New proof PXT Gain twist barrels

[omicron1792]

That post, and a couple of earlier ones from Miles should do it.

Next guy said he got the exact opposite, worse groups.

 

[UncleNommies]

Comparing like products, carbon to carbon, 15% increase. $999 to $1149

View attachment 1086543

This is accurate! I had a 16.5" 7mm backcountry carbon prefit on order from J&A outdoors, saw the PXT version was in stock, paid the difference of $150 and it's on the rifle! Now I just need to figure out what scope I want

 

[nm.otter]

Next guy said he got the exact opposite, worse groups.

From a different load in a different gun -- using 5 shot groups.

 

[omicron1792]

From a different load in a different gun -- using 5 shot groups.

I would assume someone else shooting would have a different load from different gun.

I think reading that one post would be a bit disingenuous about the tenor of the thread. It was pretty mixed. The Bartlein barrel company owner was the most informative of the thread imo. He definitely has a vested interest in pxt not doing well. But also has much more knowledge than most to discuss the issue.

 

[Treelineasassin]

Next guy said he got the exact opposite, worse groups.

I mean the one fellow while pulled his Tikka supervarmint barrel was getting 5 shots groups in the 4s and 5s, and now was getting consistent 5 shot groups in 5s and 6s if I recall. Insignificant difference, especially at hunting distances.

It's one barrel sample. I'm not defending PXT but rather pointing out the difference of it shooting worse, but a small increase in groupsize is irrelevant for 90% of applications. Nobody is going to be shooting a carbon in benchrest.

 

[omicron1792]

I mean the one fellow while pulled his Tikka supervarmint barrel was getting 5 shots groups in the 4s and 5s, and now was getting consistent 5 shot groups in 5s and 6s if I recall. Insignificant difference, especially at hunting distances.

It's one barrel sample. I'm not defending PXT but rather pointing out the difference of it shooting worse, but a small increase in groupsize is irrelevant for 90% of applications. Nobody is going to be shooting a carbon in benchrest.

I don’t think “it’s not shooting worse” is the endorsement needed for new, more expensive tech.

The endorsers are claiming improved accuracy, velocity, and barrel life. If not, I just ask why.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I don’t think “it’s not shooting worse” is the endorsement needed for new, more expensive tech.

The endorsers are claiming improved accuracy, velocity, and barrel life. If not, I just ask why.

Well, comparing it to other carbon fiber barrels would be a start. Not a thick-ish contour steel barrel.

 

[SkunkCabbage]

I’m really curious to see if guys are shooting conventional brass cases at higher pressures and more speed opposed to a regular barrel.

I’m also curious if there’s a noticeable difference between these pressures from say an 18-22” or even 20 to 22”

 

[RME]

I don’t think “it’s not shooting worse” is the endorsement needed for new, more expensive tech.

The endorsers are claiming improved accuracy, velocity, and barrel life. If not, I just ask why.

I can't remember now if it was in the Hornady podcast or somewhere else but my understanding of the discussion was that much of the improved accuracy claims were in relation to barrel life. In other words, the difference wasn't so much in comparing two new barrels but rather the PXT barrels maintaining their accuracy long after conventionally rifled barrels bit the dust which would make sense if their barrel life claims are true.