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
Hammer ballistic coefficient tests...
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="Muddyboots" data-source="post: 2613359" data-attributes="member: 63925"><p>No, I understand completely what you did and how. Its the comparison of well established bullet companies with dedicated ballistic resources to a very young almost considered startup company. You did one heck of a great write up, not disputing that one bit. My term exception was not meant relative to the actual work you did. My apologies for that misstatement and resulting misunderstanding.</p><p></p><p>My comments are not a Hammer defense but is simply an observation of the group in the study.</p><p>As you stated, there are a lot of other companies similar to Hammer that do not use a LabRadar or comparable. How they arrive at their BC's from shot drops and resulting "suggested" BC's will have better consistent, comparable results of a common group. My apples to oranges comment is simply comparison of the maturity of companies, size of the companies and their resources to one that has been in business 6 years and still in the "growth" curve. </p><p></p><p>IMO, a study on similar companies that may be in same boat for resources would be a better analysis of how each one of them calculate their BC's and the perceived "accuracy" therein.</p><p></p><p>How many shots per bullet to provide a reasonable BC for each bullet. A data point for how much time it took for you to perform this work. Portal to Portal unless you have your own range plus actual total time to conduct each one of the calculations. I think this is an interesting data point as well. This may even be the most telling data point in the study. This will provide an insight into resources required to perform BC testing for their portfolio of products.</p><p></p><p>For example, CE has about 350 bullets in their portfolio, Hammer has about 240 bullets, Badlands Precision about 35. What time and costs can be associated conducting this work? How much does it cost to farm this work out? </p><p></p><p>Personally, I would prefer a third party analysis to derive BC's of any bullet. Even then, its a suggested starting point for setting your shot drops.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Muddyboots, post: 2613359, member: 63925"] No, I understand completely what you did and how. Its the comparison of well established bullet companies with dedicated ballistic resources to a very young almost considered startup company. You did one heck of a great write up, not disputing that one bit. My term exception was not meant relative to the actual work you did. My apologies for that misstatement and resulting misunderstanding. My comments are not a Hammer defense but is simply an observation of the group in the study. As you stated, there are a lot of other companies similar to Hammer that do not use a LabRadar or comparable. How they arrive at their BC's from shot drops and resulting "suggested" BC's will have better consistent, comparable results of a common group. My apples to oranges comment is simply comparison of the maturity of companies, size of the companies and their resources to one that has been in business 6 years and still in the "growth" curve. IMO, a study on similar companies that may be in same boat for resources would be a better analysis of how each one of them calculate their BC's and the perceived "accuracy" therein. How many shots per bullet to provide a reasonable BC for each bullet. A data point for how much time it took for you to perform this work. Portal to Portal unless you have your own range plus actual total time to conduct each one of the calculations. I think this is an interesting data point as well. This may even be the most telling data point in the study. This will provide an insight into resources required to perform BC testing for their portfolio of products. For example, CE has about 350 bullets in their portfolio, Hammer has about 240 bullets, Badlands Precision about 35. What time and costs can be associated conducting this work? How much does it cost to farm this work out? Personally, I would prefer a third party analysis to derive BC's of any bullet. Even then, its a suggested starting point for setting your shot drops. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Hammer ballistic coefficient tests...
Top