berger bullets

[oaken]

I have long since sold my Ftr rifle and like Brillo would be well pleased to find a way to get my 26" Trg to shoot well at 1000yds.

Is there a source of reliable info regarding various bullets ability to remain stable through the transonic? I'm particularly interested in the HBC.

Is this something that the new Scenar L can do to some degree or is that just rumour?

[The Gun Pimp]

The new Scenar L bullets just have a more concentric jacket I believe.

[Laurie]

The new Scenar L bullets just have a more concentric jacket I believe.

 

Yes that's correct. Both are listed by Lapua with identical BCs and comparing the original and 'L', I can't see any difference in their shapes

[pcon]

Hi Laurie,

 

One that hasn't been spoken about is the Hornady 178 BTHP, I believe hornady have adjusted the shape of this bullet and it has similar BC's to the berger Juggernauts. Also much cheaper than the Bergers.

[Laurie]

Hi Laurie,

 

One that hasn't been spoken about is the Hornady 178 BTHP, I believe hornady have adjusted the shape of this bullet and it has similar BC's to the berger Juggernauts. Also much cheaper than the Bergers.

 

 

Maybe .... but can you get them? I've had very little luck getting examples of the new Hornady HPBT Match range, only the 225gn .308 seen to date. Looking at Hornady's revised 'emergency' production announcements of last year when the company said it would 'temporarily' stop making most of its products and concentrate on 'key' models to try to meet the vast US demand that had built up, the only BTHP Match that was included was .338-cal. My assumption is that this still applies as we start 2014.

 

I'd wondered before about these bullets and tried to get some. they look good and if half of what Hornady says about concentricity, design + component + manufacturing standards is true, they should be outstanding performers. BUT .. after their launch, absolute silence. Internet forum trawls hardly produced a mention and then usually about US dealers who might have them in stock. SO .... either the punters don't recognise and buy a good thing when they see one, or they don't do what it says on the tin, or (what I think) Hornady introduced them just before US demand went haywire and the company couldn't make enough existing models to keep up with orders never mind use scarce production resources for new bullets whose sales hadn't taken off.

 

This - and not just Hornady - begs the question about what is going to happen when (If?) the American shooting public regains enough sanity and confidence to stop panic buying. Will things go back 'to as before' and models like these and various Berger match bullets reappear? Or will the manufacturers quietly shelve many designs rather than go through the traumas of setting up production lines and relaunching them?

[Shuggy]

I have long since sold my Ftr rifle and like Brillo would be well pleased to find a way to get my 26" Trg to shoot well at 1000yds.

Is there a source of reliable info regarding various bullets ability to remain stable through the transonic? I'm particularly interested in the HBC.

Is this something that the new Scenar L can do to some degree or is that just rumour?

+1 on this. I have a Remington 700 with a factory 26" varmint barrel with a 1 in 12 twist. Based (I think) on one of Laurie's old articles, I tried it at 1000 yards with some 190 grain Sierras (HPS Target Master ammo). These shot very well, but then so did some NRA RWS 155 grain ammunition - even though these have the older style 2155 Sierra bullet.

 

There must be plenty of people who have similar rifles, who only occasionally use them at the longer ranges. What bullet is the best to use?

[Swarovski1]

Hi laurie,we have spoken about the 30 cal bergers, what bullet make is dominating the 6.5 cal

[Swarovski1]

Here is another question, I emailled berger months ago for load data for 6.5 06 for the 140gr vld type bullet, I know the obvious choice but here are the options.140gr match vld,140gr match bt longrange and the 140gr match hybrid target, judging by the bc the hybrid is 0.004 better, anybody any knowledge on the difference between them, why make 3 bullets basicly the same, why not stop making the not so good one say.

[gbal]

Here is another question, I emailled berger months ago for load data for 6.5 06 for the 140gr vld type bullet, I know the obvious choice but here are the options.140gr match vld,140gr match bt longrange and the 140gr match hybrid target, judging by the bc the hybrid is 0.004 better, anybody any knowledge on the difference between them, why make 3 bullets basicly the same, why not stop making the not so good one say.

Basically,because they are not the same!They differ in jacket composition,bullet shape (ogive-tangent or secant or hybrid),in expansion raates,and in intended useage-target,hunting,tactical etc,different ranges.,etc (in essence ,different markets).Berger have also tried to overcome ignorance-eg that a bullet made to match standards can still be a hunting bullet-their 'Premium' range,but essentially gave up (I wonder why?).There are also differences in boat tail design,and whether there is a boat tail at all....

It's quite detailed,but not complex,and informative generally-one spec/size does not fit all,equally.Why not google as follows,and read about it in detail,direct from Berger-it's quite short,but very informative:

Berger Bullets;Information;Line and Design

 

Gbal

[Swarovski1]

Which one do I buy for 1000yd shooting then for my 1 in 200mm twist barrel, will do that reading later

[Swarovski1]

After reading the lines and designs am still looking at 1 of 2, the lrbt or the hybrid, I am no expert thats why I am asking the audience

[gbal]

After reading the lines and designs am still looking at 1 of 2, the lrbt or the hybrid, I am no expert thats why I am asking the audience

OK-the only real answer is to try them and see what your rifle prefers....did you not say a whiles back that you wanted to try the 140 vld-the 10 you had borrowed were loaded way too hot.Well,do not load them hot-that applies to whatever you choose.If you have your depth set up for the vlds,why not (but see below).The Hybrids would be my starting point,as they are designed for tolerant seating depth,with very little loss of BC- so much more likely to get top results with minimal "load development" ie fiddling around,with what you correctly described as very expensive bullets.vlds can be difficult to optimise seating depth.That's why that nice Bryan Litz has designed the hybrids.

Now,are they available?....Good luck...

Gbal

[Swarovski1]

Hi gbul, the reason the vlds were to hot really was they were loaded exactly the same as the others I loaded to test and shoot barrel in, 139gr scenars and 142gr smks to sierra accuload powder measures, they were also too hot due too oal they were made too, they were touching rifling and v close due too tight chamber which increased chamber pressures, am I starting to sound like I know what I am talking about lol.all I can say is the data I used must be wrong, I am using 2grs less powder now and still getting higher velocities than the sierra data, had same thing with imr4350, sierra start load was 47grs I think for 2700fps, I used 46.5grs because previous loads were too hot and I was getting 2895fps, maxload was 51.5grs ish and data fps was ment to be slower than what I was getting on 46.5gr

[1967spud]

O yeh? Maybe it was just a co-incidence that eight out of the top ten FTR shooters in the European F Class Championship used Bergers.

 

It really depends on what you want from your gun - if you are a serious competition shooter you want the very best - of everything. When you weigh-up the cost of competing, there are many costs - fuel, accommodation, entry fee etc. Are you really going to skimp on the bullet to save a tenner?

Well put GP

[gbal]

Hi gbul, the reason the vlds were to hot really was they were loaded exactly the same as the others I loaded to test and shoot barrel in, 139gr scenars and 142gr smks to sierra accuload powder measures, they were also too hot due too oal they were made too, they were touching rifling and v close due too tight chamber which increased chamber pressures, am I starting to sound like I know what I am talking about lol.all I can say is the data I used must be wrong, I am using 2grs less powder now and still getting higher velocities than the sierra data, had same thing with imr4350, sierra start load was 47grs I think for 2700fps, I used 46.5grs because previous loads were too hot and I was getting 2895fps, maxload was 51.5grs ish and data fps was ment to be slower than what I was getting on 46.5gr

Hmmmm...wrt COAL,I am now resting my case,but your comments I think are in line with my post yesterday....it is the wrong measure.

If 5 grains less than book max (ie 46.5 ) gave nearly 200 fps MORE than book max(51.5g) figures,something is way out of kilter-don't resurrect 'tight chamber'-we've done that...but at the very least,this puts me off suggesting more VLD loading....back to basics,I think-you just can't 'load exactly the same' when components differ-in ogive-even if weight similar-maybe you realise that now...tomorrow is another day....

