-
We had an unusually warm (and windy) weekend so I got to the range with my Labradar chronograph to compare a standard 6" barrel (BAR506SR) and the IMB barrel that my gun came with. The new barrel dropped right in and both functioned perfectly with full power ammo (which is all I had). The difference in felt recoil was definitely noticeable but I wouldn't say it was a huge difference. I was mainly there to get chrono data and blast some gallon jugs of water on video so I didn't compare how well I could put groups on a target with each barrel. I'll do that next time I'm at my local indoor range. I will say the standard barrel w/o the muzzle brake generates some amazing fire rings that are visible in direct sunlight.
As for the chronograph results, I foolishly left my ProChrono optical unit at home and only brought my Labradar unit and it was being temperamental. The first issue was it suddenly decided to stop recognizing my SD card once I got to the range. The built in audio trigger was very flaky so I had to switch to the ballistic trigger. And somehow the muzzle blast, even at 18" away, was enough to rattle the the AA batteries around and shut the off the Labradar without recording a shot. Very strange. Using an external battery and a USB cable I was able to keep it powered up with each shot. With all the unrecorded shots in the beginning, I was getting grumpy and stingy with ammo so some of the ammo / barrel combos comparison are based on only 5 shot strings. I'll paste in the data straight from excel and hopefully the formatting won't be completely lost.
Manufacturer |
Hornady XTP |
Hornady XTP |
Underwood |
Underwood |
Reloads |
Reloads |
Reloads |
Reloads |
Bullet |
300 gr. |
300 gr. |
300 gr. |
300 gr. |
300 gr. |
300 gr. |
325 gr. |
325 gr. |
Barrel |
6" Std |
6" IMB |
6" Std |
6" IMB |
6" Std |
6" IMB |
6" Std |
6" IMB |
|
1250 |
1246 |
1297 |
1225 |
1332 |
1238 |
1315 |
1292 |
|
1294 |
1237 |
1401 |
1221 |
1269 |
1264 |
1310 |
1323 |
|
1269 |
1256 |
1361 |
1275 |
1280 |
1269 |
1373 |
1319 |
|
1298 |
1261 |
1337 |
1355 |
1247 |
1249 |
1348 |
1319 |
|
1307 |
1285 |
1383 |
1369 |
1328 |
1258 |
1336 |
1313 |
|
1303 |
|
1419 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1278 |
|
1283 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1263 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1308 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1305 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average FPS |
1288 |
1257 |
1354 |
1289 |
1291 |
1256 |
1336 |
1313 |
IMB FPS loss |
|
31 |
|
65 |
|
36 |
|
23 |
Compared to the previous readings from the ProChrono optical chronograph I'd say the 1289 fps average of the Underwood 300 gr. ammo using the IMB barrel is atypical and you wouldn't normally lose 65 fps with the IMB. So from this small test I'd sum things up by saying that when shooting full power ammo the IMB provides a noticeable reduction in felt recoil at the expense of 25-50 fps at the muzzle, which ain't bad.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules