24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
-->
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,422
R
Robster Offline OP
Campfire Regular
OP Offline
Campfire Regular
R
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,422
I have a piece of property that I hunt on. 280 acres. the surrounding area is somewhat suburban. There are many places I can discharge a firearm using the 500 feet from residence rule/law. I have a Black Mouth Cur I use for squirrels and starting on coon. I want to shoot the squirrels but also want to be a little quiet about it, no sense in alarming the neighbors. I have a Crosman TR77 pellet gun. nice and quiet, 1000fps. I have a Ruger Single Six with a 4 5/8" barrel that I would prefer to use. I have some CCI quiet ammo which shoots out of a rifle at 710 fps.

The question I have is, I never worry if I miss the squirrel and tree when shooting up using the pellet gun. Just shoot up in the air and no fear that it will hurt human or damage property. Is there a difference shooting the .22 lr quiet? even with a lower velocity, will it travel farther? could it potentially land somewhere that it could do property damage or bodily harm?

I guess I am wondering if a .22 quiet round will travel farther at 710fps than a pellet at 1000fps.


Life is but the memories we've created.....Sully Erna
GB1

Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 462
S
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
S
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 462
That is gonna depend on the weight of each projectile.

Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
That is something to ponder.

While you shoot squirrels.



Travis


Originally Posted by Geno67
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual.
Originally Posted by Judman
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
Originally Posted by KSMITH
My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 927
A
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
A
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 927
Originally Posted by s4s4u
That is gonna depend on the weight of each projectile.


It actually does not depend on weight of the projectile.

BC on the other hand...

Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 462
S
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
S
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 462
Originally Posted by alukban
Originally Posted by s4s4u
That is gonna depend on the weight of each projectile.


It actually does not depend on weight of the projectile.

BC on the other hand...


Both are useful. Weight is easier to attain and will suffice for a basic comparison.

IC B2

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,873
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,873
Originally Posted by alukban
Originally Posted by s4s4u
That is gonna depend on the weight of each projectile.


It actually does not depend on weight of the projectile.

BC on the other hand...


Acctualy is does depend on mass. Mass is extremely significant aspect of BC.



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,545
JOG Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,545
Since the .177 pellet and the .22 rimfire have a different diameter and shape the direct effect of mass doesn't matter.


Forgive me my nonsense, as I also forgive the nonsense of those that think they talk sense.
Robert Frost
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 33,653
E
EdM Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
E
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 33,653
It will which is why, when needed, my big critter pellet rifle is a .22 RWS M48. I have owned it for 20 years and have thumped an azzload of ground squirrels and rabbits with it out to 70 yards with the heavier Crosman Premier.


Conduct is the best proof of character.
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,124
C
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
C
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,124
Yes, the .22 bullet will travel much farther than an airgun's pellet, which will shed its velocity much more quickly.

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,422
R
Robster Offline OP
Campfire Regular
OP Offline
Campfire Regular
R
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,422
Thanks CraigC.


Life is but the memories we've created.....Sully Erna
IC B3

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 927
A
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
A
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 927
So... in your trajactory calculator, you're changing the mass of your projectile (for the same caliber) and finding that it changes your trajectory? You are also calculating your BC with the mass term explicitly entered for your projectile?

Lemme know - there must be something I don't understand.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,873
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,873
Originally Posted by JOG
Since the .177 pellet and the .22 rimfire have a different diameter and shape the direct effect of mass doesn't matter.


Mass always matter, if not then we could make very long bullets from aluminum with extremely high BCs. The 177 pellet is low in mass for the diameter.

Last edited by jwp475; 11/22/14.


I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,545
JOG Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,545
The direct effect of mass doesn't matter.

Case in point: Which bullet will fly the farthest at the same velocity, a 105 grain or a 168 grain?


Forgive me my nonsense, as I also forgive the nonsense of those that think they talk sense.
Robert Frost
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,873
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,873

As I said mass in relation to diameter such as A 105 grain 6mm VS a 168 7mm or 30?



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,873
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,873



http://www.jbmballistics.com/ballistics/topics/secdens.shtml


Sectional Density and Ballistic Coefficients

Sectional density equations and calculations. References and a list of variables are at the bottom of this page.

The BC, or ballistic coefficient is defined as:

BC = w / [i d2]
here the diameter is specified in inches and the weight in pounds and the form factor is found using:

i = CD / CDG
The sectional density is defined as:

SD = w / d2
making the ballistic coefficient

BC = SD / i
[NOTE: Some references define the sectional density with the mass not weight. All the listings I've seen from bullet manufacturers use weight. Most ballistics texts use mass.]

So this means that the ballistic coefficient is proportional to the weight of the bullet and inversely proportional to the diameter squared. (Keep in mind that the ballistic coefficient is also inversely proportional to the form factor which depends on the shape of the bullet!)

Calculation of the sectional density is straight forward. For a 300 grain, .338 caliber bullet, the sectional density is:

SD = [ 300 gr / (7000 gr/lb) ] / [ 0.338 in ]2 = 0.375 lb/in2
NOTE: With the common definition of the sectional density, the units have to be converted when used with drag functions, velocity, etc, to convert the in2 to ft2 resulting in a factor of 144.

Variables

d bullet diameter w bullet weight
SD sectional density BC ballistic coefficient
i form factor G "G" function
CD drag coefficient CDG drag coefficient of the standard bullet
References

Hatcher's Notebook, Julian S. Hatcher, Major General, USA, retired, Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Second printing, 1966.



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,202
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,202
Quote
Lemme know - there must be something I don't understand.

That's correct

Weight matters


One shot, one kill........ It saves a lot of ammo!
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,885
A
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Content
Campfire 'Bwana
A
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,885
Originally Posted by jwp475

As I said mass in relation to diameter such as A 105 grain 6mm VS a 168 7mm or 30?


Mass in relation to diameter is call sectional density.


You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.

You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
AX24

573 members (12344mag, 1936M71, 16penny, 17CalFan, 10gaugemag, 1234, 47 invisible), 2,699 guests, and 1,154 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,190,514
Posts18,452,673
Members73,901
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 


Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.



Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.098s Queries: 14 (0.005s) Memory: 0.8688 MB (Peak: 0.9857 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-04-18 14:44:11 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS