User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 2:41:28 AM EDT
[#1]
I have both but I prefer 1/9. Lots of people do.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 2:43:22 AM EDT
[#2]
Ignorance on the part of manufacturers and consumers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 4:19:29 AM EDT
[#3]
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 4:54:39 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 5:01:41 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. People like you are not the people that buy the majority of ARs in the civilian market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 5:04:09 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People like you are not the people that buy the majority of ARs in the civilian market. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. People like you are not the people that buy the majority of ARs in the civilian market. I know. At the same time the advantages of 1/7 work also for the civilian sport shooter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 5:08:08 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know. At the same time the advantages of 1/7 work also for the civilian sport shooter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. People like you are not the people that buy the majority of ARs in the civilian market. I know. At the same time the advantages of 1/7 work also for the civilian sport shooter. There is no difference for the average JoeBlow that takes his rifle to the range once a month, if that, and shoots regular ammo he finds at Walmart or even online. I bet 95% of AR owners fall into that category. That is why DPMS sells so many more ARs than so many of the other AR manufacturers. You can sit there and circle jerk on your own. I am not arguing the point any further. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 4:42:01 PM EDT
[#8]
Well, I've kind of always wanted a 1/9, just to see. The most available ammo there is, is 55 grain ammo. I can get Q3131 at Farm and Fleet for a pretty decent price and I'm curious as if you (Combat Jack) would argue that it would be a bad choice in SHTF ammo. Sure, 75/77 grain is better. But it's also more expensive, less available, and even more hard to find in 5.56 pressure. Although I realize it's out there. But sometimes if you get like Black Hills blue, you're not getting sealed primers, which I don't really know how necessary it is. But nevertheless...
Anyways.... my point is I don't know if one is really all that undergunned with a stash of XM193 or Q3131. For any AR. And for me, the heavier stuff is for: "nice to have and maybe help with shooting groups" ammo. But it's very possible that most serious AR shooters feel differently. Like Combat Jack. But really I remember Troy or someone who knew his stuff, I thought I remember them saying their go to gun was a 16" M4 type 1/9. I think it was a bushmaster. Although that was years ago. One thing I like to harp is that sometimes good enough is good enough. I get sick of the "it has to be the best or you're gonna die" mantra. But my only back up for my argument is just common sense. I don't use a gun for a living. So.... maybe it doesn't carry any weight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 5:16:27 PM EDT
[#9]
In reference to 5.56mm Carbines and SBRs:
- The 1/9" twist has no benefit. - The 1/7" twist has no disadvantage. I am confounded as to why this continues to be topic of contention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 5:35:08 PM EDT
[#10]
The vast majority of AR shooters are still running 55 grain ammo. Hence the one in nine. Look at all the bulk ammo sales. Most of it is 55 grain ball.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 6:02:50 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Nice. Everyone who wants a 1:7 barrel is a mall ninja. Got it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 6:10:23 PM EDT
[#12]
But but the army has 1/7.....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 6:29:01 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I get sick of the "it has to be the best or you're gonna die" mantra. Given that 1:7 barrels cost the same as 1:9 barrels, I don't think this is applicable. The tighter twist does not hurt lighter bullets but opens up your AR to heavier bullets. If you want to try a box of Black Hills 77gr TMKs for hunting but shoot 99.9% 55gr loads, your 1:7 barrel would be fine with that. I fail to understand how a win-win is a bad thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 7:26:25 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is no difference for the average JoeBlow that takes his rifle to the range once a month, if that, and shoots regular ammo he finds at Walmart or even online. I bet 95% of AR owners fall into that category. That is why DPMS sells so many more ARs than so many of the other AR manufacturers. You can sit there and circle jerk on your own. I am not arguing the point any further. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. People like you are not the people that buy the majority of ARs in the civilian market. I know. At the same time the advantages of 1/7 work also for the civilian sport shooter. There is no difference for the average JoeBlow that takes his rifle to the range once a month, if that, and shoots regular ammo he finds at Walmart or even online. I bet 95% of AR owners fall into that category. That is why DPMS sells so many more ARs than so many of the other AR manufacturers. You can sit there and circle jerk on your own. I am not arguing the point any further. If there is no difference to 95%, but 5% want 1:7, and they cost the same, a company would be retarded not to make all its barrels 1:7. Thanks for making the best pro-1:7 argument that can be made.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 7:30:26 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The vast majority of AR shooters are still running 55 grain ammo. Hence the one in nine. Look at all the bulk ammo sales. Most of it is 55 grain ball. You state that with some implied logical progression: as if a 55gr bullet must be used in 1/9" twist. Because 55gr can, of course, be utilized in 1/7" twist with absolutely no detriment to performance. So again why does the 1/9" twist persist? Ignorance on the part of manufacturers and consumers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 8:04:21 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
I sure it has to do with cost but the adjacent market. AR15 market has mostly transitioned to 1/7 twist barrels. The market always reacts with "I wish it was a 1 in 7 twist" so I could shoot this or that. Adding additional costs that will decide whether you float or sink doesn't make sense. more than a few test have proven the 1-9" twist very versatile. Handles everything from 35gr to 75gr bullets. Only the guys who insist on shooting bullets heavier than 75grs insist on the 1-7" twist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 9:27:12 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Given that 1:7 barrels cost the same as 1:9 barrels, I don't think this is applicable. The tighter twist does not hurt lighter bullets but opens up your AR to heavier bullets. If you want to try a box of Black Hills 77gr TMKs for hunting but shoot 99.9% 55gr loads, your 1:7 barrel would be fine with that. I fail to understand how a win-win is a bad thing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I get sick of the "it has to be the best or you're gonna die" mantra. Given that 1:7 barrels cost the same as 1:9 barrels, I don't think this is applicable. The tighter twist does not hurt lighter bullets but opens up your AR to heavier bullets. If you want to try a box of Black Hills 77gr TMKs for hunting but shoot 99.9% 55gr loads, your 1:7 barrel would be fine with that. I fail to understand how a win-win is a bad thing. It can. Shooting lightly jacketed varmint bullets at high velocities (3000 fps and up) the jackets can become separated from the lead core. Then the lead core disintegrates into a grey "puff". 
Same load in a 1 in 9 twist shoots fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 11:30:13 PM EDT
[#18]
USG tested 1/7 extensively, down to 40gr. No issues.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 11:38:16 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In reference to 5.56mm Carbines and SBRs: - The 1/9" twist has no benefit. - The 1/7" twist has no disadvantage. I am confounded as to why this continues to be topic of contention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 11:39:03 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In reference to 5.56mm Carbines and SBRs: - The 1/9" twist has no benefit. - The 1/7" twist has no disadvantage. I am confounded as to why this continues to be topic of contention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 1:04:05 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
more than a few test have proven the 1-9" twist very versatile. Handles everything from 35gr to 75gr bullets. Only the guys who insist on shooting bullets heavier than 75grs insist on the 1-7" twist. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I sure it has to do with cost but the adjacent market. AR15 market has mostly transitioned to 1/7 twist barrels. The market always reacts with "I wish it was a 1 in 7 twist" so I could shoot this or that. Adding additional costs that will decide whether you float or sink doesn't make sense. more than a few test have proven the 1-9" twist very versatile. Handles everything from 35gr to 75gr bullets. Only the guys who insist on shooting bullets heavier than 75grs insist on the 1-7" twist. There have been people on here that have stated that 1/9's weren't working with the heavier bullets for them. So..... I don't entirely agree. I do sometimes wonder if there isn't a benefit for the lighter bullet shooter. My only experience is that I had an A1 1/12 upper for a little while (got rid of it because I really didn't have the money for it) that shot really well with of course 55 grain and the 52's. That being said, all the tighter twist barrels I've owned usually shoot the 52's really well also. So..... But would a 1/9 be a bit better for a .22lr build? Obviously a 1/12 would be good for that too. Plus, from what I understand, a lot of the HiPower builds and match barrels are 1/8. And I think some shoot all the way up to 80's. or 90's? Or the long ballistic tip 75's. So you would think a 1/9 on average should at least stabilize the shorter heavier rounds. Like 75's. I thought the 1/7 was mainly for the tracers which are really long for their weight. Who's got that bullet picture? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 1:11:45 AM EDT
