When I took the time to look at SAAMI specs and ran the numbers for various .277 cartridges, I was surprised that most of the barrels that I have seen are undersized. Virtually all the .277's call for a 25/75 land-to-groove ratio. The only significantly different one was the new 6.8 Western, and it called for a 33/67 ratio which is still considered a "thin land" design.I'm thinking more along the lines of a 5R or 3R with a .090 freebore and a pressure reducing land/groove ratio.
The whole 'twist" of this story in its intent was just to say the 6.8 does not get hampered by a change of 1:10 to 1:9This thread is rapidly spinning off topic.
With all due respect to Litz, he just simply states bullets that are over spun do not fly nose high. His explanation says the same laws of physics do not apply to bullets as to artillery shells. Huh? When asked a string of serious questions to back up his statement, he uses a somewhat rambling analogy of a spinning top. The spinning top analogy actually points to the opposite of his claims. I do understand it is fashionable in this political climate to make a statement as fact with no real proof to back it up. I’m not saying his statement isn’t true, he just offers no real proof to back it up.
6.8 projectiles do have enough “power” to self destruct when over spun by 100,000 rpm. Ask Any machinist what level of damage can happen when objects are over spun buy just a couple thousand RPM. I have had 444 Marlin bullets self destruct when going from 1:36 to 1:12 twist. While the Marlin bullet is much bigger than a 6.8, it is certainly not an artillery shell. The energy in a spinning bullet can be greater than the energy of forward flight. This is especially true down range where the spin does not degrade like the forward velocity of the bullet.
Maybe a separate thread should be spun off to discuss bullet spin and gyroscopic affects?
There has been a big shift towards 10-11" 5.56 rifles in the last few years, MK18 type builds. More suppressor brands are starting to offer better flowing cans for gas guns to mitigate blow back that we normally fight with agb's, special carriers and gas tubes. One of those might be my next purchase..I don't have a a good feel for the market, though, so does shortening the barrel with the expectation that it will appeal to people with suppressors seem like a good idea?
Ain’t you a punny guy.😉The whole 'twist" of this story in its intent was just to say the 6.8 does not get hampered by a change of 1:10 to 1:9
Hardly enough to initiate projectile destruction in the 6.8 or an accuracy reducing effect.
However enough to add more terminal damage to the intended target.
Although the topic does get continually spun out of its original intent.
I think with most of the statements Litz makes these days they are back up by the degree of research and equippment they are using.
Like doppler radar and high speed imaging which has came a long way in the last ten years.
But who know, maybe his opinions are twisted and spun out of context.
My own comments about an increase in terminal performance come from testing Xman did that showed a difference between 1:11.5 twist barrels and 1:10 twist barrels at the same velocity with a given projectile. Ironically he also said that while most all monolithics showed a noticable increase in terminal performance the CBB's showed very little. Apparently they dont need it.
SO perhaps bolt gun from a fairly big name company with a SAAMI improved chamber and a 1:9.5 twist and an 18 or 20in barrel would help the 6.8.
It certainly wouldnt hurt. Which does twist it right back to the topic of this thread. YMMV
I believe Litz was using the top analogy for visualization purposes.Ain’t you a punny guy.😉
From what I saw, in Litz’s FB post he had a picture of something computer generated. Computer programs are only as good as the understanding of the programer and the data collected and applied. From my experience, super computers are needed when
trying to understanding gyroscopic effects. I also have no idea what Litz is using for equipment.
His only explanation when question directly was an analogy to a spinning top. To my understanding of his explanation, instead of dazzling with brilliance he baffles with BS. To this I would like to point out, that he points out, how the top returns to its vertical axis after a disruption, because of the top responding 90° to the gravitational force.
Well, the top is spinning on a vertical axis not a horizontal axis like a bullet. So, according to his spinning top analogy, our spinning bullet will tend to respond by spinning and flying nose high as it reacts to gravity during flight.
IIRC, gravitate is one of those mythical forces that he states no longer apply to spinning bullets? But, but, how does a bullet fall back to earth without gravitate? 🧐 Hummm, I wonder how he spins that phenomenon?
The 6.8 SPC does not really gain a whole lot by going from a 16 to an 18 or 20" barrel. I wonder if more interest would be generated in a rifle with a 16" threaded barrel. A suppressed rifle is certainly more pleasant for hunting and for range time. I don't have a a good feel for the market, though, so does shortening the barrel with the expectation that it will appeal to people with suppressors seem like a good idea?
Ever since discovering the 6.8 SPC I have thought of it as the spiritual successor to the 30-30, and not only because the case is the same diameter. A good hunting cartridge that has relatively light recoil and works well in light, handy rifles. Heck, if Henry would chamber the SPC in a Long Ranger lever gun, the analogy would be even better.
My thoughts or desire would be a short and lightweight bolt gun. 16" is plenty long enough. Under 5lbs with scope would be great. Blind box would be fine. Drop box ok as long as it fit flush in the stock. That is one think I absolutely hate about the Howa Mini Action rifles, the mag sticking out the bottom the way it does just ruins the look of the gun for me. CZ American the same thing. I had some nice CZ rifles and got rid of them because the magazines drove me nuts. Granted, it was a short ride.
For me its the ammo thing. I dont do much hunting anymore but if I did I could certainly see the appeal of a short lightweight bolt gun for that.I'm not here as much but on the Hide and barfcom, the 6.8 still has a stong hold. It usually gets attention when asking about hunting with the AR15 platform or when more power is needed vs .223. I've been using a 12.5" ARP for years as a deer rifle, a slick compact setup with a 5" can.
Cheap, full power ammo that is heavily advertised by someone like Federal or Hornady would really help but isn't going to happen soon, if ever.
I think a factory built 16" bolt gun would be cool but would have to be a Tikka for me to buy. I doubt it would sell to the masses though as 99% buy the common calibers.