rigidity. Look at all the building structures that use triangular tubes or supports. Not saying that it is far superior to fluting a barrel, but 5R barrel is a way to cut down the weight and maintain barrel rigidity. In addition to weight, heat dissipation is another benefit.
That being said threading a 5R barrel is much more difficult.
Remington 5Rs are some of the most accurate rifles you can find for the money. I also really like their Target Tactical, and almost bought one. But found a Remington tactical 40-XB package deal that I just couldn't pass up.
The triangular barrel is not a gimmick, it cuts down on weight but maintains stiffness and torsional rigidity. Look at all the building structures that use triangular tubes or supports. Not saying that it is far superior to fluting a barrel, but 5R barrel is a way to cut down the weight and maintain barrel rigidity. In addition to weight, heat dissipation is another benefit.
That being said threading a 5R barrel is much more difficult.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
I hear the VTR is not free floated. Are all the Triangular models the same. I saw a .223 shoot good while the same shooter, scope couln't hit to well. He was not using good ammo either so that test goes out the window in my book. Thought about getting one for a hunter but I am not sure. I would like to see how others feel about this rifle.
I hear the VTR is not free floated. Are all the Triangular models the same. I saw a .223 shoot good while the same shooter, scope couln't hit to well. He was not using good ammo either so that test goes out the window in my book. Thought about getting one for a hunter but I am not sure. I would like to see how others feel about this rifle.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but 5R barrel is a way to cut down the weight and maintain barrel rigidity. In addition to weight, heat dissipation is another benefit.
That being said threading a 5R barrel is much more difficult. </div></div>
5R refers to nothing more than the physical riffling itself. Its internal and has nada to do with weight or difficulty in threadding.
BTW 5R refers to 5 lands with a radius on the leading edge. Think it was originaly done by Obermyer and different manufacturers produce it under licence such as rem, rock and kreiger.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">but 5R barrel is a way to cut down the weight and maintain barrel rigidity. In addition to weight, heat dissipation is another benefit.
That being said threading a 5R barrel is much more difficult. </div></div>
5R refers to nothing more than the physical riffling itself. Its internal and has nada to do with weight or difficulty in threadding.
BTW 5R refers to 5 lands with a radius on the leading edge. Think it was originaly done by Obermyer and different manufacturers produce it under licence such as rem, rock and kreiger.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Just to clarify I realize you were refering to that specific barrel. I thought it important to not confuse the 5R process with this particular barrel profile as some newer members may avoid a 5R thinking they were all triangular.
Just to clarify I realize you were refering to that specific barrel. I thought it important to not confuse the 5R process with this particular barrel profile as some newer members may avoid a 5R thinking they were all triangular.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Not to hijack, but wouldn't the triangular ones be a PITA to thread (if applicable to your situation of course)?
I dont really mind them, but I haven't had much time with one. I don't imagine it could really make a big difference on accuracy from a practical standpoint.
Not to hijack, but wouldn't the triangular ones be a PITA to thread (if applicable to your situation of course)?
I dont really mind them, but I haven't had much time with one. I don't imagine it could really make a big difference on accuracy from a practical standpoint.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Not really, spin between centers and cut it till its round.
Assuming we are refering to the muzzle end the question is if the finished dia is sufficent to support the desired thread pitch.
Not really, spin between centers and cut it till its round.
Assuming we are refering to the muzzle end the question is if the finished dia is sufficent to support the desired thread pitch.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Apprciate the post, you got a range report by any chance? I'm still leaning towards the 5r milspec but toying around with idea of picking up a target tactical
Apprciate the post, you got a range report by any chance? I'm still leaning towards the 5r milspec but toying around with idea of picking up a target tactical
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Vanguard, have you looked in the XCR line?
Specs:
>45 3/4" in overall lenght.
>Short Action in .308.
>26" varmint-contour,1 in 12", LTR-style fluting, 416 stainless steel barreled action in black TriNyte® with dish-style target crown.
>40-X externally adjustable trigger.
>Bell & Carlson tactical stock w/full-length aluminum bedding block, free floating barrel, tactical beavertail fore-end and recessed “thumbhook”.
Add Ons:
>Badger M-5 bottom metal w/2-5rd and a 10rd Accuracy International detachable box magazines.
