One thing I haven't heard anyone say is deliberately matching your velocity to the twist. This is a very real thing in round ball guns. With those, the opposite is true when it comes to twists in target vs hunting guns. For instance, most of the newer barrels, from Colerain and other companies, have fast twists (1:48 for .40, 1:60 for 45, 1:66 for .50) in order to allow lighter, slower loads for less recoil in target work. With the exception of one .40 collerain barrel, my rifles all have slower twists which allow higher velocity. (My three older guns--one .40, one .38 and one .35--all have 1:56.) In my .40 Colleran (if I spell it differently every time I might get it right) I get excellent accuracy with 42 grains of powder. On the other hand, a good friend of mine has a .40 flintlock with a slow twist of 1:72, and he is running 70 grains. I cannot begin to shoot that fast, or my accuracy goes all over the map. (Yes, I weigh my balls.) This gives him a decided advantage in wind and distance. So does this hold true with the bullet guns--does a fast twist barrel benefit from reduced velocity? If they do, I would think there would be a point of no return when it comes to more twist and longer bullets, because air time would be increased. Of course, a ball is a ball, where as bullets are all different shapes, each requiring a different twist (and speed?). I think I understand you to say, Dave, that the faster twists which you prefer allow a bullet with a higher coefficient, and this allows you higher velocity for the same weight? Honestly, there is not a thing I do with a center fire that cannot be better done with a flintlock--until I pass the 100 yard mark. Since most of my hunting is well under that, hitting mostly comes down to the gun that holds the best. So, the only real reason for a cartridge gun for me at this point is power and distance. That is why I first thought of the .50 over my .45-100 and then backed off to the little .40.
|