THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM MEDIUM BORE RIFLE FORUM

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Rifles  Hop To Forums  Medium Bore Rifles    Why all this "efficiency" concern?
Page 1 2 

Moderators: Paul H
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Why all this "efficiency" concern?
 Login/Join
 
One of Us
Picture of vapodog
posted
I read again and again about efficiency.....does anyone really care?

IMO performance is the criteria and efficiency is a very distant issue in the choice of a cartridge/chambering.

Why would anyone give a rats butt about efficiency?


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 28849 | Location: western Nebraska | Registered: 27 May 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Reloader
posted Hide Post
I suppose you are refering to post such as a 300WSM is more efficient than a 300WM?

I agree, performance is #1

If I'm getting the accuracy and consistency I want along with the velocity desired, I could care less how efficient the cart is.

Then we get into the can of worms of more inherently accurate carts Smiler

Reloader
 
Posts: 4146 | Location: North Louisiana | Registered: 18 February 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of scottfromdallas
posted Hide Post
I only own efficient cartridges. I'm not a big magnum fan unless I'm going after something really big that wants to kill me. I prefer a cartridge with moderate velocity which gives excellent performance with standard cup & core bullets. They shoot flat enough out to 300 yards for big game. They uses less powder. I like anything in the 308, 7x57 family of cartridges. The 30-06 has a great family and the 6.5x55 and 9.3x62 are a great rounds. Generally the efficient rounds are much easier to shoot well. I know a lot of people love the velocity magnums give but for most applications, I don't think they are needed. Just my humble opinion.



 
Posts: 1941 | Location: Texas | Registered: 19 July 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Jerry Eden
posted Hide Post
I shoot the 6mm-06, Efficiency??? Same argument as bullet selection, and in most applications ballistic coefficient.

Jerry

"If you need more power or a different bullet, build another rifle."


NRA Benefactor Life Member
 
Posts: 1297 | Location: Chandler arizona | Registered: 29 August 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
I suppose you are refering to post such as a 300WSM is more efficient than a 300WM


300 WSM not efficient compared to 300 WM if you have to keep typing it out though.

What with that additional letter "S" in it.

Write it out twenty six times and you used a whole extra alphabet's worth of ink.
 
Posts: 6823 | Location: United Kingdom | Registered: 18 November 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I recently had a brush with "efficiency"

I'm doing load development for a .264 Win Mag and a 6.5 Creedmoor at the same time. Both with the 140 grain bullet.

Creedmoor:

42.5 Grains of powder gives 2890 fps


.264 Win Mag:

78 Grains of powder gives around 300 fps more.


It takes 35 more grains of powder to get just 300 fps extra velocity.
 
Posts: 3427 | Registered: 05 August 2008Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of ramrod340
posted Hide Post
quote:
I read again and again about efficiency

If we don't care then everyone should go out and chamber for everything built on a RUM parent case. Heck why would we even want a 250sav, 257Rob, etc when we could all just have a 257Wby or better yet 257STW or even 257-50. Until your case just gets so large that you can't burn the powder anymore you are still gaining be it a little for each bigger case.


As usual just my $.02
Paul K
 
Posts: 12881 | Location: Mexico, MO | Registered: 02 April 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Alberta Canuck
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ramrod340:
If we don't care then everyone should go out and chamber for everything built on a RUM parent case. .




Paul- I don't care about efficiency one way or the other, but I don't own anything built on the RUM case. I don't care about absolute maximum possible velocity for a given bullet weight or diameter either, as it turns out. Nor do I care a whit about how light I can make a gun overall.


What I do care about: "Is the cartridge, bullet, velocity, and accuracy enough to get the job at hand done?"

Sometimes that requires more power or more velocity than other times. Most of the time, it means I can get the job done with something like a 7x57 or less. Other times it means a .30-06 or more. On still other occasions I prefer a .404 Jeffery or .450 Ackley Mag.

If it wasn't for things like recoil, ammo cost, gun weight, retail availability, etc., I'd probably just carry a .404 Jeff all the time except for varmints. For those critters, I'd probably stick with the .219 Don Wasp., the .223, or the Swift, just because I like the rifles I have them in.

But cartridge efficiency (power generated per unit of propellant) has NEVER, not even once, entered into my decisions as to what to carry or shoot.

I have and load a hundred or more different cartridges in my various guns, but that's because I like playing with all the different toys, finding out how they perform, and so on.


My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still.

 
Posts: 9685 | Location: Cave Creek 85331, USA | Registered: 17 August 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of vapodog
posted Hide Post
quote:
I don't care about efficiency one way or the other, but I don't own anything built on the RUM case. I don't care about absolute maximum possible velocity for a given bullet weight or diameter either, as it turns out. Nor do I care a whit about how light I can make a gun overall.


What I do care about: " Is the cartridge, bullet, velocity, and accuracy enough to get the job at hand done?"

Precisely....if efficiency was the issue, no one would own a 22-250.....we'd all be shooting the .22 Hornet or .218 Bee. Instead of shooting a .25-06 we'd be lobbing the .25-20 at things!....THAT'S EFFICIENCY!


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 28849 | Location: western Nebraska | Registered: 27 May 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Another way to look at it is the amount of energy generated by a charge of powder. Recognize the definition of efficiency as the comparison of output to input. When we compare by caliber, the larger bore always wins. In this scenario, the .458 is champ, regardless of recoil, trajectory, or terminal performance, let alone action length or gun weight. Maybe efficiency isn't so important.


________________________
"Every country has the government it deserves." - Joseph de Maistre
 
Posts: 1184 | Registered: 21 April 2007Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of ramrod340
posted Hide Post
Guess I care, I use efficency in my selections. That is why I'm trying to sell my STW use a 280 not a 7mag a 25-06 not a 257STW.

I guess I look at itas a 25-06 does things a 25-20 can't. Is the 25-20 more efficent. Sure. But a 25-06 will do 99% of everything a 257Wby and 257STW will do with far less powder, blast and barrel wear. So Yes I choose the 25-06 because it will do what I want (a 25-20 doesn't) with less powder than a the larger cases. For the handloader a 257Roberts will do 95% of what a 25-06 can do.

Yes Vapodog that is why I haven't built the 264wmag. Big Grin Efficiency is why I built a family of wildcats. That is why there was the Gibbs, Hawk, Howell cases etc.


As usual just my $.02
Paul K
 
Posts: 12881 | Location: Mexico, MO | Registered: 02 April 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
a thread i have given some thought to before it came up.
each caliber hole/bore can only handle so much gas volumn.
after that you lose the efficiency of the cartridge but gain some velocity.
more gas more speed just like a car.
might just be why i don't own anything bigger than the ole0-6 and that was the wifes choice.
if i were going to shoot something that required more energy i'd go ahead and just go to a bigger hole.
maybe straight to a rifled 12ga.
 
Posts: 5003 | Location: soda springs,id | Registered: 02 April 2008Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
More efficient rounds kick less, burn less powder, make barrels last longer, cost less, are quieter, have less muzzle flash, and kill just as well.

So I hunt with a 300 RUM because the bullets go faster Smiler ..................DJ


....Remember that this is all supposed to be for fun!..................
 
Posts: 3976 | Location: Oklahoma,USA | Registered: 27 February 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Alberta Canuck
posted Hide Post
quote:
Efficiency is why I built a family of wildcats. That is why there was the Gibbs, Hawk, Howell cases etc.


I haven't anything against efficiency, it just isn't how I select my cartridges.

If I wanted an efficient .25 rifle cartridge, I surely wouldn't select a .25-06 (though I have two of them currently). I'd likely pick a .250 Savage...will easily take 95% of the deer I will ever want to shoot.

Anyway, back to your quote above....having been alive and an active reloader/shooter when Rocky Gibbs was developing the Gibbs line of cartridges, I doubt that efficiency had anything to do with that line coming into being.

Seems to me at the time everyone pretty much acknowledged that what Rocky was doing was developing cases to use the most powder that could be gotten into a .30-06-based case, in each bore size. And it could be done without the shooter having to buy a whole new barrel. Rocky re-chambered their existing rifles for them. He recommended loading them that way too. No dummy Rocky. He, as Roy Weatherby did, recognized "velocity sells".

Rocky got (or claimed he got) the most velocity out of '06 cases (in his day), and Roy did the same with the .375 H&H Mag case.


My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still.

 
Posts: 9685 | Location: Cave Creek 85331, USA | Registered: 17 August 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of bartsche
posted Hide Post
BOOMVD and AC have the right slant. clap beerroger


Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
 
Posts: 10226 | Location: Temple City CA | Registered: 29 April 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
.
 
Posts: 7857 | Registered: 16 August 2000Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of Duckear
posted Hide Post
"Efficiency" was invented by the guy worried he is losing an argument with another over which cartridge is the best.

This is how to use "efficiency" in a debate:



Guy #1 My .310 Supercool is the best ever! Smiler

Guy #2 Oh yeah? Roll Eyes Well, my .310 Ultrahot gets an extrea 150 fps AND is short enough to use the ever popular 222gr bullet! Big Grin

Guy #1 So what! My .310 Supercool is ..... more efficient. Cool

Guy #2 Confused
Guy #1 dancing


Hope that helps.

Wink


Hunting: Exercising dominion over creation at 2800 fps.
 
Posts: 3113 | Location: Southern US | Registered: 21 July 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
No, I certainly don't.
 
Posts: 2627 | Location: Where the pine trees touch the sky | Registered: 06 December 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of vapodog
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Duckear:
"Efficiency" was invented by the guy worried he is losing an argument with another over which cartridge is the best.

This is how to use "efficiency" in a debate:



Guy #1 My .310 Supercool is the best ever! Smiler

Guy #2 Oh yeah? Roll Eyes Well, my .310 Ultrahot gets an extrea 150 fps AND is short enough to use the ever popular 222gr bullet! Big Grin

Guy #1 So what! My .310 Supercool is ..... more efficient. Cool

Guy #2 Confused
Guy #1 dancing


Hope that helps.

Wink


jumping yuck


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 28849 | Location: western Nebraska | Registered: 27 May 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ALF:
There are two efficiencies in internal ballistics:

1. Piezometric efficiency:
2. Ballistic efficiency:

Thank you so much for this post. I was wondering what purpose this thread served, other than Vapo taking a departure from his usually non-contentious personna. Your contribution has redeemed his truancy in my estimation.

Excellent material.


________________________
"Every country has the government it deserves." - Joseph de Maistre
 
Posts: 1184 | Registered: 21 April 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by vapodog:
I read again and again about efficiency.....does anyone really care?

IMO performance is the criteria and efficiency is a very distant issue in the choice of a cartridge/chambering.

Why would anyone give a rats butt about efficiency?


Because guys like me can't understand the logic of having to have a rifle with an MV of 3500 fps, and 4000 ft/lbs of muzzle energy, capable of dropping an elephant at 500 yds, just so I can go out and shoot some 100 lb blacktail at 75 yds....

I handload to tailor my loads to a practical use for what I am using it for... I don't handload to turn a 308 into a 300 Weatherby.

and for varmint guns, I get a rifle set up the way I want it and get the accuracy I want out of it.. I want to keep that barrel on it for as long as possible...

the expense of replacement is secondary to the time involved to get the replacement to get to the point that the other was operating at.
 
Posts: 16144 | Location: Southern Oregon USA | Registered: 04 January 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Alberta Canuck
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by seafire/B17G:

I don't handload to turn a 308 into a 300 Weatherby.

Nor do I, nor did I see Vapo suggest that anywhere either..




I handload to tailor my loads to a practical use for what I am using it for...

You know, that's what Vapo and I both said. We don't pick our cartridges or our loads on the basis of efficiency, but on the basis of what we need to get the job done ethically and humanely. At least I do, and the way I read Vapo and his history here at AR, so does he.

Sometimes that takes a bigger cartridge, not a more efficient one.


My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still.

