Please show me anywhere in my post where I mentioned ethics.
I’m surprised the difference is so small. It feels pretty noticable when shooting.
Well I can see it in the bullet trace and hear the difference when it impacts steel. I shoot these guns side by side on my home range. Haven’t done this on game but I can tell you 600 “feels” more like 500 with the faster cartridge. And I would say my confidence is higher because of it.
Beautiful music performances by true artists are only beautiful because they masterfully lengthen or shorten each note. It is the tiniest fraction of second. Computer generated music based on the score sucks. Our brains are amazing.
Time of flight comparison doesn’t have any value to me at all. Most long range shooters I know of look at the terminal velocity for bullet performance and wind drift which is the biggest unknown. Everything else might correlate to them, but those are the numbers that are worth comparing for rifles.
not sure your angle, is this coming from a bias where you want to argue with me about something? I'll argue if you like but not sure what about yet or why lol, all good if you have too many rigs and too wide a range of limits for all of them to make useful for trend finding in this post...fine by me, whatever you can share is appreciated, I agree headstamps are meaningless in most ballistics discussions, we're on same page
I ran your math at similar elevations to me, I think I used 26 in/hg...maybe you're at lower elevations and things a little slower and more noticeable?...the relationship/delta should be similar enough though. I'm thinking every 100 yards beyond where the football is coming down the other side of the arc will seem like a pretty big difference as you watch through the scope, .8 seconds doesn't sound like much but as the naked eye watches a bullet flight path... 0.2 seconds is further than the small number would suggest. In all reality most of us are killing in under half second time of flights which will feel a lot more immediate...I'm looking for trends in our game that we maybe haven't noticed before. I have this feeling a lot of us, inadvertently, have matched our typical max ideal conditions hunting ranges in the ~3/4 second tof range. The more data we get here the more we may see if that's true? We know there's lots of more elite shooters here also so we should see a second trend and it's looking like ~1 second tof's are routine for some here so far.
ok this is making more sense, you're fishing here as you want to get into something with me, don't worry, there will be plenty of threads I'm sure you can argue with me about whatever or measure our weenies but this isn't the one, patience, you'll get your chance, I just moved a trailer full of heads into a new place...maybe you can come hang them with me instead and it could answer some of those questions for you? my procrastination in hanging them has me here playing instead
I don't think anyone would argue that. The point of the data isn't to try and use TOF as a measure in figuring out our rigs...we've all come up with different methods. I'm looking for a possible trend or relationship here as just another 40,000' view perspective on these things we do. Why do most of us quit around 600 on big game with bang sticks and why is it 60-70 yards in archery...they have similar TOF's....coincidence? To sending it on live critters? This isn't an argument thread, this is just a possible new look thread? As we get more data we may see some relationships or trends...we may not. Lets not treat this as an argument thread...not yet anyway. Have I conditioned the forum to bias me as just someone to get into it with? Don't answer that lol...relax guys, this isn't the angle here, this is genuine curiosity and discussion only.
This is sort of where I'm going with this. I've moved to a slow ass 6.5 Grendel...my out limit has of course reduced in terms of distance as compared to my previous rigs. The interesting part however is the TOF is about the same. So I'm down to 500 yards and 3/4's of a second now and ran as high as 650 yards with similar TOF's burning a lot more powder previously. A couple rigs I was comfortable with to 700 and 800 just about any ole time ran into the 1 second range but most of them seem to be in the 3/4 second and 600 yard range.
Agree and you definitely take the highest performing gear and push it further than most. I never used tof as a measure to select what I do but now that I'm noticing relationships/trends from a lifetime of bowhunting/rifle hunting big game...it's one I'll definitely peek at more for curiosity sake, it won't make a difference to my choices, it's just a curiosity thing at this point. For most of us the smart play is base our choices and limitations around the bullet first and then how far we can drive it under most conditions.
news.mit.edu
To clarify, the TOF is to 1800 fps. I added the max distance to the numbers based on terminal velocity.Thanks for the data, you're the tof champ right now lol
it's probably too soon to add the value of this in the discussion, I'm with you, I agree tof is a factor maybe not looked at enough but we also have the tools and tech to make it largely irrelevant in placing shots by a qualified driver who's good with his choice, the difference of .2 second tof is very very observable, while looking at the number itself you wouldn't think so, start banging steel past 400 and you'll see it plenty, we're not steering this into an argument thread just yet however, lets not find a reason to, lets get as much data and participation as we can firstI will absolutely argue it, and I can "feel" the difference between shooting a 6.5 creedmoor vs my 7 ss. When you have watched long range shots behind glass and practiced, your brain learns to "see" it. I can't tell you whether it was .9 or 1.2 seconds, but is perceptible.
I get it though, I would have argued that a person couldn't shoot and see their own bullet flying to the target in any circumstance, but I can. Its the same with a baseball player who can see the seams of a baseball pitch. And, people with "perfect pitch" can tell you the exact note and frequency in music.
Our brain has the ability to process an image flashed to our eyes for 13 milliseconds. That is a frame rate of 75 per second. So, for my TOF of 1.25 seconds, science demonstrates that a trained eye and brain can process 100 different frames.
In the blink of an eye
MIT neuroscientists find the brain can identify images seen for as little as 13 milliseconds.
so is your outer limit hunting distances the same as what you've presented? or do you shorten it up for one reason or another? what are your rules of thumb for hunting with those options then? no need for explanations, we can certainly discuss as well but no need, just trying for certain data fields here in finding where most guys tend to have a distance limit for hunting even though all our gear can generally go well beyond where we call it quits
I tell guys that ask me to help them build a rifle that long range is simple cause I can take you out right now and have you hitting 1000 yard targets with my rifle. But all the stuff I did before that is complicated. If they want to know more, I usually walk them through this advice so they know what I expect if they want my help. Long range isn't happening unless you put in the time to prepare, learn and practice. You can't buy your way into it with a rangefinder and custom turrets. But they have to spend enough money to buy the necessary gear. My first long range rifle only cost me $800 dollars. I was shooting factory Hornady and Federal match ammo. I printed sub MOA groups at 1000 yards at a long range class with Evolved Ballistics with it to the chagrin of the guys shooting Proof rifles with hand loads that couldn't hit the target, lol. The rifle was a cheap Savage on sale with rebate and the scope a fixed SWFA. My current rifle is wayyyy more than that. Everything I have is way more expensive than what I had then. Heck, my bipod right now cost 2x more than the rifle. It isn't necessary, but the gear I have increases opportunities and decreases uncertainty.
