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
If bullets are designed by volume vs weight?
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="royinidaho" data-source="post: 344717" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>I've been doing a fair amount of hitting the books on bullet design, etc.</p><p></p><p>I was surprised to read in more than one place that bullets are designed by volume not weight.</p><p></p><p>I also noticed that the benchrest bullet makers don't seem to adhere so rigidly to a/the weight designation standard. 30 cal 115s being an example (30 BR)</p><p></p><p>In our world what says the 169.5 weight 277 bullet is the cat's meow. Why not 169 or 170.1? Just as an example.</p><p></p><p>It seems that things have evolved since the early days of the industry that the the weight has become the 'name' for a class of bullet. Other descriptive adjectives and feature are added on to further describe a bullet. (Accubond, Ballistic Tip.......)</p><p></p><p>Just wondering...........<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite11" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll Eyes :rolleyes:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /></p><p></p><p>Are we stuck in some one else's box?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="royinidaho, post: 344717, member: 2011"] I've been doing a fair amount of hitting the books on bullet design, etc. I was surprised to read in more than one place that bullets are designed by volume not weight. I also noticed that the benchrest bullet makers don't seem to adhere so rigidly to a/the weight designation standard. 30 cal 115s being an example (30 BR) In our world what says the 169.5 weight 277 bullet is the cat's meow. Why not 169 or 170.1? Just as an example. It seems that things have evolved since the early days of the industry that the the weight has become the 'name' for a class of bullet. Other descriptive adjectives and feature are added on to further describe a bullet. (Accubond, Ballistic Tip.......) Just wondering...........:rolleyes: Are we stuck in some one else's box? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
If bullets are designed by volume vs weight?
Top