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="groper" data-source="post: 480865" data-attributes="member: 12550"><p>Indeed, thanks for highlighting that Bryan...</p><p></p><p>Topshot,</p><p></p><p>Did you check the zero with the modified bullets compared to the unmodified bullets? or did you simply shoot them side by side with the unmodified bullets @ 1000yds without checking the zero? Remember youve changed the mass and balance of the projectile, so the internal ballistics could have changed also... You wouldnt think it makes much difference, but i assure you it can be quite dramatic... remember, 14inches @ 1000yds would only look like 1inch zero error @ 100yds...</p><p></p><p>This is a prime example of how the slightest oversight, can effect a persons observations and trick them into believing theyve measured a vastly different BC when using the measured drops methodology - as we discussed earlier in the thread... one must be especially mindful of this when your mucking around with different loads, seating depths and bullets etc...</p><p></p><p>That was the whole point of everything ive been trying to say this entire thread, its not about whos right and wrong, its about accurate methodologies vs methods which are easily susceptible to error. Topshot, if you were using 2 chronies or the accoustic method, you most likely would not have noticed any significant change in BC for those bullets you modified, and perhaps your bright idea is not dead just yet...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="groper, post: 480865, member: 12550"] Indeed, thanks for highlighting that Bryan... Topshot, Did you check the zero with the modified bullets compared to the unmodified bullets? or did you simply shoot them side by side with the unmodified bullets @ 1000yds without checking the zero? Remember youve changed the mass and balance of the projectile, so the internal ballistics could have changed also... You wouldnt think it makes much difference, but i assure you it can be quite dramatic... remember, 14inches @ 1000yds would only look like 1inch zero error @ 100yds... This is a prime example of how the slightest oversight, can effect a persons observations and trick them into believing theyve measured a vastly different BC when using the measured drops methodology - as we discussed earlier in the thread... one must be especially mindful of this when your mucking around with different loads, seating depths and bullets etc... That was the whole point of everything ive been trying to say this entire thread, its not about whos right and wrong, its about accurate methodologies vs methods which are easily susceptible to error. Topshot, if you were using 2 chronies or the accoustic method, you most likely would not have noticed any significant change in BC for those bullets you modified, and perhaps your bright idea is not dead just yet... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Let's argue about BC's
Top