Barrel length vs MV, Fast twist vs. BC

[emerson]

My anecdotal experience with a 12T barrel is that I get much smaller vertical dispersion at 300-ish. The stability calculations show much better stability with the faster twist. Related? I don’t know. I do know that I can dope and adjust for whatever elevation correction is required to put the group Center where I expect it to be.

 

[Grantmac]

A tunnel is only real world conditions for people who don't shoot in the real world.

 

[grauhanen]

A tunnel is only real world conditions for people who don't shoot in the real world.

Is this relevent? No one here has confused a tunnel for "real world conditions".

When discussing testing results controlled conditions are needed so comparisons are as much apples to apples as possible. When testing outdoors at longer distances, it's next to imporssible to compare apples to apples. Was it wind, ammo, shooter error, something else? No one can know with certainty. Results lose value when they can't reliably be reproduced from one day to the next.

As distances grow, .22LR shooters increasingly owe something to every unpredictable element that comes into play, including air movements between shooter and target, ammo variation (such as MV as well as bullet-to-bullet differences), and shooter error. When all these potentially come together on long range .22LR targets, what's anyone testing in the "real world"?

 

[Longstud]

Litz didn't say anything about the conditions under which the tests were performed. If the testing was done in a temperature controlled indoor range, it may have the advantage of potentially establishing a reasonable base line against which to compare other tests. Testing outdoors can never establish "real world" standards as such comparisons can't be apples to apples. In other words, uncontrolled conditions are virtually impossible to replicate.

If Litz's results can be repeated in testing, then they have validity. There are, however, a number of concerns that can be raised about his methodology that make his conclusions questionable and at the very least premature.

As for faster ammo only becoming recently available, that's simply incorrect. For decades, Eley, Lapua, and RWS have made (and continue) to make .22LR match ammo varieties with faster MVs than standard match ammo.

What's now different and new are ammo varieties with the words "Long Range" on the packaging. Those words have an appeal to many shooters in PRS and ELR type. Historically, however, except for the many new enthusiasts for faster ammo in PRS and ELR, serious competitors in the longer distance .22LR prone events (100 and 200 yards) have prefered the slower match ammos. Biathlon shooters like faster ammos because they perform more like standard match ammo in the colder temperatures (all .22LR MVs fall with the temperature).

Well how could Litzs test results be repeated if the biggest variable is missing? Qoute "He didnt say anything about the conditions under which the tests were conducted." I concur about the higher velocity ammos being available for a long time but now the wrappers have changed. Just seen the prices on the new Lapua ammo AIMED (HAHA) at the mentally deficient ORPS,CRPS shooters. Myself included of course. Should just do a shoot where the ammos supplied and you sight in at the match and its SK match or Eley sport,CCI Std . You get 100 rounds to get dope and have at it. Stop buying the high priced BS ammos and the prices will go down. No sales equals CHANGE. Does anybody have any Large rifle primers for less than $100 a flat. Get my point.