-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Remington's triangle barrel?
- Thread starter TLong
- Start date
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Or is it just a new design that doesn't really enhance or decrease performance? </div></div>
BINGO !!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Or is it just a new design that doesn't really enhance or decrease performance? </div></div>
BINGO !!
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
I'm afraid that a triangular barrel could whip in a specific direction due to the shape constraints on the barrel itself. That said, if Remington didn't time the top of the triangle exactly with the top of the receiver, the barrel could sent rounds off to the left or right, even with a level rifle.
This would be a big problem at longer ranges.
Of course this is purely speculation on my part. It would be nice to see a triangular barrel undergo some FEA to determine if this is true.
Or just stick with a round barrel, as it can't possibly have any directional constraints in shape!
(<span style="font-style: italic">courtesy of </span> <span style="font-style: italic">Varmint Al)</span>
I'm afraid that a triangular barrel could whip in a specific direction due to the shape constraints on the barrel itself. That said, if Remington didn't time the top of the triangle exactly with the top of the receiver, the barrel could sent rounds off to the left or right, even with a level rifle.
This would be a big problem at longer ranges.
Of course this is purely speculation on my part. It would be nice to see a triangular barrel undergo some FEA to determine if this is true.
Or just stick with a round barrel, as it can't possibly have any directional constraints in shape!
(<span style="font-style: italic">courtesy of </span> <span style="font-style: italic">Varmint Al)</span>
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: glock24</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm afraid that a triangular barrel could whip in a specific direction due to the shape constraints on the barrel itself. That said, if Remington didn't time the top of the triangle exactly with the top of the receiver, the barrel could sent rounds off to the left or right, even with a level rifle.
This would be a big problem at longer ranges.
Of course this is purely speculation on my part. It would be nice to see a triangular barrel undergo some FEA to determine if this is true.
Or just stick with a round barrel, as it can't possibly have any directional constraints in shape!
(<span style="font-style: italic">courtesy of </span> <span style="font-style: italic">Varmint Al)</span>
</div></div>
I thought about that, but in theory, a triangle is the strongest shape, because pressure is distributed along all three sides, preventing collapse. However, an internal force might have adverse effects on the triangle shape. Also, I would hope that Rem. would have done some extensive research before releasing the new design, but like all new products, there has to be some improvements or flaws discovered after time. I think that the design would be just as stable as a round barrel, however, I think it is flawed by it's own appearance to the consumer, whether or not they would buy it because of it's look. It is futuristic and a neat concept. I think it will come to pass in the long run though.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: glock24</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm afraid that a triangular barrel could whip in a specific direction due to the shape constraints on the barrel itself. That said, if Remington didn't time the top of the triangle exactly with the top of the receiver, the barrel could sent rounds off to the left or right, even with a level rifle.
This would be a big problem at longer ranges.
Of course this is purely speculation on my part. It would be nice to see a triangular barrel undergo some FEA to determine if this is true.
Or just stick with a round barrel, as it can't possibly have any directional constraints in shape!
(<span style="font-style: italic">courtesy of </span> <span style="font-style: italic">Varmint Al)</span>
</div></div>
I thought about that, but in theory, a triangle is the strongest shape, because pressure is distributed along all three sides, preventing collapse. However, an internal force might have adverse effects on the triangle shape. Also, I would hope that Rem. would have done some extensive research before releasing the new design, but like all new products, there has to be some improvements or flaws discovered after time. I think that the design would be just as stable as a round barrel, however, I think it is flawed by it's own appearance to the consumer, whether or not they would buy it because of it's look. It is futuristic and a neat concept. I think it will come to pass in the long run though.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
TLong, you may want to check your physics as I believe a circle is the strongest shape, which is why many arches and stone/brick doorways are round and not triangular.
TLong, you may want to check your physics as I believe a circle is the strongest shape, which is why many arches and stone/brick doorways are round and not triangular.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
I think you want to check your facts. Been out of school for 20 years and only had my PE for 10 years....
