Although I’ve never been deeply involved in long distance rifle shooting, I do have some appreciation of how the ammunition and equipment have evolved and improved over the past 50+ years. As I look at the results that skilled shooters can achieve and everything they use to achieve them, I’ve been wondering what’s next?

The one thing I see discussed over and over is barrel life, and the limits that factor places on the practical appeal of certain cartridges. For the fully-equipped and skilled shooter who can replace his own barrels it may not be a big deal, but despite my gunsmithing knowledge and experience, it’s not something I’m ever likely to attempt myself. For the prospective purchaser of a particular rifle and cartridge combination, therefore, I wonder if there’s some possible process or metallurgical advance that would make concerns about burning out a barrel in 1000 super hot rounds a thing of the past.

Any thoughts from the experts?

The next big advancement is going to be "smart" scopes. There are already some on the market (i.e. Swarovski dS), but the technology is still in its infancy.

As for barrel life, unlike handguns, centerfire rifles start losing accuracy as a result of throat erosion, rather than the rifling wearing out. I don't foresee any metallurgical improvements that could significantly reduce this phenomenon. Extreme pressure and heat cause steel to erode. That's basic physics. What is more likely is the increased proliferation of rifles with quick-change barrel systems. They are already popular in Europe due to laws that restrict the amount of guns a person can own, and I can see them becoming more common in North America with the increased popularity of long range competitive shooting and overbore "barrel burner" cartridges.

I'm hoping for an app to help calculate bullet impact. One that actually works with directions that can be followed by someone who isn't a ballistician.

quote:

Originally posted by capp325:
What is more likely is the increased proliferation of rifles with quick-change barrel systems. They are already popular in Europe due to laws that restrict the amount of guns a person can own, and I can see them becoming more common in North America with the increased popularity of long range competitive shooting and overbore "barrel burner" cartridges.

Agree. AI has been doing the quick change barrel for awhile. For the average Joe, pre-fit barrels with a barrel nut of some sort is getting more and more available. More action builders use Savage tenon threads to accommodate pre-fit barrels. More gunsmiths are offering pre-fit barrels..... With the tolerances custom actions are being built at today, lots of gunsmiths offer shouldered chambered barrels also. I've put on a friends Dasher barrel from his Bighorn action onto my Bighorn and the headspace is perfect. I can swap same caliber barrels between my two actions...... Swapping barrels with a vice and wrench, no different then putting a nut on a bolt!

Ex. https://www.bugholes.com/category-s/1820.htm

quote:

Originally posted by offgrid:
Agree. AI has been doing the quick change barrel for awhile. For the average Joe, pre-fit barrels with a barrel nut of some sort is getting more and more available. More action builders use Savage tenon threads to accommodate pre-fit barrels. More gunsmiths are offering pre-fit barrels..... With the tolerances custom actions are being built at today, lots of gunsmiths offer shouldered chambered barrels also. I've put on a friends Dasher barrel from his Bighorn action onto my Bighorn and the headspace is perfect. I can swap same caliber barrels between my two actions...... Swapping barrels with a vice and wrench, no different then putting a nut on a bolt!

Ex. https://www.bugholes.com/category-s/1820.htm

Vice and wrench??? There are much more elegant solutions than that. Look, for example, at how quick change barrels work on Sauer 202/404 and Mauser M03 rifles. No need for a vice or wrench or any of that nonsense. The only tool needed is a screwdriver to loosen a couple of bolts. Takes about 30 seconds to replace a barrel. Or how about Merkel Helix. You don't even need a screwdriver. Just remove the barrel with a push of a button.

I don't understand why American gunmakers still can't figure out something that the Germans have been doing for decades. A Savage-style barrel nut system is really crude in comparison.

I know that throat erosion is what usually causes high power rifle barrels to be “shot out.” The throat is part of the barrel so it’s included in my question about what advances in processes or metallurgy might alleviate that problem. I don’t believe, however, that it’s a, “Ye canna changes the laws of physics, Captain,” issue. Steels used in barrels in the 21st century, for example, are far different than what gunmakers had available in the 19th, and that was accomplished without changing our view of the universe. Just as the “Nitron” used on SIG pistol slides virtually eliminated finish wear from holsters and other causes, I wonder if someone will develop a process to reduce the effects of throat erosion. With the military moving toward cartridges like the 300 PRC for its snipers, I would think there might be some incentive to improve barrel life.

As for ballistics solvers, I don’t consider myself to be a ballistician, and yet find the Applied Ballistics version to be usable. The online JBM calculator is a little simpler. The less complicated a solver is, the less accurate it is as well, but keep in mind that things like Coriolis drop, spin drift, and aerodynamic “jump” become important only at extended ranges. The longest range I have readily available is a bit less than 500 yards, and those things amount to only fractions of an inch even at 308 Winchester velocities. I can only hope the day will come when such factors are things I need to worry about.

Applied Ballistics is available for smartphones as well as computers, and there’s even a version available in a Kestrel weather monitor. The Kestrel “Drop” is a separate monitor that sends atmospheric pressure and other data to a phone and integrates it automatically in the ballistics solver. The AB solver does require a understanding what the inputs are, but that’s just a matter of reading the instructions or asking questions such as on this forum.

Thanks for the comments about user-changeable barrels. That’s something I’m not very familiar with.

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:
I'm hoping for an app to help calculate bullet impact. One that actually works with directions that can be followed by someone who isn't a ballistician.

StrelokPro

quote:

Originally posted by capp325:
The next big advancement is going to be "smart" scopes. There are already some on the market (i.e. Swarovski dS), but the technology is still in its infancy.

That’s another interesting point. I haven’t seen much, if any discussion here, but I agree that they are a wave of the future as some shooters start to believe that such scopesights will make them into infallible 800-yard pronghorn killers. Of course, for those who spend $4000 on one and discover that it doesn’t work like that, it could create a backlash that might dampen the market. But if they become cheap enough maybe it won’t matter.

My question is who will really benefit from such sights. One review of the Swarovski dS indicated that the optical quality wasn’t up to what is usually expected of the maker’s line; I can’t imagine some of our Precision Rifle guys being satisfied with that. And even if the calculator factors in all the subtle effects I mentioned before, a hunter who isn’t all that skilled as a shooter and is perhaps relying on factory data for bullet velocity and ballistic coefficient, plus can’t read the wind all that well could still become very disappointed very quickly.

As I say, though, I do agree that we’re seeing only the first ones and many scope companies will feel compelled to follow suit just so they won’t be left behind. It will be interesting to see what develops.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
That’s another interesting point. I haven’t seen much, if any discussion here, but I agree that they are a wave of the future as some shooters start to believe that such scopesights will make them into infallible 800-yard pronghorn killers. Of course, for those who spend $4000 on one and discover that it doesn’t work like that, it could create a backlash that might dampen the market. But if they become cheap enough maybe it won’t matter.

My question is who will really benefit from such sights. One review of the Swarovski dS indicated that the optical quality wasn’t up to what is usually expected of the maker’s line; I can’t imagine some of our Precision Rifle guys being satisfied with that. And even if the calculator factors in all the subtle effects I mentioned before, a hunter who isn’t all that skilled as a shooter and is perhaps relying on factory data for bullet velocity and ballistic coefficient, plus can’t read the wind all that well could still become very disappointed very quickly.

As I say, though, I do agree that we’re seeing only the first ones and many scope companies will feel compelled to follow suit just so they won’t be left behind. It will be interesting to see what develops.

Anytime you try to automate a task that previously required a degree of manual skill, the initial results are going to be suboptimal. Early automatic transmission weren't particularly good and took about half-an-hour to shift a gear (I'm exaggerating but not by much). Early point-and-shoot cameras weren't great either.

I don't know how well the dS works, but I have no doubt that in a few years the technology will be refined to a point where the scope does everything for you, including measuring wind speed. Whether that's good or bad depends on how much you like math...

Most of the long range competitive shooters have moved towards very high BC bullets in cartridges that are not so overbore as to be extreme barrel burners.

6.5, 6mm Creedmoor, 6x47 in the PRS type events.

Bryan Litz of Berger Bullets just introduced a couple new cartridges for extreme long range shooting out to 2 miles plus or minus.


Nobody is really chasing extreme velocity anymore, they are chasing extreme precision and efficiency. Seems to me that making good wind calls is the make or break variable.

A device that could measure wind speed and mirage at distance would add more utility than a couple hundred more FPS.

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:
I'm hoping for an app to help calculate bullet impact. One that actually works with directions that can be followed by someone who isn't a ballistician.

Strelok Pro is a fantastic resource but it requires good data input. You must have a chronograph to input your real world bullet speed. Although even a chronograph isn't always perfect. My 73gr ELD from a 223 flies flatter than what my chronograph and Strelok says it should.

There is a Truing function in Strelok that will allow you to account for such discrepancies.


Strelok Pro is very easy to use but long range shooting isn't something that you can do well without putting in some homework to have an accurate picture of what your rifle and ammo are doing in the real world.

That manufacturers muzzle velocity on the side of your box of ammo ain't gonna cut it if you want to shoot past half a mile.

I don't see all this tech and gadgets as advancement, it's sort of the opposite.

quote:

Originally posted by cas:
I don't see all this tech and gadgets as advancement, it's sort of the opposite.

It is simply necessary if hit probability is going to improve. At extreme long range, a 30 yard error in range estimation is a miss. Same thing with a 2 mph error in a wind read.

Time for TOW-lite and laser designators...

Always improving gear.

The Hog saddle on a tripod was a big deal a few years back. Along comes Really Right Stuff, a well established high quality video tripod manufacturer now offers a line of tripods and various heads targeted towards long range shooting. We're going to see more and more chassis cut with a Swiss Arca rails to accommodate leveling bases/ball heads. Lots of manufacturers are making rails to adapt to existing stocks/chassis. EX: https://www.area419.com/produc...ry/accessories/arca/

Shot off of fritz's RRS tripod at team match we shot together last October, huge difference in stability compared to my wet noodle Manfrotto tripod/saddle. I've had this RRS tripod/Leveling base for a couple months now. Added a Swiss Arca rail to my chassis. What I can hold with this set up.... In the picture height kneeling I can keep the reticle on a 1/2-5/8 dot at 100yds. I have a 100yd target set up, learn a lot simply seeing how small of a dot I can hold with the reticle w/o firing the rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by cas:
I don't see all this tech and gadgets as advancement, it's sort of the opposite.

Which means you have never really shot at distance. That's fine -- nobody starts with long distance targets.

Let's assume you have a .22lr rifle and you want to shoot at "long distance" for rimfire. A 250 yard range isn't out of the question for many people. And let's assume you have a 4" plate at 200 yards and a 5" plate at 250 yards. In other words, 2 MOA targets -- which according to the sub-MOA all day long when I do my part once in a blue moon internet snipers, is easy peasy.

Assuming 5,000 foot Density Altitude, a quality sub-sonic 40 grain round such as Eley EPS Match needs 23.5 MOA of elevation for 200 yards and 33.5 MOA of elevation for 250 yards. Setting your scope's elevation at 23.5 MOA for 200 yards, if your actual target distance isn't within 5 yards +/- of 200 yards, you won't hit the target. Setting your elevation at 33.5 MOA for 250 yards, if your actual target distance isn't with 4 yards +/- of 250 yards, you won't hit the target.

As for windage, you must estimate the wind speed within 2.5 mph to hit the 200 yard target, and within 2 mph to hit the 250 yard target.

Now try hitting those targets without:
- a range finder to determine the true distance
- a chronograph to determine muzzle velocity
- a weather gauge to determine air density and wind speed
- a ballistic program to determine bullet drop and drift
- a scope with enough elevation adjustment to dial 33 MOA and still have a clear picture
- a reticle that can help with elevation and windage holds
- and let's not forget all the technology advances that got the rifle, barrel, and ammo to the point that it actually can shoot sub-MOA

Of course we could always regress to the days of black powder and vernier sights. The challenge is having Tom Selleck (Quigley Down Under) and Burt Lancaster (Valdez is Coming) around to shoot such rifles with the stunning accuracy that Hollywood states is so simple to do.

I just got back from SHOT 2019 where I actually got to play quite a bit with the latest evolution and current state of the art in long range optics. There were two scopes in the March booth that were absolutely stunning.

The first one I already talked about last year, but it was finally there in the booth and I understand the first shipment had just arrived in the USA. I'm talking about the Genesis scope. You can go the stickied thread above for a link to pictures and I will add a lot more detail in there because it's a truly amazing scope, albeit on for a particular niche: ELR.

The other scope was a total surprise when I got to the booth on Tuesday morning and we were putting the scopes on display. This scope is dubbed the PRS scope and to my mind it brings the optics for that game to a new level. I will add details of this scope in the stickied thread also.

The highlights of this evolution are things that stretch the optical capabilities of the optics. In the case of the Genesis, it's the 350MOA of up elevation available while still looking through the middle of the scope (the sweet spot.) That's 100mils of up elevation. That is huge. It also has 150MOA of windage (75L/75R). I believe that translates to 42mils total.

The other scope also stretches the limits by being a 5-42X which is 1:8.4 zoom ratio. This 5-42X56 FFP scope is only 14 inches long where others in that range are 17 inches or more and the weight is 33 ounces. So, high magnification, high zoom ratio in a compact package. It has 140 MOA of elevation range (70up/70down), so slap a 30 or 40MOA ramp under it and you have 100 or 110MOA of up elevation. And it focuses at 10 yards.

This has set a new level in state of the art and I see more of this in the future. I don't know that any higher magnification is worthwhile when looking through atmospheric conditions, but the zoom ratio and the adjustment range will probably keep growing. The size of that package may continue to shrink but I don't see it getting smaller that this until we either get to phase/Fresnel lenses or go digital. However, even digital will still gain from any optical improvements.

The issue with wind measurements is that whatever conditions you can measure with devices will be at you position. I've shipped enough jacketed lead 1000 yards downrange in individual high speed shipments to know that the wind at you position is essentially meaningless. Wind comes in gradients and when you measure the wind with your outstretched arm at the line, whatever you get there has little to do with the wind a few inches off the ground for the first 100-200 yards of the journey.

I have yet to see a handheld Doppler radar station that you can use to get the wind velocity at 500 yards or 800 yards and so on.

Another new way of measuring wind would be to digitize the image through the scope and see if you can get a velocity for that mirage in your scope and the actual angle from the trajectory. Maybe you can get the spotting scope to measure the wind velocity from the grass or the branches and feed that to the riflescope via Bluetooth.

So, to my mind, until we go digital, the trend is for better optics in a smaller package.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by capp325:
The next big advancement is going to be "smart" scopes. There are already some on the market (i.e. Swarovski dS), but the technology is still in its infancy.

That’s another interesting point. I haven’t seen much, if any discussion here, but I agree that they are a wave of the future as some shooters start to believe that such scopesights will make them into infallible 800-yard pronghorn killers. Of course, for those who spend $4000 on one and discover that it doesn’t work like that, it could create a backlash that might dampen the market. But if they become cheap enough maybe it won’t matter.

My question is who will really benefit from such sights. One review of the Swarovski dS indicated that the optical quality wasn’t up to what is usually expected of the maker’s line; I can’t imagine some of our Precision Rifle guys being satisfied with that. And even if the calculator factors in all the subtle effects I mentioned before, a hunter who isn’t all that skilled as a shooter and is perhaps relying on factory data for bullet velocity and ballistic coefficient, plus can’t read the wind all that well could still become very disappointed very quickly.

As I say, though, I do agree that we’re seeing only the first ones and many scope companies will feel compelled to follow suit just so they won’t be left behind. It will be interesting to see what develops.

I looked at the specs on that Swaro dS. It stated a light transmission factor of 83%. That is sad. I can help but wonder if that's because of the active focal plane or if it's just the use of bad optics. One should expect better from a $5000 scope.

Have you ever seen the "digital bugle" they use more and more to play taps at funerals? Do you look at them as an advancement in bugling?

quote:

Originally posted by cas:
Have you ever seen the "digital bugle" they use more and more to play taps at funerals? Do you look at them as an advancement in bugling?

Last I looked, this is a website directed at firearms enthusiasts, not musicians. But if you wish to use a straw man argument to back up your lack of experience with long range shooting, so be it.