Ballistic Programs
#3
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: River Ridge, LA (Suburb of New Orleans)
Posts: 10,917
#4
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,585
I have use all the ones mentioned by the guys here, and they all do the job but here is the one I like best.
http://www.mega.nu/traj.html
http://www.mega.nu/traj.html
#6
Spike
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: New York
Posts: 98
i feel like the bc on the handlload one isnt to accurate because i heard that the barnes expanders bc was .204 and when i plugged the numbers into the handload one it came out as .168 or something close to that
#8
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: River Ridge, LA (Suburb of New Orleans)
Posts: 10,917
BCs are a floating number anyway, dependent upon velocity and the whim of the gods. You can pretty much expect the BCs published by bullet makers are either optimum or optimistic.
#9
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 187
The numbers may be off, but it can give an idea of what it does down range. I cannot find BC's for most cast conicals/bullets so it gives me a rough number to use. It can't possibly know the exact number as there is such a broad spectrum of "SWC" type designs. And a RN could be perfectly round or oblong. For me it's better than guessing...
#10
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rapid City, South Dakota
Posts: 3,732
Yesterday from actual clocked velocity, this here ballistic program calculation the BC of the 270g Deep Curl to be 0.213. This is significantly higher than Speer published BC for this bullet of 0.193.
Please don't construe what i wrote as disagreeing with you, i wish not to suffer your wrath.