- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The .30-06 conspiracy theory is the theory with the most legs.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:05 pm to BabyDraco1499
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:05 pm to BabyDraco1499
quote:
What happened upon impact. What was the grain, the powder, the casing, the integrity of the weapon even.
1
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:08 pm to RollTide4547
quote:You’re at least starting to think.
At little above 90 or a little below 90, that's still a big deflection off a relatively small back bone.
How much is your bullet drop at 200 yards? Now add the elevation differential and what happens to the angle?
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:10 pm to RogerTheShrubber
We finally agree on something 
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:12 pm to BabyDraco1499
quote:
We finally agree on something
We probably agree on a lot, once you get past the current temporary political situation.
Most of these baws used to agree with me on most topics, and I havent changed
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:14 pm to RogerTheShrubber
I always say that. People see a political stance and automatically shut people out when in reality they are probably good baws and you probably agree on alot more than you think. But just because they vote a certain way means you deem them "bad"
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:18 pm to BabyDraco1499
quote:
I always say that. People see a political stance and automatically shut people out when in reality they are probably good baws and you probably agree on alot more than you think. But just because they vote a certain way means you deem them "bad"
No lies here.
I dont mind Trump voters, I get them. Its the loyalists who I have an issue with, same as I did Obamabots.
Because nothing fits neatly in the box, unless its been controlled.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:27 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Precisely. I don't agree with everything he does but I don't disagree. I am definitely conservative, but anyone that just blindly agrees with something because of a party or person is just as bad as someone that disagrees with someone because of party or person. Sheep
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:38 pm to BabyDraco1499
Posted on 12/14/25 at 4:49 pm to llfshoals
quote:Apparently you aren't. I just posted that MY 30-06 is dead on at 25, a couple inches high at 100 and back to bulls eye about 200. So at 150 yards, it would be an inch high and it had dropped about an inch in the additional 50 yards. Not that steep of an angle. 50 yards is 150 feet and 150 feet is 1800 inches. If we compare this to a 1/12 pitch roof, a 1/1800 pitch roof would be pretty flat.
You’re at least starting to think.
Let's say the shooter was 50 feet above Kirk and 150 yards away. So the sine of the angle made be the shooter's line of sight and horizontal would be 50/450 or 1/9 or .111. The inverse sine of .0111 is 6.36 degrees. The bullet trajectory is pretty stinking flat, but we'll calculate it anyway. Inverse sign of 1/1800 is .0344 degrees from line of sight from shooter. Combining the 2 we'd have .6.7 degrees from horizontal. The bullet would be coming in at 6.7 degree off of horizontal, or 83.3 degrees from a vertical line (perpendicular to horizontal). If Kirk was reclining more than 6 degrees, the deflection would have to be 90 or more for it to stay in the body. The math doesn't lie.
This post was edited on 12/14/25 at 4:52 pm
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:11 pm to RollTide4547
The bullet trajectory is pretty stinking flat, but we'll calculate it anyway. Inverse sign of 1/1800 is .0344 degrees from line of sight from shooter. Combining the 2 we'd have .6.7 degrees from horizontal.
Not that I think it really matters but it appears you are making a mistake. The line of sight or the bullet path with regards to where the scope if looking is not relevant. The bullet drop is closer but also not relevant. What matters is the path of the bullet (its path at a 150 yards from the when it left the muzzle.
The bullet drop at 150 yards is much more than 1 inch. Look up a ballistics table or calculator to find the drop at 150 yards when sighted in at zero yards. This will give you the inches it dropped (guess about 3 inches (idk). From there you somehow need to calculate the angle at the 150 yard mark.
Hint if you care to calculate. The bullet starts dropping the instant it leaves the barrel. The drop per second is steady. The distance it travels will decrease for any time interval you choose to examine.
Not that I think it really matters but it appears you are making a mistake. The line of sight or the bullet path with regards to where the scope if looking is not relevant. The bullet drop is closer but also not relevant. What matters is the path of the bullet (its path at a 150 yards from the when it left the muzzle.
The bullet drop at 150 yards is much more than 1 inch. Look up a ballistics table or calculator to find the drop at 150 yards when sighted in at zero yards. This will give you the inches it dropped (guess about 3 inches (idk). From there you somehow need to calculate the angle at the 150 yard mark.
