Ammo For Sale

« « Ammo progression | Home | Gun Control in the State of the Union » »

The 6.8 Bison Subsonic Platform

That is a long bullet. Anyone tried it yet?

8 Responses to “The 6.8 Bison Subsonic Platform”

  1. Mike Says:

    Don’t you have an interest in Bison Armory, and thus tried it for yourself?

  2. SayUncle Says:

    I own an insignificant share of it and haven’t asked.

  3. Paul Kisling Says:

    That is not a very good bullet design. I was under the impression that a long bullet would work best with a boat tail and a custom spire point. You ought to look at the .458 whisper for the way it is supposed to look.

    http://www.deutsches-jagd-lexikon.de/index.php/Datei:302whisper.JPG

    Yes I know it has magazine constraints, but isn’t there a point where a weapons platform is ‘modulared’ to inefficacy by compromise???

  4. ben Says:

    Paul, please tell me what you mean by “work best” as that could mean many things.

    And what exactly is the compromise in a subsonic 6.8 with 200 grain bullets?

  5. Paul Kisling Says:

    Perhaps range and accuracy. Of course it depends on whether one is shooting for which side of the torso or which button. Do you want a 100 yard bullet or a 300 yard bullet?

    A boat tail spire designed for subsonic flight will always be capable of better range and accuracy then that travesty of bullet.

    There is also cartridge combustion inefficiency because of how far down in the case the bullet has to sit. This effects flight characteristics and brass life.

    Did you even read the statement at the end of the article? That the bullets cone at mere 100 yards? They try to make it sound like that is a design perk. Truth is that it is instability in flight due to piss poor design.
    The bullet literally shakes its ass in a circular motion in flight.
    If you believe those guys, next they will be telling us that keyholing is a means of amplifying bullet effectiveness.

    The bullet looks like a blackpowder design. Do you know why blackpowder bullets are not generally used with smokeless powder? The pressure curve destabilizes the bullet’s flight path just like this design is demonstrating.

    Perfect is the enemy of good enough, but so is quick and dirty.

  6. Jim W Says:

    The military did some experiments with high speed photography going into ballistics gelatin where they compared yaw just before impact with the effects after impact and discovered that for FMJ projectiles, striking with a high yaw angle caused much earlier fragmentation than if the bullet was going perfectly point-forward.

  7. Paul Kisling Says:

    Yes they did.
    And what was the reason for the redesign?
    Something about bullet accuracy?

    The 556 bullet was not originally designed to yaw at all. The redesign cut down the instability problems.

    We should take a look at the Russian 5.45×39 round to deepen our knowledge. The Russians loved how the 556 would yaw inside the body.
    They did NOT like however that it yawed before hitting the body. Hence why they designed a bullet that starts yawing around 1 inch after impact.

    Good bullet design goes a long way toward bullet effectiveness.

  8. ben Says:

    For a full power round I agree that yawing before any penetration may not be desirable. However, this is a subsonic round that will likely not expand at all on impact as not enough velocity is available. The bullet will almost certainly not fragment in the least on impact again due to the low velocity.

    This is a SUBSONIC round, remember. It’s effective range is limited to not much more than 100 yards, even if it had zero drag, as it simply drops too fast. The bullet is capable of 2″ 5-shot groups at its intended range, possibly better, and that’s fine for hog hunting, backyard plinking, home defense with minimal structure penetration, or whatever else you need a subsonic round for.

    I think you are mixing up traits that are desirable in a full power round with traits that are desirable in a subsonic round.