What's Happening with the Beggs Cartridges?

Guys,

Can we talk about the 22 Beggs? This is the route I took - BAT S action, 1 in 15 Bartlein, 52 gn Bart's bullets.

I tried various powders - like H4198, Vit 130 but came back to Vit 133. I shot it in the 2008 season and won one match with a 0.21 agg. - my best agg. for some time! Most of the time though, it was frustratingly inconsistant - and capable of shooting embarassingly large groups on occasion! When I went back to a 6PPC it just seemed so 'solid' and easy to shoot.

What powders are you guys using with the 22 Beggs - I'd like to have another go with it next season.

Best regards
Vince (UK)
 
DanK said:
Gene .. Have you done a side by side comparison using H4198 in the Beggs and in the 6ppc to see if it has the same recoil?

Dan Kibler
Click to expand...


No, I have not tried it, but I'm sure it would take about two grains more powder to get the same velocity in the 6PPC since it has a bigger boiler room, then you're right back where you started; more muzzle blast and recoil.

Gene Beggs
 
VinceB said:
Guys,

Can we talk about the 22 Beggs? This is the route I took - BAT S action, 1 in 15 Bartlein, 52 gn Bart's bullets.

I tried various powders - like H4198, Vit 130 but came back to Vit 133. I shot it in the 2008 season and won one match with a 0.21 agg. - my best agg. for some time! Most of the time though, it was frustratingly inconsistant - and capable of shooting embarassingly large groups on occasion! When I went back to a 6PPC it just seemed so 'solid' and easy to shoot.

What powders are you guys using with the 22 Beggs - I'd like to have another go with it next season.

Best regards
Vince (UK)
Click to expand...


Vince, in the 220 Beggs, I believe you will find best results with Vit., N133 or Hodgdon's Benchmark. Use about 47 to 48 clicks on a Harrel's measure. The 52 grain bullets seem to shoot best at around 3550 to 3600 fps. Your 15 twist barrel is probably right on the borderline of being unstable in dense air. I would recommend a 13.5 to 14 twist.

Gene Beggs
 
My grandfather used to be fond of the Yogi Berra-ish "Ya don't know till you *know*".

He would use this on me when I tried to "mental" my way through something rather than by experiement/measurement.

So, you want to get the bottom of the actual recoil force? Measure it. Pretty simple to do.

Greg J.
 
SGJennings said:
My grandfather used to be fond of the Yogi Berra-ish "Ya don't know till you *know*".

He would use this on me when I tried to "mental" my way through something rather than by experiement/measurement.

So, you want to get the bottom of the actual recoil force? Measure it. Pretty simple to do.

Greg J.
Click to expand...



Greg, I'm open to suggestion. How do I measure recoil force?

Gene Beggs
 
There are a lot of ways to do it. Here are two quick jury-rigged ideas using things that you'll have around the house.

Method 1:

Snug up a set of old-fashioned bathroom scales behind the stock of rifle 1. Let fly. Observe the reading. Repeat till you have a good sample. Repeat exercise for rifle 2.


Method 2:

Rig a kids protractor with sliding arm or something similar so that the arm is behind the butt of rifle 1. You'll need to load up the rifle into the forend stop with a known force that is repeatable. A spring of some kind would be great. Let fly. Measure the displacement of the sliding arm on the protractor. If it's too short or too long, change the force loading the rifle. Repeat for rifle 2. Have to use the same force, of course. That's why it has to be something repeatable.

Heck, if you wanted to get fancy, you could use something like a bellville washer stack and dial indicator a'la the K&M arbor press.

Gerg J.
 
SGJennings said:
There are a lot of ways to do it. Here are two quick jury-rigged ideas using things that you'll have around the house.

Method 1:

Snug up a set of old-fashioned bathroom scales behind the stock of rifle 1. Let fly. Observe the reading. Repeat till you have a good sample. Repeat exercise for rifle 2.


Method 2:

Rig a kids protractor with sliding arm or something similar so that the arm is behind the butt of rifle 1. You'll need to load up the rifle into the forend stop with a known force that is repeatable. A spring of some kind would be great. Let fly. Measure the displacement of the sliding arm on the protractor. If it's too short or too long, change the force loading the rifle. Repeat for rifle 2. Have to use the same force, of course. That's why it has to be something repeatable.

Heck, if you wanted to get fancy, you could use something like a bellville washer stack and dial indicator a'la the K&M arbor press.

Gerg J.
Click to expand...

i dont think the bathroom scale is very plauseable due to the speed of the recoil, the design of the scale and the tolerance of a bathroom scale.
remember we are talking a small but measurable diff in the two.

what might work, but is still iffy, is an rcbs trigger pull gage. the older one has a sliding max indicator, and i do not know what the newer electronic has.

and...all friction need to be removed....not so easy.
so fire for recoil onlu not accuracy and use teflon/some slick plastic to support both ends of the gun. if both guns weight the same you could call it a wash for the numbers knowing its not perfect recoil number.
mike in co
 
Something I Forgot

My friend Stu Harvey reminded me that I should explain the difference between the original 220 Russian 'go' gauge and the Beggs 'go' gauge which is .010 shorter.

When I design and build something, I strive for perfection in every way right from the 'git-go', but as most of you know, that is almost impossible to achieve; the 220 and 6mm Beggs cartridges were no exception. :rolleyes:

During the planning stages, I studied and agonized over the dimensions for the chamber reamers and dies. I wanted everything to be as standard and uncomplicated as possible. I was determined to make everything fit perfectly so shooters would not experience the frustration of mismatched chambers, cases, dies etc.

With the exception of the sharper radius at the junction of the neck and shoulder, the chambers were to be exactly the same as the original 220 Russian cartridge and use the Lapua 220 Russian case as it came from the box. The Beggs cartridges would use the standard 220 Russian 'go' gauge. All was well, or so I thought. :eek: :rolleyes:

Bushing type sizing dies were ordered from Hornady and L.E. Wilson agreed to make the straight-line seater dies. All was well and good until some began complaining that the no-turn chambers were .010 too long for the Lapua 220 Russian case.

This was no problem with the tight-neck benchrest rifles as you get some crush fit as a result of the neck turning operation, but in an effort to get everything perfect, I decided the Beggs 'go'gauge should be ground .010 shorter than the 220 Russian. I should have stayed with the original 220 Russian 'go' gauge and that's what I do with the rifles I chamber, but for those who use the .010 short Beggs gauge; listen up. :eek:

The Hornady bushing-type sizing dies were designed for the 220 Russian 'go' gauge. If your chamber is headspaced on the Beggs 'go' gauge, which is .010 shorter, it is necessary to remove .010 from the bottom of the sizing die or top of the shell holder in order to bump the shoulders back when sizing.

So there you have it; warts and all. :rolleyes: :eek:

It's HARD to get anything perfect the first time; isn't it? But I tried, and let me be quick to say that if this has caused any grief on your part, I'll be happy to compensate you, make the modifications for you, whatever it takes to make you happy. :) It's really no big deal and any gunsmith worth his salt will not see this as a serious problem. I can assure you, Stuart Harvey understands it and any rifle he chambers in either 220 or 6mm Beggs, will shoot well and function perfectly.

Stu Harvey was quick to recognize the advantages of the Beggs cartridges and now shoots nothing else in his short range BR rifles. Such an endorsement from a man of his experience and stature is indeed, a great honor. :)

Thank you Stu :)

Gene Beggs
 
Donald said:
I just use this. Don't know whow accurate it is but there are others out there too. Just google for them.

http://www.huntamerica.com/recoil_calculator/

Donald
Click to expand...

Ah, that one takes an analytical viewpoint. We all know it's *at least* a good approximation.

Gene and others feel that there is less recoil from a smaller case, less powder charge even if it is sending an identical weight bullet downrange at identical velocity.

I have no opinion. I'm just brainstorming how to settle it. The way to measure that is to measure it for real at the buttstock.

Greg J.
 
recoil

Physics dictates that to move the same projectile, with the same friction coefficient (down the barrel), at the same speed the counter acting energy will be the alike. However as we know the "gun manners" of certain cartridges and gun combinations allow that energy to be expressed differantly.
IE the guns motions in recoil are differant which can translate to less "felt" or percieved recoil.
 
Greg and Capt Bill, you are considering only the recoil force generated by the bullet's acceleration down the bore. The greatest part of felt recoil is produced by the jet effect of the escaping high pressure gases at bullet exit. This fact is clearly demonstrated by muzzle brakes. A muzzle brake redirects the high pressure gases from forward to the side thereby greatly reducing felt recoil.

A faster burning powder that burns more completely before bullet exit results in less felt recoil. I first experienced this phenomena many years ago when I was trying to shoot W748 in the 6PPC. I had a fairly substantial quantity of 748 on hand and thought I would try it. I had been shooting H322. I had the Oehler 35 chronograph set up and was getting excellent accuracy at about 3330 fps with the H322. When I tried a case full of 748 the rifle acted like it was producing at least 3400 fps; it kicked like a mule and muzzle blast was noticeably greater but the chronograph showed only 3180 fps. Accuracy was terrible! When I returned to the H322 the rifle settled back down to normal.

FWIW

Gene Beggs
 
An overlooked piece of the puzzle

A big contributor to 'felt' recoil is muzzle pressure as it relates to powder burn rate. In general, the slower the burn rate of the powder, the higher the muzzle pressure and the higher the 'felt' recoil.

Here's an example:

Assuming the same rifle but with different chamberings: a 30BR firing a 118 gr. bullet @ 3050 with H4198 will have significantly less recoil than a 30X47 firing the same 118 bullet @ 3050 but using N135 powder. And a full length 308W spinning the same 118 out @ 3050 over N140 will have more recoil than either the 30BR or the 30X47.

We can see a good example of that when we compare the recoil figures from a 6PPC to a 30BR using the various recoil calculators available online. Assuming indentical rifles, a 6PPC with a 68 gr. bullet @ 3400 generates around 3.7 lbs. of recoil. A 30BR with a 118 @ 3050 shows around 7.5 lbs. of recoil. But anyone that's worked with both of these knows that the 30BR...while it has higher recoil...doesn't have twice the recoil of the 6PPC. The difference is in the muzzle pressure...N133 is a relatively slow powder for the PPC case size when compared to the faster H4198 in the larger BR case. When you continue on a bit further, you'll find the expansion ratio of both cartridges to be almost identical.





Good shootin'. :) -Al
 
Now, wait a second.

I proposed measuring force at the butt stock. Total force is total force regardless of the source.

It might also be possible to use a more sophisticated setup to measure the force profile. That is, the force as a function of time. I've seen this done, but I don't know of readily available equipment to do it.
 
total force is total force

Total force is total force however alot is absorbed by the flexing of of the barrel action and total rig. The way the guns moves ie muzzle kick etc absorbs as well. Muzzlebrakes redirect the gases backward to counter act recoil. The fast burnrate of the powder contributes to the gun manners ie the amplitude of flex. The force is the same if all is totalled.
I have 2 examples- one my 30br which if held tight has almost no recoil. In "free recoil" the force is allowed to redirect and the momentum is definately worse.
t2- my frined and I have very similar rilfes mine is 300 wm and his is 300 wsm. With the same powder charge and bullet the wsm has less felt recoil. The energy ( the fps of the 200gr Barnes I did this with) is alike but because of the movement of the gun the recoil characteristics are much differant.
Alot breaks down to harmonics and flex characteristics. That is why you will hear that a good shooting rifle "sounds" differant. Although years of shooting and large disaels hamper my ability to hear it.
 
I really don't understand how anyone thinks that measuring force at the butt stock isn't a good approximation of real recoil. But, what do I know, I'm an *electrical* engineer, not a ME.

Perceived recoil is something else. Ain't much way to measure without getting into measuring what's going on between the ears of the shooter. I don't think I want to get into that...
 
German Salazar said:
A smaller quantity of a faster burning powder in a barrel of the same bore diameter and length will generate less muzzle pressure. This will result in less disturbance to the bullet as it clear the muzzle, potentially enhancing accuracy and will create less felt recoil. Chamber pressure is important in recoil calculations but muzzle pressure can't be overlooked.

It would be nice to at least have a first name to be able to address you with, just as you were able to start your post with "Gene..."
Click to expand...

German,

Several ballisticians with whom I have spoken apply a "rule of thumb" for most cartridges when calculating recoil. In addition to that of the bullet they calculate 1 1/2 times the muzzle velocity of the bullet into the same equation using the mass of the powder charge. Their experience has been that there is an "instantaneous" acceleration of the powder gasses when the bullet exits the muzzle to approximately 1 1/2 times the bullet's muzzle velocity. This also creates a reverse flow where the powder gasses are passing the bullet from the back end and are a potential source of instability for the bullet. This is why some cartridges have experienced an improvement in accuracy with the use of a muzzle brake and why the recoil is reduced with the use of either a muzzle brake or a suppressor ("can").

Obviously, reducing the muzzle pressure reduces recoil as has been demonstrated with .22 LRs of various barrel lengths. (In anything much longer than a pistol barrel the small powder charge in a .22 LR is consumed and the pressure at bullet exit from the barrel is comparatively low. Even so, people have noted that various devices can reduce recoil.

Cheers,

Rick
 
A method I used for measuring recoil when playing with a muzzle brake was to clamp a barreled action in my rail gun. I shot it without the brake and measured the amount of movement of the rail. Then using the brake, I did the same and compared the difference. As I recall, the brake reduced the rail top recoil by 60%. It was very repeatable.

You would need 2 similar weight barrels, one in 6 PPC and the other in 6 Beggs to verify the real difference in the recoil.

Jim Carstensen
 
A couple of thoughts: :)

Right or wrong, here's my take on a couple of the things mentioned.....

muzzle brakes,

I think a muzzle brake works differently than some suggest. IMO the rifle fired with or without a muzzle brake recoils THE SAME until the bullet exits, at which point the rifle without the brake continues backwards with it's momentum unabated....... whereas the rifle with a muzzle brake captures a hunk of high velocity gas which would have been wasted and uses it to "pull the rifle forward." This "wasted energy," the energy given to the gas, is in fact reused by the system. It's like firing a cork popgun with or without a string attached to the cork. With the string attached the cork jerks the gun forward when it hits the end of the string. Total recoil force IS NOT THE SAME because something is added into the muzzle braked system.

Regarding the 30BR example cited by captbill, "one my 30br which if held tight has almost no recoil. In "free recoil" the force is allowed to redirect and the momentum is definately worse." ............ Again, I see this differently. IMO the 30BR allowed to move versus held tightly can be summed up thus. Two people, one holds a baseball bat against the cheek of the other and leans into it..... no real harm done. NOW, back the bat off the cheekbone a few inches and lean into it the same.... :eek:

I don't know that any force is "redirected" but it's applied differently and the effect is different. Total recoil force IS THE SAME, no added force.

opinionsby




al
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top