What are the general bullet weight range in 32/40 for a 16" twist rate? Newly acquired rifle has 16" twist, my other 32/40's all have 14". Would imagine the bullets that work in the 14" twist I use 200-210gr probably won't work. It is way to cold currently here where I live to go to the range.
bob

Accurate mold bullet. 187gr and 200 yard group. Base is exactly groove diameter. Minor diameter is exactly bore diameter. 14.1 gr 4227. WLR primers. Old 32-40 Remington barrel with six grooves, 16 twist. 20-1 alloy. Bullet breech seated ahead of the Hudson throat.

For a 16 twist it would be three times the groove diameter for the bullets length. 
Weight is actually not the determining factor.

Yes I do Joe and I also appreciate it as well. 

If being a Spitzer Bullet the Bullet length can be abit longer based on my own 16 twist 32-40 experience.
But why even try to push it to that extent ?

Had a Stevens 44 1/2 that shot Jones 205s fine 1475 fps

JLouis wrote on Feb 1^st, 2023 at 7:42pm:


To determine through actual trial if it's the most accurate bullet. 

Well there ya go John. That's why ya gotta try all types even when they seem wrong. Long ones fat ones short ones skinny ones.

Dellet that was handed down to me by Barry Darr for use in 16 twist and it would not true for others.

[quote

x3.5 for the 14 twist
x2.7 for the 18

best I can tell its based on Greenhill data 


[/quote]

And that's fine, I think, for our low vel cast bullets. But, as with all such ballistic formulas there are caveats. Velocity is a big one - faster allows for the stabilization of a bullet that may not be perfectly ideal for the rate of twist. Air density - what works at higher altitude may not at sea level (I've encountered that phenomenon living here on the shores of the Chesapeake Bay). Air temperature is a factor also. Therein lies why one encounters little mysteries that don't fit twist rate formulas.

JLouis wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2023 at 10:18am:



so, you were just using somebody's empirical evidence to copy the work. 
For a moment it sounded like you were an inovator

This is a Cherrie that I was making that I wanted to try in my 28-35. 
I had been wanting to try a spitzer with a 7 diameter ogive / 7 times the bullets diameter. 
It is now to the shape that I want and I still need to cut the flutes.
Then to harden it, sharpen it with a back bevel so the trailing edges do not make any contact, while also not changing the bullets diameter. 
It was just pretty much a hobby for me and for also being able to help out my friends if in need. 
Probably cut close to 50 moulds off the top of my head and I now don't even have one of own. 
Pretty much just gave them all away and to the point that I had to actually make one for myself to use for a match. 
Cutting a mould is easy and it is in the making of the mould block blanks that is kind of a pain in the A--s and also very time consuming as well.   

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

I personally do not believe that the Greenhill Formula actually works for our breech seating needs. 
CBA Shooter I do agree with you a rifle with the same length barrel and the same twist. 
Including the velocities being real close to being the same, one will shoot extremely well and the other possibly not. 
I built three identical breech seating 25-35's with the same barrel contour, maker  and length.
All also being chambered the same with zero headspace but no three exactly liked he same things. 
Bullet was the same and the Mos 120 grain spitzer the difference was in the primers, powder and possibly the breech seating depth.

Based on my own personal experience a spitzer bullet can be about 30 thousandths longer than a flat or a round nose bullet at times.  
Pretty much depends on the center of gravity and also the center of pressure but I have also not yet ran into that specific issue yet.

Dellet wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2023 at 5:18pm:

  There it is gentlemen, "in a nutshell".    

JLouis wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2023 at 9:01pm:


Which part is not really, and why?

JLouis wrote on Feb 4^th, 2023 at 10:03am:


So because “you haven’t experienced it”, tho many others have, is wrong.
 
Yet, 3X bullet diameter is the perfect bullet for a 16 twist 32-40 should be taken as gospel because you have experienced that.

Even tho you can’t explain how you got that number(other than some one told you) and freely admit if you change the bullet shape, it will no longer be true. And it can’t be applied to other calibers or even twist rates, velocities or barrel lengths of the same cartridge.

Somewhere in there, is a disconnect.

Trust but verify, seems to be applicable here.

Always good to share ideas with you, but without being able to express the what and why of them, or lay down a challenge based on fact instead of feeling, it’s tough to gain any knowledge. And that’s the whole point of sharing ideas.

Premod70 I just didn't want to get into a pissing match. 
I have personally shot 100's of various bullets through an Ohler 43 Ballistic System and I  just don't want to argue over those results with someone who has not. 
Not sure if anyone here has also done the same but the results do not lie. 
With that being said one can actually confirm a bullets stability by it's actual time of flight and comparing that to several bullets, flat nose, spitzer's, round nose, truncated nose and other individual designs. 

