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
Reloading
Some good news
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="MontanaRifleman" data-source="post: 337519" data-attributes="member: 11717"><p>Tayhot,</p><p> </p><p>Good point. Who cares about BC if if someone is "only" hunting to 600 yds? Some of the guys I know look at me like, 'what are you doing?' when I talk about ranges like that. As phorwath said, this site is dedicated to LR hunting, and 600 yds is on the low end of the LRH spectrum. But even out to just 600 yds with a few cartridges BC matters a lot to 600 yds and in any case, higher BC will get the bullet there with more velocity, energy/momentum and less wind drift. </p><p> </p><p>Which is more important, BC or terminal performance? I think that's a personal preference with the bottom line being a dead animal on the receiving end. Some folks prefer explosive bullets and there is something to be said for that type of performance, although it's not my cup of tea. In most cases it will kill quicker than a monometal. I dont care for the potential damage it does to the meat. I've also read "some" reports of inconsistant performance. But then again I've read the same of Barnes and Nolsers and Hornadys and Sierras. </p><p> </p><p>I mentioned BC mostly in response to your mention of it and in these forums it is a big topic. You pointed out that many bullet makers exagerate their BC's and that is probably true. Bryan Litz' testing seems to bear that out. But then again, what velocities and atmospheric conditions were used in obtaining the BC's? Do G7 profiles matter? I think for many or most of the hunters in these forums it does. It give a more acurate represntation of the bullets performance over wide margin of ranges. This is especially critical beyond 100 yds or even beyond 800-900 yds, as bullets will start losing BC efficiency at these ranges and velocities which result in misses. That may be beyond where you shoot, but most here prepare for that type of shooting.</p><p> </p><p>If the monometal peroformance is what you like, by all means use them. I also prefer them, but the Barnes bullets are down the list for me. I like the GS bullets best (haven't usded them yet), followed by the E-Tips or GMX's (depending on BC) then the TTSX. Have you tried the E-Tips yet? For reasons already mentioned I think they are better than the TSX/TTSX.</p><p> </p><p>Assuming that a bullet will give me some sort of reasonable terminal performance, accuracy is the most important thing I look for follwed by BC.</p><p> </p><p>Good shooting and good hunting,</p><p> </p><p>Mark</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MontanaRifleman, post: 337519, member: 11717"] Tayhot, Good point. Who cares about BC if if someone is "only" hunting to 600 yds? Some of the guys I know look at me like, 'what are you doing?' when I talk about ranges like that. As phorwath said, this site is dedicated to LR hunting, and 600 yds is on the low end of the LRH spectrum. But even out to just 600 yds with a few cartridges BC matters a lot to 600 yds and in any case, higher BC will get the bullet there with more velocity, energy/momentum and less wind drift. Which is more important, BC or terminal performance? I think that's a personal preference with the bottom line being a dead animal on the receiving end. Some folks prefer explosive bullets and there is something to be said for that type of performance, although it's not my cup of tea. In most cases it will kill quicker than a monometal. I dont care for the potential damage it does to the meat. I've also read "some" reports of inconsistant performance. But then again I've read the same of Barnes and Nolsers and Hornadys and Sierras. I mentioned BC mostly in response to your mention of it and in these forums it is a big topic. You pointed out that many bullet makers exagerate their BC's and that is probably true. Bryan Litz' testing seems to bear that out. But then again, what velocities and atmospheric conditions were used in obtaining the BC's? Do G7 profiles matter? I think for many or most of the hunters in these forums it does. It give a more acurate represntation of the bullets performance over wide margin of ranges. This is especially critical beyond 100 yds or even beyond 800-900 yds, as bullets will start losing BC efficiency at these ranges and velocities which result in misses. That may be beyond where you shoot, but most here prepare for that type of shooting. If the monometal peroformance is what you like, by all means use them. I also prefer them, but the Barnes bullets are down the list for me. I like the GS bullets best (haven't usded them yet), followed by the E-Tips or GMX's (depending on BC) then the TTSX. Have you tried the E-Tips yet? For reasons already mentioned I think they are better than the TSX/TTSX. Assuming that a bullet will give me some sort of reasonable terminal performance, accuracy is the most important thing I look for follwed by BC. Good shooting and good hunting, Mark [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Some good news
Top