RE: New Bullet Design
 

We will be controlling the weight of the core material. At this time I cannot say exactly what the specific gravity will be. That will be a function of the materials we have to use to achieve proper mushrooming, adhesion to the jacket, and specific gravity of the matrix materials. Theoretically we could achieve about 75% increase in weight on the same profile with current art- but don't hold your breathe for anything like that. This has to be a bullet that works on game as well as on the range. Cost of a 200 grain bullet on a 125 grain profile would also be prohibitive.

RE: New Bullet Design
 

I am no ballistics expert. That is why I have engaged one in this project, but let me take a quick run at this.

There is no doubt that any bullet of common BC fired at the same velocity will impact at for all intents the same point and at the same time. There is also no doubt that if you take these same bullets and increase their SD without changing their profiles, the BC will increase.

What we have to understand is that the BC is a function of profile and mass. For a given profile if we increase the mass, we will also increase the BC. A longer bullet that is made lighter will suffer a decrease in its BC, and therefore will suffer downrange.

There is a tradeoff here that has not been entered into the equation. A longer lighter bullet may suffer a decrease in BC, but it will also be fired at higher velocities. The jury is out on which one will be more accurate. BC does not mean accuracy and neither does SD. They work together in the optimum bullet design to achieve the best results from accuracy and retained energy fired from a proper weapon.

I am excited to get to the range with some of these bullets and do some testing. We will be doing a lot of these calculations in the months to come, and I want you two guys doing some of the first shooting. I appreciate your passion.

RE: New Bullet Design
 

It is important not to try to reduce the performance of all bullets to one mathematical formula. The SD of a 180 gr boattail hollowpoint is the same as a 180 gr round nose. Both are great bullets, but for different applications. the same goes for BC. The ogive of the bullet plays an extremely large role in the BC. The drag coefficient of a bullet is a function of the ogive given by the designer. Most of the new high BC bullets have very long ogives to help them you might say part the air and slip through it. It obviously works with bullet designs like the Bergers and the Wildcats.

What is missing in the equation still is the management of the distribution of mass in the bullet. SD won't be affected as long as the weight does not change, but BC with the same weight and the same bullet profile, but with different distribution of the mass of the bullet will be affected.

We are heading down this path. Not only do we want to change the mass of a given profile, but we also want to change the distribution of that mass.

Your friends who are shooting aluminum tipped bullets may by virtue of removing mass from the tip of the bullet be contributing to an increase in BC while lowering the SD

I am convinced that the only way to truly know the BC of a bullet is to shoot it and calculate the BC based on the chronograph results. Calculations from formulas can be close, but in this sport close only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes and maybe 155 rounds from 16000 meters. Too many variables.

RE: New Bullet Design
 

I agree with most of your posts. This post however is not exactly correct. A longer bullet has a greaterpotential tohave a drag reducing profile. Therefore the benefit of the longer profile may (and does) in many cases, overcome the benefits gainedby the heavier bullets SD.
This is why the 338 cal bullets with aluminumRidge metioned earlier perform so well. Remember the formula is SD/i = BC and the longer bullet will always have the potential to outperform the shorter more dense bullet with regard to "i"/Form. If the SD of the bullets is equal the longer bullet will always have the potential to outperfom the shorter bullets with regard to BC. At some point however stabilizing a longer bullet and the loss powder capacity become a problem.

RE: New Bullet Design
 

You can do these things within limits, but given a fixed profile changes to BC will be relatively minor unless the SD is also changed.

RE: New Bullet Design
 

Not really I do not metion velocity at all. Mass to frontal area however is more or less SD.

This is correct except in a total vaccum. I think the fariswmresponse to your post above was misinterpeted. In your example above (I assume the object is 3D ie 12x12x12) you havetwo weights that are identical but the smaller 2x2object is muchdenser. This will infact fall faster because it will have an equal gravitational pull but has far less wind resistance due to the greatly reduces frontal area.

In the copper ball/lead ball example the frontal area and drag are equal, but the gravitation pull is greater on the lead ball so i agree the lead ball will fall faster.

RE: New Bullet Design
 

I appreciate the academics of your position Scott. However; this falls under the hypothesis of our exercise, so I am going to defer any answer to this beyond acknowledging how well you have presented yourself in this discussion.

RE: New Bullet Design
 

I anxiously await someone to invent a better killing system than an X smashing offsidebone just prior to exit.

I'm not holding my breath, but I do remain hopeful...........

RE: New Bullet Design
 

I plan on having a discussion with a moose in the Yukon this fall with one of these rounds. I'll let you know how the conversation went.

RE: New Bullet Design
 

Once production starts you don't plan on manufacturing them in China do you?[:'(]
Thats one thing I don't want to see..