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
Introducing the Absolute Hammer
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="Hand Skills" data-source="post: 2012179" data-attributes="member: 103303"><p>I'm not sure I understand. Is there such thing as a 'true solid BC'? If applied as taught me anything, it's that BC is dynamic. It changes through flight. Not only that, it's 'twist' dependant from the get go. This also doesn't account for variations in bore dimensions, which can influence drag coefficient - the very problem that brought about the Absolute Hammer design.</p><p></p><p>A lot of guys get uppity about BC, but it is misunderstood (and somewhat outdated as a concept). Drag models seem to be the way forward for those looking to accurately predict a flight path, but that's a whole other subject.</p><p></p><p>Personally, I expect to have to 'true' any BC to my equipment. It's great to hear from people like yourself who have actually shot bullets to distance and can confirm that the published values work with their particular firing solution. </p><p></p><p>It's also great to know when published numbers DO NOT work out in the real world. </p><p></p><p>Hammer is a small company, and they make a LOT of different bullets. I'm glad that they are putting new products out, and I'm happy to crowdsource preliminary data. Testing is a great idea, but please try to be realistic about what is possible. Consider the cost implications - where would the funds for testing come from? How much more would each bullet cost? How much longer would it take to bring a new design to market? </p><p></p><p>[USER=86554]@seekoutside[/USER] I gotta disagree. Going out and collecting data is what long range is ALL ABOUT! If you don't have the time to put in, consider teaming up with someone who does. It takes a lot of DOPE to make first round hits at extended ranges. I dont think it's reasonable to expect a ballistic computer to do all the work. </p><p></p><p>To me, the issue is more about having a new fast twist barrel spun on and investing hundreds in components to find out 'oh, this does not offer me any advantage '.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hand Skills, post: 2012179, member: 103303"] I'm not sure I understand. Is there such thing as a 'true solid BC'? If applied as taught me anything, it's that BC is dynamic. It changes through flight. Not only that, it's 'twist' dependant from the get go. This also doesn't account for variations in bore dimensions, which can influence drag coefficient - the very problem that brought about the Absolute Hammer design. A lot of guys get uppity about BC, but it is misunderstood (and somewhat outdated as a concept). Drag models seem to be the way forward for those looking to accurately predict a flight path, but that's a whole other subject. Personally, I expect to have to 'true' any BC to my equipment. It's great to hear from people like yourself who have actually shot bullets to distance and can confirm that the published values work with their particular firing solution. It's also great to know when published numbers DO NOT work out in the real world. Hammer is a small company, and they make a LOT of different bullets. I'm glad that they are putting new products out, and I'm happy to crowdsource preliminary data. Testing is a great idea, but please try to be realistic about what is possible. Consider the cost implications - where would the funds for testing come from? How much more would each bullet cost? How much longer would it take to bring a new design to market? [USER=86554]@seekoutside[/USER] I gotta disagree. Going out and collecting data is what long range is ALL ABOUT! If you don't have the time to put in, consider teaming up with someone who does. It takes a lot of DOPE to make first round hits at extended ranges. I dont think it's reasonable to expect a ballistic computer to do all the work. To me, the issue is more about having a new fast twist barrel spun on and investing hundreds in components to find out 'oh, this does not offer me any advantage '. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Introducing the Absolute Hammer
Top