Something I have come to understand once I got off of the "speed uber alles" race horse, is that there can be more to increased velocity than just 'speed'. And I'm not talking about kinetic energy. Much.

If you can get your bullet going faster with the same charge of the same powder, OR, you can get your bullet going just as fast with less powder, then you are 'improving' the performance of your firearm.

It's easy to assume that such endeavors are based on a desire for SPEED. That's NOT the case!

Within reason, I couldn't care less about 'speed' (OR "TRAJECTORY"). What I care about is DELIVERED ENERGY. BUT...

To deliver the most energy to the animal, you have to maximize speed, but you have to keep pressure down below SOME threshold! Because I shoot "old" and "big around", that pressure threshold is fairly low in comparison to the current vogue of 'supermagnimitis'. If you can maintain the same speed with a lower charge of the same powder, you have lowered the PRESSURE! THAT'S the goal I am after these days.

Put differently, it's the 'best' speed (in a barrel harmonics/timing context) at the lowest pressure that I'm after.

If I was after speed alone, I wouldn't care what the max pressure was. That's the raison d'etre of all of the supermagnumitis rounds produced today.

So... My interest in "moly" and "lube" is NOT to squeeze an extra 100 f/s out of a given round. I've got ALL KINDS of pressure headroom that would allow me to do that if speed was all I was interested in. What I'm "interested" in is keeping the velocity I have while lowering the pressure. That's 100% a function of reducing friction. We can reduce friction by "lubing" (moly or "grease"), or by changing the bearing surface - like 'ribs' on the bullet. It appears that both moly and grease require way too much effort for the potential gain. These days, I'm more interested in REDUCING effort than increasing it!

Paul

Paul, THAT is also the reason I moly coated a few  bullets when I was looking for the max. speed I could get in the 22/6mm AI using 80 grain bullets & the 17/225 Winchester. Moly made little or no difference that I could detect. Now that I found out what I wanted to know, I have little interest in the project. In the 22/6mm AI best accuracy was obtained at considerably less than maximum  velocity.  .......Paul H

QuoteIn the 22/6mm AI best accuracy was obtained at considerably less than maximum velocity.

With all the fiddling around I've done with QuickLOAD AND live-fire, I think I understand the cause for why the above statement is often true. It's the relationship between pressure, velocity, and the barrel length. The barrel length is a significant factor when trying to keep pressure down and velocity up.

When Ol' John created the .338 MAI and made a rifle for each of us, I 'ordered' a 24" barrel, and John made his 26". I wasn't worried about the extra speed I would get out of the extra two inches of barrel. What I didn't consider, because I was unaware of it at the time, was the speed/pressure relationship. Turns out, 26" is a much better barrel length for that cartridge than 24" is, IF YOU WANT TO KEEP THE MAX PRESSURE BELOW THE CIP SPEC OF 56,565 PSI FOR THE '98 MAUSER ACTION AND 8X57 CARTRIDGE.

I had no problem with running the pressure up to 56565 PSI in my rifle. The 'problem' arose when I started looking at the timing of the bullet's exit from the muzzle. Because the timing was different on John's rifle due to the extra two inches of barrel, I could get his rifle on a timing node, while still being UNDER the 56565 PSI pressure ceiling. I could NOT do that on my rifle. Which means that in order for me to get "on node", AND BE UNDER THE PRESSURE CEILING, I have to LOWER THE MUZZEL VELOCITY rather significantly.

In my rifle the most accurate loads (on node loads), were significantly slower than out of John's rifle, while the most accurate loads in his rifle (same bullet), were at a highter MV simply because I could reach the next higher timing node with John's 26" barrel BEFORE I HIT THE PRESSURE CEILING.

Here's the point: It is absolutely true that some rifles demonstrate the best precision with muzzle velocities well below "max". If that same rifle had a longer barrel, it's likely that it would achieve the same level of precision at a higher MV due to the harmonic timing of the longer barrel allowing the bullet to get on a timing node without exceeding the spec on max pressure.

Paul

Paul, the barrel length of the 22/6mm AI is 28 inches & fairly heavy. I never really liked it because of the long barrel.  The barrel is still around here somewhere. It has a 9 inch twist. .....Paul H

I haven't posted on the forearm shaping for a bit. It's tough (for me anyway) to take pictures and "do". Most of the 'doing' is pretty boring anyway. Regardless, While I still have a lot left to do, I thought I'd post some pictures and solicit comments, NOT praise. This is the birch, practice forearm. I've got a little more shaping to do on it. I'm not finished with the schnable shaping and there is some fine tuning on the main body. There's a bit of 'belly' that I'm not too fond of, but there isn't a lot I can do about it. The attachment screw is right where that belly starts, and because of the inletting for the hanger I can't really thin that out any more and have any substantive "meat" for the screw head to seat against. So in large part, what you see is close to the final shape.

This first image is just the "side view". It's tough to get lighting 'right' on wood. Especially, pieces that contrast as much as the birch and black and white ebony.


