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
Weight a factor of BC?
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="BrentM" data-source="post: 2104356" data-attributes="member: 61747"><p>All a person needs to do is plug in to the BC formula. Weight is always a factor but not nearly as much as some believe. For example, doubling the weight doesn't double BC. Weight is just one part of the whole. Clearly in the example you are using a dimensionally same bullet and only changing the weight. </p><p></p><p>Myth- higher weight mean higher bc. Not true by itself. Think round ball, round nose, short stubby fat bullets.</p><p>Myth- smaller caliber and lighter bullet is more effected by wind then large heavier caliber. Not true. It is directly related to BC.</p><p></p><p>On another note, it has been proven than BC is affected by velocity so in some cases a lighter, lower bc, at a higher velocity can have better ballistics then a slower, heavier, higher BC bullet. Generally the terminal ballistics is all that is negatively effected and that is not an always the case gig either. </p><p></p><p>Something I always thought was strange is how a 143 eldx has less bc than a 140 eld. Even a 135 a has higher BC. When breaking down the bullet the form factor etc the bullet shape and design, even though very similar tends to net slight differences in bc.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BrentM, post: 2104356, member: 61747"] All a person needs to do is plug in to the BC formula. Weight is always a factor but not nearly as much as some believe. For example, doubling the weight doesn't double BC. Weight is just one part of the whole. Clearly in the example you are using a dimensionally same bullet and only changing the weight. Myth- higher weight mean higher bc. Not true by itself. Think round ball, round nose, short stubby fat bullets. Myth- smaller caliber and lighter bullet is more effected by wind then large heavier caliber. Not true. It is directly related to BC. On another note, it has been proven than BC is affected by velocity so in some cases a lighter, lower bc, at a higher velocity can have better ballistics then a slower, heavier, higher BC bullet. Generally the terminal ballistics is all that is negatively effected and that is not an always the case gig either. Something I always thought was strange is how a 143 eldx has less bc than a 140 eld. Even a 135 a has higher BC. When breaking down the bullet the form factor etc the bullet shape and design, even though very similar tends to net slight differences in bc. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Weight a factor of BC?
Top