Originally Posted by Gath_Sten
Long odds that something you wrote would be published in Shooting Times or some other publication,

Whatever you intended to mean by that, I hate to burst your bubble but technical expertise means very little in getting something published in a gun magazine. Guys like Ken and Bryan are the exception, not the rule.
Quote
6th grade math shows that a bullet with the same form factor as a standard has a value of 1. If it�s a perfect match it has a value for 1 at all velocities.

Now that you�ve added the second sentence, you have a correct statement. Congratulations. Unfortunately it does not apply to the bullet you said it did. The bullet I gave as an example has an i7 of .913 at 1500 fps and 1.051 at 3000 fps. You claimed it was a perfect match because at one particular velocity it has an i7 of close to 1.

Do you stand by your original statement? Would you expect a ballistics calculator using the G7 curve to give more accurate predictions with this bullet or a bullet with an i7 of exactly 1.30 over its entire velocity range? Is the lightbulb on yet? Did you happen to notice in Bryan�s plots that compare the data to the curves they are �scaled by the bullet�s form factor?� What do you think that means?

Quote
It�s pretty obvious your real goal is to disagree regardless of how dumb or out of contest your arguments are.

My goal is to teach correct information. What�s obvious is you have picked a side with your emotions. That�s unfortunate. Hopefully you�ll be able to see the data above through the red mist well enough to realize I gave correct information the first time and your emotional tirade was unwarranted.
Quote
I�ve ran all MacLorry�s numbers and more and what he�s saying is correct. My contention is that it doesn�t make much difference in the real world.

His contention was the method outlined in his first post (not Sierra�s method to which he has now switched) gave a single G1 BC that was more accurate that what Berger gave for a bullet following the G7 curve. If you have really run all his numbers, as well as running them again at a different velocity as I suggested, you know that to be a false assertion.