Here's the "bottom view". I forgot to take a "top view". I'll get that when it's finished.


Here's the first attempt to show the "flame" of the birch. It will look good when it has been stained and finished.


Here is an attempt to show the flame a little more.


I'll finish fine tuning the shaping, sand to probably no finer than 320, (but I might go to 400 on the ebony), then seal the grain with shellac, stain (probably something like "pecan"), and then finish with Linspeed or Birchwood Casey's stock finish.



Paul

I just got an idea...

There is a store in Anchorage named "The Fur Factory". It's been in business for a LONG time, maybe before statehood. It is a place I tell people to go when they ask me "Where can I get some Alaskana to take home?" This store has the REAL Alaskan 'stuff', not the tourist stuff. Sue and I were in there on Wednesday, and I was rootin' around the antler, horn, whalebone, and walrus 'pieces'. We got a couple of pieces. Some antler tines for Sue to make ear-ring and pendants with, and I got some walrus and whalebone pieces. The walrus jaw for forearm end-pieces and  the whale rib to send to England for knife scales or whatever.

I was just looking at the above pictures and thinking about the "screw issue" and it first occurred to me that I could reinforce the 'belly' of the forearm by putting a plate of antler or whalebone on the underside. A piece large enough to checker. Then I thought about the inserts in the Ruger Model 77 "paddle" stock, and thought it might be very cool to inlay some whale bone or walrus bone or even moose antler or sheep horn in the side of the forearm and checker those pieces too. Those pieces would be glued in place, not screwed in like on the Ruger stock.

I'm going to have to give that some serious thought. I'll be practicing my checkering on bone.

Paul

Love that schnable...

Paul, that looks really good. Nicely proportioned & shaped. The schnable is the same as I would shape it. I think I would thin it down a bit in the tip area but it looks good just as it is. I always liked the shape of fore ends on old '99 Savage rifles & most SS rifles look good with that fore end shape. It adds class to the gun that you don't find on a gun any more. Especially modern factory guns. The Ruger "schnable" fore end is NOT a true schnable. It's ugly too. With that birchwood stock & fore end you don't need a persimmon stock. You can justly be proud of the birch.   ......Paul H

I like your idea for some bone inlay.....is it hard to checker? My thought are probably not. You may want to order new checkering tips from Brownells.....I just changed mine and I couldn't believe the difference......like night and day! I only use the straight fine and medium pointing 90 deg. tips which are all I use these days.

Quote from: Paul HoskinsThe Ruger "schnable" fore end is NOT a true schnable. It's ugly too.

Couldn't agree more!

Thanks for the compliments and suggestions, guys. The schnable is going to get the most significant work. I already fixed the 'wows' in the birch part. I may have to wait for a specific file to finish the schnable. I could simply use dowels and sandpaper, but it's so much nicer to work with a good file/rasp.

I'm going to the Homeless Despot today and see if they have any analine dies. If they do, I'll practice on the scrap pieces that came off of the butt blank and try to get a color that I like. The sapwood of the birch is just a little too light for my tastes, and it seems exaggerated against the BWE. Anyway, I'm almost finished. Not thinking that the 'practice' piece might turn out good enough to use, I ordered only one escutcheon and screw. I think I'll save that for the persimmon, and order another for the birch. I'm waiting to fit the escutcheon until I am completely finishes with the shaping and right before putting the finish on.

It's surprising how little 'meat' there is left on this forearm. The inletting for the 'hanger' takes a lot of the guts out of it. Inlaying an antler insert might be a bit tricky, and at the moment, I'm not sure whether it would weaken or strengthen the forearm.

I think antler - the outside of an antler - may be 'hard' with respect to checkering. Walrus and whale bone, (the dense parts), are much like ivory in density. I THINK they will be relatively easy to checker. I'll be practicing on some pieces I have while I wait for the files to come in the mail.

Paul

That Schnabel really is awesome Paul!




I'd say: "You make a nice schnabel."

But that sounds kinda weird and I wouldn't want anyone taking it the wrong way.
:D

Quote from: Jamie.270But that sounds kinda weird and I wouldn't want anyone taking it the wrong way.

Paul

PS - You spelled it correctly, Jamie.270. I looked at that when I wrote it the first time and said to myself, "That's not the correct GERMAN spelling", but when I looked it up, the first place I looked spelled it with the "e" and "l" backwards, so I wrote it wrong in spite of 'knowing' better. Won't happen again. At least not for a while.

Paul

In truth, in the old days I always had to think of "Schnitzel" and "Strudel" to remember the correct way.
Us Yanks tend to do to el/le what Joe Bloggs and his UK friends do with er/re.


I didn't mean to correct anyone's spelling when I wrote it.  My typing skills are so poor I rarely correct anyone's spelling on purpose anymore.
When my typos are involved, it matters not whether I know how to spell correctly.
 It still looks/reads like a moron wrote it.

Paul

There ya go Jamie, I corrected my initial 'bel' to 'ble' as I noticed Paul's spelling.....cannot win sometimes!