Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Equipment Discussions
Barret .416?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Fiftydriver" data-source="post: 140454" data-attributes="member: 10"><p>I would have to say there is a combination of both sides that are correct here. Having shot the 50 cals in quality rifles I can tell you that with the proper load in a well set up rifle, and with a marksmen that knows his rifle and rifles trajectory well, you would see no advantage with a 416 Barrett over the 50 BMG. Only advantage I see would be less recoil which makes the rifles easier to shoot of course.</p><p></p><p>I agree that the faster a projectile is launched, the less time there is for the external elements to act on that bullet to cause it to be moved off its original flight path.</p><p></p><p>That said, we are again comparing apples to oranges here. I am sure they were using the VLD solid type 416 bullets which from what I have seen have a BC in the .850 range.</p><p></p><p>I am also sure they were not using a VLD type bullet such as the 750 gr A-Max with its advertised BC of 1.050 and actual BC of around .980. Instead I suspect they were using a 647 gr ball or 700 gr AP bullet in the 50 cal which will have a BC of around .6 at best.</p><p></p><p>Not only does this bullet have a ballisic disadvantage, it also has a consistancy disadvantage because it was not designed with accuracy in mind. It was designed for the specific use of saturating a given area with impacts. In the M-2 you do not want every bullet to land on a 10" group. As such the bullets are made with a dispersion factor build in and generally they will only hold around a 16" diameter group at 1/2 mile or so unless sorted.</p><p></p><p>SO in one case we are comparing a match bullet designed to offer the highest ballistic potential possible against a bullet that can hardly be discribed as anything but a plinker.</p><p></p><p>Had that 50 cal shooter been using quality ammo with a 750 gr A-max loaded to 2650 fps I suspect the results would have been much better.</p><p></p><p>Also, I would be suprised if the 416 had not been shot before had and proven to be on target before the cameras started rolling.</p><p></p><p>The 50 cal may have as well but I suspect to prove it was not hitting on target.</p><p></p><p>Again, its an apples and oranges comparision in my opinion, the strongest of one against the weakest of another. That is often how these things are compared to make one look artifically superior to the other.</p><p></p><p>I would also agree that this caliber based on the 408 CT case will get you everything that the 416 Barrett will get you. Its just to much case capacity to be efficent with this bore size. I am working on a new family of wildcats based on the 50 Spotter case which will offer around 170 to 175 gr powder capacity in comparision to the 408 CT with its 135 to 145 gr depending on its case configuration and also compared to the 416 Barrett with its 220 gr powder capacity. They use 200 gr of powders simply because the case design is so inefficent they can not get more powder in it with the current available powders we have to select from.</p><p></p><p>I see comparisions like this and I simply smile. I did not see what ammo they were using in the 50 BMG but would be interested to hear what it was in fact that they were using. I suspect plain old M33 ball ammo.</p><p></p><p>Just my opinion. I think the 416 Barrett is over rated. That case necked up to 50 cal would make a better round then the 50 BMG in my opinion for this purpose or even 458 with proper bullets!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif</p><p></p><p>Good Shooting!!</p><p></p><p>Kirby Allen(50)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fiftydriver, post: 140454, member: 10"] I would have to say there is a combination of both sides that are correct here. Having shot the 50 cals in quality rifles I can tell you that with the proper load in a well set up rifle, and with a marksmen that knows his rifle and rifles trajectory well, you would see no advantage with a 416 Barrett over the 50 BMG. Only advantage I see would be less recoil which makes the rifles easier to shoot of course. I agree that the faster a projectile is launched, the less time there is for the external elements to act on that bullet to cause it to be moved off its original flight path. That said, we are again comparing apples to oranges here. I am sure they were using the VLD solid type 416 bullets which from what I have seen have a BC in the .850 range. I am also sure they were not using a VLD type bullet such as the 750 gr A-Max with its advertised BC of 1.050 and actual BC of around .980. Instead I suspect they were using a 647 gr ball or 700 gr AP bullet in the 50 cal which will have a BC of around .6 at best. Not only does this bullet have a ballisic disadvantage, it also has a consistancy disadvantage because it was not designed with accuracy in mind. It was designed for the specific use of saturating a given area with impacts. In the M-2 you do not want every bullet to land on a 10" group. As such the bullets are made with a dispersion factor build in and generally they will only hold around a 16" diameter group at 1/2 mile or so unless sorted. SO in one case we are comparing a match bullet designed to offer the highest ballistic potential possible against a bullet that can hardly be discribed as anything but a plinker. Had that 50 cal shooter been using quality ammo with a 750 gr A-max loaded to 2650 fps I suspect the results would have been much better. Also, I would be suprised if the 416 had not been shot before had and proven to be on target before the cameras started rolling. The 50 cal may have as well but I suspect to prove it was not hitting on target. Again, its an apples and oranges comparision in my opinion, the strongest of one against the weakest of another. That is often how these things are compared to make one look artifically superior to the other. I would also agree that this caliber based on the 408 CT case will get you everything that the 416 Barrett will get you. Its just to much case capacity to be efficent with this bore size. I am working on a new family of wildcats based on the 50 Spotter case which will offer around 170 to 175 gr powder capacity in comparision to the 408 CT with its 135 to 145 gr depending on its case configuration and also compared to the 416 Barrett with its 220 gr powder capacity. They use 200 gr of powders simply because the case design is so inefficent they can not get more powder in it with the current available powders we have to select from. I see comparisions like this and I simply smile. I did not see what ammo they were using in the 50 BMG but would be interested to hear what it was in fact that they were using. I suspect plain old M33 ball ammo. Just my opinion. I think the 416 Barrett is over rated. That case necked up to 50 cal would make a better round then the 50 BMG in my opinion for this purpose or even 458 with proper bullets!!! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Good Shooting!! Kirby Allen(50) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Equipment Discussions
Barret .416?
Top