[Swarovski1]

Bergers data powder measures is more realistic and is close match to what ive been finding, their maxload for 140 grainer with imr 4350 is 46grs for I think 2837fps, i found 46.5grs with 142gr smks gave me 2895fps,will dub check all sierra data and compare.berger didnt list n160 thats why I used sierra data powder measure as they are simalar long 6.5 target bullet, I bet if I loaded the bergers with 48.2grs of n160 as I now do with 142gr smks they would be awesome aswell, I checked powder measures and there weren't many powders the same but ones that were was grains more with sierra data.

[Laurie]

Hi laurie, so if you you had to choose a 30 cal bullet for 1000yds you would choose the 155.5gr bergers over the 175 and 185 grain bergers then even though the heavier ones have a better bc, i am assuming they have, why would you use them instead.

 

 

Bullet choice is partly about matching ballistics to match distances, partly about what works for you and your rifle. I used the 185gn Berger LRBT Juggernaut for a couple of seasons with very good results and still like this bullet. If you can get ~2,800 fps MV and small groups, it'll perform very well at 900 and 1,000 yards.

 

I've tried 200-215gn models and had no luck with them and don't like the recoil.

 

Returning to 155s, mainly, the 155.5gn Berger, I find the recoil significantly lower helping rifle handling, they group fantastically and LR elevations are good. No need to use high-energy powders to get enough MV for long ranges from a 30 or 323-inch barrel, so better barrel life too.

 

It's very much what works for people. I've come to the conclusion that shooting should be like driving a car - the less you have to concentrate on the mechanical basics to the point where you do them withouit thinking about them the better. With a very heavy and stiff rear bag (Edgewood Mini Gator with grab handle filled with Chromite heavy sand), Dan Pahlobel's FLEX-Bipod and 155s, the rifle hardly changes position betwen shots so I'm reset quick and can give 100% of my time and attention to looking at the flags and/or other people's targets to see what the wind is doing. 2+20 shots is less tiring than using 'heavies' so you stay fresh to the end of a long match including club comps where there are often three shooters squadded to a target.

[Laurie]

Does foxy have plenty of these hbc bullets in stock? I might try them in my tx1200

 

 

I forgot to ask Simon Fox that on Saturday, but there are usually plenty in stock in the Diggle shop.

[Laurie]

Hi laurie,we have spoken about the 30 cal bergers, what bullet make is dominating the 6.5 cal

 

 

Can't say - not enough experience with 6.5s and not many people use them in F-Class these days. I've had very good results with the 123gn Lapua Scenar up to 800 yards in .260 Rem and at 600 yards in my new 6.5X47 Lapua on its first outing on Saturday. Some people like 130gn VLDs in this class of cartridge and if they shoot well in your barrel are probably the optimal weight for 260 Rem, 6.5X47L, and 6.5mm Creedmoor.

 

For 6.5X55mm, 6.5-284 and similar, there is an excellent choice of 139-142 grainers. I suspect most larger cartridge 6.5mm shooters here still use the 139gn Scenar. It's not as high BC as the Bergers, but is an excellent performer and many people have stuck with what they know. Across the Atlantic, the 142gn Sierra MK is regarded as THE bullet for LR in the large case 6.5s. Supposedly they're more consistently made now than they used to be, but a few years back their big downside was large variations in base to ogive measurements. So, if you try them I'd recommend measuring them and if ncessary batching them.

[Laurie]

I have long since sold my Ftr rifle and like Brillo would be well pleased to find a way to get my 26" Trg to shoot well at 1000yds.

Is there a source of reliable info regarding various bullets ability to remain stable through the transonic? I'm particularly interested in the HBC.

Is this something that the new Scenar L can do to some degree or is that just rumour?

 

 

No - there isn't any listing as to this factor, and standard BC + MV type results don't help no matter how good the data and the ballistics program. It's an experience issue, and often people won't share what works for them or doesn't. This might particularly apply to tactical rifles at very long range. After all if you've spent a lot of time, money and thought that sees you and your TRG or similar beat everybody else at long ranges, you'll probably be a bit wary of passing the 'tricks' on!

