Rethinking heavy bullets

[highxj]

I've been crunching some numbers with a couple different bullets. The range where I've been shooting 3-gun maxes out at 200 yards, so I haven't had to concern myself much with drop, drift, or retained energy at long range. I've shot nothing but 52 MK's and Hornady 55 FMJs at mild velocities (2850-2900 fps) out of my 17" barrel with complete satisfaction.

But I'm thinking about hitting the RM3G match next year where longer distances will come into play, and I need to come up with a better long range load. One of the members here recently mentioned the new 53 gr. Vmax, an interesting bullet which I was aware of but hadn't given much thought to. It has an unusually high BC for it's weight with a claimed value of .290.

I compared that bullet to the popular 69 gr. SMK. I don't know what velocities my rifle would be capable of with either bullet as I haven't tried them, but I chose 2700 fps for the 69 and 3000 for the 53....it looks like a 300 fps advantage with the 53 is reasonable. At 500 yards, the 53 has 13" less drop and 4" less wind drift (full value 10 mph.) I though the retained energy might kill the 53 but it's running only about 35 ft-lbs. behind the heavier 69 at 500 yards. I don't imagine this would be a deal breaker but I haven't shot the type of targets shot at RM3G either.

It looks to me like the 53 might be a winner here, beating the 69 in every category due to it's BC that's only slightly lower than the 69 combined with it's higher velocity potential. What do you guys think??

[highxj]

This probably should be in the reloading section? If so sorry to the mods.....

[MarkCO]

It looks to me like the 53 might be a winner here, beating the 69 in every category due to it's BC that's only slightly lower than the 69 combined with it's higher velocity potential. What do you guys think??

Your rationale holds to some degree. At RM3G, the ROs generally call hits, thus hitting those longer targets with something that makes them flash well is beneficial, thus the heaveir bullets have an advantage. Also, my experience "on the clock" illustrates better hit percentages with the heavier bullets in the wind. I have spent a LOT of time and energy chasing loads and FWIW, a good 55 with a high BC at 3100 fps is pretty darn good across the course. The lighter the bullet, the more finicky the laod will be w.r.t gas and the faster the barrel will wear.

[Alaskapopo]

I've been crunching some numbers with a couple different bullets. The range where I've been shooting 3-gun maxes out at 200 yards, so I haven't had to concern myself much with drop, drift, or retained energy at long range. I've shot nothing but 52 MK's and Hornady 55 FMJs at mild velocities (2850-2900 fps) out of my 17" barrel with complete satisfaction.

But I'm thinking about hitting the RM3G match next year where longer distances will come into play, and I need to come up with a better long range load. One of the members here recently mentioned the new 53 gr. Vmax, an interesting bullet which I was aware of but hadn't given much thought to. It has an unusually high BC for it's weight with a claimed value of .290.

I compared that bullet to the popular 69 gr. SMK. I don't know what velocities my rifle would be capable of with either bullet as I haven't tried them, but I chose 2700 fps for the 69 and 3000 for the 53....it looks like a 300 fps advantage with the 53 is reasonable. At 500 yards, the 53 has 13" less drop and 4" less wind drift (full value 10 mph.) I though the retained energy might kill the 53 but it's running only about 35 ft-lbs. behind the heavier 69 at 500 yards. I don't imagine this would be a deal breaker but I haven't shot the type of targets shot at RM3G either.

It looks to me like the 53 might be a winner here, beating the 69 in every category due to it's BC that's only slightly lower than the 69 combined with it's higher velocity potential. What do you guys think??

At 500 yards my 77 grain match kings have nearly double the energy and power factor of my 52 grian match king loads. They also buck wind much better. The 69's are very close. I think that the heavies are a definate edge at long range.

Pat

[Steve L]

whats your barrel twist? you will have to base your bullet off of that. if its a typical 1/8 I would stick to 62s anything higher can possess a problem with stabilizing. You may get lucky with a 69gr but coming close to 70+ gr bullets a 1/7 twist barrel is beneficial.

