7mm Rem Berger 180gr/168 difference?

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by ovastafford, Feb 8, 2010.

  1. ovastafford

    ovastafford Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    938
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    I am trying to decide if I want to load up the 168gr berger or the 180gr berger and I have run the ballistics on them and there is hardly any difference out to 1000yards. I have been using the berger ballistic program. What do you guys think, can you guys try it in your programs and see what you get? Its a 26" barrel and I figured around max for both weights. Elevation will be around 5000'. My guess was around 3050 for the 168's and 2950 for the 180. Thanks
     
  2. kiwi3006

    kiwi3006 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    674
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    I have done the same and got the same results, 168 slightly better on drop, 180 slightly better on windage.
    I've gone with the 168. Only shoot deer in NZ, no need for the extra recoil with the 180 gr.

    stu.
     

  3. Jumpalot

    Jumpalot Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    384
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    I've run it on Exbal and Ballistic and there is hardly any difference, I didn't look at KE though. I bought the 180's because they are better on windage. Adding a couple of clicks for elevation is easy. Figuring the wind correctly or a gust is the tough part, so I'll take all the help I can get there. I don't know about the difference in recoil. Seems to me that you take away some bullet weight but add in more powder and you're right back where you started. I actually thought that my 300 WM w/165 grn. bullets kicked worse than it did w/180 grn. bullets.
     
  4. 338 LEGEND

    338 LEGEND Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    196
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    +1
    UPS are easy, go with the best wind beater.
     
  5. AZShooter

    AZShooter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,075
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Here is a picture. Besides the 180 being slightly longer there is alot more bearing surface.

    There is another thing....you can get the thicker jacketed versions with the 180 should you have an issue with the jacket integrity.


    [​IMG]
     
  6. moombaskier

    moombaskier Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    405
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    I pondered the same thing with my 7mag. I started with the 168's, and they shot so good I just stuck with them. The 180's take a little faster twist and your barrel may not stabilize them. FWIW 3050fps. with a 26" is obtainable. Try H1000 and 215m's.
     
  7. tjaketerry

    tjaketerry Active Member

    Messages:
    38
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2008
    I've shot both out of my 7STW, and I decided to go with the 180s simpy because to get the 168s to group well I had to seat them on the lands which turned my bolt action into a single shot. The 180s I could seat to magizne length and they grouped better than the 168s.
     
  8. ovastafford

    ovastafford Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    938
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    I worried about my twist, its 1-9.5 and they recommend 1-9 so im going to start with the 168's first. I dont want to find out my gun wont stabilize the 180's. Iv heard it will but I think ill play it safe, and I have some HSM 168 gr loaded ammo so and when I break it in ill see how it shoots. It might be a real quick way to find my load if it works good. Doesnt seem like it would be too hard to duplicate. Thanks for all the responses!
     
  9. sniperjwt

    sniperjwt Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    825
    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    i think that was a good choice i have a 1- 9.5 on my 7STW and tried the 180s first (could not find any 168s at that time) could not get them to stabilize so found some 168s and they shoot great.
     
  10. BryanLitz

    BryanLitz <b>Official LRH Sponsor</b>

    Messages:
    633
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Here's some in-depth material on these two bullets regarding BC, stability, and overall ballistic performance from a target shooting perspective. Note the analysis was not geared toward LRH, but much of the analysis is still very relevant.

    Articles

    Click on the 7mm VLD analysis articles.

    -Bryan
     
  11. ovastafford

    ovastafford Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    938
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Thanks Bryan, thats an awesome article and really helps me out!
     
  12. 4bycamper

    4bycamper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    607
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2009
    Thanks Bryan, that was a very good read. Cleared up some of the 'muddy water' in my perception.
     
  13. sambo3006

    sambo3006 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,343
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    I had the same problem as sniperjwt with my Remington factory barrel. I could not stabilize the 180's. I shot .6" at 100 yards and figured they might really group at longer distances after they "went to sleep" but my 500 yard groups off sand bags with my Leupold 6.5-20x SF scope looked more like shotgun patterns. I was disappointed but that is the way it goes.
     
  14. BryanLitz

    BryanLitz <b>Official LRH Sponsor</b>

    Messages:
    633
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Sambo,

    I don't believe that your poor groups at 500 yards were due to stability. If they were grouping .6" at 100 yards, that proves that they're stable from the muzzle. Until they slow to transonic speed (in this case, 1000 yards +) stability will not be a problem.

    I would guess that your poor groups at long range might be due to bad velocity variation, or scope parallax not being adjusted properly for the range, or something else besides stability. In other words, I think that whatever was causing the excessive dispersion at range is a 'solve-able' problem.

    -Bryan