[#22]
M856 in arctic temps. Right?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 1:56:12 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is no difference for the average JoeBlow that takes his rifle to the range once a month, if that, and shoots regular ammo he finds at Walmart or even online. I bet 95% of AR owners fall into that category. That is why DPMS sells so many more ARs than so many of the other AR manufacturers. You can sit there and circle jerk on your own. I am not arguing the point any further. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. People like you are not the people that buy the majority of ARs in the civilian market. I know. At the same time the advantages of 1/7 work also for the civilian sport shooter. There is no difference for the average JoeBlow that takes his rifle to the range once a month, if that, and shoots regular ammo he finds at Walmart or even online. I bet 95% of AR owners fall into that category. That is why DPMS sells so many more ARs than so many of the other AR manufacturers. You can sit there and circle jerk on your own. I am not arguing the point any further. You're not arguing at all, you're simply wrong and everyone knows it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 3:19:31 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M856 in arctic temps. Right? http://i665.photobucket.com/albums/vv20/27mcannon/223bulletsCopy.jpg 1/7 is slower than was recommended for M856. 1/6 I think was the recommendation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 4:45:00 AM EDT
[#25]
Interesting. I didn't know that. Also when I googled those pics, there were some of the M855A1 and that sucker is pretty long too. I would imagine 1/9 might not work, or could be marginal. Maybe not though.
I get it, if there really is no downside to 1/7 then there really isn't a point to offering 1/9's. But if most of the match barrels are made in 1/8, it does kind of beg the question, why. And if they're shooting 80's and possibly 90's, you would think a 1/9 would handle the 77's. And I think some or maybe most do. I personally don't bthink I would have a problem owning a 1/9. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 9:01:46 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Interesting. I didn't know that. Also when I googled those pics, there were some of the M855A1 and that sucker is pretty long too. I would imagine 1/9 might not work, or could be marginal. Maybe not though. I get it, if there really is no downside to 1/7 then there really isn't a point to offering 1/9's. But if most of the match barrels are made in 1/8, it does kind of beg the question, why. And if they're shooting 80's and possibly 90's, you would think a 1/9 would handle the 77's. And I think some or maybe most do. I personally don't bthink I would have a problem owning a 1/9. The problem with 1:9 and heavier bullets is that most rack grade barrels are not exactly 1:9. They can vary quite a bit, and if the variance pushes the twist to something like 1:9.5 then your barrel will not stabilize heavier bullets reliably. On the other hand, a rack-grade 1:7 twist barrel pushed out to 1:7.5 will not have any problem with heavy bullets. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:04:32 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. The 55 grain Barnes TSX handoads and the 64 grain Speer Gold Dots I use are not toy ammunition, nor is the 16" 1:9 melonite carbine barrel that prints them in nice, consistent one MOA groups. 55 grain Burgers go sub MOA. Most of us have no need to shoot the longer and heavier, skower bullets. If I do, it will be from a 1:8 barrel and not the silly 1:7 needed only to shoot military issued tracers. Maybe someday the industry will respond to logic and facts rather than milspec hype entirely built around a twist rate required to stabilize a tracer no one is likely to ever fire. Even the very long for weight Barnes 70 grain TSX is optimally stabilized in 1:8. With respect, I would suggest that a 1:7 twist barrel is more of a toy if it is never going to shoot milspec tracers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:06:25 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know. At the same time the advantages of 1/7 work also for the civilian sport shooter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. People like you are not the people that buy the majority of ARs in the civilian market. I know. At the same time the advantages of 1/7 work also for the civilian sport shooter. Please explain the advantage of 1:7 compared to 1:8, which is what the manufacturers ought to be cranking out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:36:55 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is no difference for the average JoeBlow that takes his rifle to the range once a month, if that, and shoots regular ammo he finds at Walmart or even online. I bet 95% of AR owners fall into that category. That is why DPMS sells so many more ARs than so many of the other AR manufacturers. You can sit there and circle jerk on your own. I am not arguing the point any further. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. People like you are not the people that buy the majority of ARs in the civilian market. I know. At the same time the advantages of 1/7 work also for the civilian sport shooter. There is no difference for the average JoeBlow that takes his rifle to the range once a month, if that, and shoots regular ammo he finds at Walmart or even online. I bet 95% of AR owners fall into that category. That is why DPMS sells so many more ARs than so many of the other AR manufacturers. You can sit there and circle jerk on your own. I am not arguing the point any further. so its the end of the thread because you have spoken your final word? good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:43:51 AM EDT
[#30]
I think 1:8 is the barrel that should be the most popular.
it is right in the middle and will work with the widest range of ammunition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:43:58 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have both but I prefer 1/9. Lots of people do. Me too! I never understood how 1:9 went from "teir-1" to "your stupid" (according to the Internet) overnight. Frankly, if you are shooting mostly M193 or M885 (or clones) then 1:9 probably ideal. Personally, XM193 or XM885 is what I am shooting 90% of the time and if the S-ever-HTF that is what I will likely have already loaded in my mags. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 10:53:06 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Me too! I never understood how 1:9 went from "teir-1" to "your stupid" (according to the Internet) overnight. Frankly, if you are shooting mostly M193 or M885 (or clones) then 1:9 probably ideal. Personally, XM193 or XM885 is what I am shooting 90% of the time and if the S-ever-HTF that is what I will likely have already loaded in my mags. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I have both but I prefer 1/9. Lots of people do. Me too! I never understood how 1:9 went from "teir-1" to "your stupid" (according to the Internet) overnight. Frankly, if you are shooting mostly M193 or M885 (or clones) then 1:9 probably ideal. Personally, XM193 or XM885 is what I am shooting 90% of the time and if the S-ever-HTF that is what I will likely have already loaded in my mags. Yep. And most 1:9s will stabilize 75gr just fine. I noticed someone referenced m855a1... They tested and the 1:9 actually performed better than 1:7 with that particular round. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 11:03:40 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
I sure it has to do with cost but the adjacent market. AR15 market has mostly transitioned to 1/7 twist barrels. The market always reacts with "I wish it was a 1 in 7 twist" so I could shoot this or that. Adding additional costs that will decide whether you float or sink doesn't make sense. because despite the hard core "I gotta be able to should 77 grain ordnance" folks here on Arfcom, 1/9 is really better suited for the majority of shooting that most people do. Go check an ammo counter at walmart. What do you find? Winchester white box in 55 grain. Maybe 62 if you are lucky. 90% of people's shooting (yes, I know, whoever you are that is already hitting the reply button is way more hard core than that and only shoots 70+ grain handloads) is done with this ammo, and for this ammo, 1/9 is ideal. Can you shoot it through 1/7? Sure. But how about that box of 45 grain varmint busters? 1/9 is an excellent average, if you are trying to capture the average shooter. What I don't understand, is why more barrels aren't rifled in 1/8, which I think is the true ideal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 11:37:33 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What I don't understand, is why more barrels aren't rifled in 1/8, which I think is the true ideal. Because ultimately, it's hard to be taken seriously as a tier 0 Operator if your gun specs are based on logic as opposed to mall ninja hype. Logic would suggest that a 1/8 twist Wylde chamber LW barrel is the most versatile combination for 95% of civilian shooters, but you don't exactly see manufacturers falling over themselves making barrels to that spec. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 1:08:25 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
because despite the hard core "I gotta be able to should 77 grain ordnance" folks here on Arfcom, 1/9 is really better suited for the majority of shooting that most people do. Go check an ammo counter at walmart. What do you find? Winchester white box in 55 grain. Maybe 62 if you are lucky. 90% of people's shooting (yes, I know, whoever you are that is already hitting the reply button is way more hard core than that and only shoots 70+ grain handloads) is done with this ammo, and for this ammo, 1/9 is ideal. Can you shoot it through 1/7? Sure. But how about that box of 45 grain varmint busters? 1/9 is an excellent average, if you are trying to capture the average shooter. What I don't understand, is why more barrels aren't rifled in 1/8, which I think is the true ideal. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I sure it has to do with cost but the adjacent market. AR15 market has mostly transitioned to 1/7 twist barrels. The market always reacts with "I wish it was a 1 in 7 twist" so I could shoot this or that. Adding additional costs that will decide whether you float or sink doesn't make sense. because despite the hard core "I gotta be able to should 77 grain ordnance" folks here on Arfcom, 1/9 is really better suited for the majority of shooting that most people do. Go check an ammo counter at walmart. What do you find? Winchester white box in 55 grain. Maybe 62 if you are lucky. 90% of people's shooting (yes, I know, whoever you are that is already hitting the reply button is way more hard core than that and only shoots 70+ grain handloads) is done with this ammo, and for this ammo, 1/9 is ideal. Can you shoot it through 1/7? Sure. But how about that box of 45 grain varmint busters? 1/9 is an excellent average, if you are trying to capture the average shooter. What I don't understand, is why more barrels aren't rifled in 1/8, which I think is the true ideal. 1 in 8 is very common in the CMP/Hi Power area. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 1:40:51 PM EDT
[#36]
And didn't NRA's American Rifleman magazine publish an article several months back about M855A1 ammo, in which they found that 1:9 actually shot groups half the size of 1:7? There are links to that article here somewhere.
And I believe the same article published that they also found out that the military actually "cheated" in the public trials for M855A1 to meet the accuracy claims by switching to 1:8 barrels rather than 1:7 to obtain the accuracy needed to meet the standard. Milspec barrels would not meet the accuracy claims. 1:7 is simply too tight for any ammo other than the current very long for weight tracer rounds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 2:10:00 PM EDT
[#37]
It's way more annoying how many insist on 1:8 or 1:9 for 300blk. It seems every cheap new company is pumping those out, while the original developers and builders all still go 1:7.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 2:29:00 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And didn't NRA's American Rifleman magazine publish an article several months back about M855A1 ammo, in which they found that 1:9 actually shot groups half the size of 1:7? There are links to that article here somewhere. And I believe the same article published that they also found out that the military actually "cheated" in the public trials for M855A1 to meet the accuracy claims by switching to 1:8 barrels rather than 1:7 to obtain the accuracy needed to meet the standard. Milspec barrels would not meet the accuracy claims. 1:7 is simply too tight for any ammo other than the current very long for weight tracer rounds. I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but not really with this post specifically. One test doesn't make for the status quo. In my experience, with a at least 3-4 1/7 or 1/8 barrels, Black Hills 52 grain BTHP has ALWAYS been a good performer. There's magic dust on that load from them. For some reason. And I've also shot it out of a 1/12 and it performed very good. If a 1/9 will stabilize the M855A1, that is great. But I wouldn't blame the twist ITSELF as the determining factor for the worse performance in the 1/7 in that particular test. There is a truth that is hard to deny but I suppose you could. But each barrel is prejudiced. Now if you took 10 different guns of each twist and found the 1/9's to print better with M855A1 each time, or the majority, then at least you'd be heading towards a pattern. Still not conclusive, but you get my point. But I agree, the prevailing wisdom for 1/7 does seem to be driven by "because its milspec" and I'm not sure if there is a clear answer that "there is no upside to the 1/9 over the 1/7" debate. I also agree that 1/8 is probably the better spec. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 3:14:01 PM EDT
[#39]
This thread has been pretty entertaining.
