https://plus.google.com/+luckygunner/posts/ZZPNiRXyqYm
Here is a brief and interesting write-up on addressing barrel twists and stability issues for 5.56mm ammunition. I thought it was worth posting.
hey buddy, thanks for the post. This was a very great read for a first timer as myself. Shed lots of info for being as brief as it was.
Thanks for the post
We’ve shot 2 1/9 (nominal) barrels that ran 77s fine. One is a bolt gun that we shoot the 77s out to 1000 yards.
I see nothing new in this article. I don’t get the point of anecdotal findings that bring nothing new to the table.
There is a fairly interesting article on bullet stabilization in the December 2012 issue of handloader… interesting stuff in that one that goes deeper than anecdotal gibber jabber.
Meh, nothing at all new.
Thanks for the quick read, but there really wasn’t anything substantial here. Barrel lengths were all different, linings, chamberings…and scopes. I think it would have been more conclusive to use all same spec barrels minus twist rate…use the same scope too.
Taking this read with a grain of salt…
Anecdotal gibber jabber, eh? The author did state the article was based on preliminary testing, or was that missed?
What I find interesting is the fact folks are willing to be critical about the article being anecdotal (which the author clearly explains) while ignoring the perpetuation the “over stabilization” myth
Exactly.
Are you suggesting overstabilization IS or IS NOT a myth?
Although I don’t find that it’s possible to be OVER stabile in the literal sense… In other words I don’t think a bullet spinning faster than necessary is harming accuracy.
However bullets do have RPM limitations… and certain bullets spun fast enough will disintegrate in flight. This is not a myth.
Clearly, this is news to some of us on the newer side of things. No harm no foul.
Yeah… but it’s offensive to us pinky up types. 
Bullets cannot be over stabilized. They are either stable in flight or they are not.
I do know that subjected to excessive RPMs bullets will start coming apart from the centrifugal force. I have seen this first hand on a pet load my father had for his 22-250 driving the Hornady SX bullets designed for 223 velocities to 3800 fps. They were so close to coming apart in flight they would leave a blue-grey dust trail behind them from the lead leaking out of the jacket. The bullets would explode into fragments even hitting tiny branches or leaves. Boy did they do a number when they connected with a jackrabbit!
So we’re in agreement as far as I can tell.
I’d listen a little harder if it was different barrel lengths from them same guns, same optic. That’s like comparing a Yugo to a Honda to a F350 cause they all have wheels…kinda.
I’m the first to admit, I’ve got shit to learn, not there though.
Yep. I’m just amused about the article being criticized for anecdotal gibber jabber when the part about “over stabilization” causing bullet yaw and jacket failure (a real “shoulder thing that goes up” moment) goes unoticed
Could you kindly clarify what you mean?
So there is no such thing as over-stabilization?
If so, what it is it called when a bullet is spinning faster than its ideal rate? (You even described your dad’s .22-250 going so fast that lead particles were separating out of the jacket.)
I am confused.
As I said before- A bullet is either stable in flight or it is unstable. It cannot be “over stable”.
When a bullet is spinning so fast, centrifugal force is ripping it apart, that is excessive RPM or it’s spinning too fast, it is not “over stabilized”.
If a bullet is spinning so fast it yaws or has excessive precession, it is not “over stable” it is unstable
Understood.
I suppose then it is just a matter of semantics. I could see how the layperson would misuse the term “over-stable.”
That term is starting to make less and less sense. 
Over spun?
Yes… this topic is totally over spun! :sarcastic: