Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 Send TopicPrint
Normal Topic Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length? (Read 1318 times)
Dellet
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1213
Joined: May 19th, 2017
Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length?
Jul 4th, 2023 at 2:31pm
Print Post  
Let me start with a firm “I don’t know”.  But want to.

This rule of thumb gets thrown out every time there is a discussion on bullet length and when questioned answers are either silence, I don’t know, but it seems to work, or it’s a secret.

The Greenhill formula is tossed out there and it matches for some cartridges and bullets, but not others. Part of that is because the Greenhill formula does not take into account bullet shape or velocity, more correctly, spin rate which is determined by the combination of velocity and twist.

For most shooters velocity changes of a few hundred FPS, will not change spin rate enough to warrant a change in twist rate, but the Greenhill formula is basically accepted for velocities under 2800 fps. That is more of a 2000 fps spread.

The best way to compare the Greenhill formula and the rule of thumb 3 bore diameter length, no twist mentioned idea, is to lay out a table, or two.

Montana bullet works has done that for us. Link is here, screen shots attached below.
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

Looking at the tables it’s easy to see many popular combinations seem to fit the “rule of thumb” pretty closely. 25 caliber, 86 grain bullet, .710”, 14 twist, aligns with a Lyman 85 grain bullet and early 25 caliber rifles.

But that cartridge was developed after the Greenhill formula was published in 1879. What about cartridges predating the formula?

One example would be the 38-50 Ballard. According to Grant in “Single Shot Rifles” it used a 255 grain bullet and a 1/20 twist. That also aligns well with the Greenhill formula. Apparently the “rule of thumb” also predates the formula.

Enter Sir Joseph Whitworth. 

In 1854, Whitworth was charged with creating a better rifle for the British army. The bullet needed to weigh 530 grains, charged with 70 grains of powder. He was provided a test facility of 500 yards where he hung tissue paper the track stability and trajectory of the bullet. He created what at the time was considered the first small bore rifle of 45 caliber.

To make weight, the bullet ended up at roughly 1.350”, or 3X the bore. For best accuracy through mostly trial and error, the twist rate, 1/20.

The Whitworth rifle, the most accurate in its day, prized by the Confederate Sharpshooters, who routinely shot the Union Army sharpshooters and officers at longer distances. The story of the rifle here.
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)
« Last Edit: Jul 4th, 2023 at 2:39pm by Dellet »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bnice
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1930
Location: Iowa
Joined: Nov 30th, 2006
Re: Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length?
Reply #1 - Jul 4th, 2023 at 8:47pm
Print Post  
I think This would be a good link to add for the forum.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Cbashooter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1608
Location: Eastern Wa.
Joined: Mar 31st, 2018
Re: Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length?
Reply #2 - Jul 4th, 2023 at 9:25pm
Print Post  
there are lots of general guidelines but not all work out.I've played alot with 30 caliber plainbase in 1-10 and 1-12 Twist and the above data is optimistic of bullet length for.stability.i find 1.25" at plainbase velocity is about it for not getting tippers.
While the x3 guideline is a bit conservative of what I've been able to shoot well.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dellet
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1213
Joined: May 19th, 2017
Re: Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length?
Reply #3 - Jul 4th, 2023 at 9:32pm
Print Post  
bnice wrote on Jul 4th, 2023 at 8:47pm:
I think This would be a good link to add for the forum.

David Minshall aka researchpress here on the forum

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

More or less his introductory post for the journal.
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Cbashooter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1608
Location: Eastern Wa.
Joined: Mar 31st, 2018
Re: Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length?
Reply #4 - Jul 4th, 2023 at 10:02pm
Print Post  
David Minshall helped me date a Parker Hale 2 band years back.He's a wonderful fellow full of information.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
marlinguy
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline


Ballards may be weaker,
but they sure are neater!

Posts: 17453
Location: Oregon
Joined: Feb 2nd, 2009
Re: Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length?
Reply #5 - Jul 4th, 2023 at 11:10pm
Print Post  
Rifling twist rate, and bullet shape also need to be considered when talking about what works. Bullet design also, as a hollow base changes things over a flat solid base. Weight forward blunt nose bullets vs. spire points also.
Just lots of variables beyond just bullet length.
  

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Cbashooter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1608
Location: Eastern Wa.
Joined: Mar 31st, 2018
Re: Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length?
Reply #6 - Jul 4th, 2023 at 11:38pm
Print Post  
marlinguy wrote on Jul 4th, 2023 at 11:10pm:
Rifling twist rate, and bullet shape also need to be considered when talking about what works. Bullet design also, as a hollow base changes things over a flat solid base. Weight forward blunt nose bullets vs. spire points also.
Just lots of variables beyond just bullet length.


exactly!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dellet
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1213
Joined: May 19th, 2017
Re: Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length?
Reply #7 - Jul 5th, 2023 at 12:05am
Print Post  
marlinguy wrote on Jul 4th, 2023 at 11:10pm:
Rifling twist rate, and bullet shape also need to be considered when talking about what works. Bullet design also, as a hollow base changes things over a flat solid base. Weight forward blunt nose bullets vs. spire points also.
Just lots of variables beyond just bullet length.


This has been my argument for years, formulas that do not include bullet shape can not be expected to be very precise. Other wise a bullet shot backwards would be just as stable as when shot forward.

The Greenhill formula was based on an elliptical shape, so would be the same forward or backward, and subsonic velocity. The updated version being the Miller version assumes a boat tail and allows a full range of velocity.

Berger bullets has a disclaimer on their calculator, warning against false outputs for flat base bullets.

With all that said, both generally come pretty close.

Something else to note on bullet shape, the Whitworth bullet was not cylindrical, it was hexagonal and fit the same bore. It was noted that the hexagonal bullet could be cast as 10% tin/90% lead for greater penetration. Or as a cylindrical bullet of soft lead that would obturate to fill the corners of the bore.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Cat_Whisperer
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline


No 1, 9.3x74R

Posts: 3965
Location: Mountains of Virginia
Joined: Apr 17th, 2004
Re: Why 3X bore diameter for bullet length?
Reply #8 - Jul 5th, 2023 at 6:54am
Print Post  
Dellet wrote on Jul 4th, 2023 at 2:31pm:
....

The Greenhill formula is tossed out there and it matches for some cartridges and bullets, but not others. Part of that is because the Greenhill formula does not take into account bullet shape or velocity, more correctly, spin rate which is determined by the combination of velocity and twist.

... 


the Greenhill formula is for 1" diameter x(some) length artillery shell with a 1R ogive.  For what it was derived it WORKS.  Applying it blindly to bullet "A" or bullet "B" will come CLOSE, but obviously not optimal.
  

Cat Whisperer (trk)
Chief of Smoke
Pulaski Coehorn Works and Skunk Works
Drafted May 1970, Retired Maj. U.S.Army
assra #9885
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send TopicPrint