You Only Need to Know This If You Shoot Past 700 Yards!

[Eaglet]

Originally Posted by Joe King

Your talking only about G1 BC figures correct?

Myself I use G7 and to my understanding it is for all intents and purposes a tiger of a different strip, but basically a better fit (base model) to modern long range bullets.

I'm not trying to hijack or confuse anyone so I think it should also be pointed out that.
The standard model projectile for a G1 BC is a flat based spire point

Where the standard model for G7 is a Boattail spire point.

Maybe Bryan Litz can weigh in on this, since he's my source of info on this matter.

Joe, your original question is very good and valid. I'm glad you asked.

Remember that this topic is not about G1 vs. G7, in fact, it has nothing to do
with that. This is all about Air Density and how BCs are referenced to.

Now, the correction is the same no matter what Drag Function. G1, G5, G6, G7 etc.

Just making sure I explain my self, I'll give an example:

The ICAO referenced G7 BC for Berger 300 gr Match Hybrid OTM Tactical is: 0.419--
to use this value in "Exbal" or "Ballistic Explorer", you would modify it to 0.419X1.018=0.427

[elkaholic]

Thanks Eaglet, this is very good info that I wasn't aware of.....Rich

[jkupper]

Okay. For the newby here, could you explain how much difference it would make to use the wrong B.C. For example, let's just say a 7mm Berger with a B.C. of .617, like the 168 grain VLD

[Eaglet]

Originally Posted by jkupper

Okay. For the newby here, could you explain how much difference it would make to use the wrong B.C. For example, let's just say a 7mm Berger with a B.C. of .617, like the 168 grain VLD

jkupper, since you did not specify a muzzle velocity etc. let's say this is done at
2900 f/sec muzzle velocity, at sea level and std conditions.

[bigbuck]

Originally Posted by Eaglet

Friend, I have Exbal v6.5 and it requires BC values based on "Metro Std".
You need to modify the BC values from Berger and Nosler, but you don't from Sierra.

At the risk of repeating my self, any ICAO based BC values you modify by multiplying
by 1.018 which of course will produce a higher BC value.

Thank you Sir. I am all about gtting the most accurate results .

[LouBoyd]

Originally Posted by bigbuck

Thank you Sir. I am all about gtting the most accurate results .

If you want the most accurate results arguably you shoudn't be using BC's at all. For most low drag bullets the G7 is better than G1, but there are still significant differences between the predictions and reality. Look at Brian Litz's book in the back chapters where the match between G1 and G7 trajectories are compared to millimeter radar measurements of the actual velocity vs air density results. In most cases the G7 is a better match for "long range" bullets. There are some notable examples where the G1 is a better match. The 240 grain Sierra Matchking is an example. It's really not a VLD design even though it's a spitzer boatail.

Most of us don't have access to a range equipped with mm doppler radar and I don't know of any available ballistics programs which allow entering doppler radar results directly even if you have them.

You do have the option of doing your own shooting tests from your rifle and cartridges. It's more tedious than just relying on a computer output but you can use most modern ballistics programs to "curve fit" measured results to give better results than you're likely to get using manufacturers published G1 or G7 numbers. By better results I mean a better prediction of shot placement at various ranges using your handloads (or specific model of quality factory ammo). and your rifle in your environment. You still have to adjust for your local air density at the time you shoot and (perhaps) the temperature of your ammo at the time of firing.

Few shooters want to take the time and effort to get the most accurate results for "first shot" accuracy. For target shooter who are allowed sighters knowing the exact BC and exact air density makes little difference. For hunters, snipers, and some competition with targets requiring first shot hits at random targets and random ranges it may be worth the effort.

I have far more confidence in a set of range cards set up for my rifle and specific ammo for a range of air density derived from shooting tests made in the environment where I shoot than any computer generated results based on factory numbers for BC. You can make a good table over the supersonic range of a rifle with about 20 carefully fired shots. Certainly using G() functions and a ballistic calculator are useful just to put the shots on a target face so you can measure them. Wind deflection can be calculated from accurate drop measurements. Trying to measure wind deflection vs natural wind vectors in taking the drop measurements for the range card. Shooting over flat land in low wind will result in better quality drop measurements.

[Red hunter]

A couple weeks ago I was reading a thread comparing the 210 and the 200 Berger bullets with plenty of first shot kills over varying yardages. In this reading I believe the writer stated he put in 777 yards and there was a 10mph 3o'clock wind plus other data and was given a shooting dope from his ballistic calculator. I believe he stated this gave him about a 24 inch wind drift. I input this in strelock and came up with 17 inches or so. I chalked up the difference to a phone app and a high dollar ballistic calculator. Who am I to argue with the result of a one shot kill at that range. I tried several altitude adjustments and shooting angles and never came close. I figured the best results are always shooting cards for me. At least till I can afford the real deal.