Calculation of Bullet Drop/ Various Models

[Bill Norris]

As Bill stated and I thought the same thing.
If he came on here saying he wanted to test a new bullet design and wanted some top shooters to test it out in real world conditions and provide their feedback, then it would have been a much different thread.
But instead, you know what transpired. Just saying.

Absolutely, we have guys on here and abroad that make first class very accurate bullets. We also have some of the best shooters in the World here. I just can't imagine how something like this could make these guys feel. It's almost like he wants to make them feel they have missed the mark with bullets and accuracy.

I DONT BUY IT.

 

[dellet]

I’d just like to know why the only response I get to question regarding 300 Blackout drops based on my live firing results of a bullet with the exact opposite tail, cupped, that can hang with his bullet, 1/2 MOA more drop, are answered by this guy

 

[Dave M.]

Bill you may be right but we can be civil about it and wait for the testing to take place. I believe there is a member that the Dr sent bullets to for testing. This should give us an idea where he is at. JMO

I ordered the bullets and plan to take measurements, and consult the Dr. prior to firing any. I hope they are accurate because I’ll be shooting a 6.5CM that is consistently capable of shooting sub 0.400” 5 shot groups at 100 yards.
Dave

 

[Dave M.]

Absolutely, we have guys on here and abroad that make first class very accurate bullets. We also have some of the best shooters in the World here. I just can't imagine how something like this could make these guys feel. It's almost like he wants to make them feel they have missed the mark with bullets and accuracy.

I DONT BUY IT.

It truly is a tough buy for sure, but I’ll do everything in power to shoot the smallest groups with whatever pet load the Dr. suggests.
Dave

 

[Bill Norris]

I ordered the bullets and plan to take measurements, and consult the Dr. prior to firing any. I hope they are accurate because I’ll be shooting a 6.5CM that is consistently capable of shooting sub 0.400” 5 shot groups at 100 yards.
Dave

And PLEASE you post the results for us.

 

[tmwinds]

I am curious to who you are referring to?
This thread certainly has a little of everything contained in it....

I was referring to an individual that used those words to describe the op. I don’t know squat about ballistics but I do know bad behavior when I see it.

 

[Murray Brook]

It truly is a tough buy for sure, but I’ll do everything in power to shoot the smallest groups with whatever pet load the Dr. suggests.
Dave

May I ask how many bullets you have on the way.

 

[Dave M.]

Belief has nothing to do with it. I have over 95% confidence based upon testing. Compared to defending a thesis, this is a walk in the park.

Please contact me directly and let’s discuss the proper process for loading and shooting your bullets. I’m trying hard to be as impartial as possible and want to give your bullets every opportunity to keep up.

 

[Bill Norris]

Please contact me directly and let’s discuss the proper process for loading and shooting your bullets. I’m trying hard to be as impartial as possible and want to give your bullets every opportunity to keep up.

And Crickets ???

 

[Dave M.]

May I ask how many bullets you have on the way.

Currently 20 from the Dr. and potentially more if he sees fit to send additional ones for testing, or if others find there way to me though some other form of magic. Lol.
Dave

 

[Murray Brook]

@HappyHellfire
Member @Dave M. will be testing your bullets, a good shooter with experience. Now is your chance to do some real testing. You should send him at least 100 or more FREE. His time and powder/primers are on him.

 

[Bill Norris]

I probably should give the good Dr. more than 3 minutes to respond. lol

Agree but I was thinking he may not respond to your post at all. LOL.

 

[Dave M.]

@HappyHellfire
Member @Dave M. will be testing your bullets, a good shooter with experience. Now is your chance to do some real testing. You should send him at least 100 or more FREE. His time and powder/primers are on him.

Exactly my stance from the beginning. Go all the way to the top of this thread and see where I stated almost the same thing.
Dave M

 

[dellet]

I’d like to think that I have conducted myself with reasonable respect in all the OP’s threads. I have never called BS on his results, only pointing out that the results aren’t that special. I have done a lot of bullet testing for 300 Blackout, I know the cartridge well. I mentioned working with a 154 grain bullet in one of these thread, my memory of all the details failed some. Small things like barrel length, it was actually a 10.5” barrel.

