Wind number and caliber/cartridge

[Dioni A]

I guess if it doesn’t like ELDMs he might as well shoot it out as fast as possible

He wanted it as a training rifle anyways. It's not his only 22 Creedmoor. He's in the process of getting a third one made right now as am I.

 

[Sadler]

Going to see how hard I can run a creedmoor. There may be a new um solution in the future. Have to see if it comes to fruition though.

As in something other than the 22UM?

 

[Dioni A]

As in something other than the 22UM?

Yes. It's a long ways from being something though.

 

[Sadler]

Yes. It's a long ways from being something though.

Hopefully they can convince Sierra to make a 95TMK while they’re at it. Or better yet, they start making their own bullets in house that perform like a TMK.

 

[Wrench]

If I had a 600yd poke at a goat, I'd send one down wind of the goat as square to the wind as possible in a 20+ blow. The reality is the goat will not likely even care and you just got real time date.

 

[solarshooter]

Reviving and cross posting on this thread:

I have shown some calcs in the past where I've done point assessments of certain cartridges/bullets/rifles to try and determine what is the lowest recoil way to get a certain wind number. Today I decided to elaborate on this a bit and assess recoil and wind number as a function of MV and caliber.

First, I created a reference bullet for each caliber which has a weight and BC representative of the highest performing bullets in that caliber.
View attachment 820767

I then estimated powder charges needed to get that bullet to the given MV in a roughly 20" barrel. This is cartridge agnostic, and may not be perfect. I use this in conjunction with bullet momentum to calculate total recoil.
View attachment 820768

I then calculate recoil in a 9lb rifle, run the bullet at the given speed to determine the wind number, and finally calculate wind# per recoil.
View attachment 820770

The way I would use this chart is to narrow in on what bullet at what speed gives you your desired performance and what the "recoil efficiency" of that combination would be. You could then pick your barrel length and cartridge to get you that performance target. For instance, if you ask what is the minimum recoil way to get an 8mph wind number gun, the answer is a 6mm bullet at 3200fps or so, aka a 6UM. It also shows you the recoil INefficiency of larger calibers - moving up in weight is almost always less recoil efficient than going faster.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

?

spotting your misses question, is there any difference in ability to see said splashes on varying terrain between 77/88 gr .22 stuff and 108/112/115 gr 6mm and throw in the .25 cal options and then the 6.5 options 140-156?

feel like this question best answered by Form as he prolly sees the highest volume of these differences...is it a thing? is there an efficiency point of where the smaller stuff is harder to spot hits on varying terrains? or are you mostly seeing vaportrails to show your miss and not necessarily relying on the splashes?

reason I ask is just recollecting various threads of guys going back and forth from 6's to 6.5's and some guys commenting on better ability to spot misses with the bigger bullets due to the actual splash in the earth, and unrelated to this they also seemed to prefer the audible on steel from the bigger pills so it was more of a target range time preference, curious if this is a thing for the hunting scene preferences also? those of you who've shot side by side at distance in field conditions....have you noticed some stuff easier to see the misses hitting actual terrain than other stuff?

 

[Marbles]

?

spotting your misses question, is there any difference in ability to see said splashes on varying terrain between 77/88 gr .22 stuff and 108/112/115 gr 6mm and throw in the .25 cal options and then the 6.5 options 140-156?

feel like this question best answered by Form as he prolly sees the highest volume of these differences...is it a thing? is there an efficiency point of where the smaller stuff is harder to spot hits on varying terrains? or are you mostly seeing vaportrails to show your miss and not necessarily relying on the splashes?

reason I ask is just recollecting various threads of guys going back and forth from 6's to 6.5's and some guys commenting on better ability to spot misses with the bigger bullets due to the actual splash in the earth, and unrelated to this they also seemed to prefer the audible on steel from the bigger pills so it was more of a target range time preference, curious if this is a thing for the hunting scene preferences also? those of you who've shot side by side at distance in field conditions....have you noticed some stuff easier to see the misses hitting actual terrain than other stuff?

It is easier to see splash from my 243 with 108s than my 223 with 77s in my opinion.

 

[Stinky Coyote]

It is easier to see splash from my 243 with 108s than my 223 with 77s in my opinion.

maybe solarshooter can spreadsheet the most efficient splashy factor in with the recoil efficiency stuff? prolly a little too subjective lol

appreciate the response, should this be discussed more in these types of conversations? anyone else with experiences here to add?

it does seem imperative for the game's current state of watching things happen that once you can watch it happen does more splashy factor actually help and now we swing back up from 88's into 108's or 140's etc.? maybe the 6.5 140's are the most efficient???

 

[Formidilosus]

once you can watch it happen does more splashy factor actually help

No, not at the cost of recoil/muzzle blast/gun movement.

When one can no longer see splash, going up one caliber/weight increases performance. The lost gun movement/recoil/disturbance, while still being able to see splash results in the best hit rates.

In most situations, a 22CM with 75+ grain bullets, there is no issue spotting splash to 800-900’ish yards.