The original discussion was not about how the rifling was created (pressed from outside vs more traditional rifling techniques), but about the similarities of the Whitworth rifling and accuracy of the gun with the FX rifling and accuracy of the gun, nothing more.
Look at the title of the thread and this
"I guess this means what's old is new again.
and, I'm not sure if this is the original smooth twist, but it's sure close."
Now you're saying it was only meant as a comparison of accuracy?
You're comparing square cut machined internal rifling for the entire length of the barrel to pressed from the outside of the barrel for 7% of barrel length.
And for the record my original reply was to the Elbowgrease, I saw later on that you weren't too serious about the comparison but seems you kind of are.
The term Smooth Twist X is also a bit of a misnomer. The original marketing was that the barrel was a smooth bore until the pellet hit the last few inches that contained the "Twist". Now, the Smooth Twist doesn't really have any smooth bore, but is not rifled end to end. The newer STX barrels do resemble the full length rifling of the Whitworth, and while pellets start round, they end up with the 5 flats you referred to, much like the Whitworth bullet or canon shells with 6 flats.
Sure, it does shape a skirt like that. Do you end up with a pellet head doing the same thing? Do pellets go in with square angles like the Whitworth? Other than tiny flats that look like polygon rifling you get from ST as well. Again what FX did that no one to my knowledge that no one else did before what do it externally and only at the end.
The "Smooth" part could also be talking about how the internal rifling ends up with smooth lands and grooves.
While we may disagree on the nuances of the barrels, the point is that the rifling FX uses was really invented long ago. This takes nothing away from FX as designing the machining to create the original Smooth Twist barrels, and proving the incredible accuracy was an incredible undertaking, and did show the Airgun world that there's more to rifling than the traditional styles we are used to.
You call it a nuance I call it a fundamental difference, the point you claim hasn't been made yet. Show me a barrel from long ago that is pressed from the outside and only at the end. Then you can say it was invented long ago, the ST is NOT SIMPLY A POLYGON BARREL.
Upvote 0