 

The long and short of it is that a 28-inch or longer barrel is really needed for good performance from .308 Win at 900 and 1,000 yards (no pun intended). So we're looking at making the best of a not particularly great hand with a 26-inch barrel. 24-inches or less? Just don't go there! Despite what some people might say about 20-inch barrelled rifles achieving amazing feats at these distances allegedly in certain individuals' hands, I firmly believe that with two shooters of equal wind reading skill sharing a target, and using equally well specified and built rifles with similar round counts, if one has a 30-inch barrel and the other 26-inch the guy with the long barrel is going to whale the sh*t out of his partner if shooting F/TR on the little target. On the standard 2-MOA TR target, the scores might well end up the same, but a 10.5-inch dia. Five and 5.25-inch dia. V give no latitude to the 308 Win at 1K. F/O is different and a mild .284 Win or 6.5-284 Norma load might well embarass a hot 7mm WSM although over time, taking the rough with the smooth (etc, etc), the WSM will still come out on top by a modest margin.

 

However, if you have a 26-incher, and you want to have a reasonable shoot at 900/1,000 a good choice of loads and bullets does help. When I first got interested in this, I wanted to shoot an SSR-15 with 26-inch barrel and the 80gn Sierra MK at (very) modest MVs. My research purely said some bullets work, some don't so I had to suck it and see. The 80gn 0.224 SMK worked OK at 1,000 even if I had to use ~80% more windage than the 6.5-284s with 139/140 at 3,000 fps that were then appearing - no F/TR at that time. This was also before the half-size targets were introduced (actually quarter-size if you work on the ring area available to you!) My bullets weren't just transonic - they were definitely subsonic at 1,000. (I had to keep requesting the target be pulled as the markers missed half the shots arriving for this reason.)

 

This suggests one pointer that is backed up by other things I've since heard. A good 'old-fashioned' design with a tangent ogive nose may perform better in this situation than a more 'modern' very long pointy secant-nose VLD type. This was backed up by some research that John Carmichael (he of HPS-Target Rifle Ltd) did at Bisley maybe 20 years ago when 155s and even more so 155gn VLDs were pretty new in TR. He built and set up a good old-fashioned and large twin metallic coated screen chronograph in front of the target frame and shot various bullets at 800, 900, and 1,000 yards from a pretty standard spec TR rifle at the usual ~2,950 fps velocities. The Berger VLDs were going a lot faster at 800 than the 155gn SMK and Scenar. At 900, the VLDs had lot most of their edge. At 1,000, the VLDs struggled and tangent ogive bullets went faster and just stayed supersonic.

 

So, the first rule appears to be to avoid VLD types - the 155gn Scenar may fall into this class, the 155gn HBC likewise.

 

The second rule is to avoid anything with a sharp boat-tail angle, that is in double figures. The ideal BT angle is 7-8 degrees. That rules out the 168 and 180gn SMKs which most people know about, but also other 168s largely copying the Sierra from Speer, Nosler and Hornady. The Berger 168s are LR bullets and work fine. Another group to be avoided like the plague are Hornady A-Maxes with the sole and significant exception of the 208gn model, an excellent LR bullet. The 155 A-Max has a 13.5-deg angle, the 168gn 12.0-deg, and the 178gn model 12.6-degrees. All will likely generate extra turbulence at transonic speeds. The new HPBT Hornady match models are OK - the new 178gn is an ideal 7.7-degrees. A-Maxes are also secant ogive, albeit not as long radius as in Berger or JLK VLDs. The new HPBT models are dual ogive same as the Berger Hybrid which should be better thas secant at transonic speeds, but there's no real feedback around on this matter yet.

