Robbie,
That's brilliant results......... for old technology
... but still not near the .204 in terms of drop or wind. Even using the lightweight and low BC .204 32 grain V-Max bullet at a
slow 4100 fps has the .204's 380 yard POI at -10.21" as opposed to your Barnes at -15.8" (calculated with the same max rise as in your graph). The point blank range is also extended by 40 yards.
The wind results are just in a different league and the heavier .204 39 / 40 grain pills are even more efficient!
I just did a quick calc with the new .204 26 gr Barnes VG and QuickLoad shows velocities of 4,700+ fps
However, it has the BC of styrofoam
I do take your point about the deer legality issue and as I mentioned, this did play on my mind when making the choice.
In the end it was quite a simple choice based on the way I shoot - I'm either out shooting vermin
or deer, not both at the same time. If I'm out after vermin, I don't have the Roe sack, tags and other tools with me and so I cant shoot them anyway, no matter the rifle I'm holding. If I'm out stalking (with the .243) and a fox shows its face then it wont complain about being hit with a bullet twice the weight.
The way I see it, if you want to do it all with one rifle (in Scotland) then any of the .222, .223 or .22-250 calibres are an ideal choice. If you are going to have more than one centerfire then the .204 is well worth considering.
Cant wait to do a side by side comparison
Kev.