Way back when, I got hoodwinked into thinking that 1/7 was the end all and be all for barrels. I bought my first AR in late 2007. At that time most of the barrels offered were 1/9. There was a smattering of 1/7 barrels and I can't recall if the Wylde chamber was around. The kool kids in the Tech section said that the solution for everything was a 20" Govt profile barrel with a 1/7 twist. Like an idiot I believed them. Hunted around and found a 20" Govt profile 1/7 barrel. Also at that time I worked a lot of OT. I bought lots and lots of XM193 and Wolf 55gr 223. I stacked cheap and deep at pre-panic prices. I won't say how much but I haven't really made a dent in the ammo fort. Guess what? Spending the extra money to hunt down that barrel was dumb.. I think I shot maybe one 20rnd mag of Hornady 75gr precision handloads through AR#1. The rest of the ammo shot through that AR was various 55gr ammo. AR#1 has since been sold and I don't pay any attention to the flavor of the minute in the Tech Sections. My HD carbine is 1/9. It's also a slickside built specifically for shorter distances. I got the upper in 2009 at a Black Friday sale. Since I had enough 55gr stuff to supply a small revolution, 1/9 was perfect. It still is. Damned accurate gun. It will shoot 75gr Hornady match pretty good at 100yds. It will shoot 69gr SMK better. But 55gr ammo is all I put through it. My other AR is a 16" 1/8 Wylde chamber, 5R rifled, nitride coated wunderbarrel. It shoots 75 and 77gr bullets VERY well. However it sees mostly my 55gr handloaded blasting ammo and 52gr screamers. 1/9 vs 1/7 is a dumb argument. There is no reason why 1/7 barrels and 1/9 barrels can't live together. Except on the internet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 3:30:46 PM EDT
[#40]
Good post. And yes, the wylde was around long before 2007. LOL. I actually don't know when it became popular though. But when I bought my recce in 2003 it was pretty well known on here by then.
That's interesting that you say that the prevailing wisdom was a 20" barrel back then. Because as long as I can remember, the Carbine has been king around here. Now middies have taken at least a close second. If not toppled the carbine gas system. My thing is I've never seen a whole lot of technical posts about this issue to prove one way or another. It would be an interesting post for Molon to do all up.  Except I haven't seen or heard from him in forever. Maybe he's on TOS.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 5:51:06 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The 55 grain Barnes TSX handoads and the 64 grain Speer Gold Dots I use are not toy ammunition, nor is the 16" 1:9 melonite carbine barrel that prints them in nice, consistent one MOA groups. 55 grain Burgers go sub MOA. Most of us have no need to shoot the longer and heavier, skower bullets. If I do, it will be from a 1:8 barrel and not the silly 1:7 needed only to shoot military issued tracers. Maybe someday the industry will respond to logic and facts rather than milspec hype entirely built around a twist rate required to stabilize a tracer no one is likely to ever fire. Even the very long for weight Barnes 70 grain TSX is optimally stabilized in 1:8. With respect, I would suggest that a 1:7 twist barrel is more of a toy if it is never going to shoot milspec tracers. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. The 55 grain Barnes TSX handoads and the 64 grain Speer Gold Dots I use are not toy ammunition, nor is the 16" 1:9 melonite carbine barrel that prints them in nice, consistent one MOA groups. 55 grain Burgers go sub MOA. Most of us have no need to shoot the longer and heavier, skower bullets. If I do, it will be from a 1:8 barrel and not the silly 1:7 needed only to shoot military issued tracers. Maybe someday the industry will respond to logic and facts rather than milspec hype entirely built around a twist rate required to stabilize a tracer no one is likely to ever fire. Even the very long for weight Barnes 70 grain TSX is optimally stabilized in 1:8. With respect, I would suggest that a 1:7 twist barrel is more of a toy if it is never going to shoot milspec tracers. The choices discussed here are 1/7 or 1/9. 1/9 is a nonstarter. 