Concerning ballistic coefficent's role in hunting bullets, thought you might be interested in this pair of April 2016 posts from Coyote Hunter, edited to remove some junk:
April 17th--
Both Mike Brady, the original NF [North Fork] designer, and the current NF owners are totally unapologetic regarding the NF bullet shape. The NF bullets were never intended for long range use but rather to perform extremely well from the muzzle to ranges well past where most game is taken.
If retaining velocity is so important, why do you prefer AB [AccuBond] when there are bullets available that do a much better job at that? If B.C. is the primary consideration, AB bullets are clearly "poorly designed".
April 18th--My .338 is a 22” WM and it pushes a 225g AB to 2742fps with H100V. In 2013 I used it to take a cow at 487 yards.
I went with the 225g AB because of the extra energy at longer ranges….
While you may see some kind of contradiction there, I do not. For elk-sized game I prefer NF over AB in the smaller diameter/lighter weight bullets. When choosing a bullet for the .338WM I reasoned that a 225g bullet would be adequate even if it lost a lot of weight. Still, I went with a bonded core rather than a cup-and-core for hunting. Two elk have fallen to my .338WM/225g AB combo and all bullets have exited.
As I have stated multiple times in this thread I value terminal performance over a high B.C. value. The .225g AB don’t seem to be lacking in terminal performance.
It is pretty clear bwalker also values terminal performance over high B.C. values as, in his words, he refuses to use ‘target’ bullets for hunting. We just disagree as to what the optimum balance is for our individual purposes.
Coyote Hunter - NRA Patriot Life, NRA Whittington Center Life, GOA, DAD - and I VOTE!
No, I'm not a Ruger bigot - just an unabashed fan of their revolvers, M77's and #1's.
