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
Hammer ballistic coefficient tests...
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="cohunt" data-source="post: 2615041" data-attributes="member: 94491"><p>No matter what brand the bullet is-- would you personally rather that no BC be listed at all? Then there would be no "expectations"? -- just a question </p><p></p><p>I know that on some factory ammo they actually list a "drop chart"--- none of their drop charts have ever lined up with my real world experience </p><p></p><p>How much BC variance is acceptable in your mind? Where do "we" draw the line? </p><p></p><p>I understand the point you are making-- but we have no "velocity" data either-- we are guessing/speculating/extrapolating those numbers too until we actually settle on a powder/primer/brass. We have no idea on accuracy or terminal performance untill tested either.</p><p></p><p>Your max distance depends on all those variables above- not just bc.</p><p></p><p>I agree that a closer number helps us "guess" , so it would be nice to have less error factors but we can't have everything handed to us for free -- we still have to do the leg work to our own standards. </p><p></p><p>One guys expectations are gonna be different than another's. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I would love to just punch numbers into an app and dial my scope and be done with it having 100% confidence --- but I know that no matter who makes the bullet, powder, gun, chronograph, ballistic app-- there will be slight differences in the data and it needs to be proven on the range . Heck you can use several different ballistic apps with identical data entry and still come up with different shooting solutions</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cohunt, post: 2615041, member: 94491"] No matter what brand the bullet is-- would you personally rather that no BC be listed at all? Then there would be no "expectations"? -- just a question I know that on some factory ammo they actually list a "drop chart"--- none of their drop charts have ever lined up with my real world experience How much BC variance is acceptable in your mind? Where do "we" draw the line? I understand the point you are making-- but we have no "velocity" data either-- we are guessing/speculating/extrapolating those numbers too until we actually settle on a powder/primer/brass. We have no idea on accuracy or terminal performance untill tested either. Your max distance depends on all those variables above- not just bc. I agree that a closer number helps us "guess" , so it would be nice to have less error factors but we can't have everything handed to us for free -- we still have to do the leg work to our own standards. One guys expectations are gonna be different than another's. I would love to just punch numbers into an app and dial my scope and be done with it having 100% confidence --- but I know that no matter who makes the bullet, powder, gun, chronograph, ballistic app-- there will be slight differences in the data and it needs to be proven on the range . Heck you can use several different ballistic apps with identical data entry and still come up with different shooting solutions [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Hammer ballistic coefficient tests...
Top