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
Let's argue about BC's
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="WildcatB" data-source="post: 474625" data-attributes="member: 10379"><p>Using JBM's calculators, the velocity method is a lot more error tolerant - especially when dealing with the accuracy tolerances of chronographs. Plugging in the +/-.5% (accuracy tolerance of most chronographs) makes a significant change in the result using the time of flight vs velocity method. The distance measurement is also more crucial than with the velocity method. +/- 1 foot at 300 yards changes the result by 2% using the time method vs .1% (yep that's POINT one percent) using the velocity method.</p><p></p><p>The same guy also wrote this paper: <a href="http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0601/0601102.pdf" target="_blank">http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0601/0601102.pdf</a></p><p></p><p>Once I ran the numbers on the error tolerances… I switched to the velocity method.</p><p></p><p>I still buy you a beer if you ever come through Elko.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WildcatB, post: 474625, member: 10379"] Using JBM’s calculators, the velocity method is a lot more error tolerant - especially when dealing with the accuracy tolerances of chronographs. Plugging in the +/-.5% (accuracy tolerance of most chronographs) makes a significant change in the result using the time of flight vs velocity method. The distance measurement is also more crucial than with the velocity method. +/- 1 foot at 300 yards changes the result by 2% using the time method vs .1% (yep that’s POINT one percent) using the velocity method. The same guy also wrote this paper: [url]http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0601/0601102.pdf[/url] Once I ran the numbers on the error tolerances… I switched to the velocity method. I still buy you a beer if you ever come through Elko. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Let's argue about BC's
Top