|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 27, 2024, 01:11 AM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: April 24, 2024
Posts: 29
|
The AR as originally presented
Have any of you ever tried building an original spec 1/14 rate barrel with 40gr bullets as it was presented to Curtis Lemay?
If so, what are your thoughts? Would you rather have that than a 1/12 (or any other rate) along with the other bullet weights or does the tumble on impact make it worth the limitations? |
April 27, 2024, 07:22 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 396
|
No.
The twist rate and grain never caused twist. Urban legend. |
April 27, 2024, 07:35 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 16, 2012
Location: ME
Posts: 772
|
I bought an H&R 604 clone… Air Force rifle. Lightweight, accurate and handy.
Options for twist were 1:12” and 1:7”. I got 1:7” because the lightest I shoot is 55 grain… with heavier being more used. Why set up a gun to a twist rate for ammo I’d never use when I can get one that uses the standard for what is currently shot? It isn’t like you can see the differences visually. |
April 27, 2024, 08:06 AM | #4 | |
Member
Join Date: April 24, 2024
Posts: 29
|
Quote:
The man himself said the 40gr combined with the 1/14 twist rate caused the extreme tumble, initially was against the change to 1/12 & 55gr. |
|
April 27, 2024, 08:14 AM | #5 | |
Member
Join Date: April 24, 2024
Posts: 29
|
Quote:
|
|
April 27, 2024, 05:03 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 8,332
|
Interarms Mini Mauser
Can't speak to a 1-14" twist, but..........
I have a Mini-Mauser bolt rifle that I believe is twisted 1-12" and have a load using the 40 gr V-Max Hornady bullet, selected because the rifle for whatever reason, delivers relatively low velocities with heavier bullets (52-55 grains) despite its 20" bbl. The 40 grain pill with modest charges is faster than the 52 MHP I wanted to use. Additionally, it actually groups better (at 100). I expect great results on varmints. |
April 27, 2024, 05:30 PM | #7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,575
|
Quote:
|
|
April 27, 2024, 09:26 PM | #8 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,911
|
Quote:
LeMay was in a bind, his security forces used the M1 carbine. The Army was dropping the carbine. That meant no more carbines or parts for LeMay's SAC guards and SPs. HE thought the AR 15 would be an adequate replacment. When he pitched the idea, the "whiz kids" in the MacNamara defense dept thought it would be a good choice for the general service rifle. Factions in the Army objected to that. They got a requirement in the specs that the .222 Rem could not meet. They hoped this would kill the entire idea. It didn't. A different faction created the 5.56 (.223) which could meet the spec and fit in the AR 15, and that was what the Army was required to adopt. The original AR 15s don't have all the features of the M16A1 or later variants. The triangle handguards, the three prong "wait a minute" flash suppressor, NO forward assist, no brass deflector block, and no "fence" guards around the magazine catch. These are the primary differences. There are a few others...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
April 28, 2024, 09:23 AM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 21, 2012
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 3,990
|
Personally, never shot one. But the idea of a bullet that is on the razors edge of being stable so that, with FMJ ammo, it should destabilize and tumble after striking a target, seems like a VERY limited use case with a LOT of drawbacks.
Using Bergers bullet stability calculator here https://bergerbullets.com/twist-rate-calculator/ gave me a stability of 0.939, with anything under 1.0 being unstable. For data I used the 40g v-max BC of .2 https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1165189058?pid=692022 Caliber .224 weight 40g Length .686 https://jbmballistics.com/ballistics....shtml#Hornady Velocity, 3650fps https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1836223300?pid=533596 Twist rate 1:14 air temp 59F Altitude 0 Berger quantifies stability using this scale based on their calculations under 1.0 unstable 1.0 to 1.5 marginally stable 1.5 or more comfortably stable using the bullet above changing the twist rates 1:14 0.939 1:12 1.28 1:9 2.27 1:8 2.88 1:7 3.76
__________________
I don't believe in "range fodder" that is why I reload. Last edited by Shadow9mm; April 28, 2024 at 09:32 AM. |
April 28, 2024, 10:02 AM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,575
|
Interesting, considering that a .222 is darned accurate with a 52 gr SMK at 3200 fps from a 14 twist even though the calculated stability is only 1.11.
The story at the time was that the cheap 55gr FMJ BT was not stable or accurate in cold weather testing. As Jeff Cooper put it, rumor has it that it gets cold in Germany. So they increased the twist from varmint rifle 14 to service rifle 12. An old gunzine showed an M16 with an early tubular free float foreend and a 10 twist barrel. Work done by the USMC to try to squeeze some accuracy out of M193 hardball. Of course now everybody shoots non-GI match ammo in their "service rifles." Last edited by Jim Watson; April 28, 2024 at 10:09 AM. |
April 28, 2024, 10:03 AM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,475
|
Quote:
On the other hand, it won't keep 62gr green tipped rounds inside a one foot circle at 50 yards. For some people that would be a considerable drawback. If I had to find and shoot only 40gr rounds for a barrel, I'd find that unduly limiting.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
April 28, 2024, 03:29 PM | #12 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,911
|
Quote:
Yes, the bullet will tumble after impact. EVERY BULLET LONGER THAN IT IS WIDE DOES THAT! What differs is the degree of yaw, how soon (in terms of distance traveled) it happens, and how noticeable it is. The .26-.32 caliber bullets used by the world's militaries for most of the major 20th century wars all tumble after impact. Eventually. If they aren't stopped by something before full tumble happens. Those long, heavy "stable" bullets still tumbled. The difference being it mostly happened AFTER the bullet exited the enemy soldier's bodies, so no one really SAW it happen. The short, light .224 frequently tumbled while it was going through the enemy. This did cause wounds out of proportion to its small diameter, and this factor was seized upon by advocates of the small round, and this became the myth that it was designed to do that, rather than what it really was, a fortuitous benefit of physics. The round and its rifling were designed to be accurate. The rapid tumbling after impact was an unexpected military benefit, claimed to have been the idea all along. Take a look at the history, people were shooting .22 centerfires for some decades before the .223 came along. NEVER any mention of the tumbling and how it enhanced the wounding effect. Why not?? Couple of reasons. First, no one was shooting people (enemy soldiers) with .22 centerfires. Second, what they were shooting were varmint bullets, intended to expand rapidly (even explosively) on targets with very light resistance, compared to the human body or big game animals. There were some "big game" (deer, primarily) bullets, and no mention of their "tumbling" is found in period literature, either. The other "myth" one frequently hears about the 5.56mm is that its "horrific wounding power" actually makes it a more effective military round because a wounded soldier takes 2-3 other soldiers "out of the fight" to care for the wounded man. Sure, that happens, sometimes, WE DO THAT, and so do many nations, who have the resources, and care about individual soldier's health. Doesn't work that way when the enemy doesn't fight the way we do. Nations that treat their troops as cannon fodder, and also those "insurgent" groups without the resources to care for their troops the way we do, generally don't take many, if any guys "out of the fight" to care for their wounded. What frequently happens is the wounded get what care is available, if they are still alive AFTER the fighting is over.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
April 28, 2024, 04:33 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 18,575
|
Early smokeless military bullets were jacketed roundnose, as used for deep straight penetration on megafauna. The British went through a whole series of expanding bullets for “stopping power” against enraged savage tribesmen. Those were barred by The Hague conventions. But they and everybody else had the last laugh when spitzers became standard.
|
May 1, 2024, 11:42 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 29, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,350
|
Very informative discussion! I learned a few things. Thx. I only shoot 1:8 and 1:7 barrels in ARs so none of this has been relevant to me. But it is fascinating to read the background.
|
May 1, 2024, 07:45 PM | #15 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,911
|
For those of us who lived through the havoc created by the MacNamra defense dept, and its aftermath, most of the memories are more bitter than sweet.
The nickname "whiz kids" was not given out of admiration, rather the opposite. If the whiz kids every had any really good ideas, I don't recall what they were. Seemed like about everything they wanted done wasn't a good idea (though it could be done) and I remember some that were barking stupid. Don't know if they were Lord of the Rings fans, or even if they knew the stories existed, but they were hard into "One Ring to Rule them ALL" as a concept. They pushed hard to get the military all using the same equiptment, one rifle, one plane, etc. On paper that looks good, in the real world, not so much. One fellow I remember reading claimed that the MacNamara Defense Dept actually took more weapons and weapon systems out of action than a Soviet nuclear first strike would have. That's probably overstating things a bit, but most of us felt it wasn't all that far off. There are probably entire books written about the actions and the power struggles that went on between various factions in the military and the govt during those years. One thing I do know, with certainty is that the poor line troops were "lab rats" having each new idea tested on us, and blamed if we couldn't make it work, by one group and blamed by another faction if we could make it work, no matter how badly it did work. And, tragically, soldiers were killed and injured that didn't need to be, while the various factions did things to "prove their point". The story of the M16 isn't the only place this happened, but its probably the best known and most tragic.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
Tags |
bullet weight , original ar , twist rate |
|
|