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

The thread is closed

(HAT) Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet 338 Rum Test

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #134  
Unread 02-02-2010, 01:42 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South of Canada and North of Wyoming
Posts: 6,068
Re: (HAT) Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet 338 Rum Test

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by phorwath View Post
Jon,
Now this rings of teaching. Present the information for digestion, consideration, understanding, and the benefit of others. This fits right in line with the vast majority of the posts you've contributed on this Forum. Why did you save the teaching until now?

I don't have access to my LoadBase ballistics program, but I was under the impression that BC increased with bullet length - all other bullet parameters remaining constant. I'm a registered engineer with a decent understanding of mathematics. I have not specialized in the field of exterior ballistics, but when I read the theory I have some capability of understanding. I've played with Patagonia Ballistics LoadBase ballistics software (a commercially sold ballistics program) and I was quite certain inputting a longer bullet increased BC. Is there no affect, or are you simply saying there is very real limit to the benefit of a longer bullet?
Paul,

I've learned a lot in my "dicussions" with both Jon and Noel on the subject as well as reading posts and articles by Bryan and a discussion with him on the JLK bullets and their difference of advertised BC vs the Bergers. These guys, especially Bryan, know what they are talking about and for the most part it's fairly basic stuff. To put it simply BC is mostly affected by bullet SD (weight) and shape. If you have a bullet such as the .338 300 SMK with a known BC of .768 then you have a good reference point. If you take the same shape bullet and cut 36.5 gr from the weight you are going to loose a significant amount of BC. No way around it. The only way to gain that BC back is to change the shape of the bullet. The 265 HAT is slightly longer and of "similar" shape to the 300 SMK. In my layman's opinion, there is no way the slight change in shape will make up for that loss of SD, let alone far exceed it. Either the 300 SMK is greatly under rated or the 265 HAT is greatly over rated. There is just no way around it and for some reason people just dont want to believe that. And then if someone confronts such claims the confronter becomes a bad and mean person. Very sad.

The question you ask Jon, is very well explained in great technical detail by someone who has spent thousands of hours studying, calculating BCs and actually shooting them. Thousands of hours. It is his profession and not just a hobby. Here's a link to Bryan's report that I posted back in post #30 that answers the question you're asking Jon in great detail.

http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/...ATS_Report.pdf

PS. I am glad to see the field shooting that Greyghost and Noel are going to do. I think it would also be be helpful to shoot some 300 SMK's under the same conditions for comparisom. Noel or Mr Henson, if you're reading, just some food for thought.

-Mark

Last edited by MontanaRifleman; 02-02-2010 at 01:52 PM.
  •   #135  
    Unread 02-02-2010, 02:41 PM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Dec 2001
    Location: Mukilteo, WA
    Posts: 1,092
    Re: (HAT) Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet 338 Rum Test

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by phorwath View Post
    Then I'd have asked you for the correct BC for this bullet. Logic here would dictate absolute knowledge of the "correct" BC with associated limits of precision. Haven't heard that yet unless you concluded that Bryan's BC is the correct BC with the same conviction you dismiss LVs - and failed to mention it.
    Two things:

    1) Yes, I have complete faith in Bryan's testing. Any bullet he tests is one I don't have to because I know he will do a better job than I can.

    2) Your premise that one needs to know an exact value before he can know another specific value is incorrect is a false one. If I tell you I am 12 feet tall, you can feel pretty secure in saying I'm full of crap without knowing my exact height.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by phorwath View Post
    I was under the impression that BC increased with bullet length - all other bullet parameters remaining constant.
    You were under a false impression. The BC does not change significantly. It can even go down a tiny bit due to increased skin drag.

    This illustrates my point very well. The claims made only seemed credible enough to you that you'd attack anybody questioning them due to your lack of knowledge of the subject matter. Your time may be better spent doing less attacking and more learning.

      #136  
    Unread 02-02-2010, 03:29 PM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Nov 2005
    Posts: 1,088
    Re: (HAT) Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet 338 Rum Test

    WOW, 12 feet tall!!!

    Hard to believe it, but if its on the Internet it must be true.

    edge.
      #137  
    Unread 02-02-2010, 04:09 PM
    Silver Member
     
    Join Date: Mar 2009
    Posts: 214
    Re: (HAT) Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet 338 Rum Test

    Jon,

    I would add one qualification to the wave/skin drag trade-off. There are no VLD projectiles, currently manufactured, that have reached the threshold of skin drag exceeding shock wave drag.

