Author Topic: Wood vs. synthetic in bad weather (Read 1371 times)

Eddie in Delta · « **on:** February 15, 2005, 06:21:54 PM »

I've always heard horror stories about wood stocks swelling up and warping in rain and such. Are they true? My gun's synthetic, so I don't know. Any first hand experiences?

I've toyed with the idea of a wood stock, but I don't want to go to the trouble if the stories are true.

Eddie

Patriot_1776 · « **Reply #1 on:** February 15, 2005, 06:54:12 PM »

From what I understand, if a wood stock is sealed real good, it shouldn't absorb water or humidity very readily. It is still a good idea to pack a synthetic if one is going to hunt in likely rainy conditions, IMO. But, between the two, cold and heat have generally the same effects, if not worse on the synthetic. Being the synthetic is, well, synthetic, it is more prone to temperature; on the other hand, it is less prone to wetness or humidity. Whereas with wood, it would be the other way around.

-Patriot

FURocious · « **Reply #2 on:** February 15, 2005, 07:20:21 PM »

You know, these forums have a tendency to perpetuate myths and distort the realities of hunting/shooting. How many years did people (Hence, OConnor, Carmichel, Kieth et al.) use wood stocked guns?

I was going to get really deep into this, but for brevity sake, EITHER stock choice will do you just fine. I really don't believe this wood stock swelling - POI shift BS. I think the totality of ambient condition changes is whats to blame for rifles shifting POI, even with synthetics. Most people still don't understand the enormous affects temperature and pressure have on velocity. The harmonics of any gun changes with change in ambient conditions.

I posted this a while back on concerning this issue.

[As per Jim Carmichel:

"These three rifles stand together in my gun rack, like three old men telling hunting tales and sharing memories of days past, of shots well done and misses too, shots close and far, some quick and deadly and others just lucky. And when I trace my fingers along their scarred stocks and feel the cool steel of the barrels through which so many bullets have passed, I can hear the whisper of the sheep mountain and listen to the songs of places far away. And I dream of hunts to come."

I guess you can look at rifles in two ways, as a "functionalist" or as a "romanticist", the latter described above by Carmichel.

I heard one guy refer to his synthetics as "Four-wheel drive rifles", a rifle he could take in any weather. That is a very functionalist perspective. (I laughed when I heard the term, for it rings true)

A romanticist adds an art to his hunting passion with his rifle. The rifleman and rifle adventure together, a level of trust builds and eventually he attaches to it heavy sentimental value. Like Carmichel, he remembers the hunts by the touch, feel, and scars on this extension of his body.

The functionalist is damn glad he has an all weather synthetic rifle he doesn't have to pamper when quartering out a kill when he is cold, wet, hungary, and tired.

The romanticist returns to the lodge, rifle in hand, to reminisce about the hunt and passes around the beauty that took the game.

The functionalist returns to camp and reminisces about how he took the game and the rifle is back in a case in the truck where it should be. To the functionalist, passing a rifle around camp would compare to a mechanic passing around the wrench he used to rebuild an engine.

Now... I think most of us share a little of both these perspectives and find a happy medium. Thus, the reason to have a synthetic for the 4X4 function, and the wood beauty for the aesthetic value.]

Thebear_78 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 15, 2005, 07:30:20 PM »

I have seen first hand what one alaskan hunting season can do to a wood stock and blued metal. Its not a pretty sight. Most of your finish will come off. I have had no problem with synthetic stocks down to even -35 below and colder. No problems what so ever. Wood is definately prettier but synthetic will hold up better.

Ron T. · « **Reply #4 on:** February 15, 2005, 10:36:42 PM »

WOW, FURocious...

THANK YOU!!!

Your post is BEAUTIFUL... and I recognized myself (and others of my ilk) as the "romanticist" that YOU and Jim Carmichel described so well while my youngest son (Patrick, age 42)) is a "functionalist" and his slightly older brother, my namesake (Ron, Jr.), is in between the two descriptions, but tends towards being a "romanticist" as well.

I copied and intend to keep your post in a WORD File for future reference & reading pleasure... you PERFECTLY described my feelings about my rifle (a 1953 Savage Model 99 "EG" in almost "new" condition in .300 Savage caliber)... and about hunting with it. It was as if you "read my mind" and then described what I was thinking.

Thank you, again, for your moving post... your way with words is outstanding.

Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

jvs · « **Reply #5 on:** February 15, 2005, 10:52:45 PM »

In the long run synthetic stocks will have a tendancy to allow the end user become more complacent (and possibly ignorant) when it comes to the proper care and maintenance of a firearm. I have been out in all kinds of weather with some of my rifles, not one has warped or rusted from rain, snow, sleet or humidity. WHY? ......because when my rifle got soaked I took the time to take it apart, dry it out and lube it when I got home. Synthetic stocks are a relatively new addition in the name of progress. I see them as a way to produce rifles cheaper, with little concern about durability after it walks out the door. I would really like to see a study about the life expentancy of those synthetic stocks under different conditions.

When a synthetic stock is 50 years old, will it still have the same visual properties? Will it crack and dry rot? Will it have the ability to outlive the useful life of the rifle like wood? Will the synthetic stock that is produced today still be around in 100 yrs? Maybe if it sits in a gun cabinet most of the time. Time will be the judge.

No man-made concoction can outwit the natural forces better than wood. Possibly the same, but never better. I might have to worry about Termites, but that's ok.

wink_man · « **Reply #6 on:** February 16, 2005, 01:14:43 AM »

If a wood stock is sealed properly, I feel it is just as weatherprof as a synthetic. I have a variety of rifles, and only one synthetic stock, and I prefer to hunt deer in the rain, and I've had no problems. Of course the KEY words here are 'sealed properly', if you pull a wood stock off most bolt action rifles, you'll be amazed how much hidden wood is unsealed from the factory. The first thing I do when I get a new rifle; bolt, breakopen, pump, whatever, is remove the wood from the gun, and seal all unfinished spots with tru-oil, then put it back together, and I have never had a problem with change of POI.
Sincerely,
Garry

Graybeard · « **Reply #7 on:** February 16, 2005, 03:44:48 AM »

I'm one of those oddballs who think a real hunting gun should be designed and build to take the worse nature can dish out. So I want the metal to be stainless and the stock to be either plastic or laminated wood. I prefer the laminate stocks as they are basically as stable as plastic but without the cold feel and noise of the plastic. I also think they should be quite and for me that means laminate over plastic.

Not all but nearly all of mine fit this profile. Those that don't get left behind for foul weather.

lilabner · « **Reply #8 on:** February 16, 2005, 05:03:37 AM »

I have had rifles that would change point of impact because of changes in relative humidity. Stocks with a lot of figure in the wood are more apt to do this in my experience. Keeping wood stocks pretty when hunting in bad weather can be done but it is one more thing to worry about. I've noticed that guides (who often pack a rifle around in case their hunter's rifle craps out for some reason) seem to favor synthetic stocks for their "truck" rifles. I prefer a beautiful piece of wood on a rifle but not for hunting in inclement weather.

Zachary · « **Reply #9 on:** February 16, 2005, 06:38:31 AM »

I once used a friend's wood stocked rifle and it shot about 1.5" groups at 100 yards - which wasn't that bad considering that most of the shots would be under 100 yards (with most being between 50 yards and 75 yards).

Anyway, I was in Texas at the time and the weather was a balmy 80 degrees - yup, 80 degrees in the middle of winter. I still remember what I was wearing - a thin long sleved camo shirt and thin camo pants with tennis shoes - hunting out of a ground box blind. I

We heard and saw on the news the day before that a huge cold front came through Oklahoma and dropped tons of snow. Same thing with Dallas. People warned us, but we thought that it could never get that cold down where we were (San Antonio). t was about 2pm when I got in and I remember being hot and kinda sweating. Well, within a matter of minutes, a rush of cool air came through the trees and it got downright cold in a hurry.

Let me tell you, in about 3 hours the temperature dropped 50 degrees! Yup, it was about 30 degrees when they picked me up from the box blind and I was freezing since I didn't have the proper clothes. Later that night, the roads were almost completely iced over and we couldn't drive anywhere, so we were stuck at the ranch and decided to just walk to one of the several hunting blinds. I went to one nearby with the same wood stocked gun. Although it was windy overall, it wasn't as windy where I was hunting because the heavy tree cover blocked most of the wind. Anyhow, two deer came across my path at about 75 yards or so and I took a shot.....and missed?

I aimed at the base of the neck (which I usually do which drops them right in their tracks) but this time I missed? How could that be?

The ranch had a little shooting range that was between 75 and 100 yards long. I took a test shot and guess what? The point of impact was about 6 inches from where it should have been. I thought this was a fluke, so I took another shot and the second shot was about an inch and a half from where the first shot was, which means that it wasn't me or the ammo, but rather the gun.

My conclusion was that the gun stock was drastically affected by the weather. Granted, a 50 degree temperature change, as well as humidity change, is drastic and not common - at least not common in south Texas, but it showed me the weakness of having a wood stocked rifle.

Now, I'm sure that many of you may tell me that you have encountered similar situations with your wood stocked rifles and never had a problem. Okay, I believe you. I also believe that a well lacquered wood stock will be less affected than a less lacquered wood stock. I honestly do not remember what kind of a gun it was, and I don't remember the finish on the stock, but whatever it was, the bottom line is that I not only missed a deer (which isn't that big of a deal because it was just a doe) but that I could have wounded it. (Some of you may say that taking neck shots is risky anyway, and that's generally true for inexperienced shooters, but like I said, I never had a problem.)

Laminated stocks are supposedly much better than regular stocks, but still not as good as synthetic stocks. I have, in recent years, purchased some wood stocked rifles - particularly the Tikka Deluxe in 7mag, and a Sako 75 Deluxe in .308. Both are just beautiful guns that I feel bad about taking in the field because they are just a work of art. Still, all of my other rifles are synthetic stocked and, although I had kinda similar weather situations, I never had a problem with them.

I view hunting rifles as tools. Yes, I take VERY VERY good care of them, even the stainless synthetic ones, but it's nice to know that they can take the abuse of nicks, scratches, and other hazards in the field.

A stainless synthetic rifle really is the 4x4 of rifles.

Zachary

Yukon Jack · « **Reply #10 on:** February 16, 2005, 07:11:04 AM »

If wood stocks are properly treated and the blued chrome/moly steel is treated for the weather, you won't have any problems because of the weather. Granted, you don't want to leave your rifle in the bottom of a canoe for a week in the rain, but for most other types of hunting they work. I've been using my wood stocked chrome/moly blued rifles here in Alaska ever since I've hunted and I've never had a problem with them.

They do require a little more attention, won't stand for lazy neglect, but most of us would not treat the synthetic/stainless rifles that way as well. You will want to wipe them down in the evenings, keep water out of the barrel, keep the firearm from being submersed in water, and they will be okay. Other than a few dings in the stocks and bluing wear around the muzzle, my rifles are rust free and POI doesn't change with weather conditions.

The horror stories that have been perpetuated across the internet and through gun magazines are based on one of two things.
1) Either the rifle had serious problems before encountering bad weather conditions; or
2) The rifle was not weatherized or was abused.

If you are the type to chunk your rifle into the bottom of a canoe in a couple of inches of standing water or refuse to take any precautionary measures, then synthetic and stainless are probably a pretty good idea. If you tinker or use your guns throughout the year and put a tiny bit of work into them, wood and blued steel will work just fine.

FURocious · « **Reply #11 on:** February 16, 2005, 07:18:37 AM »

Zachary:

Bubba...a change from a steamy 80 degrees to a icy 25-30 degrees is going to cause any gun, synthetic or not, to shift POI. Temperature effects velocity, in your instance the velocity of your round dropped approximately 150 fps from just the weather alone. The gun metal was even colder, reducing the velocity some more. This added with shooting a cold barrel changed the harmonics of your gun to make the POI shift. If you were wearing different clothing, hence thicker clothing, you will experience a change as well. Competitive shooters wear the same jacket and the same thickness of layers. They also have to make mechanical zero adjustments between shooting positions.

I just read an article in a gun mag at "Borders" (sorry I can't make a reference) about a sniper challenge shoot held in Arizona. They invited multi-agency military and police snipers from around the country. The snipers who arrived a day earlier had the luxury of confirming their zeros and calibrating their rifles to the ambient conditions. The snipers who arrived the day of the event, not having confirmed their zeros, went on to compete and soon experienced POI shifts. These competitors ended up either not placing in the tournament, or placing low in the standings. And...there wasn't a wood gun to be had at this tournament, let alone any gun under $1500.

After the event, the snipers got together and discussed the need to confirm zeros in the changing climates. Success was attributed to the snipers who were able to arrive early and calibrate their guns.

I know for a fact when I switch to shooting with a heavy coat/winter wear, my POI on shifts 2-2.5" to the leftat 100 yds. That goes for all my guns, synthetoc or wood. Just the way my body aligns with the gun while wearing heavy clothing. When shooting in warm weather with a t-shirt, that POI goes to the right, or returns to the zero I established in the warm weather.

