coming from a long range perspective, that equasion only works with equal drag models. higher speed will increese the point blank range of a given projectile, but higher speed with a less arrow dynamic projectile might actually reduce your point blank range depending on how much faster and how much more arrow dynamic.
Lots of comparisons only work when you are comparing similar things.
I'd like to see an example where higher velocity decreases the point blank range of a given projectile. I can't think of one. DO you have an example??
(also, check your "auto correct" feature, "arrow dynamics" and "aerodynamics" are not the same thing.
)
I was an Army Small Arms Repairman (MOS 45B20) 75-78. There is always a development time, often several years before actual official adoption of equipment, and then there is a lag time between initial issue and full equipage of all authorized units. This can also be years.
And then, there is the "secondary" lag time between when flaws are discovered, and when they get fixed, and the improved item becomes standard general issue.
Back on topic, the twist for .223s, there is "lag time" with what gunmakers offer. And, it can be years, or even decades for certain things. Remember that what is offered (and kept in production) is what sells, and in part, what sells is determined by what is offered.
A 1-14" twist works well for 55gr and lighter slugs. Bolt actions, both heavy varmint models and ligher "stalking rifles" were traditionally for varmints and pest control and for that reason were kept in production with the slower twists for some time after the semi autos (where it was assumed many buyers would be shooting the longer heavier bullets) got made with the faster twists.
A slow twist isn't necessarily a mistake, its a design philosophy that sometimes becomes a mistake on the market when the market wants something else instead.
In what is now a classic blunder, look at the .244 Remington. Initial production rifles had a 1-12" twist, which did fine for varmint bullets but not so well for the 105gr "deer bullet". Where Remington screwed up was not recognizing the market demand for "dual purpose" rifles in .24 caliber. The faster twist standard in the .243 Win did both.
Remington changed the .244 twist rate to 1-9" in the second year production (I think) but it was too late, the .244 had gotten a reputation for not shooting deer loads worth a damn.
Changing the name to 6mm Remington (and all 6mm Rems were made with the fast 1-9" twist) helped some, but with both an earlier start and being a dual purpose rifle from the get go, the .243 Win dominated, and has continued to do so, as the 6mm Rem fades away.
