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
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
ballistic coefficient on bullets
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="Mikecr" data-source="post: 131504" data-attributes="member: 1521"><p>Bullets used in PB BR are completely different than long range bullets, where overstabilization might come into play. They can get away with lower Sg and there are benefits in reduced twist for them. Afterall, there are penalties(in accuracy) for excess twist due to imperfections in bullets.</p><p></p><p>But this has nothing to do with BC loss that might occur much FURTHER downrange -due to 'Overstabilization'.</p><p></p><p>I don't have the Sierra book. But given that Sierra went through the effort to demonstrate BC loss due to bullet noses not following trajectory, surely they would try to define it, right? When does it happen? Why did it happen here? What bullets might do it? What RPM &amp; drop speed? When can anyone expect it to happen? What can be done about it?</p><p>And here is a formula which defines what we observed, and our drag curves show....A Sierra formula for Overtwist...</p><p></p><p>This is what I suspect would seperate science from heresay.</p><p>Anybody can fire bullets at increased twist rate, and see that BC as well as accuracy suffers beyond some point. But does it differentiate 'Overstabilization' w/regard to trajectory down range?</p><p>Sure there are bullets that are known to be dynamically unstable. But not many. And I suspect that you'd have to go way off the beaten path to have an issue with overstabilization. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe every ballistic program in existance needs to account for this. </p><p></p><p>I'm getting an itch to setup a radar system, but lack the range -unfortunately.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mikecr, post: 131504, member: 1521"] Bullets used in PB BR are completely different than long range bullets, where overstabilization might come into play. They can get away with lower Sg and there are benefits in reduced twist for them. Afterall, there are penalties(in accuracy) for excess twist due to imperfections in bullets. But this has nothing to do with BC loss that might occur much FURTHER downrange -due to 'Overstabilization'. I don't have the Sierra book. But given that Sierra went through the effort to demonstrate BC loss due to bullet noses not following trajectory, surely they would try to define it, right? When does it happen? Why did it happen here? What bullets might do it? What RPM & drop speed? When can anyone expect it to happen? What can be done about it? And here is a formula which defines what we observed, and our drag curves show....A Sierra formula for Overtwist... This is what I suspect would seperate science from heresay. Anybody can fire bullets at increased twist rate, and see that BC as well as accuracy suffers beyond some point. But does it differentiate 'Overstabilization' w/regard to trajectory down range? Sure there are bullets that are known to be dynamically unstable. But not many. And I suspect that you'd have to go way off the beaten path to have an issue with overstabilization. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe every ballistic program in existance needs to account for this. I'm getting an itch to setup a radar system, but lack the range -unfortunately. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
ballistic coefficient on bullets
Top