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
8MM Remington Mag Questions
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="etisll40" data-source="post: 655018" data-attributes="member: 15229"><p>Thanks for the information. I must of mis-interpreted an article I read on here.</p><p> </p><p>It was written by one of us that worked at Berger and was in the know, and he insinuated that the 338 Sierra Matchking had a higher bc due to it's weight and sectional density more so than it's design.</p><p> </p><p>I have confused something though, the sectional density part was probably another article that was emphasizing terminal ballistics.</p><p> </p><p>I have to go back and find the articles. I need to clear up sectional density.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="etisll40, post: 655018, member: 15229"] Thanks for the information. I must of mis-interpreted an article I read on here. It was written by one of us that worked at Berger and was in the know, and he insinuated that the 338 Sierra Matchking had a higher bc due to it's weight and sectional density more so than it's design. I have confused something though, the sectional density part was probably another article that was emphasizing terminal ballistics. I have to go back and find the articles. I need to clear up sectional density. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
8MM Remington Mag Questions
Top