Re: Banded Solid 375 Test Results
Gerard,
"What is the velocity potential of a 338 LM? Was it exceeded in this case?"... I would say NO based upon Jeff's stated application:
"My <span style="font-style: italic">338 Lapua Magnum Improved </span>rifle was designed from the ground up to shoot some of Noel Carlson's ultra high BC lathe-turned, banded solid bullets..."
... Anthony's assurance:
"The 295 will work in anything faster then an 8 twist, and no gain twist is needed."
... The GS offer to resupply:
"Sorry about the wait. Really did want to get you those bullets before your brother arrived. We are so busy that we are 2 months behind. Sorry guys, but just cannot keep up, and we are not willing to speed things up and sacrifice quality. Once the shop here is up and running we will be able to get orders out in a few days, but that is still a little ways off."
... And the absence of any launch velocity limitation disclaimer on your website. If you think you are having problems with Jeff, just wait until someone with a 338/408 orders from you. (And really, are you telling me that the additional ~100 fps is just too much for your bullet?)
['If projectile "length isn't (the) focus" (as you say), everyone understands that BC will be the sacrificed in the bargain.' ...Thanks for that Noel. Now we know that you grasp of the concept of BC is weak. It explains some of the other weird statements you have made.]
Due to the fact that these projectiles are purpose built for the supersonic velocity range, I use a closed mathematical solution in configuring both the nose, and tail, which by definition minimizes total drag as a direct function of increased length for a given diameter. In theory, I could go as long as a ~9.0 caliber projectile before the gains in reduced wave drag were negated by increased surface friction. I realize the 6.5+ caliber projectile is a new area of experience for you, but even your simple secant ogive follows the same basic rule, all else being equal. I thought you understood this, and sought help from Lutz for that reason.
"What happens when a bullet as long as the 338295SP is severly overspun?"... This is what is called a complex question, not because it is complicated, but because you are burying a premise within it that is, itself, at issue. I dispute that there is an instability issue, germane to an 800 yard range, that can arise from "severe" gyroscopic stability.
"Anthony has supplied the link so you have no excuse. It shows that the 338295SP was severely overspun."... The calculation used to derive gyroscopic stability is not intended to imply overstability, only minimum stability requirements. The actual configuration of the projectile is not addressed by this equation, and further complicates spin requirement estimates.
Dave,
"The rifles have been here for a <span style="font-style: italic">year</span> waiting on bullets and results from Noel."... I understand that it is easy to loose track of time, but as of September 2009 you had not even installed one of these barrels, and when I contacted you, on December 25, I do not recall you telling me that anything had changed.
You have now added additional time to your customers wait with the GS experiment.
By the way, what is the caliber length of your second test bullet from GS, and is it actually still 414 grains?
PS,
What velocity did you launch it at?