 

Relatively blunt front-end models with very long BT sections seem to perform particularly well in transonic conditions. The improved match version of the Frankford Arsenal 173gn M1 .30-06 bullet was famous in US shooting circles for its 1,000 yard (and longer) stability a generation or two back. Not surprising as the US Army developed the cooking version shortly after WW1 through trial and error starting with the same weight Swiss 7.5X55mm bullet for LR (5,000 metres or so) in MG sustained fire. However, while it retained velocity and stability well, it was never a small grouping bullet in .30-06 and early versions of the 7.62/308 sniper and match cartridges. During the 1980s, the US Army commissioned Sierra to produce a model that provided the 168gn SMK's precision while performing at long ranges and that produced the 175gn SMK, although interestingly, Sierra went for a much shorter boat-tail section length than in either the M1 / Match or in its original LR 180gn MK version and surviving 190/200gn models.

 

Which brings me onto the 190/200 SMKs that built up an excellent reputation amongst Match Rifle shooters (308 Win at 1,000 / 1,100, and 1,200 yard matches) as being outstandingly good transonic / subsonic performers until the modern 210gn models appeared. So ... try the 190gn SMK in as hot an N550 load as your rifle accepts and still groups well. Reasonably priced too! (But while a cheaper bullet, a 190 + high-energy powder at full pressures will reduce barrel life substantially, so it may well not be cheaper in the long-run compared to shooting a more expensive bullet over VarGet or N150!)

 

Sierras and (maybe) the new 178gn Hornady aside, that leaves two options. Although the longstanding TR mantra says a good 150/155 with at least 2,950 fps MV, I reckon a lot of rifles in the discipline don't get that. Two pointers - (1) these guys and girls often don't rebarrell until they have 5,000 round plus down the tube and (2) the nominal MV that I've seen quoted for the current RWS is around 2,920 fps. (I'll see for myself soon as I have a 30-inch Paramount with slow twist 'tight' Krieger ex-TR rifle about to be used as an 'affordable' F/TR rifle and the RWS facftory ammo will provide the baseline performance figure.) The old Sierra 155 as still used in the RWS ammo needs a full 2,950 fps to guarantee every bullet being supersonic at 1,000 under 'standard conditions', and on a cold winter day (4-deg C / 40-deg F) a full 3,000 fps barely scrapes supersonic at 1K (1,129 fps estimated) so some bullets will likely drop through the sound barrier. Under standard conditions (29.92 inch Hg pressure / 59-deg F), this bullet at 2,950 fps moves into transonic flight at ~830 yards.

 

So .... bullets that 'work' in TR should be the least bad in F/TR at reduced velocities.

 

Finally, there is a crop of modern 308 bullets that meet our criteria - well designed, low BT angle values and tangent ogive with good-for-weight BCs. The bad news is that they're all made by Berger and hence not cheap! The ultimate bullet for your situation has been designed to remain 100% unaffected by trans and sub-sonic speeds when fired at 2,600-2,650 fps in 1-11.25 twist barrels as now used exclusively by the US military in their 'marksmen' and sniper rifles - the Berger 175gn Tactical OTM, an efficient design without the stability factor and with a G7 BC of 0.259 compared to the 175gn SMK's 0.243, only just behind the Berger 175gn LR BT's 0.264 (an excellent long-range bullet for 308 Win). I've loaded some for a 22-inch barrel Howa 1500 Varminter to see how it manages at 800, but not got around to trying it yet. In a slower twist barrel, you need higher MVs to get the same spin rate as 2,600 in a 1-11.25 - which is 166,400 rpm spin rate. 2,773 fps MV provides the same spin in a 1-12" twist barrel, so that's what I've loaded the bullet to (more or less) in the 1-12 twist Howa. If your TRG uses 1-12 you could do the same. If it's 1-10", forget it as the MV would be much slower than you'd want. This bullet at ~2,775 fps MV stays comfortably supersonic to 1,000 and is just above transonic speed at 900 under standard conditions. The bad news is of course it's an expensive Berger, and just as bad is usually unobtainable here and when I bought 200 they were more expensive than the 155.5gn BT

[oaken]

Thanks Laurie

More information than I dreamed of :-) and much food for thought.

Need to digest it all now and come up with a plan

Cheers

Rup

[Shuggy]

Laurie - thank you for taking the trouble to post all of this fantastic information.