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
Berger .338 300 grain EH - ballistic coefficient
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="Timber338" data-source="post: 1172276" data-attributes="member: 33822"><p>Thanks for the response... so are there ever any times when you slightly adjust the BC of any of the Berger bullets? Or are the Berger bullets so well tested that BC is never the source of error? I'm just trying to pinpoint the real world methods that you guys are using to dial in your loads. From everybody's response it really appears that tuning BC is not the favored approach when you're shooting Berger bullets...</p><p></p><p>I get that real-world results are what we are tuning our analytical models to match... but just looking at the numbers there is a very small analytical difference in tuning the BC vs tuning the MV.</p><p></p><p>Running the numbers in Shooter with my load.... I originally started with a MV of 2725 @ a BC of .417. My shots were 4 inches low at 1000 yards.</p><p>To pull those 4 inches up I can either go with Option A.) tune my MV down to 2705 FPS @ .417 BC or Option B.) tune my BC down to .400 @ 2725 FPS. I think both of these solutions get me within .2" analytically at 1000. </p><p></p><p>So just to look at the analytical teter toter (I get this is just analytical, and not actual), if you run the numbers at 600, 1000 and 1200. I get the following drops in inches. This also assumes you are shooting due north to eliminate any vertical Coriolos.</p><p></p><p>MV tune Option A.) 65.8" @ 600 : 252.6" @ 1000 : 405.3" @ 1200</p><p></p><p>BC tune Option B.) 65.4" @ 600 : 252.4" @ 1000 : 406.2" at 1200</p><p></p><p>Although it is intuitive, the above numbers make it very easy to see that tuning MV creates more drop up front and less out far and the opposite is true of tuning BC... just highlighting your point of teter toter, and more than that I think you hit the nail on the head with seeing the trend of the load is doing over the entire trajectory. Obviously going to get more and more error as the distance gets beyond 1200 yards when you tune the wrong variable.</p><p></p><p>At the same time, the analytical difference in drop between options A and B at any hunting distance within 1200 yards is really within the noise for what's going to make a difference on an elk. But I know you've shot a whole lot more than I have at long range, and it sounds like there's a larger real world difference if you don't get your system totally dialed in.</p><p></p><p>I'll get out sometime within the next couple of weeks to get more data points for this load.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Timber338, post: 1172276, member: 33822"] Thanks for the response... so are there ever any times when you slightly adjust the BC of any of the Berger bullets? Or are the Berger bullets so well tested that BC is never the source of error? I'm just trying to pinpoint the real world methods that you guys are using to dial in your loads. From everybody's response it really appears that tuning BC is not the favored approach when you're shooting Berger bullets... I get that real-world results are what we are tuning our analytical models to match... but just looking at the numbers there is a very small analytical difference in tuning the BC vs tuning the MV. Running the numbers in Shooter with my load.... I originally started with a MV of 2725 @ a BC of .417. My shots were 4 inches low at 1000 yards. To pull those 4 inches up I can either go with Option A.) tune my MV down to 2705 FPS @ .417 BC or Option B.) tune my BC down to .400 @ 2725 FPS. I think both of these solutions get me within .2" analytically at 1000. So just to look at the analytical teter toter (I get this is just analytical, and not actual), if you run the numbers at 600, 1000 and 1200. I get the following drops in inches. This also assumes you are shooting due north to eliminate any vertical Coriolos. MV tune Option A.) 65.8" @ 600 : 252.6" @ 1000 : 405.3" @ 1200 BC tune Option B.) 65.4" @ 600 : 252.4" @ 1000 : 406.2" at 1200 Although it is intuitive, the above numbers make it very easy to see that tuning MV creates more drop up front and less out far and the opposite is true of tuning BC... just highlighting your point of teter toter, and more than that I think you hit the nail on the head with seeing the trend of the load is doing over the entire trajectory. Obviously going to get more and more error as the distance gets beyond 1200 yards when you tune the wrong variable. At the same time, the analytical difference in drop between options A and B at any hunting distance within 1200 yards is really within the noise for what's going to make a difference on an elk. But I know you've shot a whole lot more than I have at long range, and it sounds like there's a larger real world difference if you don't get your system totally dialed in. I'll get out sometime within the next couple of weeks to get more data points for this load. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Berger .338 300 grain EH - ballistic coefficient
Top