>Model-A, Karsten's adjustable cheek rest.
>Harris 6" to 9", notched leg, swivel bipod.
>Phoenix style custom bolt knob and cerakoted by AZ Precision.
>Millet TRS-1, 1/4"MOA, 4-16X50 long range, tactical scope w/illuminated green Mil-Dot reticle.
>Butler Creek flip up scope caps.
>Farrel one piece tactical base.
>Burris Xtreme tactical 30mm low rings.
I purchased the rifle new a couple of years ago for just over $1K. Out of the box I managed to do sub 1/2" groups on a box test with the first box of Black Hills Gold, 168gr. Ballistic Tip Hornady A-Max. I don't think is that bad taking into consideration that I'm a amateur. The 40-X adjustable trigger is actually really crisp with no creep. I'm really happy with it and even though it does not stack up against an AICS or GAP, I think it holds it own as a out of box unit.
Here's a link on a previous post:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=530256
Good Luck with your new aquisition.
Vanguard, have you looked in the XCR line?
Specs:
>45 3/4" in overall lenght.
>Short Action in .308.
>26" varmint-contour,1 in 12", LTR-style fluting, 416 stainless steel barreled action in black TriNyte® with dish-style target crown.
>40-X externally adjustable trigger.
>Bell & Carlson tactical stock w/full-length aluminum bedding block, free floating barrel, tactical beavertail fore-end and recessed “thumbhook”.
Add Ons:
>Badger M-5 bottom metal w/2-5rd and a 10rd Accuracy International detachable box magazines.
>Model-A, Karsten's adjustable cheek rest.
>Harris 6" to 9", notched leg, swivel bipod.
>Phoenix style custom bolt knob and cerakoted by AZ Precision.
>Millet TRS-1, 1/4"MOA, 4-16X50 long range, tactical scope w/illuminated green Mil-Dot reticle.
>Butler Creek flip up scope caps.
>Farrel one piece tactical base.
>Burris Xtreme tactical 30mm low rings.
I purchased the rifle new a couple of years ago for just over $1K. Out of the box I managed to do sub 1/2" groups on a box test with the first box of Black Hills Gold, 168gr. Ballistic Tip Hornady A-Max. I don't think is that bad taking into consideration that I'm a amateur. The 40-X adjustable trigger is actually really crisp with no creep. I'm really happy with it and even though it does not stack up against an AICS or GAP, I think it holds it own as a out of box unit.
Here's a link on a previous post:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=530256
Good Luck with your new aquisition.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The triangular barrel is not a gimmick,
</div></div>
Not quite, tiger.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> it cuts down on weight but maintains stiffness and torsional rigidity.
</div></div>
A triangular barrel profile of the same diameter is NOT going to have the same rigidity / stiffness of a cylinder. There is a reason why every other barrel has been a cylinder: its the strongest structure out there.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look at all the building structures that use triangular tubes or supports.
</div></div>
Um, there is a patented engineering design that uses such for individual beams but its not used in most construction. Most triangular implementations are where separate beams/supports are coming TOGETHER and has more to do with load bearing, not the strength of individual cantilevered beams.
If you want a cantilevered beam, which by the way is essentially what a rifle barrel is, the cylinder is your best choice if you are willing to accept the additional weight.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Not saying that it is far superior to fluting a barrel, but 5R barrel is a way to cut down the weight and maintain barrel rigidity.</div></div>
Three problems here.
1) Even remington admits its just a way of fluting the barrel. They are simply doing something that allows them to make a barrel of the same diameter with less material. They don't even try to claim anything about rigidity or stiffness when you talk to them about it. There is a reason for this. The cylinder is going to be better at both than a VTR of the same diameter.
2) So you now have a light(er) weight barrel, what platforms is it offered on? Surely the hunting rifles, right? Wait... no.... its on target rifles... ergo claim of 'gimmick'.
3) 5R rifling in the barrel has NOTHING to do with the VTR barrel profile.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> In addition to weight, heat dissipation is another benefit. </div></div>
Actually this is true but only slightly. The VTR does indeed have both more surface area and thinner walls in terms of the material between the outside of the triangle and the lands within the rifling.
This allows faster heat dissipation but the lack of material also provides for a faster increase in heat as well.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That being said threading a 5R barrel is much more difficult. </div></div>
Uh, no.