If memory serves the tubular shape is the stronger of the two shapes.
I think you want to check your facts. Been out of school for 20 years and only had my PE for 10 years....
If memory serves the tubular shape is the stronger of the two shapes.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
I imagine someone upstairs thought it looked cool and I also imagine it was considerably cheaper to do than fluting the barrel. It has no accuracy benefit either way. The part that bothers me is the integral muzzle break that looks as if were cut with a grinder... by hand. That could be detrimental to accuracy, at least until enough rounds were put through it to smooth it out.
I imagine someone upstairs thought it looked cool and I also imagine it was considerably cheaper to do than fluting the barrel. It has no accuracy benefit either way. The part that bothers me is the integral muzzle break that looks as if were cut with a grinder... by hand. That could be detrimental to accuracy, at least until enough rounds were put through it to smooth it out.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
The only problume that i can see is the thinner spots on the flats that will heat up faster that the thicker portions of that barrel.
but i dont really give a flying monkeys ass. it jest looks kool.
Scott
The only problume that i can see is the thinner spots on the flats that will heat up faster that the thicker portions of that barrel.
but i dont really give a flying monkeys ass. it jest looks kool.
Scott
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
Compare accuracy tests on an SPS Varmint vs the triangle barrel. from what i have seen the triangle barrel is not holding the same accuracy as the SPS Varmint rigs. I would imagine the actions and stocks are identical if not REAL close.
Food for thought.
Compare accuracy tests on an SPS Varmint vs the triangle barrel. from what i have seen the triangle barrel is not holding the same accuracy as the SPS Varmint rigs. I would imagine the actions and stocks are identical if not REAL close.
Food for thought.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
In my opinion there are a couple of serious problems that exist with the VTR barrels. I have seen a couple really shoot and some not so well.
#1 it is flat out a marketing gimmick to sell guns, people buy stuff cuz its cool and not because it works.
#2 the thick and thin portions of the barrel cause varying stress points. Stock contact and heat make them shift erratically.
Kind of like one of those blow up party favors when you quit blowing they roll up. once heat is applied to the barrel, it wants to pull in different direction. The thin portion cools faster than the thick, and can make them very erratic.
#3 the crown with the integral muzzle brake is very difficult to clean up. it is inset into the end of the barrel and the brake needs to be cut off to do it properly.
In my opinion there are a couple of serious problems that exist with the VTR barrels. I have seen a couple really shoot and some not so well.
#1 it is flat out a marketing gimmick to sell guns, people buy stuff cuz its cool and not because it works.
#2 the thick and thin portions of the barrel cause varying stress points. Stock contact and heat make them shift erratically.
Kind of like one of those blow up party favors when you quit blowing they roll up. once heat is applied to the barrel, it wants to pull in different direction. The thin portion cools faster than the thick, and can make them very erratic.
#3 the crown with the integral muzzle brake is very difficult to clean up. it is inset into the end of the barrel and the brake needs to be cut off to do it properly.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
I have a buddy who has an SPS Varmint, 5/8-3/4moa accurate with FGMM. Same caliber, same ammo, triangle barrel version at the rifle range shot 1"-1 1/2". Maybe not a slam dunk but i was not impressed. I had the SPS Tactical that would shoot .35"-.4" out of the box with FGMM. To me they are not worth the money considering you can get the SPS Tac or the Varmint.
I have a buddy who has an SPS Varmint, 5/8-3/4moa accurate with FGMM. Same caliber, same ammo, triangle barrel version at the rifle range shot 1"-1 1/2". Maybe not a slam dunk but i was not impressed. I had the SPS Tactical that would shoot .35"-.4" out of the box with FGMM. To me they are not worth the money considering you can get the SPS Tac or the Varmint.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
I have a buddy that has one in 22-250. the gun is very light and nice to carry in the field. downside of being light is that the barrel heats up quick but it cools down just a fast. we have been trying to work a load up but the best we have been able to get is 1" to 1 1/2". we figure this is is good enough for any coyote and the weight saving is more than worth it. just my input.
