Dont get to excited yet.
12-13-2011, 04:39 PM
#11
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Saxonburg Pa
Posts: 3,925
12-13-2011, 05:01 PM
#15
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Yucca Valley,Ca
Posts: 2,496
I agree with Lehigh Dave's assessment if your a match shooter and a machinist. the problem isn't quality bullets, it's the "length" of the bullets a 1:20 shoots well.Chet posted a great example with the 240 gr dead center bullet.if hornady or speer would make a special M/L bullet for the .40 cal, that weighed in at.225-.240 gr they would be tack drivers. why? the length of the bullet.the 185 gr Lehigh and the Barnes .195 are at the top of spectrum length wise due to the material there made from and both shoot well in the 1:20.the longer Lehigh 200 gr has to be pushed, since it's actually long for caliber.the 1:20 problems are not sabots or the twist.jacket or solid material bullets are the way to go if one wants a flat shooting bullet.the pure lead offerings can only be pushed so far before they start having problems of there own."point and case" the hornady SST and the Harvester PT gold plated bullets are among the most accurate on the market.this subject has been covered many times and it comes down to length of bullets for caliber not weight or even quality.
12-13-2011, 05:07 PM
#18
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Yucca Valley,Ca
Posts: 2,496
I really don't see a point with a 1:20 twist. I get amazing accuracy with a 454gr conical and a slow 1:48 twist. A 1:20 twist would be for something that none of us shoot..... 700gr conicals.
Now with the " some bullets will shoot worse" theory, it sounds like a bigger oopsie than when they came out with the .52cal.
Now with the " some bullets will shoot worse" theory, it sounds like a bigger oopsie than when they came out with the .52cal.