Guy Neill

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Guy Neill

  • Rank
    Calls Shots
  • Birthday 09/04/1951

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

999 profile views
  1. I don;t recall all the powders I tried some time back, with photos in the dark, but my experience with HS-6 was like a flash bulb going off in front of my face. If I'm remembering right, the Vihtavuori powders were fairly low flash, and I don't recall 231 being too bad. Guy
  2. Never having used one, I'll defer to those with experience with a Ransom rest. Do slower burning powders tend to rotate it more? Or is there a guideline? Thanks. Guy
  3. You may want to shoot for a velocity of 945 fps with your 180gr bullets. This would give a 170 power factor that should be good most anywhere. What online calculators are giving different values? Guy
  4. Trying to use the values listed for Titegroup and WSF, here’s the difference. Using a 3 pound gun and equal velocities of 865 fps for 230 grain bullet, and 5.2 grains of Titegroup and 6.7 grains of WSF. Charge Velocity Recoil Acceleration Force PF Titegroup 5.2 865 5.3 1795740 1834 199 WSF 6.7 865 5.6 1795740 1834 199 Since the bullet is accelerated to the same muzzle velocity, the acceleration value, and subsequent force must be equal. Recoil is in ft-lbs using the gun velocity and mass. Force is in pounds, acceleration is fps2. Power factor is a form of momentum with inconsistent units (grains-feet/second instead of pounds-second) resulting from wv instead of mv. Another aspect of what we feel ins the moment. This is the force times the distance between the bore and our hand. In the case of the Ransom rest, it is the distance between the bore and the pivot point of the rest, likely greater than the distance between the bore and the pivot point of our hand. If, for the sake of argument, we assume the distance between the bore and the pivot point of our hand is one inch, the moment arm would be 153 ft-lbs with the force determined earlier. This seems a lot, but it is applied very briefly (0.0005 seconds). I tend to expect the moment is more a factor in the rotation of the Ransom rest than recoil (though obviously they are not totally unrelated). For equal power factors (resulting in equal force) the rotation should be equal, though there will be variations just as we see in load tests with velocity variations. It seems likely approximations could be calculated, though I find angular calculations more tedious than linear ones and have not pursued it further at this time. While all this is interesting, it still comes down to how the shooter perceives the recoil – the combination if the actual recoil plus the muzzle flip caused from the moment arm. In my own shooting, if I’m doing my part, the load doesn’t seem to matter much other than accuracy. I’ve done some of my best shooting with heavier loads. As such, I select components that are available and satisfactorily economical, develop an accurate load – and go shoot. No particular worry about finding the mathematically lowest recoil load. Others may find they are more prone to the recoil feel and should experiment to see what works for them. Guy
  5. Hatcher states: "Bevis and Donovan, in The Modern Rifle, 1917, state that experiments with a Seibert Velocimeter lead to the conclusion that a value of 4700 may be used for the exit velocity of the gases. Balleisen, in Principles of Firearms, 1945, gives the same figure." Guy Guy
  6. As you quote, the multipliers come from the British Textbook of Small Arms 1929. Hatcher's 4700 value comes from his latter 1950's book. Quickly scanning the book, I do not see teh individual factors as listed by SAAMI, but the statement that the value will be between 1 and 2, to be determined by experiment, but generally as 1.5. It has been said the 4700 value is applicable to artillery, and the 4000 to small arms. I've also seen recommendations to use 2000 for black powder. Which is "best"? I don't know, but as long as one system is used for side by side comparison, it should give a relative comparison. As a comparison, let's look at the aforementioned 20gr bullet at 850 with 5 grains of powders versus a 250gr bullet at 680 fps with 4.2gr of powder. Bullet Bullet Powder Recoil Recoil Recoil Bullet Only Weight Velocity Charge 4700 4000 SAAMI Recoil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 200 850 5.0 4.0 3.8 3.8 3.1 250 680 4.2 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.1 These have equal momentum (power factor) but we see the heavier bullet gives less recoil energy through the use of less powder. Guy
