|
The Ballistic Comparison Tool is specifically designed to produces more reliable indicators of REAL-WORLD performance - something you can't derive from simply comparing factory ballistics (which shooters often cannot reach anyway) - especially with wildcats (where there are no factory ballistics published). The tool doesn't "guess" - it analyzes all *REAL* load data that is available to it.
"Average" data values reported for these rounds are just that - a weighted average of all available load data on the website for that round. As such, it is more representative of the performance levels that people actually achieve when they reload ammunition than blindly listing maximum velocities (after all, one rifle may simply have a longer barrel than another or a tighter chamber, etc).
Also keep in mind that, for some applications, manufacturers use specially-tailored powders with burn rates that aren't available to reloaders, preventing one from ever reaching their maximum possible velocities in those cartridges.
Have to also point out the AmmoGuide Ballistic Comparison tool does not perform a simple averaging but a weighted calculation. This means that all bullet weights listed in the load data for that round are given equal "mathematical consideration" in the averaging - i.e., just because a given loadset for a round might have a predominance of light or heavy bullets, the comparison tool "levels the field" when it arrives at it's final values and accounts for this.
The Ballistic Comparison Tool also ignores loads that are too far outside the norm for a given round - "anomolies" as it were. Why? So that the calculated performance level for a given high-velocity round isn't artificially lowered if someone adds special-case loads to the database (like subsonic ones).
For these reasons, the AmmoGuide Ballistuic Comparison Tool provides a more accurate view of how rounds ACTUALLY PERFORM, not what CAN be observed under optimum conditions that are seldom, if ever, seen in real life. I do have plans to also report "maximum" and "minimum" values encountered during the calculation, so the tool will get even better in the future.
Mike
|