I have a buddy that has one in 22-250. the gun is very light and nice to carry in the field. downside of being light is that the barrel heats up quick but it cools down just a fast. we have been trying to work a load up but the best we have been able to get is 1" to 1 1/2". we figure this is is good enough for any coyote and the weight saving is more than worth it. just my input.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: glock24</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
(<span style="font-style: italic">courtesy of </span> <span style="font-style: italic">Varmint Al)</span>
</div></div>
Pervert...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: glock24</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
(<span style="font-style: italic">courtesy of </span> <span style="font-style: italic">Varmint Al)</span>
</div></div>
Pervert...
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whatever...I didn't do to well in physiology when I went to school. Now that the geography lesson is over with, how about this damn barrel design?! </div></div>
would that be <span style="color: #CC0000">Geometry lesson ??</span> LOL
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whatever...I didn't do to well in physiology when I went to school. Now that the geography lesson is over with, how about this damn barrel design?! </div></div>
would that be <span style="color: #CC0000">Geometry lesson ??</span> LOL
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sendero_man</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whatever...I didn't do to well in physiology when I went to school. Now that the geography lesson is over with, how about this damn barrel design?! </div></div>
would that be <span style="color: #CC0000">Geometry lesson ??</span> LOL
</div></div>
Nah...that's the one that has to do with studying rocks and stuff.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sendero_man</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whatever...I didn't do to well in physiology when I went to school. Now that the geography lesson is over with, how about this damn barrel design?! </div></div>
would that be <span style="color: #CC0000">Geometry lesson ??</span> LOL
Nah...that's the one that has to do with studying rocks and stuff.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sendero_man</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whatever...I didn't do to well in physiology when I went to school. Now that the geography lesson is over with, how about this damn barrel design?! </div></div>
would that be <span style="color: #CC0000">Geometry lesson ??</span> LOL
</div></div>
Nah...that's the one that has to do with studying rocks and stuff. </div></div>
no... that is another G word.. um Geology
lol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sendero_man</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whatever...I didn't do to well in physiology when I went to school. Now that the geography lesson is over with, how about this damn barrel design?! </div></div>
would that be <span style="color: #CC0000">Geometry lesson ??</span> LOL
Nah...that's the one that has to do with studying rocks and stuff. </div></div>
no... that is another G word.. um Geology
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SINGLE.SHOT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">how about gynecology </div></div>
Topic worthy of studying?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SINGLE.SHOT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">how about gynecology </div></div>
Topic worthy of studying?
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
In my opinion it is just fluting in extreme. But cheaply done. Some time ago I read an article in an german journal about that rifle. It shot OK. BUT in the mag's over here, you must see what is NOT written about. There was no word about longer series and hot vs cold barrel poi!!
If you want a light rifle, go with a thinner cylindrical barrel!
And yes, it looks cool!
In my opinion it is just fluting in extreme. But cheaply done. Some time ago I read an article in an german journal about that rifle. It shot OK. BUT in the mag's over here, you must see what is NOT written about. There was no word about longer series and hot vs cold barrel poi!!
If you want a light rifle, go with a thinner cylindrical barrel!
And yes, it looks cool!
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
yall need to simmer down with all this ther fancy coloquiel diatribe as i is fairly illegitimate sos i has tubbles readin dis stuff.
yall need to simmer down with all this ther fancy coloquiel diatribe as i is fairly illegitimate sos i has tubbles readin dis stuff.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
The way I see it is that if the flats aren't exactly the same size the barrel will warp to the direction of the smaller flat. A cure for a non existant problem.
Besides, the barrel is mucking fugly.
The way I see it is that if the flats aren't exactly the same size the barrel will warp to the direction of the smaller flat. A cure for a non existant problem.
Besides, the barrel is mucking fugly.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: marduk185</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yall need to simmer down with all this ther fancy coloquiel diatribe as i is fairly illegitimate sos i has tubbles readin dis stuff. </div></div>
LOL...oh man!! That reminds me of some of the witness statements I get from people. They not only butcher the words when they say them, they write them down like they say them too!!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: marduk185</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yall need to simmer down with all this ther fancy coloquiel diatribe as i is fairly illegitimate sos i has tubbles readin dis stuff. </div></div>
LOL...oh man!! That reminds me of some of the witness statements I get from people. They not only butcher the words when they say them, they write them down like they say them too!!
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
So, I was a checking out a local gun shop and, when I asked if they " had anything cool in a .308" he show me the VTR with a digital camo stock. and tells me that "you know that a triangle is the strongest shape available and that is why it is designed that way" I just nodded my head and laughed to myself. Back to the argument, I don't think that it is any stronger, I do think that it resist bending in certain directions because of the shape, similar to big sky cranes with their triangle jibs.
For me, I think I will just stick to good round ones until someone can really prove to me that the triangle is more accurate.
SScott
So, I was a checking out a local gun shop and, when I asked if they " had anything cool in a .308" he show me the VTR with a digital camo stock. and tells me that "you know that a triangle is the strongest shape available and that is why it is designed that way" I just nodded my head and laughed to myself. Back to the argument, I don't think that it is any stronger, I do think that it resist bending in certain directions because of the shape, similar to big sky cranes with their triangle jibs.
For me, I think I will just stick to good round ones until someone can really prove to me that the triangle is more accurate.
SScott
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL...he was right!! </div></div>
a triangle bar that would fit though a 1" round hole is not stronger than a round bar that would also fit though a 1" round hole. the triangle will weigh less but it will not be stronger/more rigid if it fits in the same size constraints.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL...he was right!! </div></div>
a triangle bar that would fit though a 1" round hole is not stronger than a round bar that would also fit though a 1" round hole. the triangle will weigh less but it will not be stronger/more rigid if it fits in the same size constraints.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
Holy shit! I believe we have covered everything from guns, to women's virginia's, to arguing over the fact that the triangle is the strongest shape. LOL...gotta love it. Actually, I think the triangle/circle/arc argument in general has gone on about as long as the chicken or the egg argument. The circle is strong as structural integrity I believe, and the triangle is stronger at distributing weight evenly, and the arc........well that is the symbol for fags!
Holy shit! I believe we have covered everything from guns, to women's virginia's, to arguing over the fact that the triangle is the strongest shape. LOL...gotta love it. Actually, I think the triangle/circle/arc argument in general has gone on about as long as the chicken or the egg argument. The circle is strong as structural integrity I believe, and the triangle is stronger at distributing weight evenly, and the arc........well that is the symbol for fags!
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
Actually, after hundreds of years of poor barrel design on everything from artillery to tanks to BB guns, Remington has developed something entirely new. It's something that no one else had ever thought of, something that the greatest minds of the industry somehow missed, and something that works better than anything that came before it.
Actually, after hundreds of years of poor barrel design on everything from artillery to tanks to BB guns, Remington has developed something entirely new. It's something that no one else had ever thought of, something that the greatest minds of the industry somehow missed, and something that works better than anything that came before it.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whatever...I didn't do to well in physiology when I went to school. Now that the geography lesson is over with, how about this damn barrel design?! </div></div>
Sweatheart....that PE is Professional Engineer
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sunnyside Scott</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So, I was a checking out a local gun shop and, when I asked if they " had anything cool in a .308" he show me the VTR with a digital camo stock. and tells me that "you know that a triangle is the strongest shape available and that is why it is designed that way" I just nodded my head and laughed to myself. Back to the argument, I don't think that it is any stronger, I do think that it resist bending in certain directions because of the shape, similar to big sky cranes with their triangle jibs.
For me, I think I will just stick to good round ones until someone can really prove to me that the triangle is more accurate.
SScott </div></div>
The last conversation I had with an engineer at Manitowoc the primary shape is a box boom lattice for the jib. It will support the horizontal and vertical forces significantly better than a triangular shaped lattice. A circular boom would even do better from a pure engineering standpoint, however the manufacturing and maintenance would become a significant hurdle. Light tower cranes will use the triangular shape in that the majority of the forces are a vertical bending moment. Under high winds tower cranes are allowed to weathervane in that they are not designed to carry significant lateral loads.
The actions and reaction that are occurring during internal ballistics are generally not a straight forward “up/down” action. The circular shape allows for a more uniform method of dealing with all the violence that begins with the breaking of the trigger until the exit of the barrel.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whatever...I didn't do to well in physiology when I went to school. Now that the geography lesson is over with, how about this damn barrel design?! </div></div>
Sweatheart....that PE is Professional Engineer
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sunnyside Scott</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So, I was a checking out a local gun shop and, when I asked if they " had anything cool in a .308" he show me the VTR with a digital camo stock. and tells me that "you know that a triangle is the strongest shape available and that is why it is designed that way" I just nodded my head and laughed to myself. Back to the argument, I don't think that it is any stronger, I do think that it resist bending in certain directions because of the shape, similar to big sky cranes with their triangle jibs.
For me, I think I will just stick to good round ones until someone can really prove to me that the triangle is more accurate.
SScott </div></div>
The last conversation I had with an engineer at Manitowoc the primary shape is a box boom lattice for the jib. It will support the horizontal and vertical forces significantly better than a triangular shaped lattice. A circular boom would even do better from a pure engineering standpoint, however the manufacturing and maintenance would become a significant hurdle. Light tower cranes will use the triangular shape in that the majority of the forces are a vertical bending moment. Under high winds tower cranes are allowed to weathervane in that they are not designed to carry significant lateral loads.
The actions and reaction that are occurring during internal ballistics are generally not a straight forward “up/down” action. The circular shape allows for a more uniform method of dealing with all the violence that begins with the breaking of the trigger until the exit of the barrel.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Elxx</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: glock24</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
(<span style="font-style: italic">courtesy of </span> <span style="font-style: italic">Varmint Al)</span>
</div></div>
Pervert...</div></div>
hahaha
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Elxx</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: glock24</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
(<span style="font-style: italic">courtesy of </span> <span style="font-style: italic">Varmint Al)</span>
</div></div>
Pervert...</div></div>
hahaha
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
I've got an SPS-T and bought my wife a VTR. They are both chambered in 308. I haven't got her optics set up but it will be identical to mine. It will have a Leupold SA 1 piece Picatinny rail, Low PRW Rings, Mark2 3-9x40 w/MilDot. The VTR has a 22" but in all reality its a 20" with 2 inches worth of muzzle break.
I'll have them sat right next to each to do accuracy comparissons. They will both have Prvi Patizan 168HPBTs shot throught them. I'm willing to bet that the triangle barrel has the same if not better accuracy, but I'll save my judgement once I see the results.
Unfortunately I'll have to wait till I'm back home from the sandbox but 5 months will start testing.
Oh just for the record, I think the barrel is ugly!
I've got an SPS-T and bought my wife a VTR. They are both chambered in 308. I haven't got her optics set up but it will be identical to mine. It will have a Leupold SA 1 piece Picatinny rail, Low PRW Rings, Mark2 3-9x40 w/MilDot. The VTR has a 22" but in all reality its a 20" with 2 inches worth of muzzle break.
I'll have them sat right next to each to do accuracy comparissons. They will both have Prvi Patizan 168HPBTs shot throught them. I'm willing to bet that the triangle barrel has the same if not better accuracy, but I'll save my judgement once I see the results.
Unfortunately I'll have to wait till I'm back home from the sandbox but 5 months will start testing.
Oh just for the record, I think the barrel is ugly!
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
I bought one awhile back thinking that if it didn't shoot I would at least have the 700 action to work with. It was not consistent at all. One time it would shoot 1" others more, could never get it to shoot the same. Sent it to Beanland customs and now I have one that will SHOOT.
