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
New Barnes bullet testing.....
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="Fiftydriver" data-source="post: 476572" data-attributes="member: 10"><p>First off, let me state that I respect both of you guys tremendously. We have been involved in many debates over the years. Often, mostly on the same side, sometimes disagreeing, always respectful.</p><p> </p><p>I also freely admit that both of you likely have far more experience on the scientific end of bullet design. I am not a bullet maker, I am not an external ballistic expert. The extend of my expertise is knowing how to make a rifle shoot a bullet to the same point of aim most of the time. I also know a bit about how drive that bullet faster then most averge chamberings. This is similiar to horse power in cars, the larger the displacement, the easier it is to make big HP. Same way with rifle chamberings, larger the case capacity, within reason, the faster you can drive bullets.</p><p> </p><p>As far as ballistic testing, I take bullets set them side by side, take measurements and record them and then shoot them and record what happens while the bullet is in the air. Then do the same with other bullets and compare shape, design and ballistic performance. Simplistic in the extreme.</p><p> </p><p>If the **** weather was not 15 below zero and snowing right now I would have offered plenty of solid drop test data and this conversation would not even be happening. Likely the results will lean closer to what you two are predicting. I simply hope that the longer TTSX bullet will offer at least as high of a BC as the SMK. IF it will, with its 200 fps velocity advantage and ability to survive impact velocities MUCH higher then the SMK for big game hunting, and also offer long range expansion, it could only be called a win for all of us.</p><p> </p><p>Again, both of your advice, comments, opinions, facts and experience is more then welcome and thankfully accepted. I was not trying to prop up the Barnes bullets into something they are not, just that from the limited testing I have been able to do, they look promising for the hyper velocity chamberings which are very hard on conventional match bullets at the terminal end of their travels!!!</p><p> </p><p>I freely defer to the ballistic experts, I just hope these bullets will perform like I think they will.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fiftydriver, post: 476572, member: 10"] First off, let me state that I respect both of you guys tremendously. We have been involved in many debates over the years. Often, mostly on the same side, sometimes disagreeing, always respectful. I also freely admit that both of you likely have far more experience on the scientific end of bullet design. I am not a bullet maker, I am not an external ballistic expert. The extend of my expertise is knowing how to make a rifle shoot a bullet to the same point of aim most of the time. I also know a bit about how drive that bullet faster then most averge chamberings. This is similiar to horse power in cars, the larger the displacement, the easier it is to make big HP. Same way with rifle chamberings, larger the case capacity, within reason, the faster you can drive bullets. As far as ballistic testing, I take bullets set them side by side, take measurements and record them and then shoot them and record what happens while the bullet is in the air. Then do the same with other bullets and compare shape, design and ballistic performance. Simplistic in the extreme. If the **** weather was not 15 below zero and snowing right now I would have offered plenty of solid drop test data and this conversation would not even be happening. Likely the results will lean closer to what you two are predicting. I simply hope that the longer TTSX bullet will offer at least as high of a BC as the SMK. IF it will, with its 200 fps velocity advantage and ability to survive impact velocities MUCH higher then the SMK for big game hunting, and also offer long range expansion, it could only be called a win for all of us. Again, both of your advice, comments, opinions, facts and experience is more then welcome and thankfully accepted. I was not trying to prop up the Barnes bullets into something they are not, just that from the limited testing I have been able to do, they look promising for the hyper velocity chamberings which are very hard on conventional match bullets at the terminal end of their travels!!! I freely defer to the ballistic experts, I just hope these bullets will perform like I think they will. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
New Barnes bullet testing.....
Top