Threading a VTR profile is a pain in the butt and questionable. The 5R has nothing to do with it. That is the internal rifling, not the external shape of the barrel.
Unlike a cylinder where you can remove some on the outside and still have a reasonable amount of material left in terms of barrel diameter, when you look at how thin the walls are from the internal dimensions out to the closest points on each of the "flats" of the triangle, that is all of the material you have to work with.
When you consider how much material you will have to strip away for threading, I have yet to see a threaded VTR so I am still curious as to how much strength really would be in the threaded portion.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The triangular barrel is not a gimmick,
</div></div>
Not quite, tiger.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> it cuts down on weight but maintains stiffness and torsional rigidity.
</div></div>
A triangular barrel profile of the same diameter is NOT going to have the same rigidity / stiffness of a cylinder. There is a reason why every other barrel has been a cylinder: its the strongest structure out there.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look at all the building structures that use triangular tubes or supports.
</div></div>
Um, there is a patented engineering design that uses such for individual beams but its not used in most construction. Most triangular implementations are where separate beams/supports are coming TOGETHER and has more to do with load bearing, not the strength of individual cantilevered beams.
If you want a cantilevered beam, which by the way is essentially what a rifle barrel is, the cylinder is your best choice if you are willing to accept the additional weight.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Not saying that it is far superior to fluting a barrel, but 5R barrel is a way to cut down the weight and maintain barrel rigidity.</div></div>
Three problems here.
1) Even remington admits its just a way of fluting the barrel. They are simply doing something that allows them to make a barrel of the same diameter with less material. They don't even try to claim anything about rigidity or stiffness when you talk to them about it. There is a reason for this. The cylinder is going to be better at both than a VTR of the same diameter.
2) So you now have a light(er) weight barrel, what platforms is it offered on? Surely the hunting rifles, right? Wait... no.... its on target rifles... ergo claim of 'gimmick'.
3) 5R rifling in the barrel has NOTHING to do with the VTR barrel profile.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> In addition to weight, heat dissipation is another benefit. </div></div>
Actually this is true but only slightly. The VTR does indeed have both more surface area and thinner walls in terms of the material between the outside of the triangle and the lands within the rifling.
This allows faster heat dissipation but the lack of material also provides for a faster increase in heat as well.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That being said threading a 5R barrel is much more difficult. </div></div>
Uh, no.
Threading a VTR profile is a pain in the butt and questionable. The 5R has nothing to do with it. That is the internal rifling, not the external shape of the barrel.
Unlike a cylinder where you can remove some on the outside and still have a reasonable amount of material left in terms of barrel diameter, when you look at how thin the walls are from the internal dimensions out to the closest points on each of the "flats" of the triangle, that is all of the material you have to work with.
When you consider how much material you will have to strip away for threading, I have yet to see a threaded VTR so I am still curious as to how much strength really would be in the threaded portion.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
I have looked at EVERY remington 700 option I have available. Im stuck in Iraq right now and I cant buy the gun I want so in my off time I research the crap out of it
I have seriously looked into the XCR long range tactical but I didn't think it was a constant 1/2 MOA gun and theres so much info/ hype about the 5r milspec. Are those group consistant or fluke? Appreciate the recomendation. Nice rifle btw
I have looked at EVERY remington 700 option I have available. Im stuck in Iraq right now and I cant buy the gun I want so in my off time I research the crap out of it
Re: Remington triangle barrels
The chamber end of the barrel is round. According to one thread on here, the barrel maker/fitter explained that the flutes do reduce weight. BUT...the stiffness is the same as a cylinder barrel of the same weight. Does Remmy form their barrel by hammer forging and then fluting? Or do they form the triangle shape into the barrel as it is being hammer forged...or is it button rifled? IMWK
The chamber end of the barrel is round. According to one thread on here, the barrel maker/fitter explained that the flutes do reduce weight. BUT...the stiffness is the same as a cylinder barrel of the same weight. Does Remmy form their barrel by hammer forging and then fluting? Or do they form the triangle shape into the barrel as it is being hammer forged...or is it button rifled? IMWK
Re: Remington triangle barrels
+1 on the XCR line, for $50-$150 more than that of that target tactical you can drop an XCR LR into an McM a5 and have a much better setup! While it does not have the 5R barrel it is stainless and already comes finished in a nice black color. Also has a 40X trigger where the 5r has the xmark pro.