1/8 works, though I would like to see a test of 12.5" 1/8s with the 70TSX in cold weather--which is something I have a distinct and real interest in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 5:51:30 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please explain the advantage of 1:7 compared to 1:8, which is what the manufacturers ought to be cranking out. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. People like you are not the people that buy the majority of ARs in the civilian market. I know. At the same time the advantages of 1/7 work also for the civilian sport shooter. Please explain the advantage of 1:7 compared to 1:8, which is what the manufacturers ought to be cranking out. 1/8 works for me as well. 1/9 doesn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 5:53:43 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's way more annoying how many insist on 1:8 or 1:9 for 300blk. It seems every cheap new company is pumping those out, while the original developers and builders all still go 1:7. SSK always used 1/8 barrels an 240 SMKs, claiming that they destabilised and caused greater terminal effect. AAC moved to 1/7 and 220s, I don't know why. I do know that people who used the 300 Whisper seem more satisfied with it's terminal effect than people who use 300BLK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 6:03:48 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SSK always used 1/8 barrels an 240 SMKs, claiming that they destabilised and caused greater terminal effect. AAC moved to 1/7 and 220s, I don't know why. I do know that people who used the 300 Whisper seem more satisfied with it's terminal effect than people who use 300BLK. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's way more annoying how many insist on 1:8 or 1:9 for 300blk. It seems every cheap new company is pumping those out, while the original developers and builders all still go 1:7. SSK always used 1/8 barrels an 240 SMKs, claiming that they destabilised and caused greater terminal effect. AAC moved to 1/7 and 220s, I don't know why. I do know that people who used the 300 Whisper seem more satisfied with it's terminal effect than people who use 300BLK. I think this has more to do with the customer base for each cartridge. All the guys I knew with .300 Whispers or .300 Fireball guns understood the ballistic compromise made shooting a 200+ grain thirty cal bullet at a third the speed it was designed for. Now every Joe Blow is throwing together a Blackout. Many thinking it is a .308WIN, or even a .300 MAG because of the projectile weight. Not realizing the .45ACP is a better ballistic comparison. For better and worse, AAC made the .300 Blackout mainstream. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 6:05:46 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The choices discussed here are 1/7 or 1/9. 1/9 is a nonstarter. 1/8 works, though I would like to see a test of 12.5" 1/8s with the 70TSX in cold weather--which is something I have a distinct and real interest in. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You have it backwards. The latest startups have been going with 1/7 to appeal to the mall ninjas. Most of the major manufacturers were cranking out 1/9 for the civilian market for years and years. Unless you are shooting premium or super accurate handloaded ammo with extremely heavy bullets for competition shooting, 1/9 will work just fine with the type of shooting the overwhelming majority of AR shooters will be doing. 1/7 is just a marketing trend. You can tell because the companies that used to only provide 1/9 have begun offering 1/7 also. It isn't really what most people need, just want they want because that is what the advertisers tell them is cool. In the AR market, where they are basically toys and not necessities, businesses make more money by selling people what they want. I guess yours is a toy. Mine isn't. Considering the amount of Mk262 I have I'm sure glad I don't have a 1/9 HBAR I can't shoot it through. The 55 grain Barnes TSX handoads and the 64 grain Speer Gold Dots I use are not toy ammunition, nor is the 16" 1:9 melonite carbine barrel that prints them in nice, consistent one MOA groups. 