From everything I've read the optimal is less than 1:1 (I'm shooting for 0.7:1 for mine).
Am I right or are they wrong
Edited by jrrdw, descriptive topic title.


hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
POLAND_SPUD wrote:even if there was no link I'd know it's a bot because of female name


That should read "most fuel efficient ratio". Whether fuel efficiency is important is up to the designer, though I suspect most spudders don't care about efficiency since fuel is basically free.jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:This seems to suggest the optimal ratio is in the region of 0.7-0.8:1

I saw a ballistic graph where they measured the muzzle velocity of a spud and all indications were that the .6-.8 to 1 ratio yielded that highest veolicty in FPS. Allot of it was marginal but that window there was allot better than the readings they were getting for something like 1.5:1, etc.... (bigger cannon theoughmind you, and my plan is a 4" chamber and 3" barrel).That should read "most fuel efficient ratio".


Not sure what data you are referring to but it is most likely Lake's data. That was acquired with a fixed chamber size and variable barrel size. For a fixed chamber size ~0.8 chamber to barrel gives the highest muzzle velocity.Essohbe wrote:I saw a ballistic graph where they measured the muzzle velocity of a spud and all indications were that the .6-.8 to 1 ratio yielded that highest veolicty in FPS. Allot of it was marginal but that window there was allot better than the readings they were getting for something like 1.5:1, etc.... (bigger cannon theoughmind you, and my plan is a 4" chamber and 3" barrel).That should read "most fuel efficient ratio".

You need to be a member in order to post a reply
Not a member? register to join our community
Members can start their own topics & subscribe to topics
It’s free and only takes a minute