In summary, there are far mor contibuting factors to POI shifts than just a wood stocked gun.

FURocious · « **Reply #12 on:** February 16, 2005, 07:30:32 AM »

RON T:

Yeah, I remember the day I wrote that response, the coffee was blended perfectly, the gun mags were abound, and I was feeling a little existential at that moment.

Lawdog · « **Reply #13 on:** February 16, 2005, 10:29:51 AM »

Quote from: Yukon Jack

If wood stocks are properly treated and the blued chrome/moly steel is treated for the weather, you won't have any problems because of the weather. Granted, you don't want to leave your rifle in the bottom of a canoe for a week in the rain, but for most other types of hunting they work. I've been using my wood stocked chrome/moly blued rifles here in Alaska ever since I've hunted and I've never had a problem with them.

They do require a little more attention, won't stand for lazy neglect, but most of us would not treat the synthetic/stainless rifles that way as well. You will want to wipe them down in the evenings, keep water out of the barrel, keep the firearm from being submersed in water, and they will be okay. Other than a few dings in the stocks and bluing wear around the muzzle, my rifles are rust free and POI doesn't change with weather conditions.

The horror stories that have been perpetuated across the internet and through gun magazines are based on one of two things.
1) Either the rifle had serious problems before encountering bad weather conditions; or
2) The rifle was not weatherized or was abused.

If you are the type to chunk your rifle into the bottom of a canoe in a couple of inches of standing water or refuse to take any precautionary measures, then synthetic and stainless are probably a pretty good idea. If you tinker or use your guns throughout the year and put a tiny bit of work into them, wood and blued steel will work just fine.

E X A C T L Y!!!

Have hunted Alaska many times in various weather conditions and havent had a stock warp or any rust yet. I was taught that taking care of your weapons was part of ownership. My Grandfather would come out of his grave and whip my butt" if I didnt take care of my weapon after I used it, EVERY TIME. Lawdog

Don Fischer · « **Reply #14 on:** February 16, 2005, 10:41:25 AM »

FURocious and Yukon Jack, I hate you both; you stole my thunder! I was going to ask were you folk's keep your rifle's at night, in the river? And what does Yukon Jack suggest, in the bottom of the canoe for a week. I lived and hunted in Alaska, Montana, Oregon's Willamette Valley and central Oregon and in Germany. I've never had a rifle swell up and shift on me. I think Graybeard is probally right tho, laminated stock's! I now have my first, and last .......composition? stock. It's on a Remington 700. It look's and handle's horrible and getting it to shoot has been a night mare. My last of either.

Super, super reply FURocious,,,,,, super!

Zachary · « **Reply #15 on:** February 16, 2005, 10:49:29 AM »

Quote from: FURocious

Zachary:

Bubba...a change from a steamy 80 degrees to a icy 25-30 degrees is going to cause any gun, synthetic or not, to shift POI. Temperature effects velocity, in your instance the velocity of your round dropped approximately 150 fps from just the weather alone. The gun metal was even colder, reducing the velocity some more. This added with shooting a cold barrel changed the harmonics of your gun to make the POI shift. If you were wearing different clothing, hence thicker clothing, you will experience a change as well. Competitive shooters wear the same jacket and the same thickness of layers. They also have to make mechanical zero adjustments between shooting positions.

I just read an article in a gun mag at "Borders" (sorry I can't make a reference) about a sniper challenge shoot held in Arizona. They invited multi-agency military and police snipers from around the country. The snipers who arrived a day earlier had the luxury of confirming their zeros and calibrating their rifles to the ambient conditions. The snipers who arrived the day of the event, not having confirmed their zeros, went on to compete and soon experienced POI shifts. These competitors ended up either not placing in the tournament, or placing low in the standings. And...there wasn't a wood gun to be had at this tournament, let alone any gun under $1500.

After the event, the snipers got together and discussed the need to confirm zeros in the changing climates. Success was attributed to the snipers who were able to arrive early and calibrate their guns.

I know for a fact when I switch to shooting with a heavy coat/winter wear, my POI on shifts 2-2.5" to the leftat 100 yds. That goes for all my guns, synthetoc or wood. Just the way my body aligns with the gun while wearing heavy clothing. When shooting in warm weather with a t-shirt, that POI goes to the right, or returns to the zero I established in the warm weather.

