Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Reloading

Reloading Techniques For Reloading


Reply

berger vld or barnes for long range

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #15  
Old 05-07-2013, 10:58 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 268
Re: berger vld or barnes for long range

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
True!

But for the record, We shot a quartering bull at 200 ish yards last fall with a 215 Hybrid from my 300 win. It stopped short of an exit in the front of the far shoulder with (if I remember correctly?) was 26" and I put a 1" wide tape in the wound channel when we skinned him.

Jeff
Yeah, I don't doubt it at all.
I suspect you could count on 12-24 inches of penetration ever time.
Have you tried the 230 yet?

I am used to smashing both shoulders on a big animal (if required) and having the bullet exit the far shoulder...Perhaps my favorite was a big coastal brownie shot square in the chest facing north and having the (.416 350grTSX) bullet exit the rear ham and continuing South...Now THAT is what I call penetration!

I most often am shooting very large game so mix that and my belief that you are more likely to screw up a hectic shot at close range (than you are at longer distance) is my love for penetration above all else. Bergers definitely have a place in my bag of tricks..I wish they made a 50BMG bullet!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-07-2013, 04:58 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,628
Re: berger vld or barnes for long range

Quote:
Originally Posted by X-man View Post
Yeah, I don't doubt it at all.
I suspect you could count on 12-24 inches of penetration ever time.
Have you tried the 230 yet?
Yes, we have been shooting the 230's in my son's 300 win for 2 years now. As far as I can remember every single one has exited at all ranges. Antelope, deer and elk out to 891 yards.

Here is a thread from when we started using the 230's in his 300 win and the 300's in my 338 Lapua.

Berger 230 and 300 OTM Hybrid terminal results

Jeff
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-08-2013, 10:58 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 268
Re: berger vld or barnes for long range

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
Yes, we have been shooting the 230's in my son's 300 win for 2 years now. As far as I can remember every single one has exited at all ranges. Antelope, deer and elk out to 891 yards.

Here is a thread from when we started using the 230's in his 300 win and the 300's in my 338 Lapua.

Berger 230 and 300 OTM Hybrid terminal results

Jeff
Thanks!

The wound channel near cut that speedgoat in half!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-08-2013, 05:25 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Maple Valley, Washington
Posts: 249
Re: berger vld or barnes for long range

Let me start by apologizing for being long winded but this is an interesting subject with a bunch of things to consider. First off, most hunters that go after elk at 700 plus yards, end up shooting them a lot closer than that, including me. I might even say especially me as Iíve shot both elk and deer at 1 yard. Thus I wouldnít limit the discussion to 700 yards plus. Any bullet/gun I would use at 700 yards I would also want to perform at 1 or 100 yards. What do I mean by ďperformĒ? That requires a bit of explanation.

I shot my first big game animal in 1963. For my Dad and me it was always about the meat. This was before Nosler invented the Partition bullet so not near as much was known about terminal performance. We tended to gravitate to what killed stuff with minimal meat damage. Thus it is probably not a surprise that today Iím a Barnes user. As they say, you can eat the bullet hole. (Not really since the hole is air but you get the idea.)

Iíve got Barnes TTSX or LRX loads worked up for 6mm Rem, 260 Rem, 270 WSM, 7mm WSM, 30-06, 300 RUM and 338 RUM. It is my belief that a Barnes bullet will upgrade the killing power of whatever you put it in as penetration is maximized while still giving good expansion. Barnes likely wonít kill as fast as Berger for generic situations but it will kill in some situations where Berger wonít kill at all.

A Montana whitetail and Washington 6X6 bull elk shot with the 338 RUM using a 210 gr TTSX (3,200 fps muzzle) are representative of what you can expect. The whitetail was at 220 yards and the elk at 358. Both were optimum broadside shots. Both had complete pass through. Both animals hunched up and stumbled for 20 yards and went down. There was not a scrap of meat damage in either. I shot the whitetail with the 338 as somewhat of an experiment. I expected that it would totally hammer that deer and was a bit surprised when it made it 20 yards just like the elk. After I thought about it I knew why and I like Barnes and my 338 RUM even more.

With Barnes bullets, the bigger the animal, the harder it gets hit. This is a feature of passing clear through whatever you are shooting. With a Barnes bullet, this works over a wide range of distances Ė especially if you have too much gun as is typical of guys geared up to shoot long range. On the other hand, if the bullet fragments and stays in the animal, how hard it hits depends only on the distance and then close is bad.

I admit that DRT there is better than 20 yards and a flop. I will, however, take the risk of tracking them for 20 yards as long as I get minimum meat damage. In the extreme I could go to a FMJ but the game would go a lot more than 20 yards. So a Barnes is kind of the Goldielocks bullet Ė just right.

More to the point however and the real advantage of a Barnes bullet are the times when you donít have a broadside opportunity as on another whitetail which was at 60 yards and ready to bolt if any move was made other than pulling the trigger. A frontal shot with the same 338 210 gr TTSX resulted in surprisingly little meat damage and DRT. So Barnes bullets allow you to take some shots that with a Berger may result in more wasted meat or a wounded animal. Where I hunt, which includes Montana, 60 yards is way more likely than 700 plus.

Barnes does have some downside versus Berger (besides higher cost) and that is the lower BC. But the flip side of that coin is that Barnes bullets are generally not as sensitive to seating depth as the Berger VLDs which is a trade Iíll make.

Another relevant thought. How many guys that hunt dangerous game use Bergers? I havenít hunted anything dangerous but my friends that do would not consider Bergers. When you are talking dangerous game you are forced to consider the scenario where things go wrong and there is more to go wrong with a Berger like bone and brush.

Having said all that Iím neither a purist or a snob. In the interest of first hand experience, I've got some 180 Bergers worked up for the 7mm WSM and I might use them at 700 +. However, Iím guessing my order of LR Accubonds will show up soon and make those 180 Bergers a lot less interesting and maybe the Barnes too. But that is another thread.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-08-2013, 07:03 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 308
Re: berger vld or barnes for long range

Just to give another data point, last year me and a buddy both shot bull elk at medium ranges, both using a .338 210 TTSX. Below is the breakdown of each shot and specifics of how the bullet performed:

my bull:
- impact velocity ~1980 fps
- bull quartering towards me, bullet hit the leading shoulder hard and broke near side ribs. center punched both lunges and severed the pulmonary artery just above the heart.
- bullet broke ribs on far side and exited with ~1/2" hole
- bull died right where I shot it

friends bull
- impact velocity ~2160
- bull nearly directly facing shooter, bullet entered front chest, damaged both lungs, and also (ironically) severed the pulmonary artery just above the heart.
- bullet did not exit, stuck in the guts, did not recover.
- bull somehow managed to walk ~50 yards...

Tissue damage around wound cavity was not extensive. This goes towards the previous comment by Engineering101... you can kill elk and minimize tissue damage.

But, what if either of these bullets had missed the pulmonary artery? I guess I just was not impressed with the wound channel... I've shot animals with Accubonds from 50 - 350 yds that literally liquify the internal organs, much like guys here see with the Bergers at just about any range. I like the accuracy I get with Barnes bullets, but I think they leave me wanting more in the way of damage to internal organs. At least that's where my head is at right now...

Have a box of Accubond LR's waiting to be loaded, and we'll see how they perform this Fall. But they have to shoot good first which is a total unknown at this point...
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-08-2013, 11:20 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,182
Re: berger vld or barnes for long range

Quote:
Originally Posted by Engineering101 View Post
With Barnes bullets, the bigger the animal, the harder it gets hit. This is a feature of passing clear through whatever you are shooting. With a Barnes bullet, this works over a wide range of distances – especially if you have too much gun as is typical of guys geared up to shoot long range. On the other hand, if the bullet fragments and stays in the animal, how hard it hits depends only on the distance and then close is bad.

I do believe that each animal gets hit with the same "hardness" that you are speaking of. Energy is energy no matter how big the animal.

I use both barnes in my 25-06 and Berger in my 338 Lapua magnum.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 05-09-2013, 04:35 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 268
Re: berger vld or barnes for long range

Quote:
Originally Posted by Korhil78 View Post
I do believe that each animal gets hit with the same "hardness" that you are speaking of. Energy is energy no matter how big the animal.

I use both barnes in my 25-06 and Berger in my 338 Lapua magnum.
Energy has nothing to do with it.
Barnes bend back rather than expand and use very little energy to in the "expansion" process.
A 2000fps impact kills much the same as a 3200fps hit.
Though 1800fps is the best minimum they will expand at lower speeds...say 1500-1600fps.

A conventional bullet shows a larger difference in the violence of expansion depending on the impact speed.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Do You Shoot Rifle Competition?
YES - 34.11%
733 Votes
NO - 65.89%
1,416 Vote
Total Votes: 2,149
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:27 PM.


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