Huntnful
Well-Known Member
Certainly a possibility of change. Would also lower the velocity. A 135 A tip would have been a little closer. A 180 Berger and 181 hammer would also be a good comparison.
Bullet Construction vs Lethality
- Thread starter nralifer
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Drop is way easier to measure and account for. The things that affect drop are more constant.
Wind is not constant and much harder to measure accurately. That doesn't mean BC is not the right figure to use for drift.
That means in order to be more accurate in your drift calculation, you need to minimize the effects of wind. To do that, you need to minimize time of flight and/or find a more accurate way to measure the wind for the path of the bullet. And to do that, you need to either develop really good wind reading skills, or select equipment and components with superior ballistics. That includes bullets with high BC. A more aerodynamic shape will reduce time of flight and thus total effect of wind on the bullet.
Bullet weight alone does not influence more or less drop or drift either. The bullet with a higher BC, all else equal, will drop less and drift less. As Larry Potterfield says: "And that's the way it is".
Here was what I said way back in post #33:
Wind is not constant and much harder to measure accurately. That doesn't mean BC is not the right figure to use for drift.
That means in order to be more accurate in your drift calculation, you need to minimize the effects of wind. To do that, you need to minimize time of flight and/or find a more accurate way to measure the wind for the path of the bullet. And to do that, you need to either develop really good wind reading skills, or select equipment and components with superior ballistics. That includes bullets with high BC. A more aerodynamic shape will reduce time of flight and thus total effect of wind on the bullet.
Bullet weight alone does not influence more or less drop or drift either. The bullet with a higher BC, all else equal, will drop less and drift less. As Larry Potterfield says: "And that's the way it is".
Here was what I said way back in post #33:
Now we are getting some where, I'm minimizing the time of flight substantially so am I ignorant Petey?
It interesting. Back when I was a beginner and about to buy my first rifle, I knew I wanted a 30 caliber, and bought the fastest MV rifle in 30 caliber at the time. I knew from plain physics, bullet would drop less. Did not know much about drift then. Still don't know enough!
Last edited:
It depends on how far you're trying to shoot and what you're ultimate goal is.
I know what you're referring to, so to answer your question civilly, yes you are compensating for the low BC of the bullet with very high MV and lowering your ToF.
To a certain point, all is well, especially if that certain point isn't over your intended range anyway. After a certain point, the low BC will degrade velocity so rapidly that you'll limit your range due to dipping below the lower impact velocity limit of the bullet, and you'll still experience more wind drift at a given distance.
For example, at 4220fps, the 124gr HH at 500 yards with a 10mph full value constant wind will experience 14.9" of drift, be at 2739fps, and have 2066ft-lbs of kinetic energy potential. At 1000 yards it will have drifted 80.2", be at 1556fps, and have 667ft-lbs of kinetic energy potential.
At 3000fps, a 215gr Berger at 500 yards with a 10mph full value constant wind will experience 11.2" of drift, be at 2362fps, and have 2663ft-lbs of kinetic energy potential. At 1000 yards it will have drifted 51.1", be at 1806fps still, and still have 1557ft-lbs of kinetic energy potential.
Wind will be a struggle for pretty much anyone until they give us technology that can actually measure it in real time and self adjust for us lol.
That first sentence tells me to stick with cup-core, mostly bonded, for what I do. I like a good bit of energy transfer in addition to penetration.
My MV is 2950-3400 depending on the gun I grab, .257 to .308 calibers.
I assume the presence of more "bloodshed" meat is from hydrostatic shock..?
I'm shooting deer though, not elk, kudu etc.
Not knocking mono's or the people who choose them! A thicker, heavier body and skin would possibly make me reconsider.
WE use certain products because WE have experience and confidence with them, for our normal tasks. Whatever they are. For my area 500-600 is a long shot. Decent BC doesn't hurt but maximum isn't required.
This bullet construction gives me consistently quick lethality.
The_Whitetail_kid
Well-Known Member
There is no one size fits all. Everybody has a different definition of what makes a good bullet and what they are looking for it to do.
Huntnful
Well-Known Member
I was just thinking this but didn't want to do the math lol. Thank you for confirming my thoughts. That Berger could easily go 3100fps too haha. We're on a LONG RANGE forum and specifically this thread is referring to 1000 yards. So that distance should be the minimum for extrapolating data.
Rich Coyle
Well-Known Member
Some times it is the bullet.
nralifer
Well-Known Member
I wish I had one but this account was related to me at Proof's SCI booth about 4 years ago.
diggdugg70
Active Member
And sometimes it's the shooter.
The "NUT" behind the trigger remains the biggest factor.
RichCoyle
Well-Known Member
Once I shot a deer through the chest with a lead core bullet from a .300 Winchester Magnum. A scapula went about thirty feet high. The exit wound was large enough for me to put my fist in. I could see inside the chest of the deer was all sparkly. I switched to Barnes the next year. The shiny objects were too small to notice in the food.
