In a recent post concerning the actual BCs of these often debated bullets, Bountyhunter made the following suggestion.
[ QUOTE ]
To get some real unbiased and performance data on these bullets, suggest that they be sent to Henry Childs (aka HBC) at BR central. Henry is the ballistics guru right for this type info now and does this type testing daily.
He can compute not only the BC but the SG and all other important data to include what the variance is from bullet to bullet in the lot sent to him.
Pretty sure Henry (as a 1k competititor) would be more than happy to do this and report his results.
He has worked with David Tubbs and sierra on the 115gr 6mm bullet that sierra just put out.
What most people do not realize is that most of the really high BC bullets require extra fast twists that are not normally used. For example the 115gr 6mm needs either a 7 or 7.5 while most barrel mftrs are only making an 8.
Henry can quickly calculate what the BC is, what is the uniformity (unless good, useless as a match bullet) and what is the probable working MV and twist required.
Until that type of work is done, real crap shoot on making these bullets work across the board.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have since inquired as to Henry's intrest in testing some of these bullets. This was his response:
[ QUOTE ]
I calculated the form factor for one of the bullets, based on the claimed BC, caliber and weight and it is highly unlikely the BC on that bullet is as high as claimed.
If the fellow makes 6mm bullets, I can shoot some of them across the Oehler M43's and that will tell the tale without a doubt. I shoot only 6mm, so have no barrels for anything bigger.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am actively searching for owners of Oehler 43s or 35s to evaluate other calibers.
If you are interested in submitting a small number of any caliber of wildcat bullets for testing including 6mm/.243 caliber(these will be sent directly to HBC for testing ASAP), please email me at firstname.lastname@example.org .
I think its time to figure out just how much of this is superior ballistic design, and how much is hype.
Just my opinion and only mine. I don't really care about the 6mm bullets and he doens't have anything to test the other bullets. HBC is a fine gentleman and very smart. So all we have to go on for the heavier bullets is by shooters that are shooting them and relying on positive information from them. If something sounds to good to be true why not spend a few extra bucks and try some out? You are not out anything and might have gained a whole lot.
A good example is of when Jerry Teo Reported unsual bullet trajectory from the 6.5 140gr sst's. Everybody called B.S. and i tried them and saw a 1-2moa difference out to 1000yards between them and the 139 scenars. For me,as him. they must have a higher b.c to fly flatter than the 139's but imho too much of, Well the 1000 yard guys don't shoot it or tested it so it don't mean squat. There are plenty of guys that shoot alot but don't either have the time or money to go around the country to shoot in 1000 yard tournaments. Are those guys and less informative than those that do? For me personaly i would like to start shooting in some 1000 yard matches but the closet one is 600miles away. I don't see a need to spend all that money and time when i can drive 50 miles or 5 miles to do it.
Now i am not saying i am in the same league as alot of guys on this board or other boards but i do like to seek their opinions on what i am seeing or expeirencing to better myself but i don't strictly look for the info from the 1000 yard guys and gals as i think that are a number a people that don't shoot in matches but are just as qualified to help me and others.
I would like to see HBC results of the 6mm bullets. Why not buy some for HBC to test? I don't really think you can ask Richard to give away all these free bullets to be tested.
okay, I should have called myself the eternal experimenter instead of goodgrouper.
I have access to a model 43, and I just ordered some 300 grain .338 wildcatters. I will see if it truly has that high of a bc at 2000 yards or if it is just hype. I will post my results soon!
While I too am not especially interested in the 6mm bullets themselves, I am interested in the degree of accuracy with which the BCs of the 6mm bullets are estimated since it has a direct correlation to the accuracy of the BCs of the larger bullets.
As for buying the bullets, if I had the capability to right now, I might think about it. If I could order 10 of everything he makes (or at least a few calibers and styles) we would all have a very good idea of what Richard's bullets will do. My current financial position prohibits me from doing this now.
And finially, I do not believe that richard has any reason to "give me all these bullets to be tested".
I understand that Richard is a small operation, and that small operations often turn out the best product in terms of quality. However, the only information that I have seen on the web, or elsewhere in terms of "measured" BC are those done by Fiftydriver by reverse engineering from drop data. I know that Kirby firmly believes that Richard makes top quality bullets, and I respect his opinion, However I also know that BC cannot be determined accurately in this way. There is no other way to say it.
I do think that most of the shooters who are willing to try these bullets would benefit from accurate BCs for the bullets they are shooting, and I for one would gladly donate 10, 15, 20 bullets for experimentaion in return for accurate information. I plan to do presicely that when my 225gr .308 Wildcats arrive, provided I can find somebody with the equipment to test them. which brings me to......
GoodGrouper AKA eternal experimentor,
Are you willing/able to do some testing on .308 bullets with your 43PBL? I am of course assuming that you have something with a 30 caliber hole in it [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
I hope nobody out there has the idea that im anti-wildcat or something. As I have said, im sure these bullets are accurate, if they werent, I don't think Kirby would be building rifles around them. On the flipside, the fact that so many, including HBC is sceptical of the BCs makes me sceptical as well. I don't believe Kirby, or Richard are being dishonest in any way. Neither do I believe that the die makers are lying, but I do know that there is no information that exists that shows that the BCs we have been discussing is accurate. Im just trying to find out, as I said in the first post, how much is hype, and how much is superior ballistic design.
On so many forums there have been guys reporting about B.C's from every major manuf. about how they are off. Some manu. quote higher bc's and some are lower than what shooters are seeing. How do the manu. do it?
I don't know how the Oehler works but how much of a certain is that?
STL quotes JLK bc's and questions Richard's. Does the owner of JLK shoot over a 43 or is it shooters reporting seeing drops that correspond to what JLK provides???
For me i take reported bc's with a grain of salt but do look at them and compare between brands but i like to see how the bullets fly compared to each other and get actual drops figured by firing at the ranges i shoot.
When talking to Richard about his bullets and bc's (at least to me) he tells me that is what he is reporting but it may be higher or lower because he doesn't and can't test every bullet he makes.
I do not know if JLK uses a 43 or not, I would speculate no. They too are a small firm that cannot test all of their bullets. I do know that their BCs are generated with a chronograph, and that their BCs are quite close. Many bullet mfgs are close on their BCs, some are badly over rated.... barnes comes to mind, but anytime that people in the know, people who are respected in the firearms industry are sceptical, it pays to be as well.
We could talk for pages and pages over why a given mfg publishes the BCs they do, and all of the variances-gun to gun that can chnge BC, but it all comes down to one thing, the BCs published by firms like Berger, JLK, Lapua, Hornady and especially Sierra have been tested (whether by the company or by independant sources) and can be replicated, within a small degree of variation from gun-to-gun differances by anybody. This testing is done either by radar, or chronograph, not by measuring drop with a tape measure.
I have "measured" the BC of the 220SMK at .655, sierra says .629. Their 240gr is published at .711, my "measurment" was exactly that.
These were determined by a friends Oehler 35 chronograph, at my home range.
The BC quoted to me for the 225gr Wildcat I have ordered is " about .740 or a little better".
Published BCs on the 210VLDs from Berger and JLK are .640, and .665
What should be obvious from those numbers is that if Richards numbers are accurate, they will outperform everything on the market. A bullet with BC that rivals the Sierra 240, that can be driven as fast as the Sierra 220 will be nothing short of a miracle, come to think of it, there is another post about these bullets that uses that exact word. All im saying, is there needs to be actual scientific testing done on the BC of these bullets before they are touted as the greatest thing since the stainless steel barrel.
Yeah, I think I could round up some sort of thutty! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
I would just like to say that as my shooting career has progressed, I find myself looking at bullets a little differently than I used to. At first, it was all about light bullets and blinding speed. Then I educated myself to the fact that speed only gets you so far, bc is what makes a bullet a real long ranger. Then I started to look at the factory published bc's as holy text. After that, I began testing my own bc's and talking to ballistic engineers about coefficients. At one point, I even had Dave Brown from Sierra scratching his head (which his colleagues later told me never happens) about some of the things we were chatting about. WHile testing my own bc's in differing conditions, I learned that you can't put too much stock in published bc's no matter who prints them. Everything and anything affects this number. These are just a few bc tweekers:
bullet bearing surface
Weight of individual bullet
and so on.
After seeing what all these things do to that published bc, I now believe that bullet consistency should be a bullet manufacurers primary goal, with coefficient of form second. There are many variables that change a bc, but it is very hard to change the consistency of a bullet's grade. To illustrate my point, let me give an example and please bear with my troubled mind. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]
Let's say you have a bullet with a rated bc of .500. It is a fairly high bc. Your gun has a perfect barrel, and your testing shows that on a given day under almost unrepeatable conditions, your bc for that bullet is actually runnning .550. While loading these high bc bullets, you realize that they vary in weight by 1.5 grains, and the base to ogive variation is .006" on bullets from the same lot. Then you measure from the ogive to the meplat. It varies .008"! Then it hits you, not every bullet in that box has the bc of .550. What you found earlier is the <font color="blue"> average </font> of the bc's, not the exact bc. That is because the exact bc is fictitious. There can never be two bullets in the same box with exactly the same bc. So hanging everything on that rated bc is not going to be exact, because the bullets are not exact!
Now you have a box of bullets for the same gun that are rated .450. You realize that these have quite a bit lower bc, but you decide to load them anyway. While loading, you discover that there is only .1 grain variance in weight on them, and the base to ogive measurement is varying only .002". The ogive to meplat variance is only .003"! These bullets are much more consistent. While testing their bc, you find that it is actually pretty close to the manufacturer's published bc of .450.
Now, which one do you choose to shoot at 1k for score and group? I would choose the .450 because it will be easier to hit what I'm aiming at with a bullet that is more consistent, as consistency is the key to accuracy. A five shot group with the higher bc bullet in this example might have one bullet leave the barrel with a bc of .5 and the next with a bc of .575, and the next be .545, and the next two at .530! As you can see, the farther out you shoot, the more this mess starts to show up. One bullet goes over a 1000 yard chucks head, so you compensate and shoot again. The next bullet goes 2 minutes higher even after you compensated by clicking down. THis stuff can drive you mad!
THis is why when I ordered a box of bullets from Wildcat today, I asked him how consistent his meplats and ogives were in relation to some of the better known match bullets before I ever asked him what the bc's were. I still badly want to know what the factory bc is, but only as a guideline for ballistic comparisons, not for scripture.
I guess what I'm trying to say is don't think of the published bc as an end-all, set in stone number. There are other factors at work here just as important.
Anyway, I am done rambling. SOrry if it was too boring! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]