Any caliber (that can be fired out of a rifle), any bullet weight, who makes it and whats the b.c.?
- Thread starter One_Man
- Start date
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Turned solids in 375 I think, somewhere around G1 of appx 1.2 I think
Turned solids in 375 I think, somewhere around G1 of appx 1.2 I think
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Specifications Of Dora And Gustav.
Range 51,000 yards ( 29 miles ) crew 250 for firing, 2000 for full operation including train drivers, assembly workers, canteen workers, armed guards, mechanics, electricians, track maintenance the list is endless.
7 to 8 ton shell
Rate of fire, 2 rounds per hour
Caliber 80cm ( 800 mm or 2ft 8in approx )
The shells for Dora and Gustav, including the 1 ton charge was 17 feet long. It needed a ton of charge to send the 7 ton shell over 25 miles from the 100 foot long barrel. The shell on test firing proved to be able to penetrate 30 feet deep into earth making a crater over 90 feet feet across.
The velocity of the shell was 2,700 feet per second, the barrel had a life of about 150 rounds.
The barrel weighed 400 tons and the breach block where the shell was inserted weighed over 100 tons Dora stood 4 stories high, over 20 feet wide 141 feet long and weighed 1323 tons.
Specifications Of Dora And Gustav.
Range 51,000 yards ( 29 miles ) crew 250 for firing, 2000 for full operation including train drivers, assembly workers, canteen workers, armed guards, mechanics, electricians, track maintenance the list is endless.
7 to 8 ton shell
Rate of fire, 2 rounds per hour
Caliber 80cm ( 800 mm or 2ft 8in approx )
The shells for Dora and Gustav, including the 1 ton charge was 17 feet long. It needed a ton of charge to send the 7 ton shell over 25 miles from the 100 foot long barrel. The shell on test firing proved to be able to penetrate 30 feet deep into earth making a crater over 90 feet feet across.
The velocity of the shell was 2,700 feet per second, the barrel had a life of about 150 rounds.
The barrel weighed 400 tons and the breach block where the shell was inserted weighed over 100 tons Dora stood 4 stories high, over 20 feet wide 141 feet long and weighed 1323 tons.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ewoaf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Specifications Of Dora And Gustav.
Range 51,000 yards ( 29 miles ) crew 250 for firing, 2000 for full operation including train drivers, assembly workers, canteen workers, armed guards, mechanics, electricians, track maintenance the list is endless.
7 to 8 ton shell
Rate of fire, 2 rounds per hour
Caliber 80cm ( 800 mm or 2ft 8in approx )
The shells for Dora and Gustav, including the 1 ton charge was 17 feet long. It needed a ton of charge to send the 7 ton shell over 25 miles from the 100 foot long barrel. The shell on test firing proved to be able to penetrate 30 feet deep into earth making a crater over 90 feet feet across.
The velocity of the shell was 2,700 feet per second, the barrel had a life of about 150 rounds.
The barrel weighed 400 tons and the breach block where the shell was inserted weighed over 100 tons Dora stood 4 stories high, over 20 feet wide 141 feet long and weighed 1323 tons.</div></div>
Yeah, but was it 1/2 MOA?
I bet the trigger sucked.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ewoaf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Specifications Of Dora And Gustav.
Range 51,000 yards ( 29 miles ) crew 250 for firing, 2000 for full operation including train drivers, assembly workers, canteen workers, armed guards, mechanics, electricians, track maintenance the list is endless.
7 to 8 ton shell
Rate of fire, 2 rounds per hour
Caliber 80cm ( 800 mm or 2ft 8in approx )
The shells for Dora and Gustav, including the 1 ton charge was 17 feet long. It needed a ton of charge to send the 7 ton shell over 25 miles from the 100 foot long barrel. The shell on test firing proved to be able to penetrate 30 feet deep into earth making a crater over 90 feet feet across.
The velocity of the shell was 2,700 feet per second, the barrel had a life of about 150 rounds.
The barrel weighed 400 tons and the breach block where the shell was inserted weighed over 100 tons Dora stood 4 stories high, over 20 feet wide 141 feet long and weighed 1323 tons.</div></div>
Yeah, but was it 1/2 MOA?
I bet the trigger sucked.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
.375, .408 or .416 all shoot some specialty turned bullets that as noted by Bohem have a G1 BC of around 1.2. There may be specialty bullets for the .338 that have those kind of BC's but I can't think who makes them right off the top of my head. Otherwise the standard Berger 300 gr. VLD and the SMK 300 gr. are pretty high.
Of the standard calibers it doesn't take a muzzle brake of pussy pad to shoot, the .Berger .210 and Hornady A-max, both around .630 BC and then of course Berger 168's and 180's with BC's of .619 and .659.
JLK's also have high BC's. 7mm 168 and 180 are a little longer than Berger's with a longer ogive by a couple of Radii
.375, .408 or .416 all shoot some specialty turned bullets that as noted by Bohem have a G1 BC of around 1.2. There may be specialty bullets for the .338 that have those kind of BC's but I can't think who makes them right off the top of my head. Otherwise the standard Berger 300 gr. VLD and the SMK 300 gr. are pretty high.
Of the standard calibers it doesn't take a muzzle brake of pussy pad to shoot, the .Berger .210 and Hornady A-max, both around .630 BC and then of course Berger 168's and 180's with BC's of .619 and .659.
JLK's also have high BC's. 7mm 168 and 180 are a little longer than Berger's with a longer ogive by a couple of Radii
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
the Dora bbl was rifled
the Dora bbl was rifled
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
The JLK 7mm 180's I tested looked indentical to Berger 180's with the exception of the metplat which was .060" on the JKL's vs .040" on the Bergers. From field testing the Bergers shot 1/2 moa flatter than the JLK's out of my 7/300 WSM at about 2890 fps. The JLK were most consitant for overall length and uniformity. .003-.006" vs .006-.016" but the bergers still shot better.
With the 180 7mm Bergers pointed I used a bc of .690 in exbal which matched my actual drop out to 1200 yds.
The JLK 7mm 180's I tested looked indentical to Berger 180's with the exception of the metplat which was .060" on the JKL's vs .040" on the Bergers. From field testing the Bergers shot 1/2 moa flatter than the JLK's out of my 7/300 WSM at about 2890 fps. The JLK were most consitant for overall length and uniformity. .003-.006" vs .006-.016" but the bergers still shot better.
With the 180 7mm Bergers pointed I used a bc of .690 in exbal which matched my actual drop out to 1200 yds.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Would it be possible to design a bullet with a center post that runs base to tip (think internal sabot) that would eject after the bullet exited the barrel, basically leaving a hollow tube. In theory, this would decrease drag, allowing for higher b.c.
Here is a crude representation of what I am talking about:
Would it be possible to design a bullet with a center post that runs base to tip (think internal sabot) that would eject after the bullet exited the barrel, basically leaving a hollow tube. In theory, this would decrease drag, allowing for higher b.c.
Here is a crude representation of what I am talking about:
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Here's a 180 grain .30 cal hunting bullet with a BC of .725 - cool! Kinda pricey though...
http://www.customprojectile.com/30-Cal-RBT-AT-180_p_42.html
Here's a 180 grain .30 cal hunting bullet with a BC of .725 - cool! Kinda pricey though...
http://www.customprojectile.com/30-Cal-RBT-AT-180_p_42.html
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Think the Wildcat 200gr ULD 7mm bullet may be right up towards the top, it has around a .9 bc I believe.
Think the Wildcat 200gr ULD 7mm bullet may be right up towards the top, it has around a .9 bc I believe.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sp260</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The JLK 7mm 180's I tested looked indentical to Berger 180's with the exception of the metplat which was .060" on the JKL's vs .040" on the Bergers. From field testing the Bergers shot 1/2 moa flatter than the JLK's out of my 7/300 WSM at about 2890 fps. The JLK were most consitant for overall length and uniformity. .003-.006" vs .006-.016" but the bergers still shot better.
With the 180 7mm Bergers pointed I used a bc of .690 in exbal which matched my actual drop out to 1200 yds. </div></div>
The length is about the same from a JLK to a Berger but JLK uses an 18R and the Berger uses a 14R. Both secant ogive I understand. If you look closely you will see a little sharper transition from bearing surface to ogive on the Berger. Also, the wider Meplat of the JLK is to keep the bullets a little shorter. IMO the tradeoff is more drag on the nose that the VLD type bullets are supposed to eliminate, even if you get better BC from the longer ogive.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sp260</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The JLK 7mm 180's I tested looked indentical to Berger 180's with the exception of the metplat which was .060" on the JKL's vs .040" on the Bergers. From field testing the Bergers shot 1/2 moa flatter than the JLK's out of my 7/300 WSM at about 2890 fps. The JLK were most consitant for overall length and uniformity. .003-.006" vs .006-.016" but the bergers still shot better.
With the 180 7mm Bergers pointed I used a bc of .690 in exbal which matched my actual drop out to 1200 yds. </div></div>
The length is about the same from a JLK to a Berger but JLK uses an 18R and the Berger uses a 14R. Both secant ogive I understand. If you look closely you will see a little sharper transition from bearing surface to ogive on the Berger. Also, the wider Meplat of the JLK is to keep the bullets a little shorter. IMO the tradeoff is more drag on the nose that the VLD type bullets are supposed to eliminate, even if you get better BC from the longer ogive.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Parkincense, I am no expert but I believe the hole through the center of the bullet would dramatically increase drag. The bullet that was designed for firing inside of aircraft used this style with a through opening to allow it to be effective at very close range, then lose enough velocity to hopefully not damage the aircraft. HTH
Parkincense, I am no expert but I believe the hole through the center of the bullet would dramatically increase drag. The bullet that was designed for firing inside of aircraft used this style with a through opening to allow it to be effective at very close range, then lose enough velocity to hopefully not damage the aircraft. HTH
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
I thought of this some time ago and came to the (maybe incorrect) conclusion that shock wave propagation my occur inside the hollowed area, INCREASING drag. If the projectile were subsonic, the idea may be valid. There are also a host of other internal ballistic issues that would have to be overcome as well. That being said, I would like to see the thing fly, and fly well.
I thought of this some time ago and came to the (maybe incorrect) conclusion that shock wave propagation my occur inside the hollowed area, INCREASING drag. If the projectile were subsonic, the idea may be valid. There are also a host of other internal ballistic issues that would have to be overcome as well. That being said, I would like to see the thing fly, and fly well.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Parkincense,
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4301736/description.html
There are a number of ways to construct an obturator that can be made to work in small calibers. The challenge is to create a seal with a minimum of non-projectile mass.
If internal projectile surfaces are properly angled, the opposing shockwaves cancel out. It is a viable design, but very expensive to produce with precision.
Parkincense,
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4301736/description.html
There are a number of ways to construct an obturator that can be made to work in small calibers. The challenge is to create a seal with a minimum of non-projectile mass.
If internal projectile surfaces are properly angled, the opposing shockwaves cancel out. It is a viable design, but very expensive to produce with precision.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
"The more pointy on both ends the better."... Within the manufacturing limitations of jacketed bullets, this is pretty much true of the nose. The tail is a little more finicky. It loses stability at approximately nine degrees, and forget finishing it to a "point". Sufficient base diameter is critical to dynamic stability. This is an effect of the CG/CP relationship
Beyond an aspect ratio of ~4.5: 1, a pointed nose begins to acquire surface drag in excess of the gain in wave drag reduction, but you would only see this in turned-solid projectiles or other construction methods capable of creating a long/durable nose.
A projectile which is optimized for minimum total drag does not "fit" the G7 model very well either.
"The more pointy on both ends the better."... Within the manufacturing limitations of jacketed bullets, this is pretty much true of the nose. The tail is a little more finicky. It loses stability at approximately nine degrees, and forget finishing it to a "point". Sufficient base diameter is critical to dynamic stability. This is an effect of the CG/CP relationship
Beyond an aspect ratio of ~4.5: 1, a pointed nose begins to acquire surface drag in excess of the gain in wave drag reduction, but you would only see this in turned-solid projectiles or other construction methods capable of creating a long/durable nose.