The black one seen here, got the stock from McM off the specials page, was like $675ish
+1 on the XCR line, for $50-$150 more than that of that target tactical you can drop an XCR LR into an McM a5 and have a much better setup! While it does not have the 5R barrel it is stainless and already comes finished in a nice black color. Also has a 40X trigger where the 5r has the xmark pro.
The black one seen here, got the stock from McM off the specials page, was like $675ish
Re: Remington triangle barrels
I have a VTR .308,I put it in an AICS chassis and I consistantley shoot .75 to 1 inch groups at 100 yrds and have had no problems with it. The switch to the chassis made a big differance. I'm sure it would shoot better , because I have been shooting from the roof of my truck. If I can get on a solid rest I believe it will perform a little better.
I have a VTR .308,I put it in an AICS chassis and I consistantley shoot .75 to 1 inch groups at 100 yrds and have had no problems with it. The switch to the chassis made a big differance. I'm sure it would shoot better , because I have been shooting from the roof of my truck. If I can get on a solid rest I believe it will perform a little better.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
I'm don't believe a triangular barrel will shoot any worse than a round one. Tom Fargnoli (a gunsmith out of Naples, New York) has a few rimfires with trangular barrels and at least one of them holds a national title.
I was in his shop recently (dropped off an MLR .338 for an overhaul) and I saw one of the aformentioned .22s sitting in an open rifle case. It's barrel was odd enough that I had to ask about it (the chamber area and muzzle area are round, but most of the length in between is deeply triangular).
Turns out he machines the barrels that way himself (I believe the barrels start life as standard Hart tubes). Unfortunately, I don't remember the reason why he started to make them triangular, but I do know that shaping the barrel that way has not made them innacurate.
That's all I got.
I'm don't believe a triangular barrel will shoot any worse than a round one. Tom Fargnoli (a gunsmith out of Naples, New York) has a few rimfires with trangular barrels and at least one of them holds a national title.
I was in his shop recently (dropped off an MLR .338 for an overhaul) and I saw one of the aformentioned .22s sitting in an open rifle case. It's barrel was odd enough that I had to ask about it (the chamber area and muzzle area are round, but most of the length in between is deeply triangular).
Turns out he machines the barrels that way himself (I believe the barrels start life as standard Hart tubes). Unfortunately, I don't remember the reason why he started to make them triangular, but I do know that shaping the barrel that way has not made them innacurate.
That's all I got.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: linebaugh500</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm don't believe a triangular barrel will shoot any worse than a round one. Tom Fargnoli (a gunsmith out of Naples, New York) has a few rimfires with trangular barrels and at least one of them holds a national title.
</div></div>
I got to the word rimfire and then ignored the rest of your post.
Apples. Oranges.
You could make a pencil barrel with thin walls and it will do just as well with a .22 LR as a 2" thick rail gun shooting the same round. The magnitude of the applied forces to the cantilevered beam.
Not really a good comparison.
And note that no one is saying it would shoot any worse, but that the stiffness and torsional rigidity benefits some people are pontificating about are complete bull pucky.
A cylindrical barrel of the same diameter as the VTR barrel will perform better in resisting vibration and flex under the stress of a fired round, which does come into play when shooting at distances you would not consider shooting with a rimfire.
I think the core idea here that people are trying to say is that the VTR profile in the first place seems to try to solve problems that dont exist.
The VTR profile is just a way of fluting. Beyond need to realize its a gimmick, Remington is dangling something different into the marketplace for people to buy just because its different.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: linebaugh500</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm don't believe a triangular barrel will shoot any worse than a round one. Tom Fargnoli (a gunsmith out of Naples, New York) has a few rimfires with trangular barrels and at least one of them holds a national title.
</div></div>
I got to the word rimfire and then ignored the rest of your post.
Apples. Oranges.
You could make a pencil barrel with thin walls and it will do just as well with a .22 LR as a 2" thick rail gun shooting the same round. The magnitude of the applied forces to the cantilevered beam.
Not really a good comparison.
And note that no one is saying it would shoot any worse, but that the stiffness and torsional rigidity benefits some people are pontificating about are complete bull pucky.
A cylindrical barrel of the same diameter as the VTR barrel will perform better in resisting vibration and flex under the stress of a fired round, which does come into play when shooting at distances you would not consider shooting with a rimfire.
I think the core idea here that people are trying to say is that the VTR profile in the first place seems to try to solve problems that dont exist.
The VTR profile is just a way of fluting. Beyond need to realize its a gimmick, Remington is dangling something different into the marketplace for people to buy just because its different.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Oddball-Six</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The VTR profile is just a way of fluting. Beyond need to realize its a gimmick, Remington is dangling something different into the marketplace for people to buy just because its different. </div></div>
Bullseye.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Oddball-Six</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The VTR profile is just a way of fluting. Beyond need to realize its a gimmick, Remington is dangling something different into the marketplace for people to buy just because its different. </div></div>
Bullseye.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Oddball-Six</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I got to the word rimfire and then ignored the rest of your post.
Apples. Oranges.
You could make a pencil barrel with thin walls and it will do just as well with a .22 LR as a 2" thick rail gun shooting the same round. The magnitude of the applied forces to the cantilevered beam.
</div></div>
That is not actually true. Calfee has made some pencil barreles rimfires but it is because he adds a tuner, not because rimfire doesn't require stiffness. Stiffness dampens the amplitude of harmonics, tuners change the dynamics of the harmonics.
If you shoot a 22LR without a tuner, a stiff barrel helps.
That said, I don't really know what that rimfire smith is doing in particular.
It does seem like adding some metal on the vertical sides of the barrel would be beneficial. From that perspective, it seems like diamond shaped is best. Why a triangle? That is what makes no sense to me. But my mind is open. There are a lot of crazy stuff that seems like it shouldn't work and yet does.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Oddball-Six</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I got to the word rimfire and then ignored the rest of your post.
Apples. Oranges.
You could make a pencil barrel with thin walls and it will do just as well with a .22 LR as a 2" thick rail gun shooting the same round. The magnitude of the applied forces to the cantilevered beam.
</div></div>
That is not actually true. Calfee has made some pencil barreles rimfires but it is because he adds a tuner, not because rimfire doesn't require stiffness. Stiffness dampens the amplitude of harmonics, tuners change the dynamics of the harmonics.
If you shoot a 22LR without a tuner, a stiff barrel helps.
That said, I don't really know what that rimfire smith is doing in particular.
It does seem like adding some metal on the vertical sides of the barrel would be beneficial. From that perspective, it seems like diamond shaped is best. Why a triangle? That is what makes no sense to me. But my mind is open. There are a lot of crazy stuff that seems like it shouldn't work and yet does.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Vanguard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have looked at EVERY remington 700 option I have available. Im stuck in Iraq right now and I cant buy the gun I want so in my off time I research the crap out of it
I have seriously looked into the XCR long range tactical but I didn't think it was a constant 1/2 MOA gun and theres so much info/ hype about the 5r milspec. Are those group consistant or fluke? Appreciate the recomendation. Nice rifle btw </div></div>
Thank You and I have to say yes, they are consistent. There are off days do to many variables but 85% of the time it is within 1/2" MOA. Ammunition has a lot to do with it and with that said since I don't re-load, I've had great results with the Black Hills Gold.
There is a guy that posted on the link that I've previously gave you, where he had some issues with his but I think that was an isolated inccident and I'm sure it would have being fixed by Remington.
Take care of yourself in Iraq.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Vanguard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have looked at EVERY remington 700 option I have available. Im stuck in Iraq right now and I cant buy the gun I want so in my off time I research the crap out of it
Thank You and I have to say yes, they are consistent. There are off days do to many variables but 85% of the time it is within 1/2" MOA. Ammunition has a lot to do with it and with that said since I don't re-load, I've had great results with the Black Hills Gold.
There is a guy that posted on the link that I've previously gave you, where he had some issues with his but I think that was an isolated inccident and I'm sure it would have being fixed by Remington.
Take care of yourself in Iraq.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Oddball Six,
I think that you are picking on what I said in isolation, understanding my message incorrectly.
I agree that a circular bull barrel the same thickness as 5R triangular barrel would be stronger, but the question is whether the same weight barrel would be stronger.
As stated threading a triangular barrel would be difficult.
As far as whether you think 5R triangular barrels are a gimmick or not, all of this is up for debate…and basically boils down to personal preference and opinions.
Oddball Six,
I think that you are picking on what I said in isolation, understanding my message incorrectly.
I agree that a circular bull barrel the same thickness as 5R triangular barrel would be stronger, but the question is whether the same weight barrel would be stronger.
As stated threading a triangular barrel would be difficult.
As far as whether you think 5R triangular barrels are a gimmick or not, all of this is up for debate…and basically boils down to personal preference and opinions.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oddball Six,
I think that you are picking on what I said in isolation, understanding my message incorrectly.
I agree that a circular bull barrel the same thickness as 5R triangular barrel would be stronger, but the question is whether the same weight barrel would be stronger.
</div></div>
Ok lets go with that theory for a second.
Remington did this barrel not as a gimmick but to offer people an option to save weight.
Lets see how they classify the 700 VTR... oh wait... its marketed as a tactical rifle.
Hmm and the other rifle with the VTR profile? Oh wait, thats a Target Tactical.
Thats one of the things I keep pointing out. If it really was about weight and truly delivering an innovative feature to the marketplace to help thier customers, it would be matched with platforms that need weight savings.
The hunting rifles. A full-on varmint package.
But thats not why they did it.
Is the VTR stronger and more resistant to vibration than a fluted cylinder?
No idea, great question, would love to see some scientific analysis against a few different kinds of flutes. My hypothesis however would be any gains would be negligible if there are any.
Hence when you look at the whole picture, you ask yourself a few things.
1) What did this really do for us?
2) Did the problem this solves exist in the first place?
3) What are they doing with this 'innovation'?
At the end of the day, there really isnt a choice given the totality of the circumstances other than to say gimmick.
Does that mean that these rifles are crap or not a good platform for someone who like them? Absolutely not.
At the end of the day, I am just trying to make sure that the information back and forth is accurate on the platform. If you are interested in a different way of fluting a rifle, great, look at the VTR and decide if its for you. But understand that the supposed benefits here are few and may not be matched to the other components of the platform the VTR profile barrel is mounted in.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oddball Six,
I think that you are picking on what I said in isolation, understanding my message incorrectly.
I agree that a circular bull barrel the same thickness as 5R triangular barrel would be stronger, but the question is whether the same weight barrel would be stronger.
</div></div>
Ok lets go with that theory for a second.
Remington did this barrel not as a gimmick but to offer people an option to save weight.
Lets see how they classify the 700 VTR... oh wait... its marketed as a tactical rifle.
Hmm and the other rifle with the VTR profile? Oh wait, thats a Target Tactical.
Thats one of the things I keep pointing out. If it really was about weight and truly delivering an innovative feature to the marketplace to help thier customers, it would be matched with platforms that need weight savings.
The hunting rifles. A full-on varmint package.
But thats not why they did it.
Is the VTR stronger and more resistant to vibration than a fluted cylinder?
No idea, great question, would love to see some scientific analysis against a few different kinds of flutes. My hypothesis however would be any gains would be negligible if there are any.
Hence when you look at the whole picture, you ask yourself a few things.
1) What did this really do for us?
2) Did the problem this solves exist in the first place?
3) What are they doing with this 'innovation'?
At the end of the day, there really isnt a choice given the totality of the circumstances other than to say gimmick.
Does that mean that these rifles are crap or not a good platform for someone who like them? Absolutely not.
At the end of the day, I am just trying to make sure that the information back and forth is accurate on the platform. If you are interested in a different way of fluting a rifle, great, look at the VTR and decide if its for you. But understand that the supposed benefits here are few and may not be matched to the other components of the platform the VTR profile barrel is mounted in.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The triangular barrel is not a gimmick, it cuts down on weight but maintains stiffness and torsional rigidity. Look at all the building structures that use triangular tubes or supports. Not saying that it is far superior to fluting a barrel, but 5R barrel is a way to cut down the weight and maintain barrel rigidity. In addition to weight, heat dissipation is another benefit.