    In theory, the tipping point falls somewhere between 4-5 calibers on the nose. A ZA/7.0 has only a 3.5 caliber nose. The practical constraints deal with material properties, and mechanical limits. For example, the high spin rate required to stabilize a hypothetical optimum shape, place extreme shearing stress on engraving bands even in LGT barrels of conventional length. At those rpm's and nose cantilever lengths, any physical imperfections are exponentially exaggerated. The issue of mass distribution, and gyroscopic moment, also begins to effect the projectile's ability to track.

    I believe that bullets longer than seven calibers are possible, but the real limits will be determined by some relatively complex design work, offset by manufacturing precision/efficiency. We may never be able to justify anything longer in a spin stabilized projectile.

    Last edited by noel carlson; 02-02-2010 at 04:43 PM.
      #138  
    Unread 02-02-2010, 05:20 PM
    Platinum Member
     
    Join Date: Apr 2005
    Location: Alaska
    Posts: 4,695
    Re: (HAT) Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet 338 Rum Test

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jon A View Post
    Two things:

    1) Yes, I have complete faith in Bryan's testing. Any bullet he tests is one I don't have to because I know he will do a better job than I can.

    2) Your premise that one needs to know an exact value before he can know another specific value is incorrect is a false one. If I tell you I am 12 feet tall, you can feel pretty secure in saying I'm full of crap without knowing my exact height.

    You were under a false impression. The BC does not change significantly. It can even go down a tiny bit due to increased skin drag.

    This illustrates my point very well. The claims made only seemed credible enough to you that you'd attack anybody questioning them due to your lack of knowledge of the subject matter. Your time may be better spent doing less attacking and more learning.
    Jon,

    I gave you the chance to step out of the muck and you've launched yourself straight back into it. You might stick to teaching. Where did the teacher go now? You've responded as if licking some wounds. Are you ready to continue the tit-for-tat?

    I ask the teacher to teach and receive a re-vitalized counter attack. Opened the door for you and you've slammed it shut. Do you really teach for a living?

    1) OK. Correct me if I misrepresent your post. Bryan's BC is correct. Correct? And the limits of precision associated with Bryan's BC is what? Is it 1%? Is that your statement Jon? Now if you believed that all along, why didn't you state it from the start? Why not clarify right after Bryan's post that Bryan's BC is the only correct BC and the issue is finally resolved, once and for all - for the sake of teaching us. And why continue to peck, probe, and prod over the LV BC? End of issue - no? We've got the one and only correct BC - end of story. End of story. For the third time - End of Story. But it wasn't the end of the story for the duration of the derogatory allegations and posts because you never stuck your neck out far enough to express your position. How do you expect to teach if you don't speak with clarity.

    You've found it more comfortable to hang back and snipe from the shadows. An allegation here and a pot-shot there. So why the continuing rhetoric when in your own mind, the BC was established as soon as Bryan posted? .... long silence.... ....no answer... Is this how you teach? Why the continuing effort to slam the bullet manufacturer, unless you're on an unrelenting mission to force yourself on the man?

    2) My premise is correct in the context presented. Your claim that my premise is incorrect when taken out of context may or may not be correct. Can you stand the bullets up on a table and identify their BC by visual observation? No. Are there bullets with BCs greater than 0.9? Yes. You're doing your best to identify a flaw in my post. Switching from ballistic coefficeints to the height of human beings doesn't cut it.

    Have you concluded the bullet manufacturer is knowingly and intentionally presenting false drop data for profit. You've as much as said it - but again not quite. Just enough spark to create some smoke. The clear talk too risky?

    I asked you the question on bullet length versus BC Jon to offer the peace pipe. Give you the chance to teach. I could have researched and obtained my answer on Google in short order. You failed. Miserably. Instead you've returned to one-upsmanship for the sake of preserving your ego. Those wounds will heal - give it some time.

    Last edited by phorwath; 02-02-2010 at 05:23 PM.
    The thread is closed

    Bookmarks

    Thread Tools
    Display Modes


    Similar Threads for: (HAT) Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet 338 Rum Test
    Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
    .30 caliber 210 grain Henson Aluminum tipped bullet meat test Lightvarmint Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 0 12-18-2008 08:35 PM
    Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet Meat test #3 Lightvarmint Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 11 12-10-2008 11:24 AM
    Another Henson Aluminum tipped Bullet Test Lightvarmint Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 98 12-07-2008 10:15 PM
    Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet Meat Test Lightvarmint Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 8 11-03-2008 06:54 AM
    Henson Aluminum tipped bullets test goodgrouper Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics 135 08-27-2008 09:24 AM


    All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:46 PM.


    Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
    All content ©2010-2015 Long Range Hunting, LLC