Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics


Reply

ballistic coefficient questions . 6.5 mm bullets

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #85  
Old 01-18-2013, 12:47 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South of Canada and North of Wyoming
Posts: 5,954
Re: ballistic coefficient questions . 6.5 mm bullets

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by benchracer View Post
G1 bc's are very velocity sensitive, but that is because of the model used to calculate a G1 bc. G7 bc's are much more stable because the model used is closer in form to modern streamlined bullets. Bryan Litz has written some pretty informative stuff on that subject, if you care to have your head spin a bit.

The problem, as I see it, with the CE 130g bullet is two fold:

First, most factory 6.5's come with a 9 twist. That means, if I want to shoot this bullet, I have to have a custom barrel. Now, it is said that the 140 class VLD's also require an 8 twist. However, I have found them to shoot very well in my 9 twist rifles. Go figure. The only way I found that out was to try them. However, at 3-4x the cost of Bergers or AMAX's, I am reluctant to experiment with these bullets. I might feel differently if there were a gain in performance to be had, which brings me to my second point...

Secondly, even if we accept CE's bc numbers, which appear almost certain to be optimistic, the CE 130g bullet will not shoot as flat as the conventional 140 VLD's at long range. Yes, the 130 may be able to be launched a bit faster, but that difference won't hold up as the range increases. So, in the balance of bc/velocity, we have a tie, at best.

Yes, the CE is more likely to perform better than the VLD's at shorter ranges where the impact velocity is still high. But, there are already bullets like Barnes, GMX, and E-Tip that do this just as well and at less expense.

To me, the CE bullets in the smaller calibers have two possible advantages over other bullet designs:

1. They offer a one bullet solution for close and long range shooting. However, close range terminal performance is still gained at the expense of long range ballistic performance. The loss of long range ballistic performace will just be smaller than with other mono metal bullets.

2. If you have a rifle/cartridge case combination that is capable of driving conventional 6.5mm bullets fast enough to make them come apart, the 130 CEB is the best of all possible worlds for you. Its monometal construction will eliminate bullet blow up in flight and give good terminal performance on impact and it will do that with the best bc obtainable in a monometal bullet.

The kicker, IMO, is that neither of the possible benefits of the CE bullets are going to be realized at the velocities produced by any 6.5 cartridge from the .264WM on down. Especially with the short action 6.5's, there is no advantage at all to shooting this bullet.

So, unless you are shooting a 6.5STW or a 6.5-300 Wby, I don't see an advantage to these bullets. And, for 3x the price of Bergers, you are going to have to show me a pretty decisive advantage to even interest me in shooting them.

For .338 and up, these bullets offer performance increases that cannot be had in other bullets. It doesn't look to me like those benefits translate to the lighter calibers, however.
For the most part I agree with you. These bullets are best in higher velocity cartridges. The advantages of the CE bullets are they are bore riding bullets and they will get higher velocities than other bullets of the same weight. Increased velocity is like increased BC. Shooting a .53 BC @ 3450 is about the same as shooting a .55 BC bullet @ 3400 to 1K.

Their design also makes them very accurate in most barrels. No fussing with seating depth. I've only tried the STD 180's in my 300 RUM, and they were much more accurate than 180 E-Tips and 210 Bergers which were fairly accurate. If i can print .4 MOA @ 1K with them vs .8 MOA with another bullet, that makes them worth the price to me. If not, then maybe it's time to reconsider.

The thing that concerns me about the Bergers and similar type bullets is the potential for massive meat damage at higher velocities, so this is another reason to like the CE's, but a bullet like an E-Tip would be cheaper, but the CE definitley has a better BC than an E-Tip.
__________________
- Mark

You will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you make good use of it.
~ John Quincy Adams
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 01-18-2013, 02:30 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Copper Basin, Alaska
Posts: 719
Re: ballistic coefficient questions . 6.5 mm bullets

I'm definatly not knocking CA bullets. Or any other brand for that matter .. Cutting Edge probably researched which bullets would sell the best and made those bullets. .

In my situation with the game I hunt with a 6.5 I need a bullet that works to 700 yards or less in the rifle. Longer shots will prolly give a guy time to change ammo.

It would be nice to have a One bullet does all. . It seems the larger bullet makers came up with a compromise of 120 gr mono bullets with a BC well under. 500 .
Perhaps because of the 9" twist. No wonder Jim Charmichel. (Sp) got p.o.d. at Remington when they brought out the 260 with the slow twist. At least Hornady got it right with the Creed .. I wish they would come out with a 130 GMX with a BC well over. .500 for the Creed.

I really appreciate everyone's input in this thread. I'm learning LOTS.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 01-18-2013, 08:48 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 127
Re: ballistic coefficient questions . 6.5 mm bullets

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cold Trigger Finger View Post
Longer shots will prolly give a guy time to change ammo.
Do I understand correctly, that you want to switch loads in mid hunting without cleaning, refouling and rezeroing and then shoot at 700 yards at a living beeing?

