TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2010/0 ... denboomer/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Ear ... udenboomer

.22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer


Because 'Merica....

Longer barrels -- say 60" or so -- might produce best velocity and least report from such a round.

Middle Age Russ wrote:Longer barrels -- say 60" or so -- might produce best velocity and least report from such a round.

P.O. Ackley developed it in a quest to push a bullet to 5,000+ fps, but failed to do so. The wiki page says that 4,600 fps was the maximum attained. I don't know anything about the test rifle.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Middle Age Russ wrote:Longer barrels -- say 60" or so -- might produce best velocity and least report from such a round.

P.O. Ackley developed it in a quest to push a bullet to 5,000+ fps, but failed to do so. The wiki page says that 4,600 fps was the maximum attained. I don't know anything about the test rifle.

I wonder about the barrel life or lack thereof.

puma guy wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Middle Age Russ wrote:Longer barrels -- say 60" or so -- might produce best velocity and least report from such a round.

P.O. Ackley developed it in a quest to push a bullet to 5,000+ fps, but failed to do so. The wiki page says that 4,600 fps was the maximum attained. I don't know anything about the test rifle.

I wonder about the barrel life or lack thereof.

I'm thinking that any cartridge with a name like "Eargesplitten Loudenboomer" wears out ears even faster than it does barrels.

Ackley created a bunch of wildcat cartridges, typically requiring fire-formed cases with sharper shoulder angles than the parent case to maximize capacity. Most of these are named for the original cartridge with "Ackley Improved" added. His use of "Eargesplitten Loudenboomer" is indicative of a very different sort of critter indeed. Just looking at the case, I know I wouldn't want to be shooting at the same line with this thing without doubled-up hearing protection.

Just looking at the case, I'd have though that projectile capable of time travel. I'm surprised it "only" reached 4,600 fps. Physics, she can be a real pig headed lady.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

puma guy wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Middle Age Russ wrote:Longer barrels -- say 60" or so -- might produce best velocity and least report from such a round.

P.O. Ackley developed it in a quest to push a bullet to 5,000+ fps, but failed to do so. The wiki page says that 4,600 fps was the maximum attained. I don't know anything about the test rifle.

I wonder about the barrel life or lack thereof.

I'm thinking that any cartridge with a name like "Eargesplitten Loudenboomer" wears out ears even faster than it does barrels.

LOL! That was exactly my first thought.

BigGuy wrote:Just looking at the case, I'd have though that projectile capable of time travel. I'm surprised it "only" reached 4,600 fps. Physics, she can be a real pig headed lady.

P.O. Ackley was a contributing editor of several gun magazines when I was growing up and I followed him and his creations.
TAM piqued my curiosity so I looked him up on Wikipedia. Found this tidbit:
"Another humorous round, the .17 Flintstone Super Eyebunger, based on the .22-250 necked down to .17 caliber, has been used by Australian gunsmith Bill Hambly-Clark, Jr. to achieve velocities of 4,798 ft/s (1,462 m/s) out of a 52-inch (1,300 mm) barreled gun."
It's interesting that a 22-250 case which has far less capacity would achieve a MV of almost 4800fps. There was no mention of what barrel length was used for the .22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer.

puma guy wrote:

BigGuy wrote:Just looking at the case, I'd have though that projectile capable of time travel. I'm surprised it "only" reached 4,600 fps. Physics, she can be a real pig headed lady.

P.O. Ackley was a contributing editor of several gun magazines when I was growing up and I followed him and his creations.
TAM piqued my curiosity so I looked him up on Wikipedia. Found this tidbit:
"Another humorous round, the .17 Flintstone Super Eyebunger, based on the .22-250 necked down to .17 caliber, has been used by Australian gunsmith Bill Hambly-Clark, Jr. to achieve velocities of 4,798 ft/s (1,462 m/s) out of a 52-inch (1,300 mm) barreled gun."
It's interesting that a 22-250 case which has far less capacity would achieve a MV of almost 4800fps. There was no mention of what barrel length was used for the .22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer.

My R700 has a 26" barrel. I can't imagine a barrel twice as long as that.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

puma guy wrote:

BigGuy wrote:Just looking at the case, I'd have though that projectile capable of time travel. I'm surprised it "only" reached 4,600 fps. Physics, she can be a real pig headed lady.

P.O. Ackley was a contributing editor of several gun magazines when I was growing up and I followed him and his creations.
TAM piqued my curiosity so I looked him up on Wikipedia. Found this tidbit:
"Another humorous round, the .17 Flintstone Super Eyebunger, based on the .22-250 necked down to .17 caliber, has been used by Australian gunsmith Bill Hambly-Clark, Jr. to achieve velocities of 4,798 ft/s (1,462 m/s) out of a 52-inch (1,300 mm) barreled gun."
It's interesting that a 22-250 case which has far less capacity would achieve a MV of almost 4800fps. There was no mention of what barrel length was used for the .22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer.

My R700 has a 26" barrel. I can't imagine a barrel twice as long as that.

You'd have to have a big deer stand to swing that baby! I wonder what the muzzle energy was on both those calibers. Anybody have a ballistics calculator app?
Found the .22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer info

Ballistic performance
Bullet weight/type

Velocity

Energy

50 gr (3 g) Machine gunpowder 106gr. 4,160 ft/s (1,270 m/s) 1,921 ft·lbf (2,605 J)
50 gr (3 g) H570 100gr. 4,170 ft/s (1,270 m/s) 1,930 ft·lbf (2,620 J)
50 gr (3 g) H570 102gr. 4,390 ft/s (1,340 m/s) 2,139 ft·lbf (2,900 J)
50 gr (3 g) H570 105gr. 4,600 ft/s (1,400 m/s) 2,349 ft·lbf (3,185 J)
Source(s): quoted "Guns and Ammo Magazine", B. Hutton[volume