The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 8, 2016, 03:36 PM   #26
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Quote:
Some people "confer a lot with gun store clerks".

So do I, and I know guns store clerks as well as other sales people push products that wont normally sell them selves.

I've seen gun clerks raving about the merits of a $2900 M1 Garand, but I know Garands, the rifle he's pushing wouldn't be allowed on the racks of Garands at the CMP with their $630 rifles.

Sorry, I don't do recommendations from clerks, gun store's or any other saleman.
When I do confer with gun store clerks I take what they say and I check it by doing further research. This further research involves talking to other gun enthusiasts, instructors, and researching on the internet which includes using forums such as this one. So some of my posts here, a good deal of my posts here are part of my research. Also, when I find a gun I want I check various sources to see where I can get it for the lowest price. This involves visiting different gun shops and in this day and age checking the internet as you can get really good prices when buying guns online. Often you will pay less for guns online than you would at a gun shop, even with the transfer fee. So when Im told something by a gun shop clerk I don't automatically believe it but I don't automatically dismiss it either. I check it against other sources. I do my homework, which involves all of the above.

Quote:
You want a $7000 shooter, good, get one. Pay $500 for the rifle, and $6450 for ammo and learn to shoot it. The weakest link to any rifle is the guy pulling the trigger.

Wait, $500 + $6450 is only $6950. That's not common core math, that's a hint to set aside $50 and buy cleaning gear and lubes to keep your rifle from Rusting.
Not including my black powder rifles, I bought my first rifle for $300 and its a .22 so I can get much more ammo for a much lower price than for rifles in most other calibers so I get that much more practice. Of course the cheapest practice is dry practice.
And I've got good cleaning and oiling supplies too.

Quote:
I have a Model 70 Win in 375 H&H I paid $235 for in 1974. I spent a lot of thine hunting with it in the salt spray of Southern Alaska, (Afognak Island to be more accurate). That rifle is 42 years old and doesn't have a speck of rust on it. Why??? Because I always carried a can of "RIG", and kept it coated.
I must say $235 is a good price for a 375 H&H even back in 1974 although this is just an educated guess on my part since 1974 was before my time. So did you buy the rifle new or used?

Quote:
I was putting on a CMP Clinic/Match one year. The match was won buy a guy who the night before went to town and bought a Mosin for $119 and some cheap surplus ammo.

He didn't win the match because the Mosin was better then the Garands, Springfields and others, he won by sticking to fundamentals that the Garand and Springfield shooters neglected.
Well certainly its not the gun but its the person using it that makes the biggest difference although it does make sense to have a gun in good working order and its good to take advantage of the low prices on surplus ammo although you do have to be careful with that as supposedly some of the junk ammo can be bad for your firearm.
Photon Guy is offline  
Old June 8, 2016, 05:27 PM   #27
DaleA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 5,283
Hey Photon Guy--how about some details about the safari gun in post #11. Don't be fooled by my high post count. I can NOT take a look at a rifle and immediately tell you the manufacturer, the caliber, details about the scope, etc.

One of my friends keeps saying this life we're living isn't a rehearsal, it's the real thing. He uses this to explain some of his purchases and IMhO he's right.

And if you really want to play games to justify a purchase nothing can beat my game where I figure if I take care of it, a firearm will last me a lifetime and probably the lifetime of whoever I leave it to...that makes the life of the gun just about forever so the cost (what ever it is) per month is just about nothing.

I guess what I'm trying to say is good for you for buying a rifle you really wanted.

Last edited by DaleA; June 8, 2016 at 05:34 PM.
DaleA is offline  
Old June 8, 2016, 05:45 PM   #28
Slamfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 5,261
I know this a gun forum, but recently I passed through Smokey Mountain Knife Works in Sevierville, TN . I have one gun club bud who is a custom knife maker, and because I love sharp edged things, I know many dedicated collectors.

They all have stories about which brands are the best and within the brands, what years are the best. I have been told that Case knives from such and such era are the best, and I have been told similar stories about other brand names.

Well, there are times when workmanship is better, and fit and finish might be better. My Boker 1976 Bicentennial knives are a bit rough compared to a Case of the same time period. But either takes an edge and holds it.

