Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
300 Grain SMK Performance
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="jmden" data-source="post: 382471" data-attributes="member: 1742"><p>I arbitrarily used 2000' ele. with, 50 F and 50% humidity and used the programs standard pressure <strong><em><u>at that altitude</u></em></strong>. That might be one are of difference, although if you used 1000' as your altitude with corresponding standard pressure at that altitude, your data should show less energy at 1700yds that my data did as the air will be more dense at lower altitude. So, my guess is that you are using Sierra's bc data, which has been shown to be fairly inaccurate on the 240. </p><p> </p><p>If you're using Sierra's G1 velocity banded bc data (which has been experimentally shown to be quite inaccruate for the 240), that'll skew the results as well to show the 240 performing better than it actually is. </p><p> </p><p>Bryan's experimentally derived G1 velocity banded data with lower velocity limits for the 240SMK in fps: 3K and above--.639, average of 2.5k to 3K--.6415, average of 2k to 2.5k--.653, average of 1.5k to 2k--.6525, 1.5k and below--.643. </p><p> </p><p>So for .639 (3K and above), the lower velocity limit would be 3k fps; for .6415 (average of 2.5k to 3k), the lower velocity limit would be 2.5K; for .653 (average of 2k to 2.5k), the lower velocity limit would be 2k; for .6525 (average of 1.5k to 2k), the lower velocity limit would be 1.5k; for .643 (1.5k and below), the lower velocity limit would be 0 fps. </p><p> </p><p>Sierra's program lets you enter your own velocity banded G1 bc data as well, like Exbal, so once you plug these bc number is, the outputs should be identical or nearly identical.</p><p> </p><p>Unless a person can toss that 240 quite a bit faster, there's just no way it can outperform the 300 in terms of drop and energy and wind deflection at long range and for long range hunting, those are typically preminent factors to consider, obviously.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jmden, post: 382471, member: 1742"] I arbitrarily used 2000' ele. with, 50 F and 50% humidity and used the programs standard pressure [B][I][U]at that altitude[/U][/I][/B]. That might be one are of difference, although if you used 1000' as your altitude with corresponding standard pressure at that altitude, your data should show less energy at 1700yds that my data did as the air will be more dense at lower altitude. So, my guess is that you are using Sierra's bc data, which has been shown to be fairly inaccurate on the 240. If you're using Sierra's G1 velocity banded bc data (which has been experimentally shown to be quite inaccruate for the 240), that'll skew the results as well to show the 240 performing better than it actually is. Bryan's experimentally derived G1 velocity banded data with lower velocity limits for the 240SMK in fps: 3K and above--.639, average of 2.5k to 3K--.6415, average of 2k to 2.5k--.653, average of 1.5k to 2k--.6525, 1.5k and below--.643. So for .639 (3K and above), the lower velocity limit would be 3k fps; for .6415 (average of 2.5k to 3k), the lower velocity limit would be 2.5K; for .653 (average of 2k to 2.5k), the lower velocity limit would be 2k; for .6525 (average of 1.5k to 2k), the lower velocity limit would be 1.5k; for .643 (1.5k and below), the lower velocity limit would be 0 fps. Sierra's program lets you enter your own velocity banded G1 bc data as well, like Exbal, so once you plug these bc number is, the outputs should be identical or nearly identical. Unless a person can toss that 240 quite a bit faster, there's just no way it can outperform the 300 in terms of drop and energy and wind deflection at long range and for long range hunting, those are typically preminent factors to consider, obviously. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
300 Grain SMK Performance
Top