close
Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics

Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics Applied Ballistics

Reply

Actual B.C. VS Claimed

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 01-28-2008, 11:40 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Worland, Wyoming
Posts: 738
Actual B.C. VS Claimed

I know this has probably been discussed before, but I am not finding the answers I want by searching. I am interested in 338 and 308 high bc hunting bullets. I just learned that Barnes has started adjusting their bc's for the tripple shock and it is WAY lower than what they used to claim. So how do other bullet makers advertised bc's compare? Is the Nosler Accubond 225 gr 338 really a .550? How about the Sierra game king 250 gr, is it really a .565? Why are the advertised bc's for Hornady's so low compared to others? Is it true that they are closer to real? How about the claimed bc's for 190 gr 308 Bergers? I am hoping to use good information that some of you already know before I spend a lot of time picking out my long range bullets. Thanks
__________________
Remington model 700 300 RUM LH 26" rem ss/blued receiver lam stock 215 Berger @3070/180 NAB @3300
Remington model 700 338 RUM LH 26" Bartlein 5C #4 Muscle Brake, blueprinted action, sako extractor, jewell trigger, bell and carlson Alaskan stock
Savage LH 22-250
Reply With Quote
  •   #2  
    Unread 01-30-2008, 12:50 AM
    Gold Member
     
    Join Date: Jan 2007
    Location: South Dakota
    Posts: 753
    I'll toss in my two cents.

    I think bullet manufacturers understand that its in their best interest to provide accurate/truthful data when it comes to bullets.

    Potential litigation being one if applied in a LE or even DOD type applications.

    The other is that we have the capacity to verify it if we choose to do so. The gun and shooting community is very fickle and the masses will gather for a lynchin just as quick as they will for an awards ceremony.

    Nothing more exotic than a chronograph and some ballistic software is needed to verify what manufacturers are publishing.

    I personally don't think its anything to get overly concerned about.

    If Barnes changed their published data then I would have to assume that they discovered an error in the information being passed or they changed the bullet's design somehow. What other explanation is their?

    Either way, they win and we win. Honesty is always the best policy.

    Good luck
    __________________
    Chad Dixon
    Reply With Quote

      #3  
    Unread 01-30-2008, 03:46 PM
    Gold Member
     
    Join Date: Jun 2004
    Location: Worland, Wyoming
    Posts: 738
    According to Barnes, they are now checking the data at 300 yards after actually shooting the bullets. They used to check the bullets at 100 yards. They claim that other bullet makers rely on computer models based on the bullet design that are not backed up by actual field tests. I am just reporting what I read to see what other opinions are out there.
    __________________
    Remington model 700 300 RUM LH 26" rem ss/blued receiver lam stock 215 Berger @3070/180 NAB @3300
    Remington model 700 338 RUM LH 26" Bartlein 5C #4 Muscle Brake, blueprinted action, sako extractor, jewell trigger, bell and carlson Alaskan stock
    Savage LH 22-250
    Reply With Quote
      #4  
    Unread 01-30-2008, 04:05 PM
    Gold Member
     
    Join Date: Jan 2002
    Location: Wenatchee, WA
    Posts: 806
    Did they go into how they do the testing? If just going by drop figures, I wouldn't feel 300yds is far enough to see a significant difference unless you have very solid zero data, and a very good gun/rest. If they are going by chrono numbers... well 300yds is about as far as some folks might want to go due to a (legitimate) fear of hitting the screens on the second (downrange) chrono. Even then, the spacing needs to be pretty damn precise, and the chronos calibrated to each other, etc. etc.

    Where the factory B.C.s get all hosed up is that they use G1 numbers... which aren't necessarily the most accurate ballistics model to use for modern HPBT or polymer tipped boat tail bullets. It's reasonably accurate for shorter ranges (600yds and in), or if you 'fudge' the numbers a bit like Sierra does w/ their multiple-BC practice, you can get it acceptably close. G5 or G7 BCs would be more accurate, but they aren't near as impressive (high) up front and most ballistics software looks for a G1 number by default - if they can even accept other G# BCs.
    Reply With Quote
      #5  
    Unread 01-30-2008, 06:19 PM
    Silver Member
     
    Join Date: Jan 2008
    Location: Missouri
    Posts: 175
    I'm no engineer, but if I recall correctly, doesn't B.C. change with velocity and other factors; so the values published represent something of an average?
    Reply With Quote
      #6  
    Unread 01-30-2008, 07:31 PM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Jan 2004
    Location: Blackfoot, Idaho
    Posts: 8,841
    Check this:

    http://www.longrangehunting.com/foru...me-bc-s-16229/
    __________________
    I may be the slowest guy on the mountain . . . . but . . . . I'm on the mountain!
    Reply With Quote
      #7  
    Unread 01-30-2008, 09:21 PM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Aug 2003
    Location: NC, oceanfront
    Posts: 4,021
    BC does change with velocity and air density.
    This because the drag curves we use don't match our bullets, and we don't shoot under 'standard conditions'.

    With some newer software, coefficients can be calibrated to allow accurate field results under any condition using one BC.
    This is somewhat like reverse engineering for a best internal drag curve. RADAR would help here a great deal, but few bullet makers test to this level. And neither do most shooters..
    Reply With Quote
    Reply

    Bookmarks

    Thread Tools
    Display Modes


    Similar Threads for: Actual B.C. VS Claimed
    Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
    How many actual snipers out their Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 24 09-30-2009 01:27 AM
    Actual B.C. hank shaper Reloading 11 02-14-2007 05:28 PM
    actual MV drpbroun5 Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 3 12-15-2006 03:45 PM
    How can I determine my actual BC? sewwhat89 Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 6 09-15-2005 11:32 AM
    Actual BC of Berger bullets??? trader388 Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 4 01-21-2005 09:16 PM


    All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:08 AM.


    Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
    All content ©2010-2015 Long Range Hunting, LLC