JLouis wrote on Feb 4^th, 2023 at 3:58pm:

Lol, John, I doubt you could quote Scripture without wrankling feathers on some of this forum’s members. Thanks for staying with us snd sharing your wisdom!

( So your experience is that if you do something it’s good, if someone else does they same thing, they’re wrong )

Not at all the Ballistic System just does not Lie !

Dellet I no longer shoot or compete and I actually do not have the time to spend on this childish BS. 
My own personal accomplishments speak for themselves.
I have set my own goals and I have now achieved them all.
It is now pretty obvious that I cannot help you but hopefully somehow I can still help others here.

Not sure why you are now involved and I was in no way trying to demean Dellet at all. 
We all have different personal experiences, he has his and I have mine.
But it also not worth arguing over by any means or for it to just end up damaging our own relationships.

Joe exactly and that is what it was. 
Going beyond that and having shot 100's of 10 shot groups through the Ohler Ballistic system I was just trying to share the actual results.
As you might or might not know I spent a year going out twice a week with a personal intent of setting a new ASSRA Record. 
Also as you may or may not know after trying several various bullets, powder, loads, primers etc.and while also shooting through the Ohler 43 ballistic system.
I was able to accomplish it with a cylindrical Pope Style /  Darr flat nose bullet of all things. 
My only point was I personally do not believe that I could have done the same by using some kind of computer generated program but only by the actual real time results. 
I also believe that you had mentioned that you also had a similar experience with the same type of bullet yourself.

The second best was also a Paul Jones 196 grain spitzer and I was finally able to narrow it down to just those two. 
And I then revisited those two several times and while actually thinking that it the Paul Jones spitzer should have ended up being thee best choice the flat nose was.

as ballistic coefficients differ, I would not assume "time of flight" (no matter what time scale is used) to be the deciding factor in accuracy.

" as ballistic coefficients differ, I would not assume "time of flight" (no matter what time scale is used) to be the deciding factor in accuracy " 

Time of flight equates to less time being spent in the wind on its way to the target.
And you are indeed correct it does not mean it would also be the most accurate.
Finding the right combination of time of flight, right bullet choice and accuracy was what I was able to achieve by use of the Ohler 43 ballistic system. 

mes wrote on Feb 6^th, 2023 at 1:58pm:

  0h you rascal.

Question for JLouis:
John
Back when you were shooting to break BR record(s) what alloy or alloys and bullet lubes did you find gave the best accuracy for .32 caliber? That is if you care to share that knowledge.
You obviously have collected a lot of data in your shooting career, have you considered compiling it? I'll bet that what you have learned over the years would make interesting reading if published in the ASSRA Journal.

Randy I personally found  that 1 in 16 was the best for my own personal use. 
Of course that also depends on bullet fit and avoiding any leading issues. 
If I had to settle on just one it would be 1 in 18. 
Moving up from 1 in 40, 30, 25, 20 18, I found 1 in 16 to be the best for my onwn personal use.
I am also not interested in writing anything about my own past 23 years of personal experiences it only tends to turn allot folks here off. 
If I cannot share it here to hopefully help others out there is really no reason for me to sit down and to write it all down now.

Use a pen name, John.  You know like Rabbeth was J Frances or something like that.  You don't have to use your own name. Write one article every month or two months and send it in to the journal. 
Really though, you should have it proof read and the grammar and punctuation, spelling corrected.  You have so much you could share. 

JLouis wrote on Feb 7^th, 2023 at 2:40am:

Personally it think an article or two would work better than posts on a forum.

Forums are by nature a discussion. Posts are open to debate and criticism. 2500 characters are used quickly and limits the explanations. 

There is more than one way to achieve what you have accomplished, so of course any one way of doing things will be challenged by others who arrived on a different path. The discussion that sorts those differences out is how iron sharpens iron.

Forum discussions are not your strongest asset.

If you truly are interested in passing on your knowledge and creating a legacy(for lack of better words), give an article or two a try. 

You could do more of a story column titled something like 
“Ramblings of a retired shooter”. Then end it with “all for this issue, now get off my lawn.”

Best part is guys like me, won’t be able to frustrate you

Think it over, but it would probably better received than you think.

Dellet please don't ever feel like you might have frustrated me.
I actually enjoy reading all of your own opinions. 
I believe when everyone is sharing their own that it can be a real big benefit to others that are here. 
It is also not my way or the highway as we might all take different paths to be able to achieve each of our own individual succeses. 
If my responses appear to come across that way it is surely not my intent. 

John,

I look forward to your posts, thank you.

I acquired but have not shot a 32- 40 with a 12 twist.
Any thoughts on alloy for that fast twist.?
All else being equal, presuming smokeless powder,
Do you know if a soft mix will lead more than a harder bullet? 

or

Is leading more of a bullet / chamber / bore fit / rifling design lube issue..

Thanks in advance

rj
more
JLouis wrote on Feb 7^th, 2023 at 2:40am: