Greybeard selling Bellm products?
http://www.handgunhunt.com/forum/messages/394.html

The ONLY reason he is selling it is that he RAN his Mouth so much he will be ridiculed for owning it!!

Cut off his Nose despite his Ugly face.

Fireball

The interesting thing would be to see if he has enough guts to post it for sale in his own clasifieds.

Odds are he hasn't, but I could be wrong.

OH He posted it on his own forum three days ago!
He also did the report on it in his test area.
and also broke his own rules and posted it in the Handgun forum for sale!!
He will just NEVER give Mike any credit.
Fireball

But for grins, compare Bill's test of the .223 Rem VVG barrel against Sean's test of the presumeably inferior, presumeably Wilson blank I kicked back to VVG for not being Shilen as they were touting their barrels to be.

On the assumption that the barrel that VVG chambered and sent to Bill themselves was in fact a Shilen, odds are it has a groove diameter closer to .224" than the presumed Wilson barrel had that I chambered and bought from VVG and that ultimately went to Sean as a "freebie" "test barrel." The "test barrel" that Sean has definitely has a groove diameter larger than .224" and noticebly larger than virtually all of the Shilen barrels I have chambered.

Inspite of its larger diameter, it appears to be outshooting Bill's barrel by a pretty good margin. Could be operator, could be the chamber work..... could even be the oversize hinge pin.

Regardless of whether it is the quality of the product or the quality of the testing being done, it appears that every dog has his day, even the underdog.

I don't have Sean's .223 Rem. Test page url handy, but I'll bet if we said please, he'd post it here. Please, Sean.

He says this is the barrel his rabbit target is from.

Mike

I may not have made it clear, but when I kicked the barrel back to VVG for not being a Shilen barrel, it went back primarily for higher locking bolts since the lock up was quite loose.

I then bought the barrel from VVG instead of their sending it to Bill.

Sean got it for a legitimate "test" because he had proven his abilities on the one hand, and I feel his integrity is above reproach. Plus I felt he was quite deserving of the benefits that accrue from such a test.

We'd have to go back into the chronology of events, but I first pulled the barrel from Bill and handed the project to Sean. The debacle over the make of the blank used ensued, and since I had committed a top quality barrel to Sean first off and delivered a lesser quality barrel in the second place, I owed still owed him a top quality barrel.

To that end, I have bought a Hart blank which will end up in his hands. Thus he will end up with not just one good shooting barrel, but two, the second of which will be a Hart benchrest grade..... not a standard grade Shilen, but a Hart.

Like I said, every dog has his day. Honor and good work does pay.

Sheesh..... that is poetic. Poetic justice?

Mike

Mike,

Thank you for the kind words, and the opportunity to participate in testing such things and furthering our knowledge!

The test is all but complete, and the final files are waiting to be posted and the product tests page updated. Right now all that is there on the .223 Bellm VVCG barrel is this preliminary report, but watch for around teusday-wednsday as the update will be posted then.

BTW, VVCG also provided a wonderful pillar bedded forend for this test, which performed extremely well! It will be included in the writeup

Here is the URL to the page

Product Test: Bellm/VVCG 14" 223 Rem SS Contender Barrel

[ 09-30-2002, 18:15: Message edited by: Sean HHI #7364 ]

Sean, we discussed also the fact that early TC barrels had 1-14" twists as indicated in much of the loading data still in print in loading manuals.

In The Custom Contender Chronicle I used to publish, one issue had extensive .223 Rem. data taken from either a 16 1/2 or 18" barrel, don't remember which it was right off. This barrel had a 1-10 twist and did quite well with a broad range of bullets.

From our recent discussions, it appears that the 1-12" twist rate is adequate, but perhaps not optimum for 55 gr. bullets, true? But properly chambered, 1-12" barrels are capable of better accuracy than the TC factory barrels often deliver.

Your point about 1-9 or 1-10" twist is probably quite valid.

I'll point out also that bullets as light as the 40 gr. Sierra hollow point were tested in the 1-10" twist barrel, and inspite of the twist rate being extremely fast for a 40 gr. bullet, it shot extremely well.

It also shot up through 69 gr. Hornady boattail HP match bullets quite well while Hornady recommended a 1-9" twist for this particular bullet.

We may come to the conclusion that for general use across the board with bullets through 55 gr. you are quite right about the optimum twist rate being 1-9 or 1-10." Note also, for example, that other manufacturers such as Ruger (their No. 3 rifle sticks in my mind) use 1-10" twist for .223 Rem.

TC has chosen to keep their stock of barrel blanks down to an absolute minimum of skus, thus as the short sighted people they are, they use the same 1-12" twist for everything .22 cal. from .22 rimfire mag through .223 Rem. They won't stock and use 1-15 or 1-16" twist for .22 mag, or .22 Hornet, nor will they stock and use anything faster than 1-12" for .223 Rem. It is a one size fits all, inspite of the fact that .223 Rem is one of the very most popular rounds today and should be a mainstay/hallmark cartridge for the company, a real "cash cow." Instead, they leave the niche to be filled by the custom makers.

I'm anxious to see the full report on the VVG barrel after our many conversations. I think I see a third barrel on the horizon for testing.

Mike

I'm having a hard time with the statement that a 12" twist rate is not optimum for a 55gr bullet. While I understand my experience my be only an isolated case, I also have experiences from a few other friends to draw upon.

I've got two factory .22 centerfire barrels (.22 Hornet 10", .223 Rem 14"). Thus far, my Hornet shoots best with a 55gr Sierra BT with a reduced load no less! I couldn't get lighter bullets to shoot worth a hoot in a couple range sessions. Of course I didn't try every combination, but when I ran across a load that puts 5 shots under .75" @ 100yds I'd rather spend my time shooting that working up more loads! My .223 Rem gave me perfectly acceptable results with a Hornady 53gr match bullet with 50yd results of .25"; 100yd group size of .75"; 1" @ 150yds.

As a side note, I was able to get groups of around 1.5" from my Hornet while using 60gr cast bullets. While this isn't great, that wasn't a fully developed load as I only tried one powder and two different charge weights. I think that is enough to at least indicate that there may be potential there worth exploring.

I am aware of some others who were able to obtain pretty good results (not sure of exact quantification of results) by using a 63gr Sierra SMP in their 12" twist Hornet. It apparently was grouping well enough to be considered for use in 200m half-scale silhouette events.

While my mind is not closed to the fact that 10" may be better for 55gr bullets, I don't believe it as I have not encountered any problems. I would suspect that faster twist rates for the .223 might have more to do with trying to make it compliant to the NATO spec ammo which uses 62gr bullets I think.

B_Koes

Greetings! Interesting experiences you have had. In my experience, in the .223 1-12" twist for 55grn and over bullet weights is not OPTIMUM, though it may be *adequate*. It will work for 55grn, certainly, but again, in my experience, a 1-10" or 1-9" twist rate is more FAVORABLE for these heavier weight bullets. During my testing, 55grn stuff was grouping right at .75 to 1.50 or more at 100yards for me, while 40-45grn selections did .25-.125 on a regular basis at the same distance under the same conditions.

This VVCG barrel liked a much wider variety of bullet selections than my factory 223 barrel of same length, yet it acted almost identically so far as an exponential decrease in accuracy was concerned with bullet weights over 55grn, with 62grn military ammo going over 2-3" at 100 and 69grn Black Hills match ammo actually key-holing 25yrds from the muzzle.

The 1-12" twist rate of this and my other Contender 223 barrel seems OPTIMUM for 50grn and under, with 40-45grn weights exhibiting the best groups.

For what it is worth, I believe there to be a difference between what is adequate , passable, or sufficient and what is optimum or superlative, and in my experiences with the .223, 1-10� to 1-9� twist rates are optimum for 55-69grn bullet weights, and 1-8� to 1-� for 69-80grn.

So how to explain some barrels that group tighter such as your Hornet that shoots best with a 55gr Sierra BT with a reduced load?

A few possibilities come to mind [just some theories mind: we may actually find a DIFFERENT ANSWER, OR NONE AT ALL!]� one is that bore dimensions are tighter + rifling cut a bit deeper yet with a tight groove diameter to produce a superior purchase upon the bullet and thus impart the spin more efficiently than a bore cut to size or slightly over.

This is something I plan to test further when I receive the .223 Hart match grade barrel Mike is making, as I trust that it�s bore will not be slightly oversize as this bore was. When Mike cut the chamber and throat for this VVCG barrel, his 224" throat reamer left a fair amount of rifling standing in the throat area, indicating the groove diameter is significantly larger than .224." Perhaps this plays a part in the overall picture by not allowing for a sufficient grip upon the heavier bullets to impart the proper RPMS? If so, then ALL of my factory .223 barrels must have the identical condition, as none of them particularly like 55grn bullets [again, some were adiquate but not OPTIMUM, and most of my factory .223 barrels would not hold better than 1" at 100yards, which is not up to par for a serious varmint barrel] and anything 69grn or heavier keyholes the target.

Time and more data and testing will perhaps tell

Sean,

You may be right. Heck I'm not an expert and I can honestly say that I'm not concerned with going to the Nth degree of accuracy. Generally I find load development so time consuming that I go with the first load that I find that meets or exceeds my requirements. Fortunately I haven't really had to work that hard to find a load for my factory barrels. I must admit that I was getting a little discouraged with my Hornet as I ran through 10-15 different loads of 4 different powders and nothing was below 2" @ 100yds. Then I tried a suggested load from a buddy and viola I got my .5-.75" so I quit!

You are describing accuracy differences that I don't even consider. I look forward to seeing more information from you because I just don't have the patience to try to squeeze an extra .125" out of a load. Heck, maybe we can all learn something that will make us better and more accurate shooters.

In standard chambers where the throat is normally cut about .001" larger than bullet diameter, I think that much of the inaccuracy that occurs in oversize groove diameter barrels is due to the bullet not entering the rifled part straight. If it goes in canted, it will be deformed and not turning on its geometric axis.

When I chamber using a tight tolerance throat reamer that leaves some rifling standing in the throat area, the tops of the rifling in this area are there to align and support the bullet as it engraves.

In the equal land and groove factory barrels, pre-fire and 6mm and larger, there remains essentially 50% of the circumference of the bullet fully supported by the tops of rifling still standing. It is somewhat less in the .22s with narrower rifling, but still a substantial surface area to support the bullet.

Whether the bullet skids entering the rifling in a barrel with an oversize groove diameter or not, I do not know. Sean could have something in this regard. Comparing the barrel he has now with one made from a Hart blank may not be too valid since the Hart will not only be closer to actual .224" diameter as noted, but it will have nearly perfect consistency of diameter end to end and a beautifully lapped interior.

To fairly test Sean's thesis, the barrels would have to be the same in all respects except for the groove diameter in order to do a valid test of that one variable.

I, too, find the 55 gr. load in the Hornet shooting that well a surprise, even if it had a perfect chamber and throat plus an "on size" groove diameter.

I have always had a fixation with Contender carbines, and one I shot quite a bit many years ago was a .223 Rem. with a 1-12" twist. I was not trying for guilt edge accuracy with it, but nonetheless shot and hunted with bullets as heavy as the 70 gr. Speer, which it shot pretty well. I don't recall now what it did with 55s.

I think the jury is still out in regard to the 1-12" twist, and the verdict will likely favor the twist rate that will MOST consistently give good performance for the vast majority of shooters.

Fishing back in my memory of events back in the early 60s when my uncle was working extensively with military contracts in the test cell at the Winchester/Western Ammunition plant in East Alton, IL, I believe he told me back then that the government requirement for the ammunition was a 1" group at 200 yards. This was for the early M-16s which were made with 1-12" twist rates. And of course, later the twist rates were tightened up quite a bit, even before the heavier bullets were adopted I believe. We'd need to get an AR-15/M-16 historian on board to verify this. But nonetheless, 1-12" was at the time considered at least satisfactory for the long, pointed 55 gr. military ball boat tail bullets. Time and history eventually favored a faster twist rate.

One shot at a time, it still may favor a faster twist rate in the TCs.

We are just trying to get a better handle on the issue of reports of factory barrels not shooting anything over about 50 gr. So, B_Koes, your input definitely is appreciated especially since it does not agree with what appears to be at least a plurality of shooters. Then again, happy campers like you may simply not be speaking up as much as the disgruntled ones.

The quest continues....

Mike

The science of twist rates does not seem to be a commonly known fact among the shooting community. I certainly cannot claim to have a lock on this knowledge and I've seen/heard it debated far too often so I know that there is not a firm "general consensus". I've seen many references to the Greenhill formula when discussing twist rates, but I do not give it much creedence because it seems to "require" faster twist rates for a given bullet than my experience tells me is adequate. So I guess the real question is "What distinguishes acceptable and optimum?"

Regarding the use of 55gr bullets in 12" twist Hornet barrels, this is a very common practice as the Hornet is currently THE choice of IHMSA Field Pistol and NRA Hunter Pistol shooters. It seems split evenly between local IHMSA shooters who shoot 50gr & 55gr bullets from their Hornets. I know that some of them have the old octagon barrels so 55gr bullets are really out of the question since they have a 14" twist (or so I'm told). I would have to say that MOST of the guys with the 12" twist barrels are using 55gr bullets with good success, but again that really only points to the fact that it is *adequate* for the task. I should also point out that the velocity ranges are generally between 1600-2000fps to provide ample power without damaging targets.

I'm also curious now to find out if the twist rate of the M-16 was reduced before the specification for heavier bullets (ie 62gr) was implemented. I know that my Ruger Mini-14 was sold with a 10" twist rate back in the early 80's and I think that was before I read about the heavier bullets being used in military rounds.

Anyway, I've got a couple more Hornet barrels in storage. This discussion makes me want to break them out to test the effectiveness of 55gr bullets compared to lighter ones. Maybe that will make a nice late fall project or perhaps early spring.

