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
Loadbase 3.0 and Exbal
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="Mikecr" data-source="post: 421478" data-attributes="member: 1521"><p>This is only pseudo-true, in a general sense, albeit the right approach.</p><p>It does solve a 'problem' with software solutions that are not taken to G1 drag coefficients. But only if that same software allows use of G7(that would be weird). And use of G7 form factors can produce less work/error for our long range bullet solutions. </p><p>But it can also produce greater errors..</p><p></p><p>Anyone should keep in mind the context of a pseudo-truth(aka rule of thumb). It's purpose is usually to provide 'useful' solutions while we're floundering with the truths. Look how long Greenhill lasted..</p><p>Sometimes pseudo-truths amount to nothing more than marketing(like extreme powders).</p><p>But only a real truth passes all tests. Any other will fail tests, unless facilitated with qualifiers.</p><p>I'm merely suggesting that we should recognize this before further building on another truth -that isn't.</p><p>I'll give you an example:</p><p></p><p>My lot, 95VLD velocity BCs taken to G1 and G7 drag coeff tables:</p><p>This shows a rock solid G7 match(compared to G1), that is the basis of Bryan's assistance.</p><p><img src="http://a.imageshack.us/img543/2051/95vld055.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>By <a href="http://profile.imageshack.us/user/null" target="_blank">null</a> at 2010-09-06</p><p></p><p>But what if someone trims these bullet noses to the same lengths, without first qualifying ogive radius(their datum), and opens a meplat to .100"?</p><p>Well I hope this person is now using G1 instead of G7 BCs..</p><p><img src="http://a.imageshack.us/img837/4041/95vld100.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>By <a href="http://profile.imageshack.us/user/null" target="_blank">null</a> at 2010-09-06</p><p></p><p>So it is possible, even if rare, to get better results using G1 BCs.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mikecr, post: 421478, member: 1521"] This is only pseudo-true, in a general sense, albeit the right approach. It does solve a 'problem' with software solutions that are not taken to G1 drag coefficients. But only if that same software allows use of G7(that would be weird). And use of G7 form factors can produce less work/error for our long range bullet solutions. But it can also produce greater errors.. Anyone should keep in mind the context of a pseudo-truth(aka rule of thumb). It's purpose is usually to provide 'useful' solutions while we're floundering with the truths. Look how long Greenhill lasted.. Sometimes pseudo-truths amount to nothing more than marketing(like extreme powders). But only a real truth passes all tests. Any other will fail tests, unless facilitated with qualifiers. I'm merely suggesting that we should recognize this before further building on another truth -that isn't. I'll give you an example: My lot, 95VLD velocity BCs taken to G1 and G7 drag coeff tables: This shows a rock solid G7 match(compared to G1), that is the basis of Bryan's assistance. [IMG]http://a.imageshack.us/img543/2051/95vld055.jpg[/IMG] By [URL=http://profile.imageshack.us/user/null]null[/URL] at 2010-09-06 But what if someone trims these bullet noses to the same lengths, without first qualifying ogive radius(their datum), and opens a meplat to .100"? Well I hope this person is now using G1 instead of G7 BCs.. [IMG]http://a.imageshack.us/img837/4041/95vld100.jpg[/IMG] By [URL=http://profile.imageshack.us/user/null]null[/URL] at 2010-09-06 So it is possible, even if rare, to get better results using G1 BCs. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Loadbase 3.0 and Exbal
Top