If you want a rifle that is good for all north american game at short and long range, then use a .30cal+ magnum cartridge.
Too big does kill, marginaly too small wounds.
Use a rifle and cartridge that maximizes your margin of error by maxizing penetration and minimizing wind drift.
.264 is a nice little caliber, but not suitable for beginners at long range hunting.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 01-19-2013, 12:40 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Copper Basin, Alaska
Posts: 719
Re: ballistic coefficient questions . 6.5 mm bullets

The only animals I will shoot at at long range are predators. Primarily wolves it can't be that hard is it? ?
How do military snipers deal with targets at various ranges? And a lot of them are using 308 Win.

I would quit shooting a rifle if I had to shoot a 30 cal I think. Yuk! !!!!!!!!

Now the 338 is a truely useful caliber. But I don't want to explode a fox with one .
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 01-19-2013, 01:45 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 881
Re: ballistic coefficient questions . 6.5 mm bullets

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontanaRifleman View Post
For the most part I agree with you. These bullets are best in higher velocity cartridges. The advantages of the CE bullets are they are bore riding bullets and they will get higher velocities than other bullets of the same weight. Increased velocity is like increased BC. Shooting a .53 BC @ 3450 is about the same as shooting a .55 BC bullet @ 3400 to 1K.

Their design also makes them very accurate in most barrels. No fussing with seating depth. I've only tried the STD 180's in my 300 RUM, and they were much more accurate than 180 E-Tips and 210 Bergers which were fairly accurate. If i can print .4 MOA @ 1K with them vs .8 MOA with another bullet, that makes them worth the price to me. If not, then maybe it's time to reconsider.

The thing that concerns me about the Bergers and similar type bullets is the potential for massive meat damage at higher velocities, so this is another reason to like the CE's, but a bullet like an E-Tip would be cheaper, but the CE definitley has a better BC than an E-Tip.
If you are getting .4 MOA @ 1000 with CE bullets, I don't blame you one bit. I would keep shooting them too!

What kind of velocity difference are you seeing between CE bullets and same weight conventional bullets? I remember reading LTLR's posts on his results with the 225 CE's in .338 and he mentioned this also. I am curious to see if the velocity gain turns out to be consistent with these bullets.

The seating depth thing doesn't bother me. I have never needed more than 20 rounds to get it figured out. So, when loading the CE bullets, do you go straight to finding your best powder charge?
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 01-19-2013, 01:48 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 881
Re: ballistic coefficient questions . 6.5 mm bullets

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beng View Post
Do I understand correctly, that you want to switch loads in mid hunting without cleaning, refouling and rezeroing and then shoot at 700 yards at a living beeing?

If you want a rifle that is good for all north american game at short and long range, then use a .30cal+ magnum cartridge.
Too big does kill, marginaly too small wounds.
Use a rifle and cartridge that maximizes your margin of error by maxizing penetration and minimizing wind drift.
.264 is a nice little caliber, but not suitable for beginners at long range hunting.
Unless you are hunting your big game by the herd, there is no reason to clean, foul, and rezero while switching loads. Maybe your rifles are that finicky. Mine aren't.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 01-19-2013, 02:31 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South of Canada and North of Wyoming
Posts: 5,954
Re: ballistic coefficient questions . 6.5 mm bullets

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by benchracer View Post
If you are getting .4 MOA @ 1000 with CE bullets, I don't blame you one bit. I would keep shooting them too!

What kind of velocity difference are you seeing between CE bullets and same weight conventional bullets? I remember reading LTLR's posts on his results with the 225 CE's in .338 and he mentioned this also. I am curious to see if the velocity gain turns out to be consistent with these bullets.

The seating depth thing doesn't bother me. I have never needed more than 20 rounds to get it figured out. So, when loading the CE bullets, do you go straight to finding your best powder charge?
.4 vs .8 was just a hypothetical example. If I don't get the significant difference in accuracy, I would weight the cost of the bullets a lot more. I have only shot them, 180 STD, for initial load development in my 300 RUM and they showed excellent accuracy. They showed about 50 fps better velocity than 180 E-Tips. Yes, I go straight to best powder and charge results. No seating trials. They do not have a traditional ogive that engages the lands. The bore rider is ideally seated into the lands with the driving band and sealtite band right behind.

I have a 6.5 WSM in the work and Outlaw has already used the 6.5 130's in his WSM with good results. With an overbore like the 6.5 WSM, you don't want to spend a lot of time finding the right bullet, the right powder and the right seating depth. My plan is to develop 1 load for the CE's for hunting and another load with maybe Bergers for other shooting.

Yup, I read LTLR's thread and liked what I read which confirms my limited experience with them.
__________________
- Mark

You will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you make good use of it.
~ John Quincy Adams
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Do you archery hunt for elk?
YES - 34.35%
113 Votes
NO - 48.33%
159 Votes
Not yet, but I plan to. - 17.33%
57 Votes
Total Votes: 329
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC