Noel,
There is no question that a projectiles COG will always fallow its trajectory line, or at least be very close. I think you are missing my point.
If you take a bullet with the nose up, it has been tested and proven in some cases that its trajectory will be flatter then a bullet with a "nose on" trajectory line.
In both trajectories, the bullets center of gravity will fallow the trajectory line or at least be very close, BUT, how to the two different trajectories compare to each other. That was my only point.
One other thing to consider as well. We are talking about standard match bullets that are designed for muzzle velocities in the 2500-2800 fps range for the most part.
There are very few "match" grade bullets that are specifically designed for velocities WELL over 3000 fps. I have found that even with the SMK, that when velocity spreads are dramatic, say from 3000 fps to 3500 fps, there can be a noticable change in BC value. I have seen this go both ways, both up and down so it does not seem overly consistant or predictable so there is something going on with these big velocity shifts causing this measurable shift in BC.
I suspect there are no mathematical equations to predict this. I say this because it does not seem to be consist over a wide range of bullets.
Again, my tests were not with these bullets in question but similiar bullets and I can say for a fact that the BC value for those bullets, changed dramatically, even though they were all fired through Lilja 1-10 twist, 6 groove barrels. Only real difference was muzzle velocity.
Could it be that there are things at play that we simply have not written the equation for? I know scientists will jump all over that and say physics is physics but I have done enough shooting with these extreme wildcats and extreme bullets to know strange or unconventional results happen all the time. Maybe things just aren't as simple as it seems.
It was impossible to pull a BC number and plug it into my exbal and get it to produce a trajectory identical to my actual bullet flight. That is one reason I had to shoot at various ranges, plot the actual bullet drops and then manipulate the imput data to get the ballistic program to match actual bullet flight.
I have never had such problems with conventional chamberings with conventional bullets. Which leads me to think there are other considerations that have to be made when using such a combo to produce an accurate drop chart. Simply coming up with a paper BC number from an equation often times will not cut it.
This is not my opinion, its been fact when developing drop charts for several of my wildcats and these extreme performance bullets. Perhaps we just need a a new drag function specifically for this type of bullet.
Said it many times before and will again, if your interested, order some and test them and post your results. The more results we get the more accurate of a BC we will get and more usible the data will be.