Case knives today show excellent fit and finish, take an edge and hold it, and what more do you expect of a knife? I talked with the guys behind the Case counter at SMKW and asked them if they had heard earnest collectors tell them that current Case knives are junk compared to ones a specific decade ago. I got a lot of eye rolling. Yes, they had, in volumes, "all the time".

I think the same is true of guns. Many people claiming this brand is good or bad, or this era is much better, really are talking from emotion more than evidence. I think most of them have a romanticized image they identify with and of course, everything in that fantasy land was better, strawberries were more strawberrier, cherries were more cherrier, the sun was brighter and it never rained . A good place to find this sort of person is at Culver Shooting Forum in the Garand and M1903 sub forums. Just go in there and claim the double heat treat M1903 was made of crap materials and the Garand can't shoot straight. You will get pilloried.

As a general rule, the guns of today are better made, of better materials, than ever before. Expensive features have dropped off, wood has gone to plastic, but today's stuff is excellent for the price point. You can always get more by paying more.
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading.
Slamfire is offline  
Old June 8, 2016, 09:42 PM   #29
emcon5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 1999
Location: High Desert NV
Posts: 2,850
Manufacturing has greatly improves in the past ~50 years or so, to the point even bargain basement entry level rifles normally shoot quite well, better than most shooters.

I am still not really understanding what you are looking for. I know you were interested in a Steyr hunting rifle in 270 Win, are you just looking for a hunting rifle?

What is it you are looking for?
emcon5 is offline  
Old June 8, 2016, 10:30 PM   #30
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Quote:
I know this a gun forum, but recently I passed through Smokey Mountain Knife Works in Sevierville, TN . I have one gun club bud who is a custom knife maker, and because I love sharp edged things, I know many dedicated collectors.

They all have stories about which brands are the best and within the brands, what years are the best. I have been told that Case knives from such and such era are the best, and I have been told similar stories about other brand names.

Well, there are times when workmanship is better, and fit and finish might be better. My Boker 1976 Bicentennial knives are a bit rough compared to a Case of the same time period. But either takes an edge and holds it.

Case knives today show excellent fit and finish, take an edge and hold it, and what more do you expect of a knife? I talked with the guys behind the Case counter at SMKW and asked them if they had heard earnest collectors tell them that current Case knives are junk compared to ones a specific decade ago. I got a lot of eye rolling. Yes, they had, in volumes, "all the time".

I think the same is true of guns. Many people claiming this brand is good or bad, or this era is much better, really are talking from emotion more than evidence. I think most of them have a romanticized image they identify with and of course, everything in that fantasy land was better, strawberries were more strawberrier, cherries were more cherrier, the sun was brighter and it never rained . A good place to find this sort of person is at Culver Shooting Forum in the Garand and M1903 sub forums. Just go in there and claim the double heat treat M1903 was made of crap materials and the Garand can't shoot straight. You will get pilloried.
Well if you ask me, I would say the best way to determine if a gun is good or not or if a brand is good or not is first hand experience. Its ideal to be able to fire a type of gun of a certain brand to see how it works for you and if you can find a range that rents out guns and that rents out the kind of gun you want to test out that's great. If you've got a friend who owns a gun you're interested in and your friend lets you try it out that's better, aside from trying the gun out your friend can also tell you of their experiences owning it. Than if you're satisfied you can buy and own the gun yourself and learn from your own experiences owning it. From my experiences I know what brands I like although there are brands I've yet to try. My experience with Remington has been both good and bad. I've never tried let alone owned a Browning but I would like to someday. I have heard that Browning makes excellent break open shotguns but Im not sure how their rifles are.

Quote:
As a general rule, the guns of today are better made, of better materials, than ever before. Expensive features have dropped off, wood has gone to plastic, but today's stuff is excellent for the price point. You can always get more by paying more.
I would say that's mostly true. And sometimes the plastic or synthetic material can be better than wood, just look at the Glock. I love my Remington 870 which has a synthetic stock as does my Marlin although I would say there are exceptions about guns being better made today. With some of their products I would say Remington has recently gone the way of Ford and I speak from my own experience.
Photon Guy is offline  
Old June 8, 2016, 10:34 PM   #31
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
Quote:
I must say $235 is a good price for a 375 H&H even back in 1974 although this is just an educated guess on my part since 1974 was before my time. So did you buy the rifle new or used?
New. Bought it at the Ft. Richardson PX, Anchorage AK.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old June 8, 2016, 10:35 PM   #32
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Quote:
Manufacturing has greatly improves in the past ~50 years or so, to the point even bargain basement entry level rifles normally shoot quite well, better than most shooters.

I am still not really understanding what you are looking for. I know you were interested in a Steyr hunting rifle in 270 Win, are you just looking for a hunting rifle?

What is it you are looking for?
What I'm looking for is a good high quality hunting rifle for medium to large game. I was considering the Steyr but after some research I might instead settle for a Cooper or a Dakota Arms. I've got a Remington 750 in .30-06 but Im looking for something more high end and preferably bolt action. And a round of similar size to the .30-06 but with more velocity.
Photon Guy is offline  
Old June 8, 2016, 10:54 PM   #33
emcon5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 1999
Location: High Desert NV
Posts: 2,850
Quote:
Expensive features have dropped off
You can include Labor in that, less time spent on fit and finish.

Quote:
What I'm looking for is a good high quality hunting rifle for medium to large game. I was considering the Steyr but after some research I might instead settle for a Cooper or a Dakota Arms. I've got a Remington 750 in .30-06 but Im looking for something more high end and preferably bolt action. And a round of similar size to the .30-06 but with more velocity.
So you are wanting something off the shelf? Meaning, have you ruled out buying an action or donor rifle and building something?

7mm Rem Mag or 300 Win Mag fit that description, but belted magnums tend to give up a little accuracy compared to standard non-belted cased cartridges. Depending on how good a shot you are, you may never notice.
emcon5 is offline  
Old June 8, 2016, 10:58 PM   #34
taylorce1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2005
Location: On the Santa Fe Trail
Posts: 8,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Photon Guy
And a round of similar size to the .30-06 but with more velocity.
I love the .270 Win but I got to ask, what's with wanting more velocity? You seem to be hung up on it by what you posted in the hunt. With equal weight bullets the .30-06 is going to produce more initial velocity, but down range beyond normal hunting ranges the .270 Win will be faster with equal weight bullets.

IMO muzzle velocity means very little, but retained velocity down range means everything. The higher the BC bullet the better off you are, even when using hunting bullets. It's all about finding balance In what you want to accomplish with the cartridge.
__________________
NRA Life Member
taylorce1 is offline  
Old June 8, 2016, 11:12 PM   #35
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Quote:
I love the .270 Win but I got to ask, what's with wanting more velocity? You seem to be hung up on it by what you posted in the hunt. With equal weight bullets the .30-06 is going to produce more initial velocity, but down range beyond normal hunting ranges the .270 Win will be faster with equal weight bullets.

IMO muzzle velocity means very little, but retained velocity down range means everything. The higher the BC bullet the better off you are, even when using hunting bullets. It's all about finding balance In what you want to accomplish with the cartridge.
I will bring some physics into discussion. The equation for determining kinetic energy is 1/2 mass times velocity squared. Another words, you take the velocity, square it, multiply it by the mass, and divide the result by half and that gives you the total kinetic energy. So, there are two ways of increasing the kinetic energy into the target. One way is to increase the mass of your bullet, since the mass is multiplied greater mass means more energy. But, the other way to increase kinetic energy is by increasing the velocity. And since the velocity is squared you get greater effect increasing the velocity than by increasing the mass. So by increasing velocity you're transferring more kinetic energy into the target than if you increase mass. That is why I want more velocity.
Photon Guy is offline  
Old June 9, 2016, 12:10 AM   #36
taylorce1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2005
Location: On the Santa Fe Trail
Posts: 8,192
Well I explained in your other post that by 300 yards a 90 grain bullet from a .243 equalled the velocity and energy of the same weight bullet in a .270 fired 400 +/- FPS faster at the muzzle. So I'm not ignoring physics at all, I'm just adding aerodynamics into the equation which you aren't considering. Even though your bullet starts out with a lot more energy, by 100 yards my .243 bullet is within 200 ft-lbs of energy as yours. So if you think 200 ft-lbs extra is necessary to kill deer at 100 yards when both bullets are above 1500 ft-lbs at that distance then use the .270 Win. The deer can't tell the difference.

