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
Bullet stabilization myth?
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="drenge" data-source="post: 200363" data-attributes="member: 9300"><p>I've been lurking around these forums for some time now and have read a lot of amazing, very useful information! I am getting ready to work up a load for my 7mm RM with the berger 168's and I had a question about something I read. </p><p> </p><p>I've read in several places in these forums that one must sight in for at least 300 yards so that the (high bc) bullet will have a chance to stabilize. I read that at 100 yards you can have 1 or higher MOA but that at 300 it could get better - or visa versa. </p><p> </p><p>My question is: How can this be??? Your bullet does not have fletchings on it like arrows. I always thought your bullet is either stabilized right out of the muzzle because of the right twist rate in your barrel (and the quality of your barrel), barrel harmonics (the right node), or it's not. Either the quarterback throws a lame duck or a tight spiral - not a lame duck that suddenly turns into a tight spiral.</p><p> </p><p>How can a bullet that is on a plus moa path at 100 yards suddenly be .5 moa at 300? It can't just change directions from it's established course. I understand sighting in at 300 yards (and 800 plus for that matter) for reasons of validating your trajectory or measuring extreme spreads, etc. But allowing your bullet to stabilize???</p><p> </p><p>Can anyone offer an explanation based on real ballistics or physics?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="drenge, post: 200363, member: 9300"] I've been lurking around these forums for some time now and have read a lot of amazing, very useful information! I am getting ready to work up a load for my 7mm RM with the berger 168's and I had a question about something I read. I've read in several places in these forums that one must sight in for at least 300 yards so that the (high bc) bullet will have a chance to stabilize. I read that at 100 yards you can have 1 or higher MOA but that at 300 it could get better - or visa versa. My question is: How can this be??? Your bullet does not have fletchings on it like arrows. I always thought your bullet is either stabilized right out of the muzzle because of the right twist rate in your barrel (and the quality of your barrel), barrel harmonics (the right node), or it's not. Either the quarterback throws a lame duck or a tight spiral - not a lame duck that suddenly turns into a tight spiral. How can a bullet that is on a plus moa path at 100 yards suddenly be .5 moa at 300? It can't just change directions from it's established course. I understand sighting in at 300 yards (and 800 plus for that matter) for reasons of validating your trajectory or measuring extreme spreads, etc. But allowing your bullet to stabilize??? Can anyone offer an explanation based on real ballistics or physics? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Bullet stabilization myth?
Top