buffalobob- I realize that a faster projectile will get there faster, but how do you still account for the CBS?? I just thought that a CBS was exactly that. I still dont really understand it. A 220 swift shooting a 40g bullet at 4400fps is not going to do any better on a CBS then a 55g going 3900fps would it?? It just seems that to me, you cant control where the CBS lands. I still dont see how velocity would make it strike any closer to the target just because its faster, its still a CBS and usually, CBS's dont go with the group reguardless of caliber/bullet/velocity, right?? I'm just trying to understand it better is all. It still dont make any sense to me.
Well, as I understood the context, it was a military weapon system under discussion. You don't get as many stationary target shots in combat as with a hunting situation, or at least you do not pass up shots because you might only wound the target. So a cold bore shot would be more likely to connect with the faster bullet.
Secondly, two bullets with comparable BCs but one at a faster speed will make it easier to navigate the wind and drops necessary to make a first round hit.
I didnot see the show I am just reading what you wrote and know that the shorter time of travel is better for military style shooting if the choice of cartridges are equal in all other respects.
You are the one who saw the show but you typed what you typed. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Ok. I can see where it would be better for military type shooting, but thats it then. They didn't elaborate very much on the subject, and based on everything I've read on here, and my own shooting experiences, CBS dont go with the group. However, the way you state that for military shooting, I guess I see how its better. Game animals are a lot smaller then tanks two though.
I didn't see the show but from what I am reading in this thread it sounds like one of two things...either the media was using a catch phrase "COLD BORE HITS" to sound better for the camera or some military guy is trying to keep/upgrade his job by using varibles for a new weapon system that don't really mean much. I've probably used a LOT worse excuses to my wife to get a new gun.
Genises 27-3: Now therefore take, I pray thee, thy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow, and go out to the field, and take me some venison...
I would have to say there is a combination of both sides that are correct here. Having shot the 50 cals in quality rifles I can tell you that with the proper load in a well set up rifle, and with a marksmen that knows his rifle and rifles trajectory well, you would see no advantage with a 416 Barrett over the 50 BMG. Only advantage I see would be less recoil which makes the rifles easier to shoot of course.
I agree that the faster a projectile is launched, the less time there is for the external elements to act on that bullet to cause it to be moved off its original flight path.
That said, we are again comparing apples to oranges here. I am sure they were using the VLD solid type 416 bullets which from what I have seen have a BC in the .850 range.
I am also sure they were not using a VLD type bullet such as the 750 gr A-Max with its advertised BC of 1.050 and actual BC of around .980. Instead I suspect they were using a 647 gr ball or 700 gr AP bullet in the 50 cal which will have a BC of around .6 at best.
Not only does this bullet have a ballisic disadvantage, it also has a consistancy disadvantage because it was not designed with accuracy in mind. It was designed for the specific use of saturating a given area with impacts. In the M-2 you do not want every bullet to land on a 10" group. As such the bullets are made with a dispersion factor build in and generally they will only hold around a 16" diameter group at 1/2 mile or so unless sorted.
SO in one case we are comparing a match bullet designed to offer the highest ballistic potential possible against a bullet that can hardly be discribed as anything but a plinker.
Had that 50 cal shooter been using quality ammo with a 750 gr A-max loaded to 2650 fps I suspect the results would have been much better.
Also, I would be suprised if the 416 had not been shot before had and proven to be on target before the cameras started rolling.
The 50 cal may have as well but I suspect to prove it was not hitting on target.
Again, its an apples and oranges comparision in my opinion, the strongest of one against the weakest of another. That is often how these things are compared to make one look artifically superior to the other.
I would also agree that this caliber based on the 408 CT case will get you everything that the 416 Barrett will get you. Its just to much case capacity to be efficent with this bore size. I am working on a new family of wildcats based on the 50 Spotter case which will offer around 170 to 175 gr powder capacity in comparision to the 408 CT with its 135 to 145 gr depending on its case configuration and also compared to the 416 Barrett with its 220 gr powder capacity. They use 200 gr of powders simply because the case design is so inefficent they can not get more powder in it with the current available powders we have to select from.
I see comparisions like this and I simply smile. I did not see what ammo they were using in the 50 BMG but would be interested to hear what it was in fact that they were using. I suspect plain old M33 ball ammo.
Just my opinion. I think the 416 Barrett is over rated. That case necked up to 50 cal would make a better round then the 50 BMG in my opinion for this purpose or even 458 with proper bullets!!! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Allen Precision Shooting
Home of the Allen Magnum, Allen Xpress and Allen Tactical Wildcats and the Painkiller Muzzle brakes.
As a muzzleloader hunter, I always keep track of my first shot on a target. Hopefully it is in the group, but it isn't for all loads.
I zero my scope for the first shot, and hopefully don't need a second..... but I do know where the group center is in relation to my cold bore zero.
If my shots were going to be hunting at 1,000 yards were I may need a spotter round, then I would be doing the reverse.
If I were shooting for the TV camera, I would absolutely know where the first shot was going [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Fifty- Thats what I'm thinking. I'm thinking the guy shot the 416 1 time before the camera started rolling to get the CBS out of the way. You never know, I wasn't there. I see yoru point about apples and oranges about the bullets to. There trying to make the 416 look superior, easy to do when your using the best bullet for a given caliber, vs the worst bullet for a caliber.