[ QUOTE ]
If you feed a calculator accurate data it will do amazing things. . . .
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, that is what I have done. Ten years ago I was doing well to get the range correct, so atmospheric calculations were just academic practice for the day when I would get a good (optical) rangefinder. Results now are just amazing. I can meaningfully account for temperature variations, and then make single-shot hits that I would have missed otherwise.
[ QUOTE ]
If you plugged in the published BC and took those numbers to the range you would miss a 4' target. That said you cannot base a caliber choice on calculations. Imagine plugging in the published BC for the 178 AMAX and comparing it to a poular 7mm rem mag load, the calculator would tell you the 7mm would blow the doors off the 300 RUM when in reality, in the "real world" the 300 RUM would leave the 7mm rem mag in the dust with the 178 AMAX. The 308 is the same way there are bullets available that will give a 7-08 a SERIOUS run for its money, despite the fact that "on paper" the 7-08 blows the 308's doors off. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
I think I see what you are saying. I am an engineer by trade (I design water systems) so I see the abuse of hyper-accurate calculations all the time. With hydraulics, the numbers are not to be trusted completely, but calculations and computer modelling are the best estimates available. You will never be "right on" with a hydraulic model except by accident. However, trying to design a complicated treatment or pumping station by "eyeballing" it is much less likely to get any kind of good results. I think it is the same with ballistics: the results you get from fictitious, i.e., uncalibrated, bullet launches is just an estimate. Still, I think it is the best estimate available.
With water and with shooting, you can't just try something and see how it goes. In both fields that method of decision making is cost- and time-prohibitive.
Also, one needs a healthy dose of proportional sense. If you are comparing wind drift at 1000 yards between two imaginary loadings, the difference between 11 MOA and 10 MOA is essentially meaningless. But if you are comparing one cartridge that models at 11 MOA to another that models at less than 8 MOA, then probably you have a good basis for a decision.
With me and this rifle, I will gather information as well as I can, then have the one built that I think will work best. I won't know for sure how well it works till I start shooting it, but that is a fact of life in design.
Scott