Comparing the Berger 210 VLD to the 215 Hybrid

[Tumbleweed]

Originally Posted by elkaholic

I have been shooting the 215's in my 30/375 S.I. and I can honestly say that they are as accurate as anything I have ever shot and are far less finicky than the old VLD's. I have also done some expansion testing recently and do not like what I am finding for really long range. You need around 2200' to get them to expand at all, and that is in water which is harder on bullets than flesh (yes that's correct)! If you drill the tip out with a .055" bit, you can drop the velocity down another 200'. What I am not liking is they blow the tip off at the lead core and the meplat rarely expands. Check out my pics on "long range bullet minimum expansion"........Rich
p.s. I'm not saying they wouldn't work in something like a RUM out to maybe 800 yards, but I would be pretty skeptical after that; especially if you didn't hit the shoulder.......Rich

I would like to see a jacket thickness comparison between the 230 target and 215 target. I think i'll cut a 215 apart. From my own personal comparison I did several months ago, I found the 210VLD hunting and 230 Hybrid Target jackets to be virtually the same thickness. I know that Bob Beck has had wonderful results with the 230 target on game from close to long range recently. If I remember correctly he was over 20 animals taken. Provided the 230 target and 215 target are constructed similar and with the same jacket thickness, I don't see why the 215 would not work just as good or better. I know Bob is running the 230's at 2,975fps last I knew. This would put the 2200fps impact velocity you mentioned at a closer range than say a 215 starting at 3150 fps.

[elkaholic]

Originally Posted by Tumbleweed

I would like to see a jacket thickness comparison between the 230 target and 215 target. I think i'll cut a 215 apart. From my own personal comparison I did several months ago, I found the 210VLD hunting and 230 Hybrid Target jackets to be virtually the same thickness. I know that Bob Beck has had wonderful results with the 230 target on game from close to long range recently. If I remember correctly he was over 20 animals taken. Provided the 230 target and 215 target are constructed similar and with the same jacket thickness, I don't see why the 215 would not work just as good or better. I know Bob is running the 230's at 2,975fps last I knew. This would put the 2200fps impact velocity you mentioned at a closer range than say a 215 starting at 3150 fps.

I did some jacket dissecting and found that they are a .030" which, at some point, tapered to approx. .014" at the tip which is typical berger. I would encourage someone else to do some expansion testing, but those are the results I've had after testing for the last three days......Rich
p.s I'm not sure about this but I think it might have a step taper rather than gradual? Somewhere within 1/2" of the tip? I was working with shrapnel, so can't be certain?.......

[Broz]

What I was questioning was the statement saying "water expands more than meat".

Do you have test results to support this? Like I said, I do not, but it does not seem right to me.

Jeff

[Broz]

Yes,as Tumbleweed stated, this is my problem with your resluts too. We have numberous kills with the 230's from a 300 win (MV 2775) and all the exit pics that I have already posted showed good expansion and excellent DRT kills on large mule deer and bull elk to 891 yards. I expected the 215's to be similar, so this is why I question water results compared to meat.

Jeff

[elkaholic]

Originally Posted by Broz

What I was questioning was the statement saying "water expands more than meat".

Do you have test results to support this? Like I said, I do not, but it does not seem right to me.

Jeff

OK, I misunderstood. Yes, I have tested my own bullets literally hundreds of times in water and have dug several out of animals with various hits and the results are always the same. Water will tear up a jacket 200-300' lower velocity than meat. Just one example: I shot a mule deer a couple of years ago at 680 yards quartering and recovered the bullet with about 1/2 the weight remaining and nicely mushroomed. The same impact velocity in H20 would have torn it apart, jacket from core. I have seen this repeated many times......Rich

[elkaholic]

Again, I'm not saying for sure that they won't work. What I'm saying is, this was the result of my testing and I am pretty leery until I see different results on game. I hope I'm wrong!.......Rich
p.s. my gutt feeling from past experience is that they will perform better on game than in H20 at higher velocities, but worse at lower.....

[Broz]

Originally Posted by elkaholic

OK, I misunderstood. Yes, I have tested my own bullets literally hundreds of times in water and have dug several out of animals with various hits and the results are always the same. Water will tear up a jacket 200-300' lower velocity than meat. Just one example: I shot a mule deer a couple of years ago at 680 yards quartering and recovered the bullet with about 1/2 the weight remaining and nicely mushroomed. The same impact velocity in H20 would have torn it apart, jacket from core. I have seen this repeated many times......Rich

OK, so what am I missing here? You just stated the bullets work much better in meat. My point is, I don't really feel a water test is a good one. This is why I built the media box and tested the 300 Berger OTM's at 1200 yards. Now with so many kills from the 300 and 230 OTM's, and 100% one shot kill results, I think I want to see the 215's tested in something more comparable to meat than water before I write them off. Water is not an animal and you said yourself that your bullets worked better in meat.

Jeff