Hint if you care to calculate. The bullet starts dropping the instant it leaves the barrel. The drop per second is steady. The distance it travels will decrease for any time interval you choose to examine.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:13 pm to RollTide4547
So we’ve established there is an angle (you’re low) and that there’s a drop in the round increasing the angle. You’re trying to recover it with an incline because you’re not yet willing to let go of your theory. We’ll come back to that.
Now we move on to the loss of energy from muzzle to impact. Any idea what that may be?
Now we move on to the loss of energy from muzzle to impact. Any idea what that may be?
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:18 pm to llfshoals
quote:
Now we move on to the loss of energy from muzzle to impact. Any idea what that may be?
Pretty easy to figure out if you know the ammo used. But we don't know that. So trajectory/velocity/ft pounds at any distance is not knowable without more information than I have seen.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:26 pm to omegaman66
quote:Those calculations are if you shoot the rifle exactly horizontal. But we wouldn't be shooting it flat. We'd be shooting it up so it is 2 or 3 inches high at 100 and drops back in at 200 or so. The first hundred yards it's climbing the 2 inches, the peak would be at 100 yards and then it would drop 1 inch to the 150 mark....
The bullet drop at 150 yards is much more than 1 inch. Look up a ballistics table or calculator to find the drop at 150 yards when sighted in at zero yards. This will give you the inches it dropped (guess about 3 inches (idk). From there you somehow need to calculate the angle at the 150 yard mark.
quote:If the gun was sighted precisely horizontal, you'd be correct. But it's not. You sight it in by making the bullet climb roughly the first half of the distance.
he bullet starts dropping the instant it leaves the barrel. The drop per second is steady. The distance it travels will decrease for any time interval you choose to examine.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:37 pm to RollTide4547
quote:
Those calculations are if you shoot the rifle exactly horizontal. But we wouldn't be shooting it flat. We'd be shooting it up so it is 2 or 3 inches high at 100 and drops back in at 200 or so. The first hundred yards it's climbing the 2 inches, the peak would be at 100 yards and then it would drop 1 inch to the 150 mark....
Bullets never climb relative to the direction at exit.
The angle from the shooter to the target was used. When the bullet left the barrel it was traveling to where it hit. It was traveling higher than that and the bullet drop brought it down to the point of impact. At which point it would be traveling at an angle steeper than the path directly from the barrel to the point of impact.
All things are calculatable, but like I said. Largely not relevant as just calculate the angle from shooter to target and know the true angle will be a little bit steeper.
quote:
If the gun was sighted precisely horizontal, you'd be correct. But it's not. You sight it in by making the bullet climb roughly the first half of the distance.
Yes but that calculates the bullet pat relative to the line of sight through the scope. You need to calculate bullet angle. And to do that you calculate the bullet path relative to the line of sight of the barrel... not the scope which isn't even on the same path as the barrel. The barrel will always have an angle rising higher than the scope.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:40 pm to llfshoals
quote:That would depend on weight of bullet and velocity. According to the internet, 180 grain 30-06 is 2750 ft/sec at muzzle, 2558 ft/sec at 100 and 2374 ft/sec at 200. At 150 yards it would be 2450 ft/sec or so. From muzzle to 150 it has lost 300 ft/sec. The energy would track as follows. Muzzle 2800 ft/lbs, 100 yards 2600 ft/lbs and 200 yards 2000 ft/lbs. 105 yards, it would be 2300 ft/lbs or so. 2300/2800 is .821. So the bullet still has over 82% of it's initial energy.
Now we move on to the loss of energy from muzzle to impact. Any idea what that may be?
quote:I'm not low. My calculations were correct. The shooter at 50 ft above Kirk and 450 ft away has a sine of 1/9 (.111111). Take the inverse sine of that an you get an angle off the horizontal leg of 6.37 degrees. Add to that the angle of the 1 in bullet drop from a peak at 100 yards and you get an additional .0344.
So we’ve established there is an angle (you’re low) and that there’s a drop in the round increasing the angle. You’re trying to recover it with an incline because you’re not yet willing to let go of your theory. We’ll come back to that.
quote:Seems to me that you're doing the very thing you're accusing me of. The math doesn't lie.
oyou’re not yet willing to let go of your theory.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:42 pm to omegaman66
quote:Pick a standard round, there’s data available. While not certain, I’d say the odds of specialty ammo is low given the profile of the shooter.
So trajectory/velocity/ft pounds at any distance is not knowable without more information than I have seen.
Specifically how much ft/lb energy do you lose from 100 to 200 yards.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:49 pm to omegaman66
quote:Sure they do, if you aim them up. That's what you are doing when you raise and lower the crosshairs in the scope. That's why you buy a 20 or 30 MOA base if you want to shoot 22 lr long range. You bake in that angle of the barrel because your scope likely doesn't have that much adjustment. You're essentially lobbing 22 artillery rounds in at 200+ yards. A mil dot scope has dots above and below the intersection point of the 2 lines. That's so if the target is beyond the zero point, you use the dots below the intersection which raises the barrel and causes the bullet to climb more and push the zero impact point further out. If the target is closer, you use the dots above which causes the bullet to climb less and move the zero point closer to the shooter.
Bullets never climb relative to the direction at exit.
quote:It didn't start dropping until it was at 100 yards. The first 100 it was climbing. So it only dropped from 100 yards (2 inches high) and the impact point 50 yards further out.
The angle from the shooter to the target was used. When the bullet left the barrel it was traveling to where it hit. It was traveling higher than that and the bullet drop brought it down to the point of impact. At which point it would be traveling at an angle steeper than the path directly from the barrel to the point of impac
quote:For the 1st 2/3 of the distance the bullet is climbing. At 100 yards it starts to drop and drops for 50 yards. During that 50 yards it will drop 1 inch, because it need to drop 2 inches to be back on bullseye at about 200 yards. Something that drops 1 inch over 50 yards. We convert yards to feet we get 150 and convert feet to inches and we get 1800. So it dropped 1 inch over 1800 inches. That is a 1/1800 pitch.
Yes but that calculates the bullet pat relative to the line of sight through the scope. You need to calculate bullet angle. And to do that you calculate the bullet path relative to the line of sight of the barrel... not the scope which isn't even on the same path as the barrel. The barrel will always have an angle rising higher than the scope.
This post was edited on 12/14/25 at 5:56 pm
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:53 pm to RollTide4547
quote:If the height were 50 feet. I’d suggest looking at the topographic map.
I'm not low. My calculations were correct.
quote:Let’s use those numbers. How much energy will it lose from impact until it strikes the spinal vertebrae. I don’t think we’ll be able to remotely calculate that absent ballistic gel tests that approximate the resistance. Agree to say 20%? So 1800-1900 ft/lb at spinal impact?
So the bullet still has over 82% of it's initial energy.
quote:You’re trying to make the math fit the theory, but at least you’re doing it. Most don’t get this far.
The math doesn't lie.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 5:59 pm to RollTide4547
quote:
Sure they do, if you aim them up.
Still dropping relative to the barrel angle, which is what he was saying. Bullets appear to rise relative to the line of sight, but not the barrel.
Posted on 12/14/25 at 6:03 pm to llfshoals
quote:I've never been there. Math says 50 feet had an angle of a little over 6 degrees. 100 feet would be 12 degrees. That is still a HUGE deflection.
If the height were 50 feet. I’d suggest looking at the topographic map.
quote:I don't know. Do know that I've killed dozens of white tail with 30-06. Never had one that didn't exit the chest cavity. Have missed high into the spine behind the shoulders and blew right thru it. Shot a antelope in Montana quartering away. Bullet entered behind the left shoulder in the kill zone and pretty much destroyed the right shoulder. I believe that that antelope's shoulder bone was more dense than Kirk's neck.
How much energy will it lose from impact until it strikes the spinal vertebrae. I don’t think we’ll be able to remotely calculate that absent ballistic gel tests that approximate the resistance. Agree to say 20%? So 1800-1900 ft/lb at spinal impact?
quote:Too many people here haven't got outside enough. Spend a little time hunting, see what a bullet really does and you might understand.
You’re trying to make the math fit the theory,
Page 11 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News