The Firing Line Forums bad ballistics
 Forum Rules Firearms Safety Firearms Photos Links Library Lost Password Email Changes
 Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 April 14, 2013, 11:44 PM #1 frakn Junior Member   Join Date: April 7, 2013 Location: Texas Posts: 4 bad ballistics Starting to learn a little about ammo, and I'm looking at ballistic coefficients for various long range rifles. Is there a reason that most of the widely-used military rounds have comparatively low ballistic coefficients? Seems a little counter-intuitive for them to adopt the crappier ammo.
 April 14, 2013, 11:58 PM #2 big al hunter Senior Member   Join Date: March 12, 2011 Location: Washington state Posts: 1,011 I think you may be a little confused. Rifles don't have ballistic coefficients, bullets do. A ballistic coefficient is determined by the weight, diameter and length of the bullet. It determines the aerodynamics of bullets and allows us a means of calculating trajectory based on the velocity of the bullet. The bullets used in military weapons have ammo that is good for its intended use. Most troops are doing battle at 300 yards or less, they don't need long range ballistics. Therefore 5.56 is sufficient even with low b.c. bullets. On the other hand snipers that are engaging targets at 1500 yards need the high b.c. of the 338 bullets in the 338 Lapua. Hope this clears things up a bit __________________ You can't fix stupid....however ignorance can be cured through education!
 April 15, 2013, 05:44 AM #3 B.L.E. Senior Member   Join Date: December 20, 2008 Location: Somewhere on the Southern shore of Lake Travis, TX Posts: 2,317 The shape of a bullet also has an effect on the BC. A spitzer boat tail usually has a higher BC than a flat base flat nose bullet all other things being equal. The smaller the bore, the harder it is to get a high BC. Even the heaviest .17 caliber bullets have BCs in the 0.125 range. The reference bullet that defines a BC of 1.00 is actually a small artillery shell with a 1 inch bore and a length of three inches if I remember correctly. Last edited by B.L.E.; April 15, 2013 at 02:11 PM. Reason: spelling
 April 15, 2013, 10:59 AM #4 g.willikers Senior Member   Join Date: September 28, 2008 Posts: 8,192 Then there's the idea of short range military rounds should yaw some, so they tumble upon impact. __________________ Lock the doors, they're coming in the windows.
 April 15, 2013, 02:52 PM #5 B.L.E. Senior Member   Join Date: December 20, 2008 Location: Somewhere on the Southern shore of Lake Travis, TX Posts: 2,317 Bullet stability has little to do with ballistic coeficients except that the higher BC bullets tend to be heavier and thus longer and thus tend to need faster rifling twists to stabilize. A .177 air rifle pellet, for example, has a BC in the 0.01 range and due to the hollow tail and heavy nose, they will actually fly nose first when shot from a smoothbore air gun. Try it for yourself if you have a smoothbore BB gun and some .177 lead pellets. They always hit the target nose first at any range. Making the bullets shorter and lighter worsens the BC but actually makes them more, not less stable.
 April 15, 2013, 02:57 PM #6 James K Staff   Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 22,873 A few military bullets have been designed to yaw, but for the most part it is not desirable. It is a bit silly to think that an enemy soldier shot with a full power rifle won't be bothered unless the bullet yaws or has a hollow point. Further, an unstable bullet might produce a more severe wound in a human body, but it will not penetrate cover as well, a drawback in combat. The military often has other concerns, not always obvious. The Army adopted a flat base 150 grain bullet with the .30-'06 cartridge. But in WWI, it was outranged by the German 8mm. So the U.S. went to a boat-tail bullet that had a longer range. Then they found out that the range was so great that bullets were striking outside the impact area of military ranges, not a good thing to have happen. So, back to the flat base bullet, which served as long as the .30 remained in service. Jim __________________ Jim K
April 15, 2013, 03:26 PM   #7
jmr40
Senior Member

Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 7,438
Quote:
 Making the bullets shorter and lighter worsens the BC but actually makes them more, not less stable.
Maybe with subsonic ammo like air rifles and possibly shotgun slugs, but not with most centerfire ammo. Bullets lose their stability when their speed slows to a certain point, usually about 1,000 fps. Bullets with better BC maintain that speed much farther downrange, and are stable longer.

Short lightweight bullets start faster, but a heavier bullet with a better BC will reach a point downrange where it is moving faster even though it may have started 200 fps or more slower at the muzzle.

 April 16, 2013, 02:12 PM #8 Colorado Redneck Senior Member   Join Date: January 6, 2008 Location: Northeast Colorado Posts: 1,389 .17 caliber bullets ballistic coefficient = >.125 http://www.hornady.com/store/17-Cal-.172-25-gr-V-MAX/ just for clarity.

 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 Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Hogan's Alley     Tactics and Training     Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum     Handguns: The Revolver Forum     Handguns: General Handgun Forum The Hide     The Art of the Rifle: Bolt, Lever, and Pump Action     The Art of the Rifle: Semi-automatics     The Art of the Rifle: General     The Dave McCracken Memorial Shotgun Forum     NFA Guns and Gear     The Hunt The North Corral     Lock and Load: Live Fire Exercises     Competition Shooting     Curios and Relics     Black Powder and Cowboy Action Shooting The Skunkworks     Gear and Accessories     The Smithy     Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting         Bullet Casting     The Harley Nolden Memorial Institute for Firearms Research The Conference Center     General Discussion Forum         TFL Photo Contest     Law and Civil Rights         Legal and Political     S.W.A.T. Magazine The Firing Line Gun Show     S.W.A.T. Exchange     Retail Deals and Feedback Forum Support     Site Questions and Tech Support (NO FIREARMS QUESTIONS)     Software and Function Testing

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:42 PM.

 -- vBulletin 3 ---- vBulletin 3 - variable fonts ---- Low profile (unsupported) Forum Home Page - Archive - Top