I have 5 barrels for my 2 TC Contender pistols, 22LR, 22 Hornet, 30 Herrett, 357 Herrett and a 357. Having read the thread on twist rates of TC barrels I got mine out to look them over and noticed that the rifling in the 357 Herrett and the 357 are opposite the other barrels. All 5 barrels are TC. I assume that there is a reason for this, can anyone explain why? I recall that an Army range instructor had told me many years ago [50] that the 1911's had a reverse twist to help with the recoil. Any truth to that? Thanks, I enjoy this site and have learned a lot also.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
rifling direction
- Thread starter D Thomson
- Start date
An Army instructor once told us that AP ammo was for combat and that ball ammo was used for target shooting because the bullet would just penetrate the target board then fall to the ground. So anything said by an Army instructor is the truth.
In fact, the direction of twist matters not at all; it usually means nothing except that the barrel makers' rifling machine was set up that way. Sometimes, the twist becomes a sort of tradition, like Colt's left hand twist and S&W's right, even though both companies used both directions at different times.
Jim
In fact, the direction of twist matters not at all; it usually means nothing except that the barrel makers' rifling machine was set up that way. Sometimes, the twist becomes a sort of tradition, like Colt's left hand twist and S&W's right, even though both companies used both directions at different times.
Jim
the rifling in the 357 Herrett and the 357 are opposite the other barrels.
Believe you got some barrels manufactured for the South American countries or Australia. You know, below the equator.
(It's still April 1st isn't it?)
"...a reverse twist..." The reverse of what?
The direction of the twist makes no difference to recoil in any way, shape or form. Recoil is physics. Period.
The only thing the direction affects is the direction the muzzle rises under recoil. That too is nothing more than physics. Has to do with momentum, as I recall.
The direction of the twist makes no difference to recoil in any way, shape or form. Recoil is physics. Period.
The only thing the direction affects is the direction the muzzle rises under recoil. That too is nothing more than physics. Has to do with momentum, as I recall.
"The direction of the twist makes no difference to recoil in any way, shape or form. Recoil is physics. Period."
So is torque and rifling twist definitely affects that, causing a rifled firearm to twist one way or the other depending on the rifling twist as the moving bullet engages the lands.
Jim
So is torque and rifling twist definitely affects that, causing a rifled firearm to twist one way or the other depending on the rifling twist as the moving bullet engages the lands.
Jim
Vector effect for right hand twist barrels
"Spin drift will drift the path of the bullet to the right when fired from a barrel with a right hand rifling twist.
When the wind is blowing from three o'clock, visualize the right-hand-twist spinning bullet as rolling up on the wind, causing an increase in elevation in addition to be pushed to the left.
When the wind is blowing from nine o'clock, you can think of the right-hand-twist spin as causing the bullet to roll under the wind and be deflected downward in addition to being pushed to the right."
quote: Vector Wind Effect for Right Hand Twist Barrels
Link:
http://www.tmtpages.com/WindVector.htm
"Spin drift will drift the path of the bullet to the right when fired from a barrel with a right hand rifling twist.
When the wind is blowing from three o'clock, visualize the right-hand-twist spinning bullet as rolling up on the wind, causing an increase in elevation in addition to be pushed to the left.
When the wind is blowing from nine o'clock, you can think of the right-hand-twist spin as causing the bullet to roll under the wind and be deflected downward in addition to being pushed to the right."
quote: Vector Wind Effect for Right Hand Twist Barrels
Link:
http://www.tmtpages.com/WindVector.htm
Last edited:
Bob Wright
New member
JamesK said:
During my time of service, ball ammunition was not issued outside the contingent United States. It was used for live fire training, rifle qualification, guard duty, and target matches. Armour piercing (AP) was the only ammunition issued when I was in Korea. There were several reasons offered, mostly citing the Geneva Convention, which had nothing to do with ammunition. But ball ammunition was flat based with exposed lead, while the AP was boat tailed with full metal jacket. The boat tailed bullet supposedly worked better when machine guns were delivering overhead fire. And, surprise, surprise! the AP penetrated vegetation and building materials better.
Bob Wright
An Army instructor once told us that AP ammo was for combat and that ball ammo was used for target shooting because the bullet would just penetrate the target board then fall to the ground. So anything said by an Army instructor is the truth.
During my time of service, ball ammunition was not issued outside the contingent United States. It was used for live fire training, rifle qualification, guard duty, and target matches. Armour piercing (AP) was the only ammunition issued when I was in Korea. There were several reasons offered, mostly citing the Geneva Convention, which had nothing to do with ammunition. But ball ammunition was flat based with exposed lead, while the AP was boat tailed with full metal jacket. The boat tailed bullet supposedly worked better when machine guns were delivering overhead fire. And, surprise, surprise! the AP penetrated vegetation and building materials better.
Bob Wright
PatientWolf
New member
I had a physics professor that I'm certain would claim that the "right hand rule" for torque would mean the right hand rifling would give a higher velocity.
AP was issued in combat for the simple reason that it gave better penetration against light vehicles and light fortifications. Its greater range was seldom a consideration. FWIW, it was totally ineffective against heavy armor. AP does not simply "punch a hole" in armor; when the bullet strikes the armor, it stops and its kinetic energy is instantly converted to heat which softens or melts the armor plate, allowing the hard core to penetrate.
As to bullet drift based on rifling twist, that is correct, and some rifle and MG sights (like the M1905 sight on the M1903 rifle) take drift into consideration. But it is important only at long range; it is hard to conceive a handgun being fired at a range where bullet drift would be significant.
On the Coriolis effect, it too is real, but usually misunderstood. It is caused by the difference in rotational speed at varying latitudes of the earth. It is greatest when firing directly north or south, non-existent when firing east or west. In any event, it is not significant, being less than an inch at 1000 yards.
Jim
As to bullet drift based on rifling twist, that is correct, and some rifle and MG sights (like the M1905 sight on the M1903 rifle) take drift into consideration. But it is important only at long range; it is hard to conceive a handgun being fired at a range where bullet drift would be significant.
On the Coriolis effect, it too is real, but usually misunderstood. It is caused by the difference in rotational speed at varying latitudes of the earth. It is greatest when firing directly north or south, non-existent when firing east or west. In any event, it is not significant, being less than an inch at 1000 yards.
Jim
Bob Wright
New member
...................................that ball ammo was used for target shooting because the bullet would just penetrate the target board then fall to the ground.
Any soldier who has ever worked the butts on the KD range knows the fallacy of this statement. Those bullets hit with enough ooomph! to shatter small rocks in the berm. And they are HOT!
Bob Wright
The OP mentioned the "wisdom" of army instructors; I was just giving another example. Of course, and it should have been obvious to him that the statement was nonsense, but no "slick sleeve" is going to tell an E-6 that he is an idjit. (At least not then - I don't know what they do now in our kind, gentle PC army.)
Jim
Jim