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
Do you guys dial in for spin drift?
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="justgoto" data-source="post: 503383" data-attributes="member: 17125"><p>I've turned on my private messaging. If your opposition to known and proven physics is a ruse to confuse the enemies of the free world, please message me and explain. If your plea is more convincing than this latest reply, I'll edit this post accordingly and let the subject drop. Either way I'm letting it drop, you can continue the argument with Britannica if you so desire.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This site has plenty of people that have. And since your statement has a caveat, evidently, you do see the coriolis effect with calibers larger than 30cal.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>When the explosion form the shell is over 100 times the correction...</p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html" target="_blank">Fallacy: Appeal to Authority</a><span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'"><span style="font-size: 15px"><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Appeal to Authority</span></span></span></span> is a logical fallacy in which a person claims to be an authority on a subject, whereas his credentials leave much to be desired. You have been using this throughout your posts in lieu of an argument. <strong>In other words, <em>you need to use data to support your argument.</em></strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>It is as specific a statement as possible, there was nothing approaching a "blanket statement" in any of my comment.</p><p><a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080502031220AAo0YV8" target="_blank">What does blanket statement mean? - Yahoo! Answers</a></p><p></p><p></p><p>I've already tested 2 different times, ((other than when I initially tested for myself,) because internet experts couldn't do it themselves,)) they demanded I do it, wasting my time and supplies <strong>proving</strong> my point... again and again! The first test for the doubters, I shot the 180s 15minutes before the 220s. The second time I shot alternating the different weights. Same results each time!</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><strong>Provide scientific data supporting that statement.</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p>My friend has won many drag race events; he is really good at it, amazing actually. He regularly provides disinformation to any of the other racers, especially when asked... no matter if they are friend or foe.</p><p>And you are getting spindrift confused with the coriolis effect, and, (since your statement is so confused,) I'm assuming, you are compounding the error by misunderstanding the effects.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This response really has me questioning your credentials... But let's forget about the probable distraction.</p><p>I'm talking about taking one shot, as in <strong>no sighting shots</strong>. Taking one shot that day, then plan for tomorrows shot, most likely at a different distance and most certainly in completely different conditions.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes there is. Any amateur can test that theory using a ballistic calculator and find it false. Hell, the drop from the 220s were almost 3 times that of the 180s at 400 yards.</p><p><strong>[EDIT] After reviewing my range data, the 220s were a bit more than twice the drop of the 180s at 400 yards.[/EDIT]</strong></p><p></p><p>And there is so much wrong with that statement, I don't really care if you get it.</p><p>For those that might want to know.</p><p><a href="http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/index_files/SpinandCoriolisDrift.htm" target="_blank">Spin and Coriolis Drift</a></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Your statements are laced with "probably<s>" "Tain't enough<s>" while in other statements have "didn't see any<s>" "not seen any<s>"; your own post contradicts itself on a regular basis.</s></s></s></s></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="justgoto, post: 503383, member: 17125"] I've turned on my private messaging. If your opposition to known and proven physics is a ruse to confuse the enemies of the free world, please message me and explain. If your plea is more convincing than this latest reply, I'll edit this post accordingly and let the subject drop. Either way I'm letting it drop, you can continue the argument with Britannica if you so desire. This site has plenty of people that have. And since your statement has a caveat, evidently, you do see the coriolis effect with calibers larger than 30cal. When the explosion form the shell is over 100 times the correction... [URL="http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html"]Fallacy: Appeal to Authority[/URL][FONT=Arial Black][SIZE=4][FONT=arial][SIZE=3] Appeal to Authority[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] is a logical fallacy in which a person claims to be an authority on a subject, whereas his credentials leave much to be desired. You have been using this throughout your posts in lieu of an argument. [B]In other words, [I]you need to use data to support your argument.[/I][/B] It is as specific a statement as possible, there was nothing approaching a "blanket statement" in any of my comment. [URL="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080502031220AAo0YV8"]What does blanket statement mean? - Yahoo! Answers[/URL] I've already tested 2 different times, ((other than when I initially tested for myself,) because internet experts couldn't do it themselves,)) they demanded I do it, wasting my time and supplies [B]proving[/B] my point... again and again! The first test for the doubters, I shot the 180s 15minutes before the 220s. The second time I shot alternating the different weights. Same results each time! [B]Provide scientific data supporting that statement.[/B] My friend has won many drag race events; he is really good at it, amazing actually. He regularly provides disinformation to any of the other racers, especially when asked... no matter if they are friend or foe. And you are getting spindrift confused with the coriolis effect, and, (since your statement is so confused,) I'm assuming, you are compounding the error by misunderstanding the effects. This response really has me questioning your credentials... But let's forget about the probable distraction. I'm talking about taking one shot, as in [B]no sighting shots[/B]. Taking one shot that day, then plan for tomorrows shot, most likely at a different distance and most certainly in completely different conditions. Yes there is. Any amateur can test that theory using a ballistic calculator and find it false. Hell, the drop from the 220s were almost 3 times that of the 180s at 400 yards. [B][EDIT] After reviewing my range data, the 220s were a bit more than twice the drop of the 180s at 400 yards.[/EDIT][/B] And there is so much wrong with that statement, I don't really care if you get it. For those that might want to know. [URL="http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/index_files/SpinandCoriolisDrift.htm"]Spin and Coriolis Drift[/URL] Your statements are laced with "probably[s]" "Tain't enough[s]" while in other statements have "didn't see any[s]" "not seen any[s]"; your own post contradicts itself on a regular basis.[/s][/s][/s][/s] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Do you guys dial in for spin drift?
Top