Here is the link to the thread generated at the time. There is a crazy cloudfare verification to get in to the forum now, so I took a screen shot of the important part. It’s below. Keep in mind the load was developed in Montana, the shooting done in North Carolina, I think less than 50 bullets total. You will have to convert MOA scope adjustments to inches.

I would love to see a 40% improvement over this bullet.

http://www.300blktalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=101253&sid=774b140a060f833635a70df41b16a702

The bullet

Real world testing.

 

[HappyHellfire]

Please contact me directly and let’s discuss the proper process for loading and shooting your bullets. I’m trying hard to be as impartial as possible and want to give your bullets every opportunity to keep up.

Wil do. Although when it comes to loading and accuracy y'all know a ton more than I do. For the last few years during covid I grabbed whatever powder I could get my hands on that the Hodges database said was safe to use.

 

[HappyHellfire]

I’d just like to know why the only response I get to question regarding 300 Blackout drops based on my live firing results of a bullet with the exact opposite tail, cupped, that can hang with his bullet, 1/2 MOA more drop, are answered by this guy

Sorry, Fielding all of the responses is pretty time consuming. What exactly did you want to know?

 

[HappyHellfire]

At the end of the day you can still calculate a BC to compare it to. Will it be perfect no but at least you can compare it. That is why the g7 BC was developed, but you can still use g1 or g7 on current bullets. To say his bullet is so far from the design the current calculators can't use it bullshit, its still a bullet with a little longer boat tail.

Here is your 100 gr scenar, so tell me what does your bullet do at over twice the cost that a myriad of other bullets do. 100gr scenar, same performance as your improved bullets, again total bullshit on your claims
View attachment 1566588

I got to admit that this has got me stumped. For them to have that low of a lag time with a boattail at 1000 yards should not be possible without an aerospike to reduce the drag below Mach 1.8. Let me dig a bit and see if I can understand it.

 

[dellet]

Sorry, Fielding all of the responses is pretty time consuming. What exactly did you want to know?

What bullet did you use to compare your bullet to, so you could claim a 40% increase in range?

At what velocity?

What is the length of your bullet?
Bonus if you would be as forthcoming as Berger or at least base to ogive or boattail length so people would have an idea how it could fit in their cartridge and chamber.

What is the exact “40% increase in range” claim?
Is it 40% less drop at a certain distance?
Travels 40% farther before it hits the ground with the same zero?

Why should I buy your bullet, when all of my live fire data suggests that the decrease in drop out to 400 yards (as far as you provided) would only be worth the switch if there was also a significant decrease in group size, below 1/2 MOA?
Example .4 to .3

Why don’t you provide windage for comparison to help with the above decision?

Just the very basic questions that some one looking for a new bullet would want answered.

Why should I buy your bullet, when based on my work with your cartridge of choice for comparison, 300 Blackout, offers almost no advantage based on your published data?

 

[HappyHellfire]

What bullet did you use to compare your bullet to, so you could claim a 40% increase in range?

At what velocity?

What is the length of your bullet?
Bonus if you would be as forthcoming as Berger or at least base to ogive or boattail length so people would have an idea how it could fit in their cartridge and chamber.

What is the exact “40% increase in range” claim?
Is it 40% less drop at a certain distance?
Travels 40% farther before it hits the ground with the same zero?

Why should I buy your bullet, when all of my live fire data suggests that the decrease in drop out to 400 yards (as far as you provided) would only be worth the switch if there was also a significant decrease in group size, below 1/2 MOA?
Example .4 to .3

Why don’t you provide windage for comparison to help with the above decision?

Just the very basic questions that some one looking for a new bullet would want answered.

Why should I buy your bullet, when based on my work with your cartridge of choice for comparison, 300 Blackout, offers almost no advantage based on your published data?

OK, here goes.

When I first started I used the Sierra 168 BTHP data from McCoy's book on external ballistics as a reference projectile. Unfortunately, the data didn't match because when you buy the Matchking 168 grain BTHP it appears to have a slightly different ogive then McCoy's data. So what I did was crate a "Moch 168" that had the same shape as the published data out of solid copper for comparison. I then collected data on both the Aerospike Bullet and the Moch Sierra that had almost the exact same weight. The data looks like:



This allowed me to compare the same bullet ogives with the only difference being the base. As you can see, at higher velocities, the two are similar but the Aerospike diverges at around Mach 1.8 and stays lower.
I then used a ballistic simulation to see the comparison between the Moch Sierra, the Published Sierra, and Aerospike. Based upon these simulations, the Aerospike from a 300 Blackout with a MV of 1785 ft/sec (Mach 1.6) would have an effective range out to 600 ft-lbs of impact energy of about 40% longer range than the Moch Sierra (similar nose and weight).

The 30 Cal Aerospike that I have for sale has a Von Kaman ogive that is 2.538 calibers long. This reduces the drag curve even further to give an effective range of 40% further than the plain old Sierra 168 "McCoy's data" but makes the bullet marginally stable out of the .308. Given that most manufacturers won't release their full drag curve, I can't say how my bullets will do against existing bullets without much more testing.

The bullet design was compared to the SAAMI standards for the 300 AAC Blackout to make sure it meets the standard as well as test fired (hundreds of rounds). The bullet has an overall length of 1.314 inches.

I know that it is a risk to try a new bullet. That is why I sell the trial packs so that you can try them without a big investment. If you don't like them, fair enough. I just really love this research and think that these will eventually replace boattails.

 

[dellet]

OK, here goes.

When I first started I used the Sierra 168 BTHP data from McCoy's book on external ballistics as a reference projectile. Unfortunately, the data didn't match because when you buy the Matchking 168 grain BTHP it appears to have a slightly different ogive then McCoy's data. So what I did was crate a "Moch 168" that had the same shape as the published data out of solid copper for comparison. I then collected data on both the Aerospike Bullet and the Moch Sierra that had almost the exact same weight. The data looks like:

View attachment 1566733

This allowed me to compare the same bullet ogives with the only difference being the base. As you can see, at higher velocities, the two are similar but the Aerospike diverges at around Mach 1.8 and stays lower.
I then used a ballistic simulation to see the comparison between the Moch Sierra, the Published Sierra, and Aerospike. Based upon these simulations, the Aerospike from a 300 Blackout with a MV of 1785 ft/sec (Mach 1.6) would have an effective range out to 600 ft-lbs of impact energy of about 40% longer range than the Moch Sierra (similar nose and weight).

The 30 Cal Aerospike that I have for sale has a Von Kaman ogive that is 2.538 calibers long. This reduces the drag curve even further to give an effective range of 40% further than the plain old Sierra 168 "McCoy's data" but makes the bullet marginally stable out of the .308. Given that most manufacturers won't release their full drag curve, I can't say how my bullets will do against existing bullets without much more testing.

The bullet design was compared to the SAAMI standards for the 300 AAC Blackout to make sure it meets the standard as well as test fired (hundreds of rounds). The bullet has an overall length of 1.314 inches.

I know that it is a risk to try a new bullet. That is why I sell the trial packs so that you can try them without a big investment. If you don't like them, fair enough. I just really love this research and think that these will eventually replace boattails.

This is actually unbelievable.

You took what is considered one of the worst bullets to use in a 308 past 600 yards. Copied its profile, made it out of copper reducing its weight 24 grains and used that bullet for a comparison claim?

A fictional bullet for comparison, did I understand that correctly?

There are probably 20-30 150 grain 308 caliber bullets that will retain 600 pounds of energy to 225-250 yards with a muzzle velocity of 1785 fps. A few that will be 275-300 yards. The 150 gold dot designed for 300 BLK is one, about 235. It’s a lead core plated bullet that costs about 23 cents. It is capable of sub 1/2 MOA out to 300 yards.

Your bullet needs to have 600 pounds well past 300 yards for your claim to even be sort of true.

Just as a side note, you claim to have shot hundreds of rounds for testing a single bullet. I can claim to have tested hundreds of different bullets in a single cartridge.

Are you starting to get an idea of the skepticism of your claims yet?
I’m a nobody, probably why many of the heavy hitters haven’t even bothered commenting.

Edit to add Aerospike performance table