I bought one awhile back thinking that if it didn't shoot I would at least have the 700 action to work with. It was not consistent at all. One time it would shoot 1" others more, could never get it to shoot the same. Sent it to Beanland customs and now I have one that will SHOOT.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
I have been shooting mine for two years now and once you dump the factory stock in the garbage you will see that they seem to shoot just as well as my SPS.
I have been shooting mine for two years now and once you dump the factory stock in the garbage you will see that they seem to shoot just as well as my SPS.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
Does this barrel fit into other stocks without any modifications? I bought a VTR over the summer and dont even shoot it because the stock is such garbage.
Does this barrel fit into other stocks without any modifications? I bought a VTR over the summer and dont even shoot it because the stock is such garbage.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
It is just an example of extreme barrel fluting as Schleifalot mentioned.
To compare the stiffness of shapes you first calculate the I value for that shape.
Of coarse the cylinder (of equal radius) will be stiffer.
Fluting removes more weight than stiffness when done right but it still removes stiffness.
The vagina is the strongest shape that I'm aware of.
It is just an example of extreme barrel fluting as Schleifalot mentioned.
To compare the stiffness of shapes you first calculate the I value for that shape.
Of coarse the cylinder (of equal radius) will be stiffer.
Fluting removes more weight than stiffness when done right but it still removes stiffness.
The vagina is the strongest shape that I'm aware of.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
I think how a barrel is shaped on the inside is a whole lot more important than how its shaped on the outside. If it'll shoot, I dont care if its square, tacticool or not
.
okie
I think how a barrel is shaped on the inside is a whole lot more important than how its shaped on the outside. If it'll shoot, I dont care if its square, tacticool or not
okie
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hamilton</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The vagina is the strongest shape that I'm aware of. </div></div>
There you go. Remington can make barrels out of vagina's and still call them a 700 VTR.
Vagina Tactical Rifle.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hamilton</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The vagina is the strongest shape that I'm aware of. </div></div>
There you go. Remington can make barrels out of vagina's and still call them a 700 VTR.
Vagina Tactical Rifle.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oldgrayone</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hamilton</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The vagina is the strongest shape that I'm aware of. </div></div>
There you go. Remington can make barrels out of vagina's and still call them a 700 VTR.
Vagina Tactical Rifle. </div></div>
now that is funny !!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oldgrayone</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hamilton</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The vagina is the strongest shape that I'm aware of. </div></div>
There you go. Remington can make barrels out of vagina's and still call them a 700 VTR.
Vagina Tactical Rifle. </div></div>
now that is funny !!
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
But thats the problem, they dont seem to shoot! Same action, same or similar stock, different barrel=different accuracy, in this case it seems worse. 1-1 1/2" isn't good enough when there are other options IMO.
But thats the problem, they dont seem to shoot! Same action, same or similar stock, different barrel=different accuracy, in this case it seems worse. 1-1 1/2" isn't good enough when there are other options IMO.
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MuleHunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But thats the problem, <span style="color: #FF0000">they dont seem to shoot</span>! </div></div>
Vagina's?!?! There have been some on occasion that I can think of......
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MuleHunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But thats the problem, <span style="color: #FF0000">they dont seem to shoot</span>! </div></div>
Vagina's?!?! There have been some on occasion that I can think of......
Re: Remington's triangle barrel?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MuleHunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But thats the problem, they dont seem to shoot! Same action, same or similar stock, different barrel=different accuracy, in this case it seems worse. 1-1 1/2" isn't good enough when there are other options IMO. </div></div>
True and I agree that thats not acceptable accuracy but I think that some have performed conciderably better than that.
okie
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MuleHunter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But thats the problem, they dont seem to shoot! Same action, same or similar stock, different barrel=different accuracy, in this case it seems worse. 1-1 1/2" isn't good enough when there are other options IMO. </div></div>
True and I agree that thats not acceptable accuracy but I think that some have performed conciderably better than that.
okie
