|
|
Post by wildcatter on Dec 18, 2018 12:10:38 GMT -5
This is good, I don't understand why they ever based there barrel lengths different than the rest of the industry, but it is nice having the same results buying whatever stated as the same thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by firedude on Dec 18, 2018 12:21:45 GMT -5
This is good, I don't understand why they ever based there barrel lengths different than the rest of the industry, but it is nice having the same results buying whatever stated as the same thing. I agree. That was weird. |
|
|
|
Post by lazytcross on Dec 18, 2018 14:37:24 GMT -5
Mine is cut down to 5 inches. Total length.
I agree that velocity can just be compensated for by load development. I found when cutting mine from 7.5” to 5 that I lost about 75fps on some loads. That can easily be gained back
|
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Dec 18, 2018 15:06:43 GMT -5
“.... velocity can just be compensated for by load development. “
----lazytcross
*****
This declarative statement is false. Once we reach a safe maximum operating pressure, pressure must ramp dramatically for the short barrel to equal velocity of the longer barrel. And it remains a losing proposition. Fat short cartridges shooting heavy bullets do comparatively well from short barrels, but this does not reverse physics. A permutation of the theory that pressure compensates for barrel length suggests a fast or medium powder----and plenty of it----equals or surpasses velocity achievable from slow powder. The application of this folly has led to the demise of some fine firearms.
David Bradshaw
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcatter on Dec 18, 2018 17:20:18 GMT -5
“.... velocity can just be compensated for by load development. “
----lazytcross
I agree with David, and I also don't think 75 fps is a significant loss from a heavy hunting load in a big bore revolver. I think the 45 Colt to the 454, or the 480 to the 475 have shown that from some who have used both for some very large dangerous game there is not a huge gain between the same calibers in slightly bigger cases.
I hope others reading what I posted previous is pertaining to gaining back any loss one would see in accuracy, and I have very guns that are loaded to the max velocity they are capable of reaching, most simply shoot better with less than max loads, or loads that use a powder that hit pressure signs before they hit max velocity one can get from some other powders, to turn it's best accuracy,, slip in words performance! To me max accuracy is the most important part of how well any of my revolvers perform! This is how I work up loads, I don't skip past a more accurate load to shoot one that is 50 or even 100 fps faster.
Now if it was a backup sidearm for self preservation from man eating predators, that may be a little different story. But I would not be worried about a 2 inch longer barrel to drag around for hust in case either. It would be a short barrel with less concern for accuracy or long barrels that are not easily maneuvered into service handily. But I would not buy a revolver for this pupose thinking I could just stoke er up to get more speed from it than longer barrel would give me.
I would consider a loss in accuracy in these revolvers an issue that needs load development to gain it back long before I worried about 75 fps. I also understand being a bow hunter, that today far to many hunters buy their equipment and put way to much in a few fps more, when they consider what makes a hunting weapon viable for them. My intentions on stating load development to gain back what you are loosing is pertaining to the accuracy, which to me is the most important thing when it comes to the use of any weapon, handgun rifle or bow.
These are all things I would consider before choosing any handgun for any purpose. This is where personal choice comes into play when picking a barrel length on any handgun, and why I say it is more of a personal preference when it comes to choosing the perfect barrel length.
|
|
|
|
Post by lazytcross on Dec 18, 2018 19:08:47 GMT -5
Bradshaw , agreed that a loss of max velocity cannot be gained back once max pressure is reached with a given load. I can understand and appreciate your correction of my “blanket statement”. We do however have access to different powder primer and bullet combinations. If 1200 FPS is what you are after, it can be reached with a 5” or a 8” barrel.
I contend that most here do not load rounds up .5 grains at a time and then settle on the max as their “final load”.
Wildcat. I would have to agree that I don’t consider speed as a factor much when choosing a barrel length. I factor in packability. I figure the 2” gun that you have on you is better than the belt fed full auto that is back in truck! We can have a whole thread on speed affects on game!
I will try not to be so vague. Assuming that we all know how to load ammo safely.
|
|
|
|
Post by snakereaper on Dec 19, 2018 7:46:14 GMT -5
Well tried to go get me a 5.5 bisley grip 500 jrh on the way today. with no luck. went to the shop that located one for sale last week threw one if delears . well it was gone. tried 4 more places with no luck. Well I contacted magnum research first to see what I could or need to do they were very helpful in what i needed to do. So then Contacted the place i like using in Gainesville Ga threw email and they said they would get one ordered from magnum research for me . Now the wait begains
|
|
|
|
Post by tradmark on Dec 20, 2018 19:50:04 GMT -5
“.... velocity can just be compensated for by load development. “ ----lazytcross I agree with David, and I also don't think 75 fps is a significant loss from a heavy hunting load in a big bore revolver. I think the 45 Colt to the 454, or the 480 to the 475 have shown that from some who have used both for some very large dangerous game there is not a huge gain between the same calibers in slightly bigger cases. I hope others reading what I posted previous is pertaining to gaining back any loss one would see in accuracy, and I have very guns that are loaded to the max velocity they are capable of reaching, most simply shoot better with less than max loads, or loads that use a powder that hit pressure signs before they hit max velocity one can get from some other powders, to turn it's best accuracy,, slip in words performance! To me max accuracy is the most important part of how well any of my revolvers perform! This is how I work up loads, I don't skip past a more accurate load to shoot one that is 50 or even 100 fps faster. Now if it was a backup sidearm for self preservation from man eating predators, that may be a little different story. But I would not be worried about a 2 inch longer barrel to drag around for hust in case either. It would be a short barrel with less concern for accuracy or long barrels that are not easily maneuvered into service handily. But I would not buy a revolver for this pupose thinking I could just stoke er up to get more speed from it than longer barrel would give me. I would consider a loss in accuracy in these revolvers an issue that needs load development to gain it back long before I worried about 75 fps. I also understand being a bow hunter, that today far to many hunters buy their equipment and put way to much in a few fps more, when they consider what makes a hunting weapon viable for them. My intentions on stating load development to gain back what you are loosing is pertaining to the accuracy, which to me is the most important thing when it comes to the use of any weapon, handgun rifle or bow. These are all things I would consider before choosing any handgun for any purpose. This is where personal choice comes into play when picking a barrel length on any handgun, and why I say it is more of a personal preference when it comes to choosing the perfect barrel length. Use the right bullets and the difference can be dramatic in my experience. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcatter on Dec 21, 2018 1:00:09 GMT -5
Not quite sure what this has to do with the affects of barrel length, most bullets will either shoot or they won't regardless of length, changing powder or the amount would have more to do with this than changing bullets once one is used that shoots well.
|
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Dec 21, 2018 9:25:20 GMT -5
Not quite sure what this has to do with the affects of barrel length, most bullets will either shoot or they won't regardless of length, changing powder or the amount would have more to do with this than changing bullets once one is used that shoots well. What he was saying is that a good, quality bullet that can exploit the additional velocity makes the value of velocity greater. Not so important if pushing a hardcast bullet under its maximum limitations. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcatter on Dec 21, 2018 21:26:27 GMT -5
Not quite sure what this has to do with the affects of barrel length, most bullets will either shoot or they won't regardless of length, changing powder or the amount would have more to do with this than changing bullets once one is used that shoots well. What he was saying is that a good, quality bullet that can exploit the additional velocity makes the value of velocity greater. Not so important if pushing a hardcast bullet under its maximum limitations. So you think you were at a significant loss with the JRH in your 5.5" and the loads you used with the premium solids for your water buffalo, than if you would have used them in 7.5" barrel. I may be wrong but don't think you gave up much at all, or had any recourse to make up for the 2" of barrel? |
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Dec 21, 2018 21:56:19 GMT -5
What he was saying is that a good, quality bullet that can exploit the additional velocity makes the value of velocity greater. Not so important if pushing a hardcast bullet under its maximum limitations. So you think you were at a significant loss with the JRH in your 5.5" and the loads you used with the premium solids for your water buffalo, than if you would have used them in 7.5" barrel. I may be wrong but don't think you gave up much at all, or had any recourse to make up for the 2" of barrel? I used the same Punch bullet load on both water buffalo and Cape buffalo, and tried to squeeze the maximum reliable velocity from my combination. There are always compromises, but I chose the shorter barrel for its handling attributes (the ability to deliver fast, accurate follow-up shots is critical in my opinion), over more velocity. When the bullet can take it and perform as designed, I want as much reliable (there goes that word again - trying to avoid a crimp pulling situation) velocity as I can squeeze out of it. There is no chance in a revolver to overtax certain bullets, and velocity is your friend especially when the animals in question are large and potentially lethal. |
|
|
|
Post by Quick Draw McGraw on Dec 21, 2018 23:06:25 GMT -5
So you think you were at a significant loss with the JRH in your 5.5" and the loads you used with the premium solids for your water buffalo, than if you would have used them in 7.5" barrel. I may be wrong but don't think you gave up much at all, or had any recourse to make up for the 2" of barrel? I used the same Punch bullet load on both water buffalo and Cape buffalo, and tried to squeeze the maximum reliable velocity from my combination. There are always compromises, but I chose the shorter barrel for its handling attributes (the ability to deliver fast, accurate follow-up shots is critical in my opinion), over more velocity. When the bullet can take it and perform as designed, I want as much reliable (there goes that word again - trying to avoid a crimp pulling situation) velocity as I can squeeze out of it. There is no chance in a revolver to overtax certain bullets, and velocity is your friend especially when the animals in question are large and potentially lethal. In a few conversations I've had with Jack, he's mentioned where velocity can hinder the ability of a bullet to be effective either be allowing the bullet to deviate when striking a bone in a less than straight line or compromising its integrity. At what point does that velocity start to create thes problems? Jack referenced that some .500 S&W magnum loads have created this issue in his experience, hence why the .500 JRH never needs as much velocity. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcatter on Dec 22, 2018 1:30:58 GMT -5
I used the same Punch bullet load on both water buffalo and Cape buffalo, and tried to squeeze the maximum reliable velocity from my combination. There are always compromises, but I chose the shorter barrel for its handling attributes (the ability to deliver fast, accurate follow-up shots is critical in my opinion), over more velocity. When the bullet can take it and perform as designed, I want as much reliable (there goes that word again - trying to avoid a crimp pulling situation) velocity as I can squeeze out of it. There is no chance in a revolver to overtax certain bullets, and velocity is your friend especially when the animals in question are large and potentially lethal. In a few conversations I've had with Jack, he's mentioned where velocity can hinder the ability of a bullet to be effective either be allowing the bullet to deviate when striking a bone in a less than straight line or compromising its integrity. At what point does that velocity start to create thes problems? Jack referenced that some .500 S&W magnum loads have created this issue in his experience, hence why the .500 JRH never needs as much velocity. This would be the same conclusion I would have and why the revolver I purchased was sent back to MRI, to have the barrel shortened from 7.5 to 5.5 inch while having the grip frame upgraded. But If I had a load picked for it that was the best I could find that would include the bullet for the game intended, I am willing to live with the insignificant lose of speed, If using a different bullet because it was a better quality bullet, I obviously would not have had my best load to begin with. |
|
|
|
Post by tradmark on Dec 22, 2018 2:09:15 GMT -5
I used the same Punch bullet load on both water buffalo and Cape buffalo, and tried to squeeze the maximum reliable velocity from my combination. There are always compromises, but I chose the shorter barrel for its handling attributes (the ability to deliver fast, accurate follow-up shots is critical in my opinion), over more velocity. When the bullet can take it and perform as designed, I want as much reliable (there goes that word again - trying to avoid a crimp pulling situation) velocity as I can squeeze out of it. There is no chance in a revolver to overtax certain bullets, and velocity is your friend especially when the animals in question are large and potentially lethal. In a few conversations I've had with Jack, he's mentioned where velocity can hinder the ability of a bullet to be effective either be allowing the bullet to deviate when striking a bone in a less than straight line or compromising its integrity. At what point does that velocity start to create thes problems? Jack referenced that some .500 S&W magnum loads have created this issue in his experience, hence why the .500 JRH never needs as much velocity. It only matters when the bullet wont stand up to the velocity. I.e. hard cast lead and/or crappy hollow points. If thats not in play then velocity does nothing but improve everything. |
|