Or to put it another way a 130 grain bullet fired at 3060 FPS will have 400 ft-lbs more energy at 100 yards than your 90 grain bullet fired out of the same .270 Win rifle at 3600 FPS. If you want energy lighter and faster usually isn't the way to go IME. Trading a high BC bullet for a lower BC bullet with higher initial MV is a bad a idea, kind of like trying to tow a 10,000 lb payload with an El Camino.

If more energy is your goal lighter and faster rarely gets it done when it comes to projectiles.
__________________
NRA Life Member
taylorce1 is offline  
Old June 9, 2016, 11:09 AM   #37
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Well also, supposedly the .270 Winchester has a very flat trajectory. That's another thing Im looking for in the round.
Photon Guy is offline  
Old June 9, 2016, 11:32 AM   #38
emcon5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 1999
Location: High Desert NV
Posts: 2,850
It is flatter, but in the grand scheme of things, not much.

Using Federal Ammunition as a reference, with a 200 yard zero, a 130gr .270 @ 3200 FPS has about an inch and a half less drop at 300 yards than a 150gr .30-06 @ 2900 FPS. on edit: drop at 300 yards

At ranges most people have any business shooting at game, it is not enough to bother with.

Compare for yourself: https://www.federalpremium.com/products/rifle.aspx

Last edited by emcon5; June 10, 2016 at 11:00 AM. Reason: clarification
emcon5 is offline  
Old June 9, 2016, 06:35 PM   #39
handlerer2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 26, 2010
Location: Yellowstone Co, MT
Posts: 489
I don't question your desire for a high end rifle at all. You earned the money, your entitled to buy any rifle that pleases you. Besides the money's going to fine local cause, if the pic is the Dakota rifle you had mentioned.

Ever notice how some rifle owners are like new parents? Don't critisise my baby or my rifle, my baby may be ugly, but.

The notion that all rifles are Chevy's under the paint is, IMO, absurd. Yep, the main difference between a Cadillac and a Chevy are fit, finish, and add ons. When you compare it to a Mercedes or a BMW you find a real difference.

Any modern product Rem, Savage, Tikka, Browning offer a product that is reliable, accurate and affordable. I don't want any of them.

I don't hunt anymore, so I don't need to put put meat in the freezer. I have put it there with Rem, Marlin, Weatherby, and Ruger. All of them perfectly serviceable, and some quite nice. I now shoot for pleasure, I have either sold or given away all of my rifles except for three, two Weatherby's and a Cooper.

I won't say that I can shoot anything that I want, but I can shoot a Cooper MDL 22, 6.5x284, a varmint rifle that will kill a Moose. It is by far the most accurate rifle that I, or any of my crony's has ever seen. I was able to talk to the boy's that built and tested it. They gave me advice on dies, coal, powder, primers and brass. Even recommended that I try RL17, even though the test on my rifle was done with RL22. The price was $1700 at the Scheel's in Billings. This is no Chevy, believe me I have owned many.

I have always wanted a Dakota Traveler. I know I'll never have one unless I win the lottery, or finally make it on Jeopardy. I only envy you a little Photon.

You could reload for it and shoot it all you want.

Last edited by handlerer2; June 9, 2016 at 06:44 PM.
handlerer2 is offline  
Old June 9, 2016, 07:49 PM   #40
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Quote:
I don't question your desire for a high end rifle at all. You earned the money, your entitled to buy any rifle that pleases you. Besides the money's going to fine local cause, if the pic is the Dakota rifle you had mentioned.
Its an American Hunting Rifle in 600 Overkill.
Photon Guy is offline  
Old June 10, 2016, 09:19 AM   #41
taylorce1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2005
Location: On the Santa Fe Trail
Posts: 8,192
Photon Guy my best advice for you is to seek a cartridge in 6.5mm to .308 calibers, and spend some time looking over ballistic tables. If its main purpose is hunting then look at bullets with a BC of .400 plus for your research. When leaving the muzzle at speeds of 2700 to 3100 fps you'll find that with a BC of .400+ it'll give you decent trajectories and plenty of energy to handle most North American big game.
__________________
NRA Life Member
taylorce1 is offline  
Old June 10, 2016, 04:36 PM   #42
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Well to bring in some further discussion on physics, momentum which is represented by P is a product of the mass and velocity. Now I would think the main factor in a bullet slowing down prior to exiting the muzzle is air resistance. If you were to shoot a gun in the vacuum of space the bullet would maintain its velocity indefinitely. In the earth's atmosphere however the air resistance will slow it down. How quickly the bullet is slowed down I would think would depend on its momentum. Now it doesn't matter if you've got a more massive slower moving bullet or a less massive faster bullet mass and velocity both have an equal effect on the momentum. So if the momentum is the same I don't see how a more massive but slower bullet would maintain its velocity better than if it were vice versa.
Photon Guy is offline  
Old June 10, 2016, 06:45 PM   #43
603Country
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2011
Location: Thornton, Texas
Posts: 3,993
Photon Guy, why do I think that this discussion has no actual purpose other than your personal amusement? If you really wanted a new rifle, more than enough info has been shared with you (by extremely knowledgable folks) to make your choice well informed.