[MarkCO]

1/8, in most cases, is fine for 69s, even 77s. I have had 1/10s that shoot 69s with exceptional accuracy at long range and 1/7s that shoot 40s with exceptional accuracy.

[Alaskapopo]

whats your barrel twist? you will have to base your bullet off of that. if its a typical 1/8 I would stick to 62s anything higher can possess a problem with stabilizing. You may get lucky with a 69gr but coming close to 70+ gr bullets a 1/7 twist barrel is beneficial.

I have had great luck with 1/8 twist on 77 grain bullets. You don't need 1/7 for most bullets. The reason the military went with 1/7 was to stabalize the long tracer bullets. The 1/8 can handle bullets up to 90 grains. I have even had good luck with most 1/9's I have tried with 77 grain bullets.

Pat

[Alaskapopo]

1/8, in most cases, is fine for 69s, even 77s. I have had 1/10s that shoot 69s with exceptional accuracy at long range and 1/7s that shoot 40s with exceptional accuracy.

The funny thing is my 1/7 twist Noveskes do better with the lighter bullets (52 grain match) than does my 1/8 twist Larue. The larue out shoots my Noveskes with 77 grain bullets. Go figure.

[highxj]

It's all at the paper napkin stage right now.....but it appears to me that the new 53 Vmax is definitely worth trying. For all I know my rifle may hate them, but we'll see.

Mark, according to the ballistics program, this bullet shows less wind deflection than the 69 and equals the 77 at 500 yds...so it *should* be, if anything, easier to hit with at range due to it's flatter trajectory. That is, if its published B.C. is accurate, and I've done my own B.C. testing on many other Hornady varmint bullets and found their published numbers to be in the ballpark.

I guess my main concern was them hitting the target hard enough, and from what you say that shouldn't be a problem.

Pat, this new Hornady 53 is a far cry from the Sierra 52 MK......they can't really be compared from an exterior ballistics standpoint. They do shoot great however. They were the best shooting bullet I tried in my 14.5" BCM chrome lined 7 twist....and they shoot great in my 17" stainless 8 twist too. But a long range bullet they are not.

[s_gorilla45]

I think you're on the right track. I run 55 gr V-Max with a BC of .255 out of a 16" bbl and have never had a problem with MGM Recon's or Larue targets at distance. I've hit strobe flashers at 585 at Rio Salado and we had one at 400+ at the Area 1 Multigun match. I understand wanting a heaver bullet with more energy but I haven't needed it yet.

[elkboy]

If your groups at 100 are similar, I have found a heavier bullet to be beneficial while on the clock. Hits on the edge of a plate or closer to the pivot point will get a hit called where a lighter bullet won't. The ballistics do sound enticing though!

[Stlhead]

This topic seems to pop up every few months. Use whatever bullet floats your boat. Good dope and a good good trigger pull are far more important than what bullet you choose. I shoot 52's, my shooting buddies only shoot 69's. The targets can't seem to tell the difference.

[Steve L]

whats your barrel twist? you will have to base your bullet off of that. if its a typical 1/8 I would stick to 62s anything higher can possess a problem with stabilizing. You may get lucky with a 69gr but coming close to 70+ gr bullets a 1/7 twist barrel is beneficial.

I have had great luck with 1/8 twist on 77 grain bullets. You don't need 1/7 for most bullets. The reason the military went with 1/7 was to stabalize the long tracer bullets. The 1/8 can handle bullets up to 90 grains. I have even had good luck with most 1/9's I have tried with 77 grain bullets.

Pat

Your luck is different then mine, I am building a 1/8 now and have 77s so I'll give them another try. My bolt gun didn't like them so they sit on the shelf. the 90s you referred to, are the Bergers? They are supposed to be real finicky so I'm curious.

Sorry for the drift

[highxj]

This topic seems to pop up every few months. Use whatever bullet floats your boat. Good dope and a good good trigger pull are far more important than what bullet you choose. I shoot 52's, my shooting buddies only shoot 69's. The targets can't seem to tell the difference.

What else am I gonna do on a cold, snowy, windy winter season? It's the time to ponder stuff when you can't actually get out and shoot. The bullet that floats my boat will be the most efficient one I can come up with for the task. This would be a pretty boring place if nobody ever participated in technical discussions......even if it's been done before.

I'm going a little beyond good dope and trigger control......that's a given, and the 52 gr. MK's I've been using are great at shorter ranges but there are better choices for longer shots in the unpredictable conditions out here.

[Dan Sierpina]

The 1/8 can handle bullets up to 90 grains. I have even had good luck with most 1/9's I have tried with 77 grain bullets.

Pat

Pat,

The highpower shooters that use 90 grain bullets all usa a 6 1/2" twist, and single load them. I've shot Hornady 75's out of a 9" twist and that barrel does well with them. Don't forget that button rifled barrels are not always exactly the twist that they are marked. Douglas is the only barrel manufacturer that admits a + or - tolerence of 1/2" twist.

[Alaskapopo]

whats your barrel twist? you will have to base your bullet off of that. if its a typical 1/8 I would stick to 62s anything higher can possess a problem with stabilizing. You may get lucky with a 69gr but coming close to 70+ gr bullets a 1/7 twist barrel is beneficial.

I have had great luck with 1/8 twist on 77 grain bullets. You don't need 1/7 for most bullets. The reason the military went with 1/7 was to stabalize the long tracer bullets. The 1/8 can handle bullets up to 90 grains. I have even had good luck with most 1/9's I have tried with 77 grain bullets.

Pat

Your luck is different then mine, I am building a 1/8 now and have 77s so I'll give them another try. My bolt gun didn't like them so they sit on the shelf. the 90s you referred to, are the Bergers? They are supposed to be real finicky so I'm curious.

Sorry for the drift

I don't shoot the 90 grainers but my friend that shoots highpower does. Not sure on the brand.

To the OP you got me thinking about this. I just ordered some of those 53 grain V maxs. I hope your right. The only thing I don't like about match king bullets is the varying oal due to the bullet nose being inconsistent.

Pat

Edited October 30, 2011 by Alaskapopo

[bigbrowndog]

stlhead has answered your question!!! it doesn't make a significant difference at the distances we shoot in a multigun stage, people like to throw around the term "long range" that term is relative and irrelevant in our sport, the distance we routinely shoot does not make a siginificant difference. Knowing your trajectory is much more important that deciding which is better between 55 - 77 grain bullets. I know for a fact the slow dimwitted guy from OK that has won Limited at RM3G too many times to remember, uses 55gr bullets exclusively. As for "bucking wind" chances are, you will not be able to hold steady enough to know if you missed because of wind or your bad hold and trigger squeeze.

Trapr

btw, I shoot 155gr bullets

[Stlhead]

I am all for experimentation, I have tried a ton of different bullets, and I still seem to come back to the same conclusion. In a match or match like situation, the performance difference between any of the better bullets seems to make no appreciable difference. As long as you buy quality bullets, and load them in a fairly consistent manner, the variables introduced by your trigger pull and wobble zone will effect your hit probability far more than the reduced margin for error that a better B.C. would provide. For the sake of discussion we can basically ignore drop, as we are shooting at known distances, and hopefully we are all able to figure our come ups, (or downs). If your wind drift from a heavier bullet is 18.6" as compared to 24.8" at 400 yards, it does not mean that your heavy bullet will be 6.2" closer to the center of the target if all other things are equal. If you could accurately estimate the winds effect on your projectile with 100% accuracy, it would not matter what the B.C. of the bullet was as long as it could get to the target, we could compensate for for any wind drift with certainty. But unfortunately we don't know for certain what the wind is going to do with our projectile. We make an educated goes based on what our experience has been in similar circumstances in the past. I figure if I can guess with a plus or minus of 40% I am doing pretty well. As an example, I am shooting from a fairly well supported position, at a full IPSIC target at 425 yards (Ironman farthest non bonus on the long range stage) I estimate a left to right cross wind of 15 MPH full value. For my 52 grain bullets that would be a 37" left 14" over hold. For our example lets say I missed my wind read by 25% and the actual wind drift is 28" for an error of 9". The wind drift for my buddy shooting a 69 SMK with the same read would be 28" and with the same error of 25% his shot would be 7" off the mark. The point is that at 425 yards with my rifle on bags shooting from a bench I can't shoot a 2" group. Put me on top of a tower, monopoding off my cinched mags I certainly can't shoot a 2" group. A mediocre trigger pull can easily send a 425 yard shot a few feet off target, add that to my wobble zone and I have plenty of reasons to miss that far outweigh the 2" difference in wind read inaccuracy that would be afforded by the higher BC bullet.

So then the question is why not shoot the 69's and eliminate that 2" from the equation? With the lighter bullets I can get a slightly flatter trajectory, with less pressure, less perceived recoil, and the biggest reason for me is that they are cheaper, allowing me to shoot more for the same ammo budget. Most of our shots are 100 yards or less, and many of the toughest shots that I face each year are at 100-125 yards (skinny sammies from less than idea positions). I feel that I get more benefit from the lighter bullets than I could possibly gain with shooting the heavies. It really is the dope behind the gun that makes the shot. The biggest difference maker in the shooting equation is still the shooter, there is no magic bullet. My trigger control seems to be what is hampering me right now, I have plenty of stuff to work on this winter!

[highxj]

Good post Stlhead, I completely understand where you're coming from. I've been shooting prairie dogs here in Wyoming for most of my life under sometimes ridiculous conditions with all sorts of precision small caliber wildcats loaded to the utmost precision in neck turned, weight segregated cases. When you're out there holding off several feet on a prairie dog in gusting, shifting winds hitting 35 mph, sometimes you think to your self, "What the hell am I worried about .1 moa or a BC difference of .020 for??!!" My friends and I laugh about it, but you know.......it's what we do. Just as you illustrated, at some point it may make the difference between a hit and a miss. So if I'm starting from scratch with components, I'm obviously going to choose the ones that may offer that little incremental advantage.

That's where I am right now with my 3-gun rifle loads. I've been shooting the Hornady 55 fmjbt and Sierra 52's.....that's what I have on hand. The Hornady flat doesn't shoot well enough for consideration at any kind of distance, and I feel the Sierra 52 can be improved upon quite a bit for longer shots. I was looking at the new Hornady 53 vmax for exactly the reasons you cited for using a standard weight bullet. It seems to have all the advantages of the 55's that you mentioned, plus the longer range performance of the heavier bullets that a lot of competitors seem to be using. On top of that I admit..... I'm a hopeless experimenter. Always have been, probably always will be. It's a fun part of the hobby, and that's what this is all about for me.

And of course you are one hundred percent right about it all coming down to the shooter

[P.E. Kelley]

I am all for experimentation, I have tried a ton of different bullets, and I still seem to come back to the same conclusion. In a match or match like situation, the performance difference between any of the better bullets seems to make no appreciable difference. As long as you buy quality bullets, and load them in a fairly consistent manner, the variables introduced by your trigger pull and wobble zone will effect your hit probability far more than the reduced margin for error that a better B.C. would provide. For the sake of discussion we can basically ignore drop, as we are shooting at known distances, and hopefully we are all able to figure our come ups, (or downs). If your wind drift from a heavier bullet is 18.6" as compared to 24.8" at 400 yards, it does not mean that your heavy bullet will be 6.2" closer to the center of the target if all other things are equal. If you could accurately estimate the winds effect on your projectile with 100% accuracy, it would not matter what the B.C. of the bullet was as long as it could get to the target, we could compensate for for any wind drift with certainty. But unfortunately we don't know for certain what the wind is going to do with our projectile. We make an educated goes based on what our experience has been in similar circumstances in the past. I figure if I can guess with a plus or minus of 40% I am doing pretty well. As an example, I am shooting from a fairly well supported position, at a full IPSIC target at 425 yards (Ironman farthest non bonus on the long range stage) I estimate a left to right cross wind of 15 MPH full value. For my 52 grain bullets that would be a 37" left 14" over hold. For our example lets say I missed my wind read by 25% and the actual wind drift is 28" for an error of 9". The wind drift for my buddy shooting a 69 SMK with the same read would be 28" and with the same error of 25% his shot would be 7" off the mark. The point is that at 425 yards with my rifle on bags shooting from a bench I can't shoot a 2" group. Put me on top of a tower, monopoding off my cinched mags I certainly can't shoot a 2" group. A mediocre trigger pull can easily send a 425 yard shot a few feet off target, add that to my wobble zone and I have plenty of reasons to miss that far outweigh the 2" difference in wind read inaccuracy that would be afforded by the higher BC bullet.