  7. The power factor is a momentum value while recoil is more commonly an energy value. Momentum id mass times velocity. Energy is one-half mass times velocity squared. The value of 4000 for the powder gas velocity is a more recent figure. Hatcher, in his book, listed 4700 for the powder gas. As someone stated, either can be used as it will still rank the relative values. I tend to stay with the 4700 value, since that is what I've been more used to. The powder charge is a significant portion of the recoil. As an example, the recoil due only to the bullet for a 200 grain bullet at 850 fps gives a recoil value of 3.1 ft-lbs. Using 5 grains of powder brings the recoil to 4 ft-lbs, comprising 13% of the total. In rifles the powder may produce more recoil than the bullet. Guy
  8. Be very cautious whacking too hard on a rod down the muzzle. There was a report in the past of a fatality when a shooter tried to remove a cartridge using a rod and the cartridge fired. The theory is that the bullet slipped into the case and the sudden compression of the air in the case heated things up and lit off the powder. This is not all that far-fetched as Daisy at one time marketed a 22 that used caseless ammunition that was fired by a sudden compression of air. You may want to soak the chamber in a penetrating oil as well, giving it time to work it's way around the case before pulling or pushing on the cartridge. If you can slightly heat the chamber area it may also expand the steel slightly - but, obviously, don;t heat it too much or you can light off the powder. Again, be cautious and do not let anyone stand in front of or behind the bore. Guy
  9. Being lead bullets, there could be some possibility that the bullet lube contaminated the powder. It may be lucky you did not stick bullets in the barrel. Today's harder grease lube may not be as prone to this as the older, softer wax type lubes, but i expect there is still some possibility. It you have any remaining, you might pull the bullet on a couple and inspect the powder. Guy
  10. Thanks for all the good wishes. I'm sorry I have not updated things. Loren is presently (and has been for a while) on a hormone treatment that looks to be controlling the cancer. They can't cure it, but they are saying that as long as she's on the medication she can see a fairly normal life. They are both interested in working a stage. They greatly enjoy seeing everyone. She is off oxygen and having her lung drained for quite a while now. She and Tammy are planning to be at the West Coast Steel Championship this year. We did pass on her going to the SHOT Show last week as she had just gotten over pneumonia a week or so before the Show. Guy
  11. Some random things that spring to mind is an ability to easily clear a station in the event of a problem of some sort. (Sort of normal, but your mention of no shell plate makes me wonder a bit if this would be in there as well.) An integral light to permit easily seeing the powder charge would also be useful. How would a primer jam be cleared? Lube points? Easy powder draining from the powder reservoir. Guy
  12. Many years ago here was a unit for the 1911. I believe it originated in California, and was later either acquired or marketed by Springfield Armory.It had a pneumatic unit that replaced the barrel, and, if I recall correctly, a replacement for the mainspring housing. When the trigger released the sear, the mainspring housing portion energized teh barrel unit to cycle the slide. There were tubes carrying CO2 to both, as I recall. Guy
  13. The one with the heavier powder charge would give more recoil. Whether it would be enough for you to feel the difference may or may not be the case. As an example, assuming a 180gr bullet and a 3 pound gun, the 4.3gr load would give 3.7 ft-lbs of recoil energy and the 4.8gr load would give 3.8 ft-lbs. The bullet alone would give you 3.1 ft-lbs, so the remainder is the powder. Guy
  14. Scope adjustments are not always as precise as we may want or expect. Have you tested the scope by shooting the box, as one test? As I see it (and I'm not the sharpest tack for some of this) - if each click amounted to 0.35 MOA, it would put you just over 18 inches - just about where you were hitting - assuming I'm getting it near right. Maybe. Guy
  15. It's not uncommon to cant the gun when shooting weak hand only. It brings the sights to the dominant eye. Guy