Go buy a rifle and tell us what and why.
603Country is offline  
Old June 10, 2016, 08:43 PM   #44
taylorce1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2005
Location: On the Santa Fe Trail
Posts: 8,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Photon Guy
Well to bring in some further discussion on physics, momentum which is represented by P is a product of the mass and velocity. Now I would think the main factor in a bullet slowing down prior to exiting the muzzle is air resistance. If you were to shoot a gun in the vacuum of space the bullet would maintain its velocity indefinitely. In the earth's atmosphere however the air resistance will slow it down. How quickly the bullet is slowed down I would think would depend on its momentum. Now it doesn't matter if you've got a more massive slower moving bullet or a less massive faster bullet mass and velocity both have an equal effect on the momentum. So if the momentum is the same I don't see how a more massive but slower bullet would maintain its velocity better than if it were vice versa.
Well physics is part of ballistics, but you're also ignoring aerodynamics in all your figures. Ballistics Coefficient or BC is the bullets ability to overcome the forces acting upon it after leaving the barrel. A bullet does not slow down prior to exiting the muzzle, not unless your barrel is so long that all the powder is consumed a long before the bullet exits.

Bullets with a higher BC resist the effects of drag better, to get a more streamlined bullet you need to increase the length and as a result the weight. You also need enough bearing surface on a bullet to engage the rifling to spin the bullet enough to stabilize its flight and to have enough surface to get proper tension when seating in the cartridge case. So in lighter bullets you can't make as streamlined of a bullet to resist drag as you can with heavier bullets and have enough bearing surface to work properly.

The only way to get a light bullet with a high BC is to drop bore diameter. So if you want to shoot a 90 grain bullet like you posted in your other thread your better off going to a 6mm bore rifle than a .277 caliber. So while you're not wrong in your physics, you're not correct in your ballistics.

I recommend you read this article by Bryan Litz. Here is a little quote from it:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Litz
It’s a generally accepted fact that the heaviest bullet in a given caliber is the best bullet to use for long range target shooting. There are several credible studies of this topic, [Ref2] [Ref3] and it is one of the fundamental truths of long range ballistic performance. Assuming constant form factors (drag profiles), heavy bullets will have higher BC’s than lighter bullets of the same caliber. Heavier bullets will also have lower muzzle velocities than lighter bullets, but when loaded to the same pressure, the higher BC of the heavier bullet is more valuable than the higher muzzle velocity in terms of retained velocity and wind deflection at long range. German Salazar put it aptly: “Muzzle velocity is a depreciating asset, not unlike a new car, but BC, like diamonds, is forever.” For this reason, the present discussion focuses on the heaviest bullets available in each caliber.
__________________
NRA Life Member
taylorce1 is offline  
Old June 10, 2016, 11:42 PM   #45
Pathfinder45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2008
Posts: 3,224
Since the 270 Winchester has been mentioned here; it's a fairly well known, "fact", that the lighter 130 grain load with its higher velocity shoots with a bit flatter trajectory than the heavier 150 grain load. A lesser I own fact, is that when 150 grain bullets are used, they actually shoot with a flatter trajectory than the 130 grain bullets when the range is substantially longer, and they arrive on target with substantially more energy. Of course, this assumes that both bullets are otherwise identical in their points and bases. High muzzle velocity is worth something, but it's also overrated. When it comes to long range, ballistic coefficient is more important.
Pathfinder45 is offline  
Old June 11, 2016, 08:39 AM   #46
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Quote:
Photon Guy, why do I think that this discussion has no actual purpose other than your personal amusement?
I don't know. There is no way I would know what you're thinking or why you're thinking it.

Quote:
If you really wanted a new rifle, more than enough info has been shared with you (by extremely knowledgable folks) to make your choice well informed.

Go buy a rifle and tell us what and why.
I will, when I can afford it. Right now Im saving up and Im looking to buy a Cooper or a Dakota Arms.
Photon Guy is offline  
Old June 11, 2016, 08:49 AM   #47
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Quote:
Well physics is part of ballistics, but you're also ignoring aerodynamics in all your figures. Ballistics Coefficient or BC is the bullets ability to overcome the forces acting upon it after leaving the barrel. A bullet does not slow down prior to exiting the muzzle, not unless your barrel is so long that all the powder is consumed a long before the bullet exits.

Bullets with a higher BC resist the effects of drag better, to get a more streamlined bullet you need to increase the length and as a result the weight. You also need enough bearing surface on a bullet to engage the rifling to spin the bullet enough to stabilize its flight and to have enough surface to get proper tension when seating in the cartridge case. So in lighter bullets you can't make as streamlined of a bullet to resist drag as you can with heavier bullets and have enough bearing surface to work properly.

The only way to get a light bullet with a high BC is to drop bore diameter. So if you want to shoot a 90 grain bullet like you posted in your other thread your better off going to a 6mm bore rifle than a .277 caliber. So while you're not wrong in your physics, you're not correct in your ballistics.
I used the wrong words in my previous post, a mistake on my part. When I said the bullet slows down prior to leaving the muzzle what I meant to say is that the bullet starts to slow down after it leaves the muzzle and no longer has the pressure behind it. But as you said, a bullet will only slow down prior to leaving the muzzle if the powder is all burned up well before it leaves the muzzle. Usually the bullet will be at maximum velocity just as it exits the muzzle. As the bullet is traveling down the muzzle it will be accelerating the whole time and then without the pressure and with the air resistance it will start to lose speed as it leaves the barrel.

Anyway, you seem to have a background in physics yourself, are you an engineer by any chance? As for me I took physics in high school and in college and while I by no means consider myself a bonifide expert I do know a few things. And I do find physics fascinating.
Photon Guy is offline  
Old June 11, 2016, 08:58 AM   #48
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA
Posts: 24,798
Probably better to learn the trajectory for whatever cartridge is chosen, for shots beyond, say, 300 yards. Inside of 300, "It don't make no nevermind, nohow." On out past 300, most folks can't guesstimate plus or minus fifty yards. The laser rangefinder is a blessing.

I've always zeroed for 200 yards. At 300, a 130-grain .270 drops about five inches. A 150-grain '06 drops about six inches. Bambi will never notice.
Art Eatman is offline  
Old June 11, 2016, 09:18 AM   #49
Boogershooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 9, 2014
Posts: 645
Physics is both fascinating and confusing. So many ( laws ) in physics and lots of formulas. I understand you like velocity. As a kid I shot alot of things with my pellet guns. .177 and .22 cal Benjamin's that were both very accurate and capable of killing all the small game around the house. If you pumped the rifle 5 times you could see the pellets in flight and they knocked cans down. Pump it 10 times and you couldn't see the pellet unless the sun was just right and the cans often went flying. These were the old metal cans back in the day not flimsy coke cans of today. Got a Lil older and started shooting 22's and other small rifles. Armadillos were the best target for me because the hard shell aided in expanding the bullets on impact. Man I can remember like it was yesterday the first time I shot one with a 220 swift.

I have since learned that bullet construction can help the slower cartridges can preform much like the high velocity cartridges if you chose the right ones. I shoot very soft bullets thru slower rounds and a tougher bullet thru high velocity chamberings.

The physics between the velocity and the density of the bullet transferring all its energy into soft tissue and fluid filled cavities is the fascinating part. That's why shooting a watermelon with a ballistic tip is much more explosive than shooting it with a fmj.
Boogershooter is offline  
Old June 11, 2016, 10:53 AM   #50
Photon Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2015
Posts: 291
Quote:
Physics is both fascinating and confusing. So many ( laws ) in physics and lots of formulas.
You just got to break it down and take it step by step. There are lots of laws and formulas but after using them so often they can become second nature. I never did more of the advanced Physics which uses Calculus but even basic physics can be challenging, and its fun once you get into it.
Photon Guy is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 11:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.09999 seconds with 8 queries