The quest does indeed continue...

Ref. the Greenhill formula, there are situations that do not match this model.

What we fail to take into account is the degree of yaw the bullet starts out with. The more yaw, the faster it must spin to overcome the yaw, it appears.

Without crunching the numbers, the Greenhill probably says you need a 1-10" twist to stabilize a 180 gr. .30 cal. bullet, yet experience and at least one incident that sticks in my mind do not bear this out.

The incident I'm thinking of was a report by one of the better custom rifle gunsmiths a generation or two back that was shooting 180 gr. bullets very accurately from I believe he stated a 1-16" twist. Whatever it was, it was inordinately slow for the round and the bullet. This led me to think that if you can get the bullet out of the barrel with the least disturbance at the crown, it has a better chance of stabilizing sooner.

Those shooting Don Bower's .30 Alaskan, which is typically done in 1-14" twist barrels, often report the same size or smaller groups at 500 yards than they can get at 100 yards, suggesting it takes a substantial distance before the bullet is stabilized from this slow rate of twist.

Best analogy I have seen is a child's top. Spin it, drop it on the table, and it wobbles around for awhile, then it reaches a point where it just sits there spinning motionless in regard to its axis moving about. I think bullets do the same thing.

Back to your Hornet.... I don't understand Greenhill very well. You can speed bullets up and they require less rotation with increases in velocity to be stable, yet in some applications, you have to spin bullets faster when the velocity is reduced. At the speeds you are working with the Hornet, it would seem a faster twist yet would be needed.

One question, and excuse me if you stated it already, but are you shooting longish spitzer boattails or shorter flat based bullets in the Hornet's 1-12" twist. The 12" twist would tend to favor shorter length bullets according to Greenhill.

I don't live in a world of higher math, but I know that Don Shearer does, and I believe he has worked with the Greenhill calculations. Any comments, Don?

Mike

Sean - I did not mention earlier that the Hornet barrel that I've been referring to is actually the one that I bought from you that you said was a display model for you. It has proven to be a real shooter...quite possibly just because you "laid hands upon it!"

Guys,
I've been soaking up your last 9 posts on twist rates and bullet stabilization-Keep writing!
Thanks
xphunter

[/qb][/QUOTE]I am using boattail bullets. Sierra's 55gr SBT to be exact. You can see a picture of it on Sierra's website, but they don't have the long tapered tail like I'm used to on my Lapua 108gr 6.5mm bullets or other match type bullets.

Regarding the mathmatics of spin, I happened across a thread in another forum (Reloading I think it was but it was on this site) and it had a reference to a very interesting site that described bullet stabilization very well. Almost too well for me to really understand. Your top analogy seems to fit the scenario of an overstabilized bullet.

Added later...

http://www.nennstiel-ruprecht.de/bullfly/index.htm

It was actually the benchrest forum. Check this out for probably the most technical explaination of bullet stabilization you have seen.[/QB][/QUOTE]

I am familiar with the 55 gr. Sierra BT bullet, which is fairly long.

Hey, that site cited above is AWESOME. That one will take some time to ingest.

A big thanks for the url.

Mike

Hey guys. Just wanted to let you know the link to Graybeards message is dead; I deleted it at his request after he didn't care for the results. We also had a few words to clear the air and I don't think he'll be back to HandgunHunt.com either.

Best Regards,
Gary Smith

I too have been reading with great interest about the use of different bullets discussed here for the .223 Remington in Contenders. For the past day I have been reflecting on my experiences with different bullet weights in Contenders as well.

For the most part, I have never gotten really great accuracy out of any 55gr. Bullets in the Contender either. However this didn't concern me too much as I have never been able to shoot them to what I felt was enough velocity to warrant their use, and to get them to expand reliablly on Prairie Dogs at longer ranges.

I have been able to obtain the best accuracy in the several different .223 Contenders that I have had with 40gr. Nosler Ballistic Tips. With this bullet I have come to favor either H-4198SC or IMR-4198, and have been able to get some really decent velocity from these loads. I have also used both H-322 & W-748 as well, but the 4198's have produced better velocity and accuracy for me.

Prior to shooting the 40gr. Nosler Ballistic Tips I always relied on two different bullets. One was the Speer 52gr. Flat Base Hollow Point (the one with the huge hollow point). These have been very accurate with either H-322 or W-748 for me. This bullet is also super explosive on Prairie Dogs. Another bullet I have shot a lot of, and obtained really good accuracy is the 50gr. Winchester Pointed Soft Point loaded with H-322 powder.

Good conversation.

Larry

Hey Gary....glad to see you posting here!!! For those that don't know, Gary is the owner of a handgun hunting board that has been around quite awhile. You might want to check it out.....

http://www.handgunhunt.com/