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
Hunting
The Basics, Starting Out
THINKING OF A NEW LIGHT GUN
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="Darryl Cassel" data-source="post: 52410" data-attributes="member: 34"><p>Boyd</p><p></p><p>It's possibly the speed and tail winds we encountered on Fathers Day and in Sept. is the reason the chart seems so close. A strong tail wind can make things seem awful flat if you fired during that time.</p><p></p><p>I to have shot the bullets in my 7/300 Weatherby and they are deffently not in the 7s as a BC. check the manufacturers advertisements as per BC as Ric mentioned.</p><p></p><p>We wrote the company when they advertised the 7 BC long ago and they came back with a more realistic figure at that time.</p><p></p><p>As a matter of fact, the 168 Gr Sierra MK performed much better in my 7/300 at 3250 FPS.</p><p></p><p>The reason the fellows went to the 220 and 240 gr 30 cal and the 300 gr 338 bullets were, you can see the hits MUCH better at extended range then any of the 7mm bullets of 162 and 168 gr weights.</p><p></p><p>I have some 176 and 180 and 186 Custom 7mm bullets but none of them do as well as the 220 and 240 in the big 30 mags such as the 30/378 or the 300 RUM or Tomahawk.</p><p></p><p>Spotting the shot better because of impaCT is extremely important at extreme range, as you know. A heavier bullet mass with a high BC allows this to happen.</p><p></p><p>This is why we got away from the 7mm diameters. </p><p></p><p>Take care and hope to see you soon.</p><p></p><p>DC <img src="http://images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> <img src="http://images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p>PS -- Ric. It calls for a 9 or 9 1/4 Twist</p><p></p><p>[ 11-16-2002: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Darryl Cassel, post: 52410, member: 34"] Boyd It's possibly the speed and tail winds we encountered on Fathers Day and in Sept. is the reason the chart seems so close. A strong tail wind can make things seem awful flat if you fired during that time. I to have shot the bullets in my 7/300 Weatherby and they are deffently not in the 7s as a BC. check the manufacturers advertisements as per BC as Ric mentioned. We wrote the company when they advertised the 7 BC long ago and they came back with a more realistic figure at that time. As a matter of fact, the 168 Gr Sierra MK performed much better in my 7/300 at 3250 FPS. The reason the fellows went to the 220 and 240 gr 30 cal and the 300 gr 338 bullets were, you can see the hits MUCH better at extended range then any of the 7mm bullets of 162 and 168 gr weights. I have some 176 and 180 and 186 Custom 7mm bullets but none of them do as well as the 220 and 240 in the big 30 mags such as the 30/378 or the 300 RUM or Tomahawk. Spotting the shot better because of impaCT is extremely important at extreme range, as you know. A heavier bullet mass with a high BC allows this to happen. This is why we got away from the 7mm diameters. Take care and hope to see you soon. DC [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] PS -- Ric. It calls for a 9 or 9 1/4 Twist [ 11-16-2002: Message edited by: Darryl Cassel ] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
The Basics, Starting Out
THINKING OF A NEW LIGHT GUN
Top