Boat-tail or no boat-tail???

In a situation where you may be loading hundreds and possibly thousands of rds. for a trip to the prairie I would find an accurate BT and call it a day. Doubtful prairie dogs can tell the difference and loading BTs is far easier on my fingers than flatbase bullets when you get down to the .20/.22 cals. In 35 years of handloading I've never been "not able" the find suitable BT bullets for that application.
I don't see it as an accuracy issue, more of a comfort issue for me. For big game I just find bullets that work and use those...some happen to be BTs, some not.
 
I can honestly say Lee that I have noticed no diference in the accuracy of a flat based VS a BT. I have found both of them to be accurate and reliable. In fact the most accurste and consistant load I feel I have is with 55 grain vmaxes and it is a flat base if I am not mistaken.
 
I 'm hopin those 55 gr. Vmaxes are accurate. Just got a sweet deal on a whole bunch of them. Up to now I'd be using 52 gr. Amaxes which are BTs and quite accurate in my rifles.
 
Quote:

And under no circumstances would I want to "give up a little bit of the inherent accuracy gained with the FB bullets" (as another poster suggested) if the FB bullet is the more accurate bullet at extended ranges. I can compensate for a little bit of difference in trajectory, but I can't do that for accuracy at that range.

-BCB



Perhaps I phrased my meaning poorly. Take two 75 grain 6mm Hornady bullets, for example, the 75 grain VMax (BT) and the 75 grain HP (FB). The VMax has a published BC of .330, and the HP sports a BC of .294. They can both be launched at similar velocities.

Assume the HP consistently produces 5 shot groups at 100 yards 1/10" better than the VMaxes. I'd shoot those HP's out to 300 or so. However, were I to step up to the plate and intend on competing under all weather conditions at 600 yards, I'd take the improved BC of the VMax. BC doesn't affect only trajectory, but also wind drift (or more correctly, bullet deceleration), and wind drift is a bigger booger at LR than is path/drop.

Mike
 
Quote:
Quote:

And under no circumstances would I want to "give up a little bit of the inherent accuracy gained with the FB bullets" (as another poster suggested) if the FB bullet is the more accurate bullet at extended ranges. I can compensate for a little bit of difference in trajectory, but I can't do that for accuracy at that range.

-BCB



Perhaps I phrased my meaning poorly. Take two 75 grain 6mm Hornady bullets, for example, the 75 grain VMax (BT) and the 75 grain HP (FB). The VMax has a published BC of .330, and the HP sports a BC of .294. They can both be launched at similar velocities.

Assume the HP consistently produces 5 shot groups at 100 yards 1/10" better than the VMaxes. I'd shoot those HP's out to 300 or so. However, were I to step up to the plate and intend on competing under all weather conditions at 600 yards, I'd take the improved BC of the VMax. BC doesn't affect only trajectory, but also wind drift (or more correctly, bullet deceleration), and wind drift is a bigger booger at LR than is path/drop.

Mike



Perhaps you did. As we both know, accuracy is directly related to all of the above that you mentioned. And ballistic coefficients are often overrated in terms of what a bullet will and will not do at extended ranges.. It still comes back to accuracy at any range as the defining element.

Besides, I doubt I'll be planning or needing to take a whole lot of 600 yard shots at any game animals for me to lose much sleep over it... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

-BCB
 
Back
Top