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
Reloading
7mm reloading
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="MudRunner2005" data-source="post: 844127" data-attributes="member: 12995"><p>Agree completely. You won't see 139 and 140 reaching 1K with as much energy. Whether it's faster or not it loses kinetic energy VERY fast and doesn't have the weight behind it to retain it at that distance. Which is WHY the 180's were invented in the first place...The heavier the bullet with the higher the BC, the better long-range capabilities it will have.</p><p> </p><p>Yeah, whoever told you the 139 and 140's were better at long range than the 168's and 180's is a moron. I wouldn't listen to them ever again.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MudRunner2005, post: 844127, member: 12995"] Agree completely. You won't see 139 and 140 reaching 1K with as much energy. Whether it's faster or not it loses kinetic energy VERY fast and doesn't have the weight behind it to retain it at that distance. Which is WHY the 180's were invented in the first place...The heavier the bullet with the higher the BC, the better long-range capabilities it will have. Yeah, whoever told you the 139 and 140's were better at long range than the 168's and 180's is a moron. I wouldn't listen to them ever again. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
7mm reloading
Top