So then the question is why not shoot the 69's and eliminate that 2" from the equation? With the lighter bullets I can get a slightly flatter trajectory, with less pressure, less perceived recoil, and the biggest reason for me is that they are cheaper, allowing me to shoot more for the same ammo budget. Most of our shots are 100 yards or less, and many of the toughest shots that I face each year are at 100-125 yards (skinny sammies from less than idea positions). I feel that I get more benefit from the lighter bullets than I could possibly gain with shooting the heavies. It really is the dope behind the gun that makes the shot. The biggest difference maker in the shooting equation is still the shooter, there is no magic bullet. My trigger control seems to be what is hampering me right now, I have plenty of stuff to work on this winter!

This ought to be read and re-read by every newbie (and some oldsters)

Thanks Sthlhead!!!

[dkleskiw]

highxj, curious to how you do your own testing for BC and find any value is "in the ballpark" to what is reported?

[highxj]

highxj, curious to how you do your own testing for BC and find any value is "in the ballpark" to what is reported?

I used a pair of Competition Electronics chronographs placed 97 yards apart, and input the data into NECO QuickTarget software that compensates for all the atmospheric conditions. I did all the BC numbers for James Calhoon's 19 caliber bullets some years back along with a bunch of other small caliber custom bullets with unpublished BC's, and also tested quite a few factory bullets at the time to see how their published numbers compared with mine. It's not perfect and BC values can and do vary, hence the 'ballpark' term.

[Graham Smith]

As long as you buy quality bullets, and load them in a fairly consistent manner, the variables introduced by your trigger pull and wobble zone will effect your hit probability far more than the reduced margin for error that a better B.C. would provide.

I've been going through a similar situation with long range bolt action .308's. In that arena, the preference is (again) for the heavier, high BC bullets, and I understand the reasoning quite well. What often seems to get missed is that with some experimentation with powders and loads, you can crank the velocity up on lighter bullets enough to compensate to some degree. Add to that the fact that bullet design is starting to nullify the difference. IOW, there are more variables than you can count on your fingers and some of them are starting to get into the territory of angels and pinheads.

The other thing to consider is, "What is the accuracy requirement?" Consider that an 8" plate at 400yds is 2 MOA - pretty much any reasonable load is capable of that. So it may come down to finding a load that will give you the best Max Point Blank Range, and lighter bullets traveling fast can often do that better than heavier bullets traveling slow.

[Alaskapopo]

The real reason I am interested in this is because the new Surefire mag is somewhat sensitive to long overall length bullets. If I can get a shorter bullet with similar peformance at long range than I am all for it. I still like the heavies however.

Pat

[highxj]

One potential problem with the new Vmax 53 Pat, is that it's pretty long. It has a very long, almost VLD-like ogive which is how it gets that spectacular BC. It *could* be a problem because, seated to magazine length, its going to be a long ways from the lands. We're just gonna have to see how they shoot....I did order a couple boxes but we have this giant snowstorm coming tonight so it'll be a while before I get to test them.