Long range bullets that will penetrate up close without blowing up.

[mmacfive]

SD is the weight in relation to its diameter. Given a caliber, the diameter doesn't change, so....whether you want to say the length gives it weight or the weight gives it length, I don't see being a point worth arguing about. Semantics. However, as we can come to understand, it will come out to the higher SD and usually a higher BC. Again it's not just weight. The disconnect seems to be the weight vs weight proportional to the diameter, so again, weight to diameter is length when talking about bullets. "My method" is not my method...it's just is what it is. The original conversation wasnt to you, it was to grease who was out there making up facts and formulas, and specifically said "the heavier the bullet, the higher the BC is" and "SD is not apart of BC." Both of which are false as you can note in my previous post.

Do you know how to calculate the BC though?

The formula you say you know... is wrong, it's not SD over form factor....I litterally took a picture of Bryan litz's book and linked to Berger website with the formula. All you needed to do is copy and paste it if you wanted to just argue and you didn't even get that right. I don't know how else to spoon feed it.
[/QUOTED



Dude, I've been playing nice. If you want to be an arrogant *** it would be better if you know what the hell you're talking about.

1) you said "It's just misleading to say mass or weight is a huge contributing factor to BC when its SD=Mass/cross section area."

It's not cross section area (that would be pi xdiaxdia/4) It is the square of the diameter that is used in calculating the SD. (That's in your Berger link)

2): you said "the w/7000 can be rewritten in more school like form of pi x radius^2."

wrong. The w/7000 is converting grains to lbs

3: From your Berger link (did you even read it?) "In words, the Ballistic Coefficient of a bullet is it's sectional density divided by its form factor."

Do you know how to calculate the BC?

Anytime you want to apologize Will be fine.

 

[Westernhuntr]

I think we've reached this point..

 

[WahooYahoo]

What is BC?

 

[mmacfive]

What is BC?

Literally the BC=SD/FF. But somehow I don't think that's what you mean!

 

[Capt RB]

What is BC?

Before kids

 

[bigngreen]

I think everyone will find a bullet or two that just works for them, not everyone has the same luck. For me and several friends we have piled up a lot of elk from close in timber to 1000+ yards with Bergers and Matrix bullets from 6.5 140's to 300gr 338's all one shot kills. I've driven the 140 Berger through elks shoulders multiple times up close and then the next time is 800+ perfection!! I've seen the same from the Berger 215 and 230, absolute flawless performance from a 308 to a 30 Nosler time after time. Shot quite a few elk with the 140 270 cal Berger smoking them out at 3300 fps and shot multiple elk inside 200 yards and out to much longer ranges and it was excellent as well, then the 165 Matrix in a WSM and my buddy in 270 Win, he's probably taco'ed 30+ with it and always one shot down, the 170 Berger in 270 hs been outstanding also, watched a bull take one at 75 yards with a center shot and dumped him hard.
I also have been super happy with the 124 Hammer and 177 Hammer bullets in a mono, super lethal and does not stop on harder close hits but still opens excellent and creates massive permanent wound channels out there on the other end of the range. I'm always playing with bullets and those are the ones I've keep coming back around to because I see the most reliable and predictable results in both accuracy and terminal performance.

 

[WildBillG]

Has it not been brought up that the BC or SD have nothing to do whether a bullet will blow up at close range or not. How a bullet performs at a given distance is in its construction. If a bullet has a thin jacket more likely than not it will be fragile up close at high velocity. That bullet may perform perfectly though at long range out beyond 600yds.
From the comments I have reag on this forum the Nosler Accu Bond Long Range is likely the best bullet for up close to way way out there. Now having said that all bullets have their ney sayers so take what you read with a grain of salt.

 

[Greasegun]

Leaving mass out of the B.C. equation would defy physics.

"Heavier objects do not fall faster than lighter objects when they are dropped from a certain height IF there is no resistance from the air. ... Because of this, the resistance from the air slows the fall of the lighter thing. But if both objects had the same ratio of mass to surface area, they would fall at the same rate."

As such, 2 bullets of precisely the same shape, but with 2 different amounts of mass, (copper vs lead) will resist the influence of drag differently. So in other words, if barnes made a copper bullet with precisely the same shape as the nosler ablr, its B.C. would be lower. The only way a copper bullet could have a higher B.C. would be for the copper bullet to have a smaller drag coefficient or diameter than the lead bullet.

 

[WildBillG]

Jarheadtim a momolithic bullet can only expand so much. The smaller the caliber the smaller the width of the expanded bullet. I have found very few Barnes x bullets but ones that hits up close and fast looked liked a mushroomed lead core. Even then the mushroom was not bigger then the four petals formed farther awy. Both kind of bullets retained at least 955 of their original weight.