55 grain Burgers go sub MOA. Most of us have no need to shoot the longer and heavier, skower bullets. If I do, it will be from a 1:8 barrel and not the silly 1:7 needed only to shoot military issued tracers. Maybe someday the industry will respond to logic and facts rather than milspec hype entirely built around a twist rate required to stabilize a tracer no one is likely to ever fire. Even the very long for weight Barnes 70 grain TSX is optimally stabilized in 1:8. With respect, I would suggest that a 1:7 twist barrel is more of a toy if it is never going to shoot milspec tracers. The choices discussed here are 1/7 or 1/9. 1/9 is a nonstarter. 1/8 works, though I would like to see a test of 12.5" 1/8s with the 70TSX in cold weather--which is something I have a distinct and real interest in. Talk about a small niche 
I have said for a long time that 1:8 would make a better twist but as stated by several above 1:9 works for the majority just fine. Most small companies aren't going to make their own barrels and I would imagine they simply pick the most common and start from there. I have also read several tests where lighter bullets were more accurate in faster twists so while a 1:7 may stabilize the little guys a 1:9 or 1:12 May be more accurate. Sometimes a gun is just lucky and goes against all logic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 6:53:59 PM EDT
[#46]
People keep claiming that tighter twists are less accurate with lighter bullets and then posting 1.5" groups to prove it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 7:10:17 PM EDT
[#47]
Except for the milspec coolness I think 1-7 is a mostly a waste as few if any here will launch 80-90 grain bullets.
http://www.bergerbullets.com/products/target-bullets/ 1-14 twist as in the early M16 was all the twist needed for 55 grain FMJ M193 and worked spectacularly well in Vietnam. In the cold dense air of the Arctic trials velocity and accuracy dropped a bit but was restored with a change of twist of 1-12 and the rest is history. Interesting stuff > http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Fackler_Articles/wounding_patterns_military_rifles.pdf |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 7:15:16 PM EDT
[#48]
B44T, how am I going to shoot 77gr SMKs or TMKs or the 70gr TSX through a 1/9?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 8:46:38 PM EDT
[#49]
From a 20" 1/7 BCM free floated government profile rifle at 100 yards:
Click for test thread XM193  Handloaded 52 gr Sierra Matchkings on the left  Federal 69gr Sierra Match king (top group) and IMI 77 OTM Razor core (bottom group).  From a 16" RRA 1/9 Lightweight barrel at 100 yards: Click for full test 0.820 -Hornady 55 gr Steel Match 0.833 -Hornady 75 gr Steel Match 1.302 -Handloaded Sierra 52 gr HPBT Note the middle is 75 gr  Hornady 52 gr HPBT Black Hills 69 gr SMK Federal Fusion (5 shots, all I had)  10 rounds of the new IMI 77 grain Razor Core ammo. This 1/9 rifle did okay with 75 grain, but not very well with 77 grain.  M16A1 20" 1/12 twist barrel at 100 yards: Click for full test 1.543" Hornady 52gr HPBT Match - giving 1.472 MOAand Mean Radius of 0.472" 1.661" Hornady 55gr Steel Match or 1.058" without one flyer, giving 1.059 MOA and Mean Radius of 0.427" 2.124" Handloaded Winchester 55gr FMJ (not shown) 2.313" Handloaded Sierra 52gr HPBT (1.625" without one flyer)    52 Sierra HPBT 52 Sierra HPBT 55 Hornady FMJBT  Conclusions so far: The 1/12 shoots the light stuff really well. It can't handle 60 grain or higher. The 1/9 shoots the light bullets well, and mine did decently with the 75's, but not too great with the 77's. The 1/7 shot all the loads well. All of them. It gave up no accuracy to the faster twists even with lighter bullets. In fact, it shot the 52 grainers better than the 1/9 and the 1/12. This only my little unscientific test. I've been having fun with it. Your mileage may vary... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2014 9:06:30 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have come to this conclusion as well Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: In reference to 5.56mm Carbines and SBRs: - The 1/9" twist has no benefit. - The 1/7" twist has no disadvantage. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
