Yes, I do incorporate a correction for barrel length, using the factors that you provided previously. First, I use a rough approximation to boost up the computed velocity at 460 feet to account for temperature and elevation, and then I apply the barrel length correction. If no barrel length is listed, I assume that it’s 16 inch. That may not be the best assumption, but that’s what I’m doing for now.
Vm = velocity(1); %Muzzle velocity
Vd = Vm * exp(-459.6 / k); %velocity @ 460 ft
%Apply factor to account for Butler temp & altitude vs. standard
%atmoshphere, using Remington Premier Match 77gr as prototype
vf = (2462-2422) / 2422; %(Vhot - Vstd) / Vstd
Vd = Vd + Vd*vf;
V = (Vm + Vd) / 2; %average velocity
bLen = velocities(n,6); %grab barrel length from table
if bLen == 20
V = V * 0.95;
elseif bLen > 20
V = V * 0.92;
end
Instead of using this rough approximation, it would be better for actual ballistic software to be used, such as the GNU library mentioned by @howdoiknowthisinfo here, but I don’t have the time to do that myself. However, I did run the 75gr TAP Precision manually in a ballistic calculator and found that it estimated 2414 at the 460 foot mark, which is 14 fps over my rough estimate, so not too bad.
So, I ran the calculations on your AmmoData-V5.xlsx and found that not much changed, but we do get one additional candidate: Hornady Critical Defense FTX 55gr. However, it has a BC of 0.175 vs. 0.355 for the TAP Precision, and this big difference pulls my velocity estimate way off the mark, 2508 fps from the online calculator vs. 2418 in my estimate. That kicks the actual average velocity up to 2874, putting that round out of contention. Therefore, given all that, there is no change to the table of candidates I posted yesterday, and at this point I’ll wait to see if someone does a more accurate run though your data set and comes up with different candidates.