A projectile which is optimized for minimum total drag does not "fit" the G7 model very well either.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Noel Carlson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It loses stability at approximately nine degrees, and forget finishing it to a "point". Sufficient base diameter is critical to dynamic stability. This is an effect of the CG/CP relationship
Beyond an aspect ratio of ~4.5: 1, a pointed nose begins to acquire surface drag in excess of the gain in wave drag reduction, but you would only see this in turned-solid projectiles or other construction methods capable of creating a long/durable nose.</div></div>
You do realize that proper gyroscopic stabilization drastically overwhelms CG/CP instabilities, right? This does not negate the fact that dual-point projectiles have other issues...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Noel Carlson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It loses stability at approximately nine degrees, and forget finishing it to a "point". Sufficient base diameter is critical to dynamic stability. This is an effect of the CG/CP relationship
Beyond an aspect ratio of ~4.5: 1, a pointed nose begins to acquire surface drag in excess of the gain in wave drag reduction, but you would only see this in turned-solid projectiles or other construction methods capable of creating a long/durable nose.</div></div>
You do realize that proper gyroscopic stabilization drastically overwhelms CG/CP instabilities, right? This does not negate the fact that dual-point projectiles have other issues...
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Hornady claims a BC of 1.050 on its 750 gr 50cal A-Max. I'm sure there is better out there, this is just the best I've seen from a larger manufacturer.
Hornady claims a BC of 1.050 on its 750 gr 50cal A-Max. I'm sure there is better out there, this is just the best I've seen from a larger manufacturer.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Tactical Rancher,
"You do realize that proper gyroscopic stabilization drastically overwhelms CG/CP instabilities, right? This does not negate the fact that dual-point projectiles have other issues..."
You are right on both counts, with some qualification. In the 6.5+ caliber-long projectile range, the GG/CP instability potential is greatly exaggerated, however; conventional projectiles (6.0- calibers in length), with a nine degree tail longer than 1.25 calibers, <span style="font-style: italic">will</span> have problems with boundary layer separation. It is not even necessary to come to a point.
P.S., I noticed that you are a mechanical engineer. Drop me a PM if you have the time to correspond.
Tactical Rancher,
"You do realize that proper gyroscopic stabilization drastically overwhelms CG/CP instabilities, right? This does not negate the fact that dual-point projectiles have other issues..."
You are right on both counts, with some qualification. In the 6.5+ caliber-long projectile range, the GG/CP instability potential is greatly exaggerated, however; conventional projectiles (6.0- calibers in length), with a nine degree tail longer than 1.25 calibers, <span style="font-style: italic">will</span> have problems with boundary layer separation. It is not even necessary to come to a point.
P.S., I noticed that you are a mechanical engineer. Drop me a PM if you have the time to correspond.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Noel Carlson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...conventional projectiles (6.0- calibers in length), with a nine degree tail longer than 1.25 calibers, <span style="font-style: italic">will</span> have problems with boundary layer separation. It is not even necessary to come to a point...</div></div>
Ahhhh! So, the turbulence adds more instabilities? Interesting.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Noel Carlson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...conventional projectiles (6.0- calibers in length), with a nine degree tail longer than 1.25 calibers, <span style="font-style: italic">will</span> have problems with boundary layer separation. It is not even necessary to come to a point...</div></div>
Ahhhh! So, the turbulence adds more instabilities? Interesting.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
lost river ballastics j 36 had some intresting stuff a few years back
A 105-LM bullet has an BC of 0.93. Lutz also has a .408 Chey-Tac bullet with a 0.95 calculated BC
I knew I had read some info where LRB was doing some "what if" bullets types'
here is the thread from 9 years ago now
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/light-high-bc-bullet-2755/
lost river ballastics j 36 had some intresting stuff a few years back
A 105-LM bullet has an BC of 0.93. Lutz also has a .408 Chey-Tac bullet with a 0.95 calculated BC
I knew I had read some info where LRB was doing some "what if" bullets types'
here is the thread from 9 years ago now
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/light-high-bc-bullet-2755/
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
GMR,
Mr. Jensen's comments were very interesting. It is hard to believe that nine years have passed since his predictions were made regarding commonplace ballistic improvements.
His critique of calculated BC estimates were spot-on also. Only three years ago the LM-105 was being advertised with a BC of 1.113. The revised number that you cited of 0.93 is much more realistic. Some of the earlier referenced 1.0+ BC projectiles are in for even more severe downward revision.
The moral of the story is;
Take calculated BC values with a grain of salt.
Reliable numbers are generated only from Doppler radar readings, acoustic range sensors, or dual chronographs at the muzzle, and shielded at range.
GMR,
Mr. Jensen's comments were very interesting. It is hard to believe that nine years have passed since his predictions were made regarding commonplace ballistic improvements.
His critique of calculated BC estimates were spot-on also. Only three years ago the LM-105 was being advertised with a BC of 1.113. The revised number that you cited of 0.93 is much more realistic. Some of the earlier referenced 1.0+ BC projectiles are in for even more severe downward revision.
The moral of the story is;
Take calculated BC values with a grain of salt.
Reliable numbers are generated only from Doppler radar readings, acoustic range sensors, or dual chronographs at the muzzle, and shielded at range.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
My 30-30 soft point has a good BC I think.
My 30-30 soft point has a good BC I think.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Noel Carlson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">GMR,
Mr. Jensen's comments were very interesting. It is hard to believe that nine years have passed since his predictions were made regarding commonplace ballistic improvements.
His critique of calculated BC estimates were spot-on also. Only three years ago the LM-105 was being advertised with a BC of 1.113. The revised number that you cited of 0.93 is much more realistic. Some of the earlier referenced 1.0+ BC projectiles are in for even more severe downward revision.
The moral of the story is;
Take calculated BC values with a grain of salt.
Reliable numbers are generated only from Doppler radar readings, acoustic range sensors, or dual chronographs at the muzzle, and shielded at range. </div></div>
I recall reading many other posts back then where many where saying that LRB was full of himself, in fact after many keyboard junkies that thought they knew more him ,....He withdrew from posting after that you really did not find him post too. A shame really as I thought he had some very interesting thought process's going on. But as I have found that arguing with someone on the net is a total waste of time. And his time I am sure was better used else where.
