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="eddybo" data-source="post: 480995" data-attributes="member: 7194"><p>Michael, </p><p></p><p>Good luck. I can understand Groper's thoughts on this, not saying I agree but understand. It is kinda like telling someone you saw big foot or a UFO. (never seen either BTW) Or telling someone that you have seen a rifle that shoots 1 MOA at 100 yards, but 1/2 MOA at 1000 yards. I used to see BCs as black and white as anyone. I never saw a real deviation that could not be explained easily for several years, and only one instance ever that I could not figure out, what the error is. If it were not for that one strange instance I would probably be in rank and file with some other posters. Since that time i have learned that BCs only work to a degree. I lost my faith. It all depends what you want out of them. If you want to hit within 3 foot of a target at a mile they are great. If you want to hit that target some one has got to shoot the gun extensively. Whether the changes to be made are changing BCs or some enviromental variable such as velocity it all becomes a matter of voodoo at some point. </p><p></p><p>I have learned one thing that is absolutely certain. No matter what number I put in my calculator, it will not effect the actual trajectory of a projectile and that even with great errors in BC ballistic calculators can be fooled into matching your actual trajectories. I learned some time before this thread that sometimes what is not "right" is what works best. I have also learned that sometimes it is best to leave well enough alone.</p><p></p><p>I am through arguing BCs, (although I never had anything to add other than stirring the pot) my concern remains the same that some will put so much faith in BCs that they will neglect shooting their rifles at ranges they will take shots at animals. I think that animals deserve more than a theoretical chance at a quick kill. I appolagize once again for any discontent that I have interjected into this thread. Please continue, I will enjoy reading the posts.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="eddybo, post: 480995, member: 7194"] Michael, Good luck. I can understand Groper's thoughts on this, not saying I agree but understand. It is kinda like telling someone you saw big foot or a UFO. (never seen either BTW) Or telling someone that you have seen a rifle that shoots 1 MOA at 100 yards, but 1/2 MOA at 1000 yards. I used to see BCs as black and white as anyone. I never saw a real deviation that could not be explained easily for several years, and only one instance ever that I could not figure out, what the error is. If it were not for that one strange instance I would probably be in rank and file with some other posters. Since that time i have learned that BCs only work to a degree. I lost my faith. It all depends what you want out of them. If you want to hit within 3 foot of a target at a mile they are great. If you want to hit that target some one has got to shoot the gun extensively. Whether the changes to be made are changing BCs or some enviromental variable such as velocity it all becomes a matter of voodoo at some point. I have learned one thing that is absolutely certain. No matter what number I put in my calculator, it will not effect the actual trajectory of a projectile and that even with great errors in BC ballistic calculators can be fooled into matching your actual trajectories. I learned some time before this thread that sometimes what is not "right" is what works best. I have also learned that sometimes it is best to leave well enough alone. I am through arguing BCs, (although I never had anything to add other than stirring the pot) my concern remains the same that some will put so much faith in BCs that they will neglect shooting their rifles at ranges they will take shots at animals. I think that animals deserve more than a theoretical chance at a quick kill. I appolagize once again for any discontent that I have interjected into this thread. Please continue, I will enjoy reading the posts. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Let's argue about BC's
Top