 
Posts: 9685 | Location: Cave Creek 85331, USA | Registered: 17 August 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
AC,

that was not said with a chip on my shoulder nor said with any malicious intention toward anyone.

if it came across that way, then please accept my apologies...
 
Posts: 16144 | Location: Southern Oregon USA | Registered: 04 January 2005Reply With Quote
<Mike McGuire>
posted
When shooting is no longer a hobby for me and becomes a business I will worry about efficiency.
 
Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of vapodog
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by seafire/B17G:
AC,

that was not said with a chip on my shoulder nor said with any malicious intention toward anyone.

if it came across that way, then please accept my apologies...


No apology required here.....

I think I may have done a poor job of explaining my point and I say this based on reading some of the posts.

It was simply to say that of all the rifles I've ever owned (well past 100 center fires) not a single one of them was purchased for it's efficiency.

Performance has always been the trump card in the decision. Not that it was the best performer but that it was completely adequate for the task intended as a mandatory requirement.

I choose a .30-06 over a .300 magnum but certainly not for efficiency.....

I own a .280 Remington but no 7mm Magnums.....and not because of efficiency.

If efficiency was critical to me then I might have opted for the 7-08........and that's among the few cartridges I've never owned.

I read so often folks claiming "bragging rights" to their "more efficient" cartridge and the whole thing is totally alien to me.....as I said.....it's never been even a small part of the reason I made or bought something.

Years back, I built a 6 X 45 on a mini Mauser action.....not for the efficiency but to get around the law in Minnesota requiring a caliber over .230 for deer. I wanted a ladies rifle of little recoil and extremely light weight. The darn thing simply works great.....love it.... but not because it's efficient!

No big deal....it's merely a term totally missing from my shooting vocabulary and I see others using it with some regularity.

Merely curious why is all!


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 28849 | Location: western Nebraska | Registered: 27 May 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by djpaintles:
More efficient rounds kick less, burn less powder, make barrels last longer, cost less, are quieter, have less muzzle flash, and kill just as well.

So I hunt with a 300 RUM because the bullets go faster Smiler ..................DJ
Big Grin thumb
 
Posts: 9920 | Location: Carolinas, USA | Registered: 22 April 2001Reply With Quote
Moderator
Picture of jeffeosso
posted Hide Post
why efficiency ?
In my cases (pun INTENDED) its a matter of cost and availibility ...

the AR carts all fit in standard length actions, as well as the 550 express, delivering the MV of much longer cases in standard length actions

you can basically build 3 rugers for the price of 1 built winchester actions ...

Since there's no real replacement for displacement, and if you stay more or less "under" bore, the cost of the build drives how many guns you can play with!

Oh, you meant grains burnt for ME? well, the ARs are also efficient that way, too, due to shoulder (vs 458 lott and 470 capstick)


opinions vary band of bubbas and STC hunting Club

Information on Ammoguide about
the416AR, 458AR, 470AR, 500AR
What is an AR round? Case Drawings 416-458-470AR and 500AR.
476AR,
http://www.weaponsmith.com
 
Posts: 40081 | Location: Conroe, TX | Registered: 01 June 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Good job, Duckear. Smiler HC is in the building so it's fixing to turn into a che and pre argument any moment now. Frowner


Aim for the exit hole
 
Posts: 4348 | Location: middle tenn | Registered: 09 December 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
i'm efficient - i shoot up alot of 22's Big Grin
 
Posts: 13466 | Location: faribault mn | Registered: 16 November 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of bartsche
posted Hide Post
thumbNeat thread. Some people really have a naque at the printed word and inteligently get their point accross. beerroger


Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
 
Posts: 10226 | Location: Temple City CA | Registered: 29 April 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of vapodog
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by butchloc:
i'm efficient - i shoot up alot of 22's Big Grin
jumping

agreed....more fun for the dollar than any other cartridge!


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 28849 | Location: western Nebraska | Registered: 27 May 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of someoldguy
posted Hide Post
I just work on being an efficient shooter.


_________________________

Glenn

 
Posts: 942 | Location: Alabama | Registered: 16 July 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of FMC
posted Hide Post
I couldn't give a shit. As long as I get a thwapp where I aimed.............




There are two types of people in the world: those that get things done and those who make excuses. There are no others.
 
Posts: 1446 | Location: El Campo Texas | Registered: 26 July 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Alberta Canuck
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by seafire/B17G:
AC,

that was not said with a chip on my shoulder nor said with any malicious intention toward anyone.

if it came across that way, then please accept my apologies...


And no apology needed here either, Seafire. I KNOW you are one of the good guys who is never malicious.

And best wishes....you getting the same frog-drowner we are today?

AC


My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still.

 
Posts: 9685 | Location: Cave Creek 85331, USA | Registered: 17 August 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of vapodog
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by FMC:
I couldn't give a shit. As long as I get a thwapp where I aimed.............

A bit direct maybe.....but hitting the nail directly on the head!

Love it!


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 28849 | Location: western Nebraska | Registered: 27 May 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
One case that would make sense is the .17 fireball compared to the .17 Remington. Alot more powder and heat, "less barrel life" for not a ton of extra fps.
 
Posts: 656 | Location: Nebraska | Registered: 06 January 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
having given some more thought to this thread and my wife having read it over from her end of the couch [she] came to the conclusion that it [the efficiency thing] is just so's i can shoot more full power loads for less powder. errrr money.
i think she said i was cheap, hard to tell who said it.
it was the oldest daughter her voice sounds like the wifes with those three blankets over her head.
i told her the oil lamp and computer screen puts out plenty of heat and light to do her homework by.
dumb kids don't know how good they got it. we only had one candle for the whole house when i was a kid.
 
Posts: 5003 | Location: soda springs,id | Registered: 02 April 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
the only thing i don't like is when, in the very early morning, my gun goes off and the fire ball lets the game warden know i just shot a deer before the season opened.......that's not very "efficient"
 
Posts: 415 | Location: no-central wisconsin | Registered: 21 October 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of bartsche
posted Hide Post
EekerOH OH ! I remember two efficients. 3 shots 5 quail and 5 hooks 6 rock cod. The Bob Whites were in VA and the fish near Montere.The effiency really kicked in when you measure bites per pound swallowed. fishingroger


Old age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone..
 
Posts: 10226 | Location: Temple City CA | Registered: 29 April 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Rub Line
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ALF:
There are two efficiencies in internal ballistics:

1. Piezometric efficiency:
2. Ballistic efficiency:

Both are important to basic gun design

Piezometric efficiency is defined as the ratio of mean barrel pressure to peak chamber pressure.

The higher the mean barrel pressure the bigger the efficiency.

The practical implication of this is that it means that the position of "burnt" is close to the muzzle thus muzzle blast is high.

It gives high velocities but the regularity of combustion is decreased, thus consistency in precision is less than for guns with relatively lower efficiencies.

The practical application can be found in the naturally occurring selection of calibers for precision shooting that favours smaller cased lower Piezometric efficiency cartridges to large magnum catridges.

In military gun design high peizometric efficiency guns are used in direct line of fire guns ( flat fire trajectory guns) such as tank and anti tank guns where high velocity is sought and regularity is of lesser importance. Low Piezometric efficiency guns are used for extreme long range shooting such as Howitzers, here regularity of combsution is paramount because even small variances in muzzle velocity has huge impact on long range precision.

Ballistic efficiency:

this refers to the ratio of the projectile kinetic energy to the total potential energy of the charge mass.

The practical application of this entails the manipulation of expansion ratio to the type of propellant used to give the best possible velocity from the gun or alternately if the combustion ratio and projectile SD is set how to choose the best possible propellant to give the highest velocity given a set pressure limit.

( this incidently underscores why velocity can be used to deduct what pressure the particular system is operating under)


That's exactly what I wanted to say.


-----------------------------------------------------


Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him. Proverbs 26-4


National Rifle Association Life Member

 
Posts: 1992 | Location: WI | Registered: 28 September 2007Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2  
 

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Rifles  Hop To Forums  Medium Bore Rifles    Why all this "efficiency" concern?

Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia