Testing new Long Range rifle.

[OldmanFCSA]

You have to be the single worst debater I’ve ever encountered.

That's quite an insult ... comin' from a master debater ... such as yerself.

Maybe .............. we need a competitive Circle Jerk to see who can shoot the best......



I lose - my gun is wore out - doesn't shoot when the trigger is pulled - sure wish it could be re-barrelled with a new hotshot Silver Bullet.

[RAGGED]

[$40/bx of .338 Lapua?! ... that's not bad!

Thats JUST the GS bullet, not a complete round

Maybe .............. we need a competitive Circle Jerk to see who can shoot the best......

We tried it a few years back, had official targets that had to be shot with a witness, it was fun while it lasted but seemed to die off pretty fast. There at least a few really good shooters on here.

[rugersol]

$40/bx of .338 Lapua?! ... that's not bad!

Thats JUST the GS bullet, not a complete round

where's he get them .8 BC .270's, again?!

... I'm really surprised 7mm ain't more popular ... seems like there's a lotta decent bullets out there ... but I don't even know that I could get Norma 'er Lapua .284 brass?!

Seems like it's 6.5, .300, .338, 'er bust?!

[RAGGED]

... I'm really surprised 7mm ain't more popular ... seems like there's a lotta decent bullets out there ... but I don't even know that I could get Norma 'er Lapua .284 brass?!

Seems like it's 6.5, .300, .338, 'er bust?!

They are, right now 7mm is the caliber of choice for almost all long range NRA shooting (when allowed), the 180gr Bergers offer the best mix of great BC and tolerable recoil (No muzzle brakes in NRA matches) If you watch F-Class results many 1000 yard matches are being won by 7mm shortmags or 284 WIN that is made from 6.5-284 Lapua brass necked up to 7mm. I’ve always been a lover of 7mm bullets, but when talking BC it’s a pretty easy to say everything you can do I can do better, when talking larger rounds vs smaller.

[rugersol]

or 284 WIN that is made from 6.5-284 Lapua brass necked up to 7mm.

Ya ... I don't know what bugs me more 'bout that ... the pain in dealing with "necked up" brass (and reusing it a few dozen times) ... or the fact that they took a .284 case, necked it down to 6.5, stopped making the .284 case, and now ya gotta neck up what they necked down!

I thought one of 'em was making .300 WSM brass ... be nice if they'd make 7mm WSM brass, too! I'm really surprised the way both Remington and Winchester have laid off their 7mm short mags! And even when Ruger came out with theirs, no 7mm! As popular as 7mm Rem. Mag. was, from a simple marketing perspective, I'd think that'd be a slam-dunk!

[Rip Van Winkle]

What I've discovered from this thread is some of you guys have a bunch more disposable income than I do. $2 per bullet!

I've been spending some time at the GS Custom Bullet web page that Ragged has been talking about. I don't know if this is an honest representation of the bullet he's talking about but WOW!

I bet it would be a temperamental bugger to get it to shoot accurately, but it would be a fun project for a guy with too much time and money on his hands.

As far as OldmanFCSA's question about his 50 cal, I have no idea if the claimed BC of 1.128 is correct or not, but I suspect it to be a G1 and not a G7 calculation. Just for yucks I ran the numbers through the JBM calculator (PDF attached bellow) and came out with a different results.

Which one is right? as I don't have a rifle and bullet combination to experiment with I don't know. The truth lies in where the bullet hits the paper. Maybe OldmanFCSA can shed some light on the question.

[Rip Van Winkle]

For those interested, Brian Litz has an article in Long Range Hunting magazine which explains G1 vs G7 ballistic coefficient numbers.

[RAGGED]

What I've discovered from this thread is some of you guys have a bunch more disposable income than I do. $2 per bullet!

It’s just a dream at this point, I’m pretty happy with the availability of the SMK’s and I’m just starting to play with the new Bergers, but someday it would be fun, be nice if they made it a hybrid like the new Bergers, those Secant Ogive bullets can be tricky to find and maintain a perfect seating depth.

I've been spending some time at the GS Custom Bullet web page that Ragged has been talking about. I don't know if this is an honest representation of the bullet he's talking about but WOW!

I couldn’t find pics of the 338 pill but here are some 416’s (not as good of a BC)




I like the pack job!
Check out the 1100gr 50cal bullets, insane!

For those interested, Brian Litz has an article in Long Range Hunting magazine which explains G1 vs G7 ballistic coefficient numbers.

I agree, using a G1 BC is not ideal, and further more if you read Litz’s article a person will understand how important the change in velocity is, you can’t just assume your BC of .695 is going to remain constant as velocity drops, it won’t. My go-to ballistic program is on my Iphone, I like it because not only can it retrieve atmospheric data and weather conditions on the fly but also has a the ability to put in multiple BC values for different velocity thresholds, and it does G1 and G7 data. Also it is constantly updated with Bryan Litz’s own experiment derived G7 Data, the numbers should up as hidden but they function the same, Bryan tries to do his numbers for all the popular long range bullets, not just the Bergers. In this discussion I’ve been using Litz’s G7 data and variable BC’s, others has been using the simple online calculator with static G1 BC’s.

[rugersol]

For those interested, Brian Litz has an article in Long Range Hunting magazine which explains G1 vs G7 ballistic coefficient numbers.

... interesting article ... so what're the odds everyone else's gonna publish a much lower B.C., as well?

I think it's kinda funny ... all these bullet manufacturers keep publishing a B.C. that all the shooters use to plug into a program, to figure out what the trajectory is ... and it sounds like a lotta them B.C.'s are worthless (or at the least, somewhat inaccurate), fer that purpose.

It'd be nice if they'd simply publish what their testing showed!

Regardless, I don't understand how a "ballistics calculator" can take in, temperature, barometric pressure, sight-height ... all them things ... and produce a somewhat realistic trajectory ... yet, if ya knew all that stuff, and where the bullet was actually hitting at 300yd, 600yd, and 1,000yd ... why couldn't the manufacturer's simply enter all that, into a sorta "reverse ballistics calculator", to derive a B.C. that's indicative of what the bullet ACTUALLY did!

G1 vs. G7 ... it's jest a matter of setting up a different fudge-factor table in the program. Rather than play games, make a calculator that takes in actual numbers, to derive a proper "table", which could then be used against different numbers for velocity, temperature, barometric pressure ... whatever.

Again, at the very least, if the manufacturers wanna test their bullets in a 25mph quartering headwind, and publish them numbers, they're probly not gonna sell a whole lotta bullets, despite disclosing the conditions. But if they wait fer a fairly calm day, if ya know a bullet with a 200yd zero only dropped 70in @600yd, compared to most anyone else's bullet, at similar velocities, ya know that's a darn good bullet ... no two ways 'bout it!

Moreover, if guys wanna brag 'bout their B.C.'s, and we know most any published number is bull****, why not provide that "manufacturer's reverse calculator" to shooters ... they can shoot the bullets, enter the conditions, zero, and the drop ... and the thing tells 'em the B.C. they actually shot! Ya know how MidwayUSA let's ya "review" an item and give it 1-5 "stars"? ... How 'bout the manufacturers let shooters enter the conditions and what-not into such a program, on the manufacturer's website?! If one guys shoots a ridiculously high B.C., 'er low B.C., ya can simply disregard it ... jest like on MidwayUSA.

[OldmanFCSA]

"As far as OldmanFCSA's question about his 50 cal, I have no idea if the claimed BC of 1.128 is correct or not, but I suspect it to be a G1 and not a G7 calculation. Just for yucks I ran the numbers through the JBM calculator (PDF attached bellow) and came out with a different results.

Which one is right? as I don't have a rifle and bullet combination to experiment with I don't know. The truth lies in where the bullet hits the paper. Maybe OldmanFCSA can shed some light on the question."


"Check out the 1100gr 50cal bullets, insane! "
This bullet was designed for a 20mm case necked down to 0.510" diameter. Tremendous overbore capacity. Rifles weigh about 120 pounds. Barrel length is 46", twist is 1/9, barrel life is about 100 rounds. There is an article somewhere here on the internet about this cartridge and rifle.
This is more of an experiment than a practical cartridge combo. I've got one of the cartridge cases around here somewhere, if I find it I will post a picture for everyone.

OldmanFCSA



All,
The http://www.lehighbullets,com website lists the BC for this bullet as "calculated" - how its calculated, I don't know. I will leave that to you "kids".
My calc using the Berger Bullets program defaults to G7 - I will re-run using G1. Please note that you did not use the same numbers as I did in some of the entries.

The next info is the bullet I use for FCSA target competitions: .510-130
"The .510 Match Hybrid, premium match bullet is designed for 50 BMG rifles with standard, hybrid, and borerider throats.
This bullet is the first choice for those with a standard chamber.
The front etching band is a 0.504 diameter and the rear driving band is 0.510 diameter.
Weight - 800 grains
BC (calculated) - 1.124
Length - 2.620
Design velocity - 2,500-3,000 Material - UNSC36000 brass
Sold in a packages of 50 at $100.00/box. "

I bought a 1000 pieces of these a few years back for a less expensive price.
I weight sort all bullets into 0.1 grain lots and shoot in order as weight increases.
I Match Prep my target brass using a 40 step process to ensure best accuracy of cases.
I weigh my powder to 0.1 grains variance, but have not gone anal enough to weigh primers.

Using VV 20N29 powder with the above components and heating my match rounds to 135 degrees, I have shot a 5-shot group at 1000 yards in sanctioned competition of 4.938" center-to-center, using my well worn AR-50 with the looong throat design (bullets about 3/4" from rifling contact). I have not to-date repeated this group size. This was with a variable 12-18mph wind from over the left shoulder and about 75 feet uphill at 1000 yards. (Alliance Nebraska Hoffland Rifle Range).

(World record is 1.995" c2c group by Lee Rassmussen of the FCSA.)

I will have this rifle at the Oakdale Gun Club this weekend fpr the ladies to shoot.
I will have "Goalie's" former State Arms Shorty 50BMG rifle there as well.
Subwofer2 will be bringing his newer version AR-50, which he used to win Hunter and Unlimited Classes at the Fall 2011 FCSA Match in Alliance.

I've used Hornady 750 grain AMAX but haven't figured out a good loading for it yet. Best group so far with the AMAX was 7+11/16".

OldmanFCSA

[OldmanFCSA]

I thought I might buy one of the AR styled rifles made in Montana chambered in one of those lesser calibers, the 338 Laupua.

Just kidding - but it is an interesting rifle.

[Rip Van Winkle]

OldmanFCSA,

I was hoping you had some real world numbers to see if the numbers we came up with in our respective examples were close to reality. We can debate who's BC numbers are right and who's aren't all day long, what counts is where the bullet meets the target in the real world.

I have shot a 5-shot group at 1000 yards in sanctioned competition of 4.938" center-to-center

This is what I'm talking about. Screw all the calculated BC numbers, this is what counts. Shooting little bug hole sized groups at yardage. Environmental conditions such as wind and mirage need to be judged and adjusted for, especially when they are changing. High BC numbers don't mean jack if the bullets don't group.

I do have a question, what is the reason for heating your ammo? I try to keep mine cool and out of the sun so as not to run into over pressure problems. See my picture bellow from the Fullbore match at Harris. My ammo box is under the white towel.

[RAGGED]

I was hoping you had some real world numbers to see if the numbers we came up with in our respective examples were close to reality. We can debate who's BC numbers are right and who's aren't all day long, what counts is where the bullet meets the target in the real world.

I have used Bryan Litz's BC's to go from a 100 yard zero to 1000 and land in the 10 ring (F-Class 10- so Highpower X-ring) just about every time, the few times I didn't were likely do velocities changing because of temp, his numbers seem to be the truest out there.

[nosualc]

That was the best thread I've read in a long time. EPIC FAIL. I need to come around here more often.

RAGGED, I owe you a beer at the legion next spring.

-nosualc

ps - +1 on the Bryan Litz book, his numbers are experimentally derived.

[Rip Van Winkle]

I have used Bryan Litz's BC's to go from a 100 yard zero to 1000 and land in the 10 ring (F-Class 10- so Highpower X-ring) just about every time, the few times I didn't were likely do velocities changing because of temp, his numbers seem to be the truest out there.

I can usually get to within .5moa with the G7 numbers. Seems I was always subtracting 200-300fps from my velocities to get the G1 numbers to work the way the bullets actually preformed.