Thread: A whim...

could try the 17 bergers Tahr?

Originally Posted by Gibo

could try the 17 bergers Tahr?

What do you mean by "17" Gibo?

Originally Posted by Tahr

What do you mean by "17" Gibo?

ha chuck a 0 on the end

Why would the WSM be any worse with a short barrel than the SAUM?

Larger case should provide more velocity loaded appropriately in any barrel length.

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

Why would the WSM be any worse with a short barrel than the SAUM?

Larger case should provide more velocity loaded appropriately in any barrel length.

I think its to do with efficiency and expansion ratios. The ratio between the bullet diameter and powder capacity dictates how efficient a combination is. By efficient I mean the loss of velocity per inch of barrel and per grain of powder. e.g. the 25-06 is less efficient than a 30-06, thus requires a longer barrel to achieve optimal performance.

The WSM has a smaller bullet diameter and larger case capacity when compared to the SAUM. So in terms of efficiency, the SAUM wins.

The same with the 22.243 and the .223. When both fired out of a 20" the 22.243 uses a heap more powder to get a similar outcome.

So, if you start hacking the 270WSM barrel you are soon back to 270W performance, but using 10 grns more powder, getting more blast, more bang, and more barrel wear.

I made most of that up, but I think that's how it works.

Originally Posted by Tahr

I think its to do with efficiency and expansion ratios. The ratio between the bullet diameter and powder capacity dictates how efficient a combination is. By efficient I mean the loss of velocity per inch of barrel and per grain of powder. e.g. the 25-06 is less efficient than a 30-06, thus requires a longer barrel to achieve optimal performance.

The WSM has a smaller bullet diameter and larger case capacity when compared to the SAUM. So in terms of efficiency, the SAUM wins.

The same with the 22.243 and the .223. When both fired out of a 20" the 22.243 uses a heap more powder to get a similar outcome.

So, if you start hacking the 270WSM barrel you are soon back to 270W performance, but using 10 grns more powder, getting more blast, more bang, and more barrel wear.

I made most of that up, but I think that's how it works.

Well yes but the wsm should be faster and if you were worried about efficiency rather than speed you would use a 7mm08 or neck up a 223 that would be efficient as

If you want shorter and was thinking of rebarreling anyway why not hacksaw (if you have nothing better that is) a few inches off it and see what can be achieved, not like a second hand 270 barrel has a huge resale value.

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

Well yes but the wsm should be faster and if you were worried about efficiency rather than speed you would use a 7mm08 or neck up a 223 that would be efficient as

And theres nothing wrong with that

Originally Posted by Tahr

I think its to do with efficiency and expansion ratios. The ratio between the bullet diameter and powder capacity dictates how efficient a combination is. By efficient I mean the loss of velocity per inch of barrel and per grain of powder. e.g. the 25-06 is less efficient than a 30-06, thus requires a longer barrel to achieve optimal performance.

The WSM has a smaller bullet diameter and larger case capacity when compared to the SAUM. So in terms of efficiency, the SAUM wins.

The same with the 22.243 and the .223. When both fired out of a 20" the 22.243 uses a heap more powder to get a similar outcome.

So, if you start hacking the 270WSM barrel you are soon back to 270W performance, but using 10 grns more powder, getting more blast, more bang, and more barrel wear.

I made most of that up, but I think that's how it works.

Think you are dead right @Tahr in your theory but the difference in bore volume between the .277 and .284 bore is negligible and overall capacity (case and bore) can be managed with the speed of the powder. As long as you don't need to shoot heavier bullets than they make in 270 I'm not sure it will make much difference.