Originally Posted by Jon A
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.
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.