Ned,
Whats your take on the Wylde chamber?
Printable View
Ned,
Whats your take on the Wylde chamber?
I second that...............
Resurrecting this thread, from Ned's latest in SWAT, a Wylde, a true Wylde, is as generous dimensionally as a NATO chamber in all of the body dimensions.
The throat diameter is the only dimension where it's tighter than a NATO chamber. The neck is more generous, the throat is longer, and the leade angle is the same.
Is there some dimension you're aware of that makes the Wylde less reliable? Is it the throat dimension that you believe detracts from it's relaibility? Have you seen Randall's posted reamer dimensions? Have you seen the data Ned posted in the SWAT article?
Grant,
I totally agree. When I was on the Battalion Rifle Team we were shooting at pop-ups with the M16A2 at 500M and with good consistency. Were they effective? Who knows. Having said that I believe that most engagements in theater and elsewhere are happening at 300M or less. The M16/ M4 is more than capable of making hits at those distances. What I want it a weapon that goes bang every time I pull the trigger and not "click".
.
The throat diameter is the only dimension where it's tighter than a NATO chamber. The neck is more generous, the throat is longer, and the leade angle is the same.
Is there some dimension you're aware of that makes the Wylde less reliable? Is it the throat dimension that you believe detracts from it's relaibility? Have you seen Randall's posted reamer dimensions? Have you seen the data Ned posted in the SWAT article?[/QUOTE]
I have to be honest, I haven't done much in the way of researching the actual differences in the Wylde and Nato 5.56 chambers. I can tell you that in my experience I have had trouble with the Wylde chambered barrels, they have been very picky as to the ammo they would digest, if the chamber dimensions are the same on paper then most of the manufactures have not stuck by it and are putting out some tight chambers. In today's times with ammo at the price it is, most of the shooting public need barrels that will work with the lower priced and lower quality ammo. Just my 2$ worth...................AD
A couple of questions, and I don't mean for the first to be insulting:Quote:
I have to be honest, I haven't done much in the way of researching the actual differences in the Wylde and Nato 5.56 chambers. I can tell you that in my experience I have had trouble with the Wylde chambered barrels, they have been very picky as to the ammo they would digest, if the chamber dimensions are the same on paper then most of the manufactures have not stuck by it and are putting out some tight chambers. In today's times with ammo at the price it is, most of the shooting public need barrels that will work with the lower priced and lower quality ammo. Just my 2$ worth...................AD
(1) Are you sure these are Wylde-chambered weapons? RRA's or some other? Or might they be some other match-style chamber, and you're just assuming they are Wylde's?
(2) Do you know the cleaning patterns of the operators? Are these guys who never clean their barrels and just occasionally lube the BCG with some CLP or lube? Any idea if the unreliability is evident with a recently cleaned weapon or only after many hundred rounds? I'm wondering if the .224-throated Wylde throat can't tolerate as many rounds between cleanings as a more generous .2265-.2270-throated NATO chamber? But run brush through the throat every so often, and the problem disappears? Just a theory......