I know that I have used many bullets for long range shooting and,.. can say that many times you must keep a very open mind on what you are doing. BC alone is just one small part in getting that distant shot to get there(using a very general term). Some days you just have to stop worrying about the small stuff and just shoot the rifle.
Nothing can beat real world testing. Example I should not have been able to shoot a .790 5 shot group with silver bear ammo out of new SASS 308 but I did in fact I had to try it several more times to see if it was just luck the first go around.
Like you said moral of story take the printed info with a grain of salt.
Glad I was able to post that up. IF you can get in touch with him he is a very educated person that if you listen to what he has to say ,.. may just enlighten you a bit on reloading and bullet design.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Noel Carlson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">GMR,
Mr. Jensen's comments were very interesting. It is hard to believe that nine years have passed since his predictions were made regarding commonplace ballistic improvements.
His critique of calculated BC estimates were spot-on also. Only three years ago the LM-105 was being advertised with a BC of 1.113. The revised number that you cited of 0.93 is much more realistic. Some of the earlier referenced 1.0+ BC projectiles are in for even more severe downward revision.
The moral of the story is;
Take calculated BC values with a grain of salt.
Reliable numbers are generated only from Doppler radar readings, acoustic range sensors, or dual chronographs at the muzzle, and shielded at range. </div></div>
I recall reading many other posts back then where many where saying that LRB was full of himself, in fact after many keyboard junkies that thought they knew more him ,....He withdrew from posting after that you really did not find him post too. A shame really as I thought he had some very interesting thought process's going on. But as I have found that arguing with someone on the net is a total waste of time. And his time I am sure was better used else where.
I know that I have used many bullets for long range shooting and,.. can say that many times you must keep a very open mind on what you are doing. BC alone is just one small part in getting that distant shot to get there(using a very general term). Some days you just have to stop worrying about the small stuff and just shoot the rifle.
Nothing can beat real world testing. Example I should not have been able to shoot a .790 5 shot group with silver bear ammo out of new SASS 308 but I did in fact I had to try it several more times to see if it was just luck the first go around.
Like you said moral of story take the printed info with a grain of salt.
Glad I was able to post that up. IF you can get in touch with him he is a very educated person that if you listen to what he has to say ,.. may just enlighten you a bit on reloading and bullet design.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
GMR,
"Nothing can beat real world testing."
I agree. It sounds like such an obvious precaution... not that I have anything against educated <span style="font-style: italic">speculation</span>, but when you see <span style="font-style: italic">estimated</span> BC values with precision three places past the decimal point, you know the writer has entered Wonderland.
It is so much more fulfilling to work with hard data.
What did happen to Warren Jensen?
GMR,
"Nothing can beat real world testing."
I agree. It sounds like such an obvious precaution... not that I have anything against educated <span style="font-style: italic">speculation</span>, but when you see <span style="font-style: italic">estimated</span> BC values with precision three places past the decimal point, you know the writer has entered Wonderland.
It is so much more fulfilling to work with hard data.
What did happen to Warren Jensen?
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
I really do not know what happen to him. I think I just might call him have not spoken to him in 9 years os so .
I agree on the .XXX decimal. I am a machinest on harley engines and I do bore cylinders to +/- 1 ten thou. However that is needed for what I do , most things are no where near that. I am picky, so I want to to know for 100% where things are at.
Bullets with BC numbers to that point are ahhhh pointless
I think that many a reloader can get there loads to do things that are not published but the real world testing shows other wise.
I really do not know what happen to him. I think I just might call him have not spoken to him in 9 years os so .
I agree on the .XXX decimal. I am a machinest on harley engines and I do bore cylinders to +/- 1 ten thou. However that is needed for what I do , most things are no where near that. I am picky, so I want to to know for 100% where things are at.
Bullets with BC numbers to that point are ahhhh pointless
I think that many a reloader can get there loads to do things that are not published but the real world testing shows other wise.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GMR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I really do not know what happen to him. I think I just might call him have not spoken to him in 9 years os so .
I agree on the .XXX decimal. I am a machinest on harley engines and I do bore cylinders to +/- 1 ten thou. However that is needed for what I do , most things are no where near that. I am picky, so I want to to know for 100% where things are at.
Bullets with BC numbers to that point are ahhhh pointless
I think that many a reloader can get there loads to do things that are not published but the real world testing shows other wise. </div></div>
I agree . bullets change their BC , according to velocity , weather conditions ,atmospheric conditions , type of rifling in barrel, any coating on bullet , etc.
You can start with two identical bullets and fire them in two different types of rifling at identical velocities and get two different BC readings at a certain velocity and range.
Two different points of impact if both bullets started out at a theoretical identical height and windage .
One barrel has caused more damage to the jacket surface than the other so two different Bc's.
Without a stated velocity boundry for the BC quoted it is just a guide . However BC 's quoted to decimal points is wishful thinking at best and marketing at worst.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GMR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I really do not know what happen to him. I think I just might call him have not spoken to him in 9 years os so .
I agree on the .XXX decimal. I am a machinest on harley engines and I do bore cylinders to +/- 1 ten thou. However that is needed for what I do , most things are no where near that. I am picky, so I want to to know for 100% where things are at.
Bullets with BC numbers to that point are ahhhh pointless
I think that many a reloader can get there loads to do things that are not published but the real world testing shows other wise. </div></div>
I agree . bullets change their BC , according to velocity , weather conditions ,atmospheric conditions , type of rifling in barrel, any coating on bullet , etc.
You can start with two identical bullets and fire them in two different types of rifling at identical velocities and get two different BC readings at a certain velocity and range.
Two different points of impact if both bullets started out at a theoretical identical height and windage .
One barrel has caused more damage to the jacket surface than the other so two different Bc's.
Without a stated velocity boundry for the BC quoted it is just a guide . However BC 's quoted to decimal points is wishful thinking at best and marketing at worst.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
This may start a bit of an issue but I can think back when moly coating bullets was a sure fire way to increase velocity, downrange energy, less bullet drop .. the list goes on. At one point I think it may have been a cure for world hunger
After testing several coated bullets and coating them myself with dry coat and even a oven cured product. I could not find anything that would make me say yes it did this or no it did not.
Real world testing in my 300 tomahawk. I looked at avgs not a one shot clean bore type test. Load 5 with the same case volume, grammed bullet weights, full case prep and shot 5 from the same gun. Take those 5 readings and divide by 5. That was my avg velocity.
End of the day I wasted my time and had no more energy to post up my findings as other where all sure that it made a change without ever even going to the most basic loading as I did.
Can you really see the difference in a bullet traveling 2700 fps vs a bullet traveling 2750?? I think there are too many variables to skew most peoples results. But hey what do I know I am just a guy building Harley's for a living , and a pecker wood that lives up in the mountains of AZ with some guns.
have a good one guys, may the accuracy gods smile upon you when you shoot.
This may start a bit of an issue but I can think back when moly coating bullets was a sure fire way to increase velocity, downrange energy, less bullet drop .. the list goes on. At one point I think it may have been a cure for world hunger
After testing several coated bullets and coating them myself with dry coat and even a oven cured product. I could not find anything that would make me say yes it did this or no it did not.
Real world testing in my 300 tomahawk. I looked at avgs not a one shot clean bore type test. Load 5 with the same case volume, grammed bullet weights, full case prep and shot 5 from the same gun. Take those 5 readings and divide by 5. That was my avg velocity.
End of the day I wasted my time and had no more energy to post up my findings as other where all sure that it made a change without ever even going to the most basic loading as I did.
Can you really see the difference in a bullet traveling 2700 fps vs a bullet traveling 2750?? I think there are too many variables to skew most peoples results. But hey what do I know I am just a guy building Harley's for a living , and a pecker wood that lives up in the mountains of AZ with some guns.
have a good one guys, may the accuracy gods smile upon you when you shoot.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Who has a .9BC 7mm bullet? You have a link.
Who has a .9BC 7mm bullet? You have a link.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Read "CLAIM" of 1.85 BC...
Damn, I might have to go and machine up a 30mm projectile weighing 2lbs that needs a 1:5twist barrel and hope that might be stable, then take it SHOT and say its got a CLAIMED BC of 7.6 in order to generate some HYPE... now why didnt i think of this before ?
Read "CLAIM" of 1.85 BC...
Damn, I might have to go and machine up a 30mm projectile weighing 2lbs that needs a 1:5twist barrel and hope that might be stable, then take it SHOT and say its got a CLAIMED BC of 7.6 in order to generate some HYPE... now why didnt i think of this before ?
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gordyd4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Who has a .9BC 7mm bullet? You have a link. </div></div>
Don't know if any version of its BC was .9 or more, but Richard Graves (then Wildcat Bullets out of Canada) was making 200gr ULD 7mm bullets a while ago.
I have his old (haven't called him in years) landline...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gordyd4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Who has a .9BC 7mm bullet? You have a link. </div></div>
Don't know if any version of its BC was .9 or more, but Richard Graves (then Wildcat Bullets out of Canada) was making 200gr ULD 7mm bullets a while ago.
I have his old (haven't called him in years) landline...
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GRIM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a 180 grain .30 cal hunting bullet with a BC of .725 - cool! Kinda pricey though...
http://www.customprojectile.com/30-Cal-RBT-AT-180_p_42.html
</div></div>
Interesting. Berger's similar caliber/weight bullets are only around a G1 b.c. of .55. I wonder if they use tungsten instead of lead or some other such thing.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GRIM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a 180 grain .30 cal hunting bullet with a BC of .725 - cool! Kinda pricey though...
http://www.customprojectile.com/30-Cal-RBT-AT-180_p_42.html
</div></div>
Interesting. Berger's similar caliber/weight bullets are only around a G1 b.c. of .55. I wonder if they use tungsten instead of lead or some other such thing.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
from a post on another site: "GS has made a special 1,100-grain 50-caliber projectile that has a calculated G1 BC of 1.85! This bullet, launched at 3400 fps, can stay supersonic out to 4,000 meters — that’s 2.49 miles!
I know this was posted just thought a little more info woundnt hurt. B.C. sounds high but when you look at the B.C. of other rounds it doesnt sound unreasonable.
P.S. that is a big case to send a 1100gr .50 @ 3400fps I believe i read that they were made for Anzio
from a post on another site: "GS has made a special 1,100-grain 50-caliber projectile that has a calculated G1 BC of 1.85! This bullet, launched at 3400 fps, can stay supersonic out to 4,000 meters — that’s 2.49 miles!
I know this was posted just thought a little more info woundnt hurt. B.C. sounds high but when you look at the B.C. of other rounds it doesnt sound unreasonable.
P.S. that is a big case to send a 1100gr .50 @ 3400fps I believe i read that they were made for Anzio
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
You bare right.
The bullet are made for Anzio's new 20/50
http://www.anzioironworks.com/Anzio-20-50.html
The bullet can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJFMGfUsrko
Cheers,
Master Diver
You bare right.
The bullet are made for Anzio's new 20/50
http://www.anzioironworks.com/Anzio-20-50.html
The bullet can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJFMGfUsrko
Cheers,
Master Diver
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jhnmdahl</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GRIM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a 180 grain .30 cal hunting bullet with a BC of .725 - cool! Kinda pricey though...
http://www.customprojectile.com/30-Cal-RBT-AT-180_p_42.html
</div></div>
Interesting. Berger's similar caliber/weight bullets are only around a G1 b.c. of .55. I wonder if they use tungsten instead of lead or some other such thing. </div></div>
That looks like Lapua 185gr FMJBT bullet.
With 180gr weight and that very similar shape, I find BC .725 very hard to believe.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jhnmdahl</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GRIM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's a 180 grain .30 cal hunting bullet with a BC of .725 - cool! Kinda pricey though...
http://www.customprojectile.com/30-Cal-RBT-AT-180_p_42.html
</div></div>
Interesting. Berger's similar caliber/weight bullets are only around a G1 b.c. of .55. I wonder if they use tungsten instead of lead or some other such thing. </div></div>
That looks like Lapua 185gr FMJBT bullet.
With 180gr weight and that very similar shape, I find BC .725 very hard to believe.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
FWIW -
SHOT Show Report: GS Custom Bullets from South Africa
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/01/shot-show-report-gs-custom-bullets-from-south-africa/
FWIW -
SHOT Show Report: GS Custom Bullets from South Africa
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/01/shot-show-report-gs-custom-bullets-from-south-africa/
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Whoop whoop for fellow South Africans!!!
I'm yet to try them, bur I've heard good things about GSC...
Whoop whoop for fellow South Africans!!!
I'm yet to try them, bur I've heard good things about GSC...
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Parkincense</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Would it be possible to design a bullet with a center post that runs base to tip (think internal sabot) that would eject after the bullet exited the barrel, basically leaving a hollow tube. In theory, this would decrease drag, allowing for higher b.c.
Here is a crude representation of what I am talking about:
</div></div>
To plagiarize a little.
It won't work. The idea is so attractive that it is always cropping up. At the supersonic speeds of high powered bullets, air just can't crowd through that little tube fast enough to help. As far as air resistance is concerned, the tube might just as well be plugged.
Two-thirds of a century ago the Chief of Ordnance directed the Frankford Arsenal to conduct exhaustive tests on this subject..
After these comprehensive tests [by the well-known European arms designer Krnka and a Dr. Hebler] the Chief of Ordnance concluded that "contrary to the claims for the tubular bullet, it suffers greater retardation from the air than service bullets employed." February 1961.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Parkincense</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Would it be possible to design a bullet with a center post that runs base to tip (think internal sabot) that would eject after the bullet exited the barrel, basically leaving a hollow tube. In theory, this would decrease drag, allowing for higher b.c.
Here is a crude representation of what I am talking about:
</div></div>
To plagiarize a little.
It won't work. The idea is so attractive that it is always cropping up. At the supersonic speeds of high powered bullets, air just can't crowd through that little tube fast enough to help. As far as air resistance is concerned, the tube might just as well be plugged.
Two-thirds of a century ago the Chief of Ordnance directed the Frankford Arsenal to conduct exhaustive tests on this subject..
After these comprehensive tests [by the well-known European arms designer Krnka and a Dr. Hebler] the Chief of Ordnance concluded that "contrary to the claims for the tubular bullet, it suffers greater retardation from the air than service bullets employed." February 1961.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
If you want to hear the details about GS Custom bullets, here they are.
.308 - 197gr. B.C. .825 @3300,RUM(more to follow in 308)
.338 - 322gr. B.C. 1.295@3500-3600,338Snipe Tac
.375 - 414gr. B.C. 1.243@3000-3200+-,375VM or Snipe-Tac
.375 - 450gr. B.C. 1.4+ @3100?(being tested)
.458 - 566gr. B.C. 1.085@3200,460 Styer
.510 - 800gr. B.C. 1.17 @3000+-,BMG
.510 - 975gr. B.C. 1.55 @2800+-,BMG
.510 - 1033gr B.C. 1.75 @2800-3000?BMG-AI(low-speed)
.510 - 1100gr B.C. 1.921@3600(high-speed, as per Mike @ Anzio)
.585 - 1690gr B.C. 2.118@3300,20mm/14.5mm
These are just a few of the bullets GS makes. No, they are not all up on the website yet as we are just too busy with actually making and shipping bullets, but they will be up soon. And yes, we do list 3 B.C.'s at 3 different velocities.
If you want to hear the details about GS Custom bullets, here they are.
.308 - 197gr. B.C. .825 @3300,RUM(more to follow in 308)
.338 - 322gr. B.C. 1.295@3500-3600,338Snipe Tac
.375 - 414gr. B.C. 1.243@3000-3200+-,375VM or Snipe-Tac
.375 - 450gr. B.C. 1.4+ @3100?(being tested)
.458 - 566gr. B.C. 1.085@3200,460 Styer
.510 - 800gr. B.C. 1.17 @3000+-,BMG
.510 - 975gr. B.C. 1.55 @2800+-,BMG
.510 - 1033gr B.C. 1.75 @2800-3000?BMG-AI(low-speed)
.510 - 1100gr B.C. 1.921@3600(high-speed, as per Mike @ Anzio)
.585 - 1690gr B.C. 2.118@3300,20mm/14.5mm
These are just a few of the bullets GS makes. No, they are not all up on the website yet as we are just too busy with actually making and shipping bullets, but they will be up soon. And yes, we do list 3 B.C.'s at 3 different velocities.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Extremist458</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you want to hear the details about GS Custom bullets, here they are.
.308 - 197gr. B.C. .825 (more to follow in 308)
.338 - 322gr. B.C. 1.295
.375 - 414gr. B.C. 1.243
.375 - 450gr. B.C. 1.4+ (being tested)
.458 - 566gr. B.C. 1.085
.510 - 800gr. B.C. 1.17
.510 - 975gr. B.C. 1.55
.510 - 1033gr B.C. 1.75 (low-speed)
.510 - 1100gr B.C. 1.921(high-speed, as per Mike @ Anzio)
These are just a few of the bullets GS makes. No, they are not all up on the website yet as we are just too busy with actually making and shipping bullets, but they will be up soon. And yes, we do list 3 B.C.'s at 3 different velocities. </div></div>
LMAO...can i play too?
-Newsflash-
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Groper has invented a 375cal 390gr projectile with a BC of 1.802 </span></span> - its just that its only a "calculated" G1 BC and its only valid @ 5000fps!!!
Anthony,
There is so much wrong with the above post, its hysterical...
Do you think its responsible to quote a random "theoretical" BC for some of those bullets which are not even proven stable thru their entire flight regime?
And do you realize that G1 BC`s - whether "calculated" OR real world accurate - have absolutely zero meaning without a velocity to go with them? i see you quote the velocity for the bullets on your website, just none in the above post...
Have you ever considered getting your bullets professionally tested so that you may give the world an accurate BC rather than a hypothetical or "calculated" BC in your marketing blurbs or loading information?
I realize that inflated G1 BC`s look good and help to sell bullets, but they dont help the user AT ALL when it comes to actually using them... The end user then has to go thru all the tedious hassle of deriving their own BC which will work for them in a trajectory calculator - which i guess is also good for selling more bullets... but the end result the user obtains, is usually full of errors as most do not have the technical competence to conduct the testing that will give them a truly accurate result.
Bryan Litz is testing bullets right now, which he will publish in his next book, so that all the bullets from all the manufacturers are on a level playing field with regard to BC... are you interested in submitting a few bullets for him to test? - or would you prefer the status quo and ambiguity of quoting random BC`s with little meaning for the bullets your trying to sell?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Extremist458</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you want to hear the details about GS Custom bullets, here they are.
.308 - 197gr. B.C. .825 (more to follow in 308)
.338 - 322gr. B.C. 1.295
.375 - 414gr. B.C. 1.243
.375 - 450gr. B.C. 1.4+ (being tested)
.458 - 566gr. B.C. 1.085
.510 - 800gr. B.C. 1.17
.510 - 975gr. B.C. 1.55
.510 - 1033gr B.C. 1.75 (low-speed)
.510 - 1100gr B.C. 1.921(high-speed, as per Mike @ Anzio)
These are just a few of the bullets GS makes. No, they are not all up on the website yet as we are just too busy with actually making and shipping bullets, but they will be up soon. And yes, we do list 3 B.C.'s at 3 different velocities. </div></div>
LMAO...can i play too?
-Newsflash-
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">Groper has invented a 375cal 390gr projectile with a BC of 1.802 </span></span> - its just that its only a "calculated" G1 BC and its only valid @ 5000fps!!!
Anthony,
There is so much wrong with the above post, its hysterical...
Do you think its responsible to quote a random "theoretical" BC for some of those bullets which are not even proven stable thru their entire flight regime?
And do you realize that G1 BC`s - whether "calculated" OR real world accurate - have absolutely zero meaning without a velocity to go with them? i see you quote the velocity for the bullets on your website, just none in the above post...
Have you ever considered getting your bullets professionally tested so that you may give the world an accurate BC rather than a hypothetical or "calculated" BC in your marketing blurbs or loading information?
I realize that inflated G1 BC`s look good and help to sell bullets, but they dont help the user AT ALL when it comes to actually using them... The end user then has to go thru all the tedious hassle of deriving their own BC which will work for them in a trajectory calculator - which i guess is also good for selling more bullets... but the end result the user obtains, is usually full of errors as most do not have the technical competence to conduct the testing that will give them a truly accurate result.
Bryan Litz is testing bullets right now, which he will publish in his next book, so that all the bullets from all the manufacturers are on a level playing field with regard to BC... are you interested in submitting a few bullets for him to test? - or would you prefer the status quo and ambiguity of quoting random BC`s with little meaning for the bullets your trying to sell?
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Ah but Groper, you are forgetting that the bullets are made of specially heat treated and compressed bulldust,...hence the incredible BC figures ROFL.
Ah but Groper, you are forgetting that the bullets are made of specially heat treated and compressed bulldust,...hence the incredible BC figures ROFL.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: groper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Anthony,
There is so much wrong with the above post, its hysterical...
Do you think its responsible to quote a random "theoretical" BC for some of those bullets which are not even proven stable thru their entire flight regime?
would you prefer the status quo and ambiguity of quoting random BC`s with little meaning for the bullets your trying to sell?
</div></div>
Since you seem to have knowledge, what stops you to make stable bullets with close to similar performance?
Some kind of comparsion table with true proven BC:s vs calculated ones would clarify your comment as well.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: groper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Anthony,
There is so much wrong with the above post, its hysterical...
Do you think its responsible to quote a random "theoretical" BC for some of those bullets which are not even proven stable thru their entire flight regime?
would you prefer the status quo and ambiguity of quoting random BC`s with little meaning for the bullets your trying to sell?
</div></div>
Since you seem to have knowledge, what stops you to make stable bullets with close to similar performance?
Some kind of comparsion table with true proven BC:s vs calculated ones would clarify your comment as well.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
My apologies to the other members here but, if Groper is trying to get a rise from me, he's got one. I do not suffer rudeness and fools gladly, I am sorry.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There is so much wrong with the above post, its hysterical...</div></div> The hysterical thing here is that you prove beyond doubt your status as an ignoranus.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you think its responsible to quote a random "theoretical" BC</div></div> There is nothing random about the quoted BCs, you allow your ignorance to shine through. While on the subject of calculated BCs, do you have any for your designs?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">for some of those bullets which are not even proven stable thru their entire flight regime?</div></div> Which are those? Or are you just running off at the mouth again?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And do you realize that G1 BC`s - whether "calculated" OR real world accurate - have absolutely zero meaning without a velocity to go with them? i see you quote the velocity for the bullets on your website, just none in the above post...</div></div> And your point is? Apart from feeling obliged demonstrate your ignorance, that is? For someone who has spent time on our website, you have learned surprisingly little.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Have you ever considered getting your bullets professionally tested yadda yadda yadda</div></div> Have you? Oh I forget, you are just an amateur with a rant to vent. Get out there and do something useful. Maybe try a little harder than this unstable, low BC joke that you produced:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the bullets your trying to sell?</div></div> We stopped the trying part several years back. We are working hard on our lead time now. It used to be 12 weeks and we have steadily whittled it down to 4. Now it is creeping up again. I fear that if we start the "trying to sell" thing again, it will be counter productive for the lead time. Bummer.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ah but Groper, you are forgetting that the bullets are made of specially heat treated and compressed bulldust,...hence the incredible BC figures ROFL.</div></div> Just when I thought groper had sole title on the ignoranus moniker, you pop up again.
My apologies to the other members here but, if Groper is trying to get a rise from me, he's got one. I do not suffer rudeness and fools gladly, I am sorry.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There is so much wrong with the above post, its hysterical...</div></div> The hysterical thing here is that you prove beyond doubt your status as an ignoranus.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you think its responsible to quote a random "theoretical" BC</div></div> There is nothing random about the quoted BCs, you allow your ignorance to shine through. While on the subject of calculated BCs, do you have any for your designs?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">for some of those bullets which are not even proven stable thru their entire flight regime?</div></div> Which are those? Or are you just running off at the mouth again?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And do you realize that G1 BC`s - whether "calculated" OR real world accurate - have absolutely zero meaning without a velocity to go with them? i see you quote the velocity for the bullets on your website, just none in the above post...</div></div> And your point is? Apart from feeling obliged demonstrate your ignorance, that is? For someone who has spent time on our website, you have learned surprisingly little.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Have you ever considered getting your bullets professionally tested yadda yadda yadda</div></div> Have you? Oh I forget, you are just an amateur with a rant to vent. Get out there and do something useful. Maybe try a little harder than this unstable, low BC joke that you produced:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the bullets your trying to sell?</div></div> We stopped the trying part several years back. We are working hard on our lead time now. It used to be 12 weeks and we have steadily whittled it down to 4. Now it is creeping up again. I fear that if we start the "trying to sell" thing again, it will be counter productive for the lead time. Bummer.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ah but Groper, you are forgetting that the bullets are made of specially heat treated and compressed bulldust,...hence the incredible BC figures ROFL.</div></div> Just when I thought groper had sole title on the ignoranus moniker, you pop up again.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
In my 338 Snipetac, the 295gr GS bullets POI in between 4-5 mils above the POI/POA of the 300gr Lapua Scenar. Rifle is zeroed at 1000yds. I only loaded a few GS's for testing and thought that they weren't stabilizing. I then walked the scope down to put some in the dirt in front of me and started to see the splash way up there in the scope.
In my 338 Snipetac, the 295gr GS bullets POI in between 4-5 mils above the POI/POA of the 300gr Lapua Scenar. Rifle is zeroed at 1000yds. I only loaded a few GS's for testing and thought that they weren't stabilizing. I then walked the scope down to put some in the dirt in front of me and started to see the splash way up there in the scope.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
groper, you have been on our case since the very first time we showed up. You have not shot or tested our bullets, nor have any ground to stand on when falsly insulting us. You don't have any reason either, unless it's for your own good. How can you disrespect our company and our product without reason?
Let me be very clear with you, they are not false, and the B.C. are as shown, but you are correct in the fact that they need speeds to go with them...and as I said, we are updating the website to include the speeds. So back off, unless you can challange us; then, don't speak, do. Go ahead and pick on what you do not understand, but you will end up eating your words because our bullets do what we say they will do.
I will go ahead and update the list above with the speeds in which those B.C.s are rated, as close as I can, but if you really care to know, we didn't just pull those speeds out of our butts, like you seem to believe, we actually had people shoot them. Remember, we are not just some chump here spouting words, we have been making bullets for over 18 years, and have made more custom bullets, like the ones above, then some companies even have in their entire line-up. I'm sorry that all our costomers are not catering to your foolish questioning herein, but they report back to us, and both us and the customer are happy.
And I do apologize for it being so hard for you to believe, but guess what, we stack up. Would be happy to let Brian Litz test all our bullets he wants, just have him contact us (since you seem to lean on him so heavily, I suspect you must know him).
You are right about one thing, and that is that listed B.C. are at the muzzle, as all other manufacturers do...I guess we need to follow the market trend if we want to compare apples to apples. But like I stated to begin with, we list the B.C. at 3 different speeds on our website, and we are the only manufacturer that does (funny how that works), so you can get a true and accurate B.C. for the rifle and distance you are using them in. Yes, B.C. degrades as velocity does (except in our HV line up...that's a different story there), so one needs 3 B.C.'s to truly triagulate the B.C. in your particular application...hence why we do just that for you. Maybe it would be good idea to check details and ask questions...you know, to make sure your comments are founded...before you speak. Have a nice day, and God bless.
groper, you have been on our case since the very first time we showed up. You have not shot or tested our bullets, nor have any ground to stand on when falsly insulting us. You don't have any reason either, unless it's for your own good. How can you disrespect our company and our product without reason?
Let me be very clear with you, they are not false, and the B.C. are as shown, but you are correct in the fact that they need speeds to go with them...and as I said, we are updating the website to include the speeds. So back off, unless you can challange us; then, don't speak, do. Go ahead and pick on what you do not understand, but you will end up eating your words because our bullets do what we say they will do.
I will go ahead and update the list above with the speeds in which those B.C.s are rated, as close as I can, but if you really care to know, we didn't just pull those speeds out of our butts, like you seem to believe, we actually had people shoot them. Remember, we are not just some chump here spouting words, we have been making bullets for over 18 years, and have made more custom bullets, like the ones above, then some companies even have in their entire line-up. I'm sorry that all our costomers are not catering to your foolish questioning herein, but they report back to us, and both us and the customer are happy.
And I do apologize for it being so hard for you to believe, but guess what, we stack up. Would be happy to let Brian Litz test all our bullets he wants, just have him contact us (since you seem to lean on him so heavily, I suspect you must know him).
You are right about one thing, and that is that listed B.C. are at the muzzle, as all other manufacturers do...I guess we need to follow the market trend if we want to compare apples to apples. But like I stated to begin with, we list the B.C. at 3 different speeds on our website, and we are the only manufacturer that does (funny how that works), so you can get a true and accurate B.C. for the rifle and distance you are using them in. Yes, B.C. degrades as velocity does (except in our HV line up...that's a different story there), so one needs 3 B.C.'s to truly triagulate the B.C. in your particular application...hence why we do just that for you. Maybe it would be good idea to check details and ask questions...you know, to make sure your comments are founded...before you speak. Have a nice day, and God bless.
A
Augustus
Guest
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Hypertex, would you look at your post and review the info you just posted. Do you stand by your claim that the GS custom 295 has 4 to 5 MILS less drop at 1000 yds than the 300 Scenar. 4 mils is around 144 inches and 5 mils is around 180 inches at 1000 yds. Plaaaeeese, this is bordering on insanity.
Hypertex, would you look at your post and review the info you just posted. Do you stand by your claim that the GS custom 295 has 4 to 5 MILS less drop at 1000 yds than the 300 Scenar. 4 mils is around 144 inches and 5 mils is around 180 inches at 1000 yds. Plaaaeeese, this is bordering on insanity.
Re: Highest BC bullet available?
Pardon my insanity bit that's what I saw, it was clearing the 1000yd burm
Pardon my insanity bit that's what I saw, it was clearing the 1000yd burm
Similar threads
