The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 7, 2013, 07:18 AM   #26
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,035
I fail to attach importance to the difference between 2.39 inches of drop and 2.21 inches of drop. Or between 7.14 and 8.73.

Drop? Wind? A shooter is supposed to have a clue about the performance of whatever load is being used.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old September 7, 2013, 09:57 AM   #27
JD0x0
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Posts: 567
not really... If you want 'real' BC's Compare the .277 diameter 150 grain Nosler Accubond 'Long range' with a listed G1 BC of .625 and a round nose of the same weight with a BC closer to .25
So my 'imaginary' BC's are not very unrealistic. If you cast a completely flat faced bullet in .277 @ 150 grains it'd likely have a BC closer to the .2 I listed. Those numbers weren't that un-realistic (Albeit it was for the caliber and weight I used as an example)
You get fairly similar results even with "real world" BC's

Quote:
Or between 7.14 and 8.73.
You've got the numbers scrambled a bit.
7.14'' drift with the .2BC
2.25'' drift with .65 BC
Both @ 200 yards.
The drop doesn't matter much, at those ranges, but the wind drift and velocity difference is fairly significant.

Do the calculations for the Accubond "long range" and the Round Nosed soft point at 3000fps, a completely reasonable velocity for those bullets.. and you'll still see significant difference in Velocity/Energy and wind drift.
JD0x0 is offline  
Old September 7, 2013, 11:11 AM   #28
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,265
I would just like to start by saying that I have never seen a single person that used a round nosed bullet in a 7mm. not saying they don't exist but they are highly impractical exactly because there are bullets of better design with better BC in the same weight class.

with that said. round nose bullets have a completely different level of application than spire point bullets. spire points are designed to give you your best performance over range while round nose are generally better suited to punching through thick hide and heavy muscle to get to vitals.

if I were shooting a bison with both of those bullets listed I would rather have the round nose than the accubond. the spitzer would be very likely to tumble and deflect, the round nose would be much less likely to do that.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.
tahunua001 is offline  
Old September 7, 2013, 12:22 PM   #29
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 17,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by JD0x0
not really... If you want 'real' BC's Compare the .277 diameter 150 grain Nosler Accubond 'Long range' with a listed G1 BC of .625 and a round nose of the same weight with a BC closer to .25
So my 'imaginary' BC's are not very unrealistic. If you cast a completely flat faced bullet in .277 @ 150 grains it'd likely have a BC closer to the .2 I listed. Those numbers weren't that un-realistic (Albeit it was for the caliber and weight I used as an example)
So if you intentionally created a bullet to have a really bad BC, you could use it to prove that two bullet of the same weight and caliber can have drastically different BCs.

Who in god's name is going to cast a flat nose .277 bullet and use it for the purposes that are required for your "proof". Google "Reification Fallacy" or Reductio Ad Absurdum

The bullets and BCs that you list as "proof" essentially do not exist in .223/4 caliber. The highest BC I've ever seen for a .224 bullet is around 0.580 and that's a 90gr which wouldn't work in 95% of the worlds .223Rem and probably not a single FN5.7.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
You do not HAVE a soul. You ARE a soul. You HAVE a body.
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old September 8, 2013, 02:29 PM   #30
Sierra280
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2013
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Posts: 448
Wow!!! Lots of really bad/misinformation on this thread.

The 5.7 x 28mm FN was produced as an easy to handle, lightweight, close quarters weapon, that had the ability to defeat body armor without the concern of over-penetration (that can happen with the 5.56NATO)

My reloading manual lists a 45gr Sierra sp, -max load- as having a muzzle velocity of less than 1600fps. That's LESS THAN HALF THE VELOCITY OF A COMPARABLE .223 load. Regardless of BC. The fn simply does not have the powder capacity, it's a tiny little 22cal cartridge, by any measure.

Sure a well placed shot with any gun at close enough range will take down game, but should you really recommend that sort of thing?
__________________
Looking for a way to keep track of your handloads?

The Shooters and Reloaders Record Book
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/149051...sr=8-1&pi=SL75
Sierra280 is offline  
Old September 8, 2013, 07:33 PM   #31
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX, USA
Posts: 22,035
I have an FN Herstal pistol. I figure that it's a good social gun for up close and personal efforts. Fort Hood, remember?

But it's still somewhere in the general vicinity of the .22 Mag, the .17 HMr or a .22 Hornet, overall. For honest work I'd call it a varmint load. In a rifle, IMO, it would be fine for deer poachers. Ethical folks? Coyotes and smaller.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Old September 8, 2013, 10:01 PM   #32
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,265
Quote:
Wow!!! Lots of really bad/misinformation on this thread.

The 5.7 x 28mm FN was produced as an easy to handle, lightweight, close quarters weapon, that had the ability to defeat body armor without the concern of over-penetration (that can happen with the 5.56NATO)

My reloading manual lists a 45gr Sierra sp, -max load- as having a muzzle velocity of less than 1600fps. That's LESS THAN HALF THE VELOCITY OF A COMPARABLE .223 load. Regardless of BC. The fn simply does not have the powder capacity, it's a tiny little 22cal cartridge, by any measure.

Sure a well placed shot with any gun at close enough range will take down game, but should you really recommend that sort of thing?
sierra, is that out of a 4.5 inch test barrel or a 16 inch test barrel? you'd be surprised how slow 223 is coming out of a pistol length barrel. there are lots of carbine length rifles that increase the velocity a great deal. federal premium lists the same 5.7 bullet in both rifle and pistol velocity. the pistol gets very close to that you stated. the rifle gets over 600FPS faster. no mis information, just misreading.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.
tahunua001 is offline  
Old September 8, 2013, 10:49 PM   #33
Sierra280
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2013
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Posts: 448
4.75in FN Five-seveN was the test gun.

Pertaining to the original question: Even with an additional 600-700fps it still comes in well under 22cal cartridges generally accepted for hunting (.223rem, 22-250, 220swift, etc). Unless you are active duty special forces, the 5.7 is really just a novelty.

Since we're debating basic reading in reloading manuals; assuming the same bullets are used: How does 4-8grs of powder produce velocities (or muzzle energies) equal to 22-48grs of powder?
__________________
Looking for a way to keep track of your handloads?

The Shooters and Reloaders Record Book
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/149051...sr=8-1&pi=SL75
Sierra280 is offline  
Old September 8, 2013, 10:56 PM   #34
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,265
I would love to see you stuff 48 grains of powder in a 223.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.
tahunua001 is offline  
Old September 9, 2013, 09:09 PM   #35
Creek Henry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2009
Location: Dallas
Posts: 280
A guy killed a hog with a .177 pellet a while back... a perfect shot through the eye into the brain. So, it CAN be done but that doesn't mean YOU should try it :)
Creek Henry is offline  
Old September 11, 2013, 06:49 AM   #36
Mobuck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2010
Posts: 1,969
Hunting with a 5.7? Yep bunnies, groundhogs, and maybe a coyote.
With many years of hunting experience(and many dead deer), I'll say I "can" kill a deer with a 22lr or 22 mag. Do I hunt during deer season with a pipsqueak round? Absolutely not!!!!!!!!!!!! The lowest energy cartridge I normally use is 257 Roberts simply because I refuse to risk losing an animal in an effort to bolster my ego. Sure I've seen deer killed effectively with stuff like the 223 but I still don't recommend such use by "Joe Average" deer hunters.

Last edited by Brian Pfleuger; September 11, 2013 at 07:33 AM.
Mobuck is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.08469 seconds with 9 queries