That being said threading a 5R barrel is much more difficult. </div></div>
Run the numbers and calculate I for a circle and a triangle and tell me what the math says. Triangular cross sections are not stiffer than a circular cross section for a given length and enclosed diameter.
Properly setup in a lathe the only thing more difficult about threading a triangular barrel is that a round profile brake/suppressor doesn't match it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The triangular barrel is not a gimmick, it cuts down on weight but maintains stiffness and torsional rigidity. Look at all the building structures that use triangular tubes or supports. Not saying that it is far superior to fluting a barrel, but 5R barrel is a way to cut down the weight and maintain barrel rigidity. In addition to weight, heat dissipation is another benefit.
That being said threading a 5R barrel is much more difficult. </div></div>
Run the numbers and calculate I for a circle and a triangle and tell me what the math says. Triangular cross sections are not stiffer than a circular cross section for a given length and enclosed diameter.
Properly setup in a lathe the only thing more difficult about threading a triangular barrel is that a round profile brake/suppressor doesn't match it.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
tough crowd, take a long at this, and see what you think:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=3vo1AAA...tem&f=false
tough crowd, take a long at this, and see what you think:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=3vo1AAA...tem&f=false
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">tough crowd, take a long at this, and see what you think:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=3vo1AAA...tem&f=false
</div></div>
I have.
Repeatedly in discussions about this.
Now go look at its use.
Oh? whats that? You cant find a building near you that doesn't use circular columns or rectangular beams?
Hmm, I wonder why that might be.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">tough crowd, take a long at this, and see what you think:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=3vo1AAA...tem&f=false
</div></div>
I have.
Repeatedly in discussions about this.
Now go look at its use.
Oh? whats that? You cant find a building near you that doesn't use circular columns or rectangular beams?
Hmm, I wonder why that might be.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Here, this is getting silly.
http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumb_396/1241694628nIQari.jpg
I'm going to leave it at personal preference. I think the Remington 5R VTR is a nice rifle. Oddball-Six, as you username implies, you are welcome to bicker on.
Here, this is getting silly.
http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumb_396/1241694628nIQari.jpg
I'm going to leave it at personal preference. I think the Remington 5R VTR is a nice rifle. Oddball-Six, as you username implies, you are welcome to bicker on.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here, this is getting silly.
http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumb_396/1241694628nIQari.jpg
I'm going to leave it at personal preference. I think the Remington 5R VTR is a nice rifle. Oddball-Six, as you username implies, you are welcome to bicker on. </div></div>
Its not bickering, its basic science. Its threads like this which are why people come to believe that the latest [insert gimmick here] have magical properties and will put down a bigfoot at 1500 miles.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here, this is getting silly.
http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumb_396/1241694628nIQari.jpg
I'm going to leave it at personal preference. I think the Remington 5R VTR is a nice rifle. Oddball-Six, as you username implies, you are welcome to bicker on. </div></div>
Its not bickering, its basic science. Its threads like this which are why people come to believe that the latest [insert gimmick here] have magical properties and will put down a bigfoot at 1500 miles.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
vkc-
My point was that the cross sectional moment of inertia of a standard round barrel is higher than a triangular cross section that fits in the same circular cross section.
The other problem is that you now have a biased stiffness depending upon which way the barrel is bending. The vibrational bending is not going to have the same deflection side to side as it will vertically or any combination of them.
It will give a slight advantage in weight, it does not give any stiffness advantage for a given barrel contour, I have serious doubts to the accuracy, more than likely it is a gimmick for the unwashed.
vkc-
My point was that the cross sectional moment of inertia of a standard round barrel is higher than a triangular cross section that fits in the same circular cross section.
The other problem is that you now have a biased stiffness depending upon which way the barrel is bending. The vibrational bending is not going to have the same deflection side to side as it will vertically or any combination of them.
It will give a slight advantage in weight, it does not give any stiffness advantage for a given barrel contour, I have serious doubts to the accuracy, more than likely it is a gimmick for the unwashed.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Bohem, now what you said makes sense and I think your arguments are valid. Thanks for enlightening me.
Bohem, now what you said makes sense and I think your arguments are valid. Thanks for enlightening me.
Re: Remington triangle barrels
Should have known I was discussing topic with a mechanical engineer.
Should have known I was discussing topic with a mechanical engineer.
Similar threads
