My understanding is that every barrel has its own resonant frequency. We adjust the jump to time the projectile exiting the muzzle as the oscillation is at its minimum. As the barrel is used the throat wears so the seating depth changes. My question is do I keep changing the jump to keep it the same as the throat wears or is it the distance from the ogive to the muzzle that has to remain constant ie leave it alone so the jump increases but muzzle to ogive remains constant?
My understanding is that every barrel has its own resonant frequency. NO, this understanding is flawed
We adjust the jump to time the projectile exiting the muzzle as the oscillation is at its minimum. NO
As the barrel is used the throat wears so the seating depth changes. Somewhat true, some "chase the lands"......some don't
My question is do I keep changing.............. muzzle to ogive remains constant? Noone could possibly measure that, and if they could it has no relevence
I just fitted a new barrel machined by the gunsmith who made the rifle to the same specs as the previous barrel and I noticed the base to ogive is just over 200 thou different. Grant Lovelock of True Flite in NZ used the same reamer. So I assume that a 284 Win wears that much over 1600 firings No, No, No.....while this last assumption is the logical conclusion based on your misunderstanding of the factors involved...... NO!
In the real world of typical gunsmiths two chambers "cut with the same reamer" are very rarely interchangeable. Guns don't "wear" on any dimension a thou per firing. Maybe 1 out of 1000 will allow you to interchange cases back and forth and none of them will tune interchangeably..... And a rifle which had over ten thousand firings ON THE BARREL once won The Super Shoot, one of the world's largest accuracy venues. At eleventy-hundred firings of a thou or more each that poor basterd would have been withdrawn into it's own foreskin so far as to have been impotent
I entered this conversation only because your final (logical?) conclusion could be dangerous. You've been fed some truly heinous information in your learning curve and it's led you to some really odd conclusions.
You seem a logical thinker. The problem with logical thinkers is that they have to get their information either via personal experimentation or from others, and these 'others' are most often a hot mess.
Good luck in your quest for meaningful information but please don't continue down your current thought path. Please broaden your information sources.
Maybe the current kings of this discussion board will stoop to help you but I doubt it ...... several of them will simply tell you "they don't waste pearls on swine" .......... and if I opine further this will turn into an argument as we've some folks here nursing ancient grudges against all forms of logical progression. And I'm firmly ensconced in the "swine" category, happy as a pig in sh!t
That said, there are no other information boards that can help you sort this out. ALL the forums have gone woke.... ALL the forums currently operating are loath to call any one opinion valid over another ...... here you at least do stand a chance of getting your information from actual successful shooters if you can find some in the mood to share.
Reread carefully John VM's reply. That is a good safe methodology he presents.... ie measure and work with what IS with no expectations and assuming NOTHING
sincerely
al