In summary, there are far mor contibuting factors to POI shifts than just a wood stocked gun.

You are right about the loss in velocity because of the reduction in temperature - I agree with you 100%. The question is, will a 150 fps loss result in groups from 1.5" to 6"?

The only thing that I am not too sure about is the change in clothing. Yes, before I was wearing very thin clothes and the next day I was wearing very heavy clothes, but I really don't think that the 6" POI was the reason. Why? Well, on my Browning Stainless Stalker that my brother was using, I also shot it the day before the freezinig cold weather came and after, and the POI was the same, and the groups were still under 1MOA (it was a .270 Winchester with Federal Premium 130 grain Sierra Boat-tails).

The issue of abuse that came up is well made. Granted, I always take very good care of my rifles, synthetic or wood, and I honestly do not know the condition of the wood stocked rifle was I was shooting. It very well could be that this was an isolated incedent due to an ill-taken-care-of rifle, but I really don't know. It's just that this was my first experience with a bad POI change and I attributed it to the wood stock because my Browning Stainless Stalker was the same before and after.

It's just that that experience really left a bad taste in my mouth. That's all. And I just don't like taking anything for chance. Again, there is nothing wrong with wood stocks - I own a couple - but I prefer the "better" weather resistence of synthetic stocks.

Zachary

Ramrod · « **Reply #16 on:** February 16, 2005, 11:23:29 AM »

In my experience, drastic POI changes in wood stock rifles are almost always caused by poor bedding. The reason "O'Connor, Carmichel, Keith et al" didn't have these problems is that they didn't have the cheap crapola the major gunmakers are foisting on us now. Don't forget, these guys used custom made guns, and even the factory guns of the day were far better than today. You have to spend darn near $1000 dollars to get a decent walnut stocked American made gun nowadays,( like Winchester's Super Grade), and most folks won't do it. Since the bedding of a synthetic is cheaper to control, it's no wonder the average synthetic shoots better than a cheap, poorly bedded piece of hardwood that might or might not even be walnut. Sorry for the long post, but I think thats why the old-timers had fewer guns than we all seem to, they spent their bucks on quality, instead of quantity.

beemanbeme · « **Reply #17 on:** February 16, 2005, 01:09:32 PM »

Ramrod, there's a good bit of truth in what you say but you lost it when you complained about having to spend $1000 to get a decent rifle nowadays. Figure out how much $1000 would have been back in Oconnor's hay day. Back when the average worker made $60 a week or less.
Folks want to complain about the QA on modern rifles but if Rem/Win/Rug were to come along and say "hey guys, we're gonna hand lap the barrels and true up the actions and do all those neat things that have to be done to bring out the best in a rifle and test fire for group every rifle we make. And we're gonna jack the price up another $400." The hew and cry would register on the Rector scale. To me, its a real hoot to listen to folks whine about the lack of quality in a Remington and then turn around and suggest that a fellow buy a Savage. Give me a break.

pastorp · « **Reply #18 on:** February 16, 2005, 03:25:41 PM »

Don Fisher, I have owned remington synthetic stocks and did not feel they were best quality. I am very happy with my Weatherby ultra-light weight stock. Much better quality.

A few years ago I went hunting with a new hunting pardner here in an unnamed creek for brown bears. He had borrowed a ruger all weather rifle in 338win. mag. but the owner had given him the bolt out of his identical ruger 30/06. When we figured out the problem he got out his tried and true, covered with rust 700 rem. in 243 cal. When he turned the power ring the cross hairs would rotate with it and the rifle was really unusable like it was. That left him with a S&W 25-5 in 45LC as his only gun that worked. I was not giving him mine, Might need it you know. Anyway we started out in a 18 ft. skiff. As we neared the creek I noticed he had laid his revolver in the self-bailing well at the stern of the skiff. When he slowed down the wake came over that part of the stern and his revolver and holster were awash. Oh well whats a little more salt water.

The attitude of some people is amazing when it comes to guns. Later that night I disassembled his revolver and cleaned and lubed it. Been working on the surface rust ever since trying to keep up with it for him.

As far as me I'm a stainless or better yet hard chrome and synthetic stock guy. Regards, Byron

Dave in WV · « **Reply #19 on:** February 16, 2005, 03:39:16 PM »

I say buy what you like. There are so many variations of stocks and finishes because there are so many diferent tastes. Kinda like beer or pickup trucks. If you want a chevy or light beer go for it. I drive a Dodge and like the darker heavier beer myself. :grin:

FURocious · « **Reply #20 on:** February 16, 2005, 03:54:46 PM »

Quote from: Ramrod

In my experience, drastic POI changes in wood stock rifles are almost always caused by poor bedding. The reason "O'Connor, Carmichel, Keith et al" didn't have these problems is that they didn't have the cheap crapola the major gunmakers are foisting on us now. Don't forget, these guys used custom made guns, and even the factory guns of the day were far better than today. You have to spend darn near $1000 dollars to get a decent walnut stocked American made gun nowadays,( like Winchester's Super Grade), and most folks won't do it. Since the bedding of a synthetic is cheaper to control, it's no wonder the average synthetic shoots better than a cheap, poorly bedded piece of hardwood that might or might not even be walnut. Sorry for the long post, but I think thats why the old-timers had fewer guns than we all seem to, they spent their bucks on quality, instead of quantity.

I would have to say that is some excellent conveyance of logic and truth.

FURocious · « **Reply #21 on:** February 16, 2005, 04:03:39 PM »

Zachary,

You have to take into account the "totality of the contibuting factors" which changed your POI.

- The stock might have contibuted 5%

- The temperature effect on velocity, thus changing burn rate, thus changing barrel harmonics, 70%

- The change in clothing 10%

- Change in shooters concentration in inclimate weather 15%.

I've noticed I don't shoot as well when I'm freezing, when compared to drinking iced tea out of a lawn chair between shots on a warm spring day.

As you stated, you only have one experience to draw from and you mentioned that wasn't enough to make a valid conclusion, so all of this was basically just FYI. :grin:

Zachary · « **Reply #22 on:** February 16, 2005, 05:17:06 PM »

Yea, I readily admit that my conclusion was not exactly proven or scientific. Despite the fact that I'm a lawyer, I do seek the truth.

I can see (and agree) that it is a combination of factors, but I was kinda surprised to hear you say that change in temperature is about 70% the reason for the change in POI. I can neither confirm nor deny, but what do you base it on? Making a rough uneducated guess, I would think that maybe it would be somewhere in the 25% range or so, but 70%? Isn't that kinda high?

Zachary

FURocious · « **Reply #23 on:** February 16, 2005, 05:56:45 PM »

Quote from: Zachary

Yea, I readily admit that my conclusion was not exactly proven or scientific. Despite the fact that I'm a lawyer, I do seek the truth.

I can see (and agree) that it is a combination of factors, but I was kinda surprised to hear you say that change in temperature is about 70% the reason for the change in POI. I can neither confirm nor deny, but what do you base it on? Making a rough uneducated guess, I would think that maybe it would be somewhere in the 25% range or so, but 70%? Isn't that kinda high?

Zachary

I base my temperature effects from a college biology science project I conducted via the scientific method a few years back. (I have since conducted numerous testings)

I used hodgdon powders to support a hypothesis that a change in temperature would change bullet velocity. I really got a kick out of the experiment because not only was a doing the project for a grade, I was seing if the Hodgdon "Extreme" line of powders were really temperature insensitive. So, there I was videotaping loading bullets, shooting a rifle through my chrony, and measuring the ambient temp with a wind/temp meter. Friggin college punks didn't know what to think of this older, non-traditional, "Towny" student.

Well, my hypothesis was supported. Temperature did indeed affect bullet velocity. My secondary finding was the extreme line of Hodgdon powders are NOT temperature insensitive. If they were, my hypothesis wouldn't have been supported by data because velocity wouldn't have changed. So ha... Hodgdon marketing! Actually I found that every 10 degree change in temperature yeilded a 30 fps change in velocity when reducing from 70-30 degrees. Velocity climbed at a higher rate at temperature increases starting at 70 and going up. From 30 degrees and lower, the velocity change begins stabilizing.

Now, as far as POI shift, reloaders experience changes in POI shifts during load development when finding thier perfect recipe. Powders burn at different rates giving varying pressures to propel the bullet. The varying recipes change the barrel harmonics. A bullet fired at 3100 fps will ring a different tune on the barrel than a bullet traveling 2900 fps, or 3300 fps.

Relevence, when the temperature reduces the velocity, the harmonics change. The barrel also rings a little differently in hot temps vs. cold temps. A piece of steel shrinks in cold weather and expands in hot weather.

So, this is why temperature and barrel harmonics play the biggest role in POI.

Ramrod · « **Reply #24 on:** February 16, 2005, 11:45:27 PM »

I think the barrel harmonics issue is the reason why in a hunting rifle some gunsmiths like a small bedding area under the barrel at the end of the forearm. It dampens the vibration and provides slight upward pressure on the barrel. Idea being that consistant P.O.I. is more important than smallest group size.

Zachary · « **Reply #25 on:** February 17, 2005, 03:58:11 AM »

Quote from: FURocious

Quote from: Zachary
Yea, I readily admit that my conclusion was not exactly proven or scientific. Despite the fact that I'm a lawyer, I do seek the truth.

I can see (and agree) that it is a combination of factors, but I was kinda surprised to hear you say that change in temperature is about 70% the reason for the change in POI. I can neither confirm nor deny, but what do you base it on? Making a rough uneducated guess, I would think that maybe it would be somewhere in the 25% range or so, but 70%? Isn't that kinda high?

Zachary

I base my temperature effects from a college biology science project I conducted via the scientific method a few years back. (I have since conducted numerous testings)

I used hodgdon powders to support a hypothesis that a change in temperature would change bullet velocity. I really got a kick out of the experiment because not only was a doing the project for a grade, I was seing if the Hodgdon "Extreme" line of powders were really temperature insensitive. So, there I was videotaping loading bullets, shooting a rifle through my chrony, and measuring the ambient temp with a wind/temp meter. Friggin college punks didn't know what to think of this older, non-traditional, "Towny" student.

Well, my hypothesis was supported. Temperature did indeed affect bullet velocity. My secondary finding was the extreme line of Hodgdon powders are NOT temperature insensitive. If they were, my hypothesis wouldn't have been supported by data because velocity wouldn't have changed. So ha... Hodgdon marketing! Actually I found that every 10 degree change in temperature yeilded a 30 fps change in velocity when reducing from 70-30 degrees. Velocity climbed at a higher rate at temperature increases starting at 70 and going up. From 30 degrees and lower, the velocity change begins stabilizing.

Now, as far as POI shift, reloaders experience changes in POI shifts during load development when finding thier perfect recipe. Powders burn at different rates giving varying pressures to propel the bullet. The varying recipes change the barrel harmonics. A bullet fired at 3100 fps will ring a different tune on the barrel than a bullet traveling 2900 fps, or 3300 fps.

Relevence, when the temperature reduces the velocity, the harmonics change. The barrel also rings a little differently in hot temps vs. cold temps. A piece of steel shrinks in cold weather and expands in hot weather.

So, this is why temperature and barrel harmonics play the biggest role in POI.

FURocious,

Well, that makes sense. I don't know much about reloading, specifically the degree to which powder companies market their powder as temperature insensitive, but your experiment makes sense.

I'm a little confused about something though. I understand the loss of velocity due to the temperature change, and also your thoughts about change in POI. However, remember that with my Browning Stainless Stalker, the gun shot in the same place with the same tight groups. So then why didn't the weather affect the Browning?

I would guess that maybe the powder in the factory ammo was different. At that point in time, I usually used only Federal Premium ammo, but I can't rule out the possibility of having used another brand. Perhaps whatever factory ammo I was using was in fact not temperature sensitive, or at least very little sensitive? Again, both guns (the wood stocked and the Stainless Stalker) were exposed to the same weather conditions at about the same time. Is there perhaps something to do with the fact that one gun was blued and the other was stainless? Perhaps the metal in each type of metal is affected differently by the weather? I don't know.

Still, some of this has enlightened me, and I find this advanced topic interesting. :grin:

Zachary

Don Fischer · « **Reply #26 on:** February 17, 2005, 04:06:49 AM »

If I thought that that forend up pressure improved accuracy, I'ed use it. In fact I had a rifle at one time that did like it. But as to POI or accuracy, How many shot's does anyone plan on shooting a game without cleaning their rifle? My worst shooting rifle doesn't start loosing it until, usually the 8th or 9th shot. All I use it for is coyote's and I've never seen 8 in one day, not even in a zoo! None of my other's loose it, concidering a hunting standard of 1 1/2", for 15 plus shot's. How many shot's do you think that critter is going to give you?

If up lift work's fine. Overall I've found it doesn't. I spend a lot more time shooting at paper than at game and I like to see as small a group as possible.