ajhardle
Well-Known Member
I understand the limitation of of drag models, but acknowledge the similarities of modern long range bullets to the g7 model. Not perfect, but close enough for my purpose. Not for calculating trajectories for each shot, but to compare bullets to reduce the wind effects so my errors have lesser consequences.
Here is what i've concluded from my own observations to reduce wind drift.
A. Bullets shape is most important, but we are limited to manufacturing techniques. I will assume a i7 ff of .9 to be the current standard.
B. By necking down a cartridge and maintaining the same form factor. limitations are=
1. throat erosion
2. copper fouling
3. internal ballistics preventing equivalent muzzle energy. it requires a longer barrel, slower powder that may not be developed, and still may not acheive same energy, but the inherent advantages of necking down seem to compensate for this. Ask some hi-power prone shooters.
C. By increasing energy content behind the bullet. Higher velocity, as with necking down. but there are downsides also.
1. It takes alot more powder to acheive equivalent drift figures as the necked down case.
2. increasing velocity has same negative side effects downsizing calibre, but at the adde cost in recoil and financialy. it get's expensive.
The heavy bullet will at longer range have reduced wind drift. The balance though, is to decrease wind drift at a practical range. I recently ordered a 30" barrel chambered in 300 r.u.m. over a .338 lapua knowing the lapua would have a longer effective range. But the wind drift with these bullets are huge as they approach subsonic. I figured if I can stay above 1500fps or so on my way to a mile, the 300 has a huge advantage. I'm not shooting bad guys in a war zone a mile and a half away. Just trying to better myself. That said, most of my shooting is done with a .223. I think that's the best way to learn to read wind because of the enormous wind drift.
I understand your shaking your head about my adherence to the g7 model, but I have nothing better in front of me, and I believe it is close enough to demonstrate my needs. ( iwonder if i would have made a better decision with less powder and 7mm)
Here is what i've concluded from my own observations to reduce wind drift.
A. Bullets shape is most important, but we are limited to manufacturing techniques. I will assume a i7 ff of .9 to be the current standard.
B. By necking down a cartridge and maintaining the same form factor. limitations are=
1. throat erosion
2. copper fouling
3. internal ballistics preventing equivalent muzzle energy. it requires a longer barrel, slower powder that may not be developed, and still may not acheive same energy, but the inherent advantages of necking down seem to compensate for this. Ask some hi-power prone shooters.
C. By increasing energy content behind the bullet. Higher velocity, as with necking down. but there are downsides also.
1. It takes alot more powder to acheive equivalent drift figures as the necked down case.
2. increasing velocity has same negative side effects downsizing calibre, but at the adde cost in recoil and financialy. it get's expensive.
The heavy bullet will at longer range have reduced wind drift. The balance though, is to decrease wind drift at a practical range. I recently ordered a 30" barrel chambered in 300 r.u.m. over a .338 lapua knowing the lapua would have a longer effective range. But the wind drift with these bullets are huge as they approach subsonic. I figured if I can stay above 1500fps or so on my way to a mile, the 300 has a huge advantage. I'm not shooting bad guys in a war zone a mile and a half away. Just trying to better myself. That said, most of my shooting is done with a .223. I think that's the best way to learn to read wind because of the enormous wind drift.
I understand your shaking your head about my adherence to the g7 model, but I have nothing better in front of me, and I believe it is close enough to demonstrate my needs. ( iwonder if i would have made a better decision with less powder and 7mm)
