bullet
Handloader
- Dec 26, 2007
- 4,975
- 18
Songdog":1u6b12so said:
If it suit your desires oh great one who never yields :lol:
Nosler gets a black eye from Varmimt Hunter...
- Thread starter Songdog
- Start date
If it suit your desires oh great one who never yields :lol:
- Thread starter
- #62
bullet
Handloader
- Dec 26, 2007
- 4,975
- 18
I hear yeah, and your point has been truly noted.
Ridge_Runner
Handloader
- Sep 29, 2006
- 1,394
- 760
makes perfect sense to me
I always buy bullets based souly on the BC, whether my rifle will shoot them or not, or before I even know, and you guys know VHM writers aren't like all the other gun scribes who sway the numbers in favor of they're more generous sponsors, nah couldn't happen.
RR
I always buy bullets based souly on the BC, whether my rifle will shoot them or not, or before I even know, and you guys know VHM writers aren't like all the other gun scribes who sway the numbers in favor of they're more generous sponsors, nah couldn't happen.
RR
bullet
Handloader
- Dec 26, 2007
- 4,975
- 18
Ridge_Runner":gjse8kb6 said:
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: I was refraining from saying as much :lol:
300WSM
Handloader
- Dec 24, 2011
- 1,095
- 699
bullet":27r9jhgq said:
I sure didn't refrain because that is a way of life with business and journalism.
Moreover he had said he will continue to buy up the BC and use his charts and such and said for Bullet to do the same with his approach.
Well I will continue to go my way of no charts and holding little stock into the BC number and actually see the real world performance of the bullet out of the platform it will be used in.
Any shooter only needs these things...
rifle, rest, target, ammo. You can figure out everything you need to know.
Oldtrader3
Ammo Smith
- Nov 6, 2009
- 8,406
- 6
Exterior/interior ballistics formulae and a calculator help as well.
Michael Courtney
Beginner
- Mar 2, 2006
- 15
- 0
Ridge_Runner":3ligqaxx said:
The numbers in the article are not swayed. My co-authors and I don't receive any $$$ from the bullet companies, and I couldn't even tell you which bullet companies buy more advertising from VHM. To date, VHM has published every article we've ever sent them, including several articles on ballistic coefficients, so I don't think they have any bias regarding how different companies bullets fare in the testing we report.
Personally, I like Nosler bullets, and they've done very well on hundreds of deer and varmints over the years. However, short range accuracy and terminal performance is not as heavily dependent on accurate BCs as longer range performance.
The independently determined BCs we've seen for Nosler bullets are consistently lower than advertised, and even though we've seen lower than advertised BCs from other companies also, Nosler seems to stand out as having the biggest difference between advertised BCs and independent measurements. Hornady, Barnes, and Berger all seem to have made concerted efforts in the last 5-10 years to publish more accurate BC specifications. We've seen no evidence that Nosler has improved their efforts to publish more accurate BC specifications.
Michael Courtney
PS Here's a link to the article at DTIC:
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a554683.pdf
bullet
Handloader
- Dec 26, 2007
- 4,975
- 18
Michael, I read every word of your report and some parts I read at least three times. It will be interesting to see if Nosler responds and corrections are made. I have found better flight characteristics from the AccuBond down range at 500 and 600yds than with same weight Ballistic Tips. Not sure all the reasons but maybe you have shed some light on the matter. I know that I have always in all but a very few cases experienced Sierra Game Kings acting pretty much in line with my ballistic calculations. Interesting, thank you for your post.
