To all,

Quite the heated debates seemed to generate from this discussion on more than one occasion with strong opinions well "mixed" to both sides.

As RIP readies his "coffin" for a 10" vs. 16" big bore comparison in "water feet", I thought more documented data in wet pack and inches may add to a better understanding for us all.

I really wanted to use the .35 Whelen in a 11" (or 10") vs. the old standard 16". Or the 9.3 x 62 in a 10" vs. 14"std..... But my choice of either is a lack of decision on my part of which one I will re-bore to; trying the new LaBounty replacement.

I decided on .22 caliber for the first comparison. 10" vs. old standard 14". Many bullet choices are available here from solid to partition to TSX to long to short to extremely explosive...... One pitted against the other in a fair same linear velocity might be interesting.

I chose lower impact speeds to "challenge" the already borderline 14" as well as letting us better see frontal areas, termination positions, and lack of fragmentation. (if possible) Velocities were chronographed and powder adjusted to the "tenth" to keep linear speed within 5fps between twists.

The first two bullets were a purposely long 69gr Sierra MK and a "Tougher"?? game bullet? the Winchester 64gr Power Point; both of conventional gilding/lead jacketed construction.

Impact velocity was 2500fps for the Power Point and 2400fps for the MK. (as this bullet is fragile)

First the 14"........



Example "A" are two 69gr Matchkings. The right example fragmented badly and the remaining jacket rested sideways at 7" depth and the remaining core piece at 7 1/2" depth also sideways but opposite hand..

The right example entered partially sideways! There was extreme violence only an inch or so in that fragmented the jacket into many pieces and somehow launched the core like a spear to the deepest penetration of 9 1/2" with a wound channel no better than if a sharpened screwdriver had been pushed into the wet pack!

Example "B" Both bullets terminated sideways at a 9" depth. Pictures display the "flat" side to each bullet. One had a frontal dia. of .40cal, one .41 cal. Retaining weights were 83% and 84%.

The 10" ......



Example "D" .... Both jacket pieces were at 7" depth and terminated straight on. Core pieces went another half inch and also were straight forward.....

Example "E" ..... Both Power Points penetrated 8 3/4" almost to the page. They were head-on and the penetration was arrow straight... One bullet is .51cal, the other .52cal. Retaining weights are 87.5% and 88%.

The next test should be of more interest with Nosler Partition and Barnes "TSX" being compared.....

BigRx

quote:

same linear velocity

How did you do this?

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:

quote:

same linear velocity

How did you do this?

This is just the forward (probably a better word) velocity as we know it and we all talk about as "Velocity" as opposed to "rotational" velocity which will change with twist even with identical "forward" velocity.... Forward, linear, some description when the two velocities are talked about at the same time.

BigRx