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
Bullet Theory
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="robbor" data-source="post: 112454" data-attributes="member: 1420"><p>Just thinking out loud here. I dont hear much in the way of bullet talk.</p><p></p><p>Concave VS convex bullet ogive</p><p></p><p>Rings around bullet wether recessed or raised</p><p></p><p>I may have to pattent this next one, golf ball dimples on bullets bearing surface. Possibly even entire bullet.</p><p></p><p>I think it would be interesting to hear of different designed bullet being test, which Im sure they have been.</p><p></p><p>Also tungsten core bullets? </p><p></p><p>Lastly I would think by now all bullets would be cad designed for the highest BC possible per weight. It seem weird that alot of the more main stream weights seem to be better designed(ie higher BC) than others.</p><p>Examples:</p><p>Sierra MK 175 BC .505 and the sierra 180 is .475, why bother? I can ony think that some are hanging on shorter ogives for length purposses.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="robbor, post: 112454, member: 1420"] Just thinking out loud here. I dont hear much in the way of bullet talk. Concave VS convex bullet ogive Rings around bullet wether recessed or raised I may have to pattent this next one, golf ball dimples on bullets bearing surface. Possibly even entire bullet. I think it would be interesting to hear of different designed bullet being test, which Im sure they have been. Also tungsten core bullets? Lastly I would think by now all bullets would be cad designed for the highest BC possible per weight. It seem weird that alot of the more main stream weights seem to be better designed(ie higher BC) than others. Examples: Sierra MK 175 BC .505 and the sierra 180 is .475, why bother? I can ony think that some are hanging on shorter ogives for length purposses. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Bullet Theory
Top