Fiftydriver
Official LRH Sponsor
I really have no dog in this fight. I read through the first 6 pages of posts and wanted to make some comments about the topic. As I am sure there was not alot of meaningful debate thereafter, I will just comment on what I have read on.
I have tested the Gen 1 HAT 265 gr bullets. In my testing a 338 AM, I loaded them up to well over 3500 fps. I had some old TTI cases and I was able to hit 3350 fps with tight primer pockets but accuracy was not the best of the test session. Around 3380 to 3440 fps were the most consistant loads as far as velocity as well as group size.
My opinion of BC, I do not look at it as a value dependant on a bullet but more importantly, a value produced by a bullets drop over distance and drift by the wind. Now this is certainly not a scientific bases opinion as several on this post could write books about BC and its scientific meaning. What does this mean to the average shooter, even the serious shooter, very little to be honest.
What does matter, being able to predict where the bullet is over its entire trajectory and being able to predictably estimate where the bullet will be in relation to wind conditions during its time of flight.
For me, I had alot of trouble getting ballistic charts to match up with what the bullet was actually doing after it left the muzzle. If a paper BC says a bullet will be 10.5 moa low at 900 yards but its actually 11.5 moa low, whats more important, using the paper BC or figuring what the bullet is actually doing in flight. To me its the later.
Again, I have no care what the BC is. I just want a number I can plug into my exbal program and have it give me reliable values for where my bullet will be over its trajectory. If that number is .450 or 1.100, it really does not matter. Knowing where that bullet is in flight is far more valuable to me then having a the highest BC around.
Do not get me wrong, everyone wants high BC values. That is because, if its true, it means their rifle/load combo is producing great drop numbers and low windage drifts but in the real world the "BC" number really means nothing as long as our ballistic program generated drop chart matches actual trajectory.
How can you do this. Easy. Shot at several ranges, the more the better. When I develop a drop chart for a new bullet, I generally zero at 500 yards and then measure drop at 800, 1200 and 1600 yards. Sometimes even stretching out to 2000 yards if conditions and the rifle combo allows it.
If your ballistic program matches up with all five of those actual drop numbers, your generated drop will be accurate with your actual drop. Then test in varying enviornmental conditions and record your adjustments if needed and correct your chart accordingly.
It takes some range time but that is never a bad thing, in fact its a good thing and in the end, your program will be dead on with your trajectory. again, the actual number you plug into your BC box is really not as important as many make it out to be, its the actual drop and drift that are important and if you know exactly what those real values are, you have pretty much won the war.
Back to bullets. When I tested the Gen 1 265 gr HAT bullets, they produced a BC just over .800. Which at a velocity of well over 3400 fps, is still quite impressive.
I have never had any experience with the Gen 2 HAT bullets so have nothing to offer there. I have however tested the old Wildcat 265 gr AT RBBTs extensively at velocities of 3050 fps and also 3400 fps levels.
This may really start a fuss but at the lower velocity, I had to use a BC value of .980 to get the programs drop to match up with the actual trajectory. At the faster muzzle velocity, I had to use a BC of .920 to get predicted drop to match up with actual trajectory. Why???? Not really sure but that was what was needed to be able to predict bullet trajectory accurately.
I can not say if LVs numbers are right or not, again, I have never shot these bullets being tested. 1.100 seems high for a BC but I got ran over the coals when I posted my information about the Wildcat bullets, nearly all of them to be honest so I have no desire to do the same thing.
I will also say I have alot of respect for those that have the minds to understand ballistic calculations but I also would like to say that sometimes if you plug all the numbers in, the value that comes out of the computer is not always exactly the number you need to accurately predict bullet trajectory.
Obviously the Gen2 HAT bullets have great drop and drift numbers. If you want to, get some and test them and see what you get. If the numbers are real or even close, it will come out when others test them and report similiar results.
I got hammered with the BC values I came out with with many of the Wildcat bullets. That was until dozens of shooters and hunters tested these same bullets and came back with identical numbers time and again. If LV numbers are close, that will play out in the end as more and more shooters and hunters get them and get them in the air. That will get us the real solid data.
So, if your interested, get some and get them in the air.
As far as sending bullets to another bullet maker to do BC testing on, PLEASE. No one in their right mind would offer their products to be tested by a commerical competitor. It has nothing to do with trusting what the other tester would say about the bullets, its just silly to recommend.
There is no one on LRH that would have a competitor inspect their work just because someone else demanded it. No disrespect to anyone here but lets get realistic. If you want to prove or disprove these results, buy some of these bullets and test them and let the world know what you honestly get for results.
If the bullets do not meet expectations, report that, FACTUALLY and politely. If they do match expectations, report that as well just as honestly and politely. Its all information that is valuable to us and in the end, its the most useful data we could get. The more that test, the larger the data base, the more valuable the information is.
Just my opinion, simply from being raked over the coals for the same thing MANY, MANY TIMES!!!!
You can call BC values into question, but there is no way, NO WAY one can discount accurate honest bullet drop numbers, especially if they come from a mass of shooters.
I have tested the Gen 1 HAT 265 gr bullets. In my testing a 338 AM, I loaded them up to well over 3500 fps. I had some old TTI cases and I was able to hit 3350 fps with tight primer pockets but accuracy was not the best of the test session. Around 3380 to 3440 fps were the most consistant loads as far as velocity as well as group size.
My opinion of BC, I do not look at it as a value dependant on a bullet but more importantly, a value produced by a bullets drop over distance and drift by the wind. Now this is certainly not a scientific bases opinion as several on this post could write books about BC and its scientific meaning. What does this mean to the average shooter, even the serious shooter, very little to be honest.
What does matter, being able to predict where the bullet is over its entire trajectory and being able to predictably estimate where the bullet will be in relation to wind conditions during its time of flight.
For me, I had alot of trouble getting ballistic charts to match up with what the bullet was actually doing after it left the muzzle. If a paper BC says a bullet will be 10.5 moa low at 900 yards but its actually 11.5 moa low, whats more important, using the paper BC or figuring what the bullet is actually doing in flight. To me its the later.
Again, I have no care what the BC is. I just want a number I can plug into my exbal program and have it give me reliable values for where my bullet will be over its trajectory. If that number is .450 or 1.100, it really does not matter. Knowing where that bullet is in flight is far more valuable to me then having a the highest BC around.
Do not get me wrong, everyone wants high BC values. That is because, if its true, it means their rifle/load combo is producing great drop numbers and low windage drifts but in the real world the "BC" number really means nothing as long as our ballistic program generated drop chart matches actual trajectory.
How can you do this. Easy. Shot at several ranges, the more the better. When I develop a drop chart for a new bullet, I generally zero at 500 yards and then measure drop at 800, 1200 and 1600 yards. Sometimes even stretching out to 2000 yards if conditions and the rifle combo allows it.
If your ballistic program matches up with all five of those actual drop numbers, your generated drop will be accurate with your actual drop. Then test in varying enviornmental conditions and record your adjustments if needed and correct your chart accordingly.
It takes some range time but that is never a bad thing, in fact its a good thing and in the end, your program will be dead on with your trajectory. again, the actual number you plug into your BC box is really not as important as many make it out to be, its the actual drop and drift that are important and if you know exactly what those real values are, you have pretty much won the war.
Back to bullets. When I tested the Gen 1 265 gr HAT bullets, they produced a BC just over .800. Which at a velocity of well over 3400 fps, is still quite impressive.
I have never had any experience with the Gen 2 HAT bullets so have nothing to offer there. I have however tested the old Wildcat 265 gr AT RBBTs extensively at velocities of 3050 fps and also 3400 fps levels.
This may really start a fuss but at the lower velocity, I had to use a BC value of .980 to get the programs drop to match up with the actual trajectory. At the faster muzzle velocity, I had to use a BC of .920 to get predicted drop to match up with actual trajectory. Why???? Not really sure but that was what was needed to be able to predict bullet trajectory accurately.
I can not say if LVs numbers are right or not, again, I have never shot these bullets being tested. 1.100 seems high for a BC but I got ran over the coals when I posted my information about the Wildcat bullets, nearly all of them to be honest so I have no desire to do the same thing.
I will also say I have alot of respect for those that have the minds to understand ballistic calculations but I also would like to say that sometimes if you plug all the numbers in, the value that comes out of the computer is not always exactly the number you need to accurately predict bullet trajectory.
Obviously the Gen2 HAT bullets have great drop and drift numbers. If you want to, get some and test them and see what you get. If the numbers are real or even close, it will come out when others test them and report similiar results.
I got hammered with the BC values I came out with with many of the Wildcat bullets. That was until dozens of shooters and hunters tested these same bullets and came back with identical numbers time and again. If LV numbers are close, that will play out in the end as more and more shooters and hunters get them and get them in the air. That will get us the real solid data.
So, if your interested, get some and get them in the air.
As far as sending bullets to another bullet maker to do BC testing on, PLEASE. No one in their right mind would offer their products to be tested by a commerical competitor. It has nothing to do with trusting what the other tester would say about the bullets, its just silly to recommend.
There is no one on LRH that would have a competitor inspect their work just because someone else demanded it. No disrespect to anyone here but lets get realistic. If you want to prove or disprove these results, buy some of these bullets and test them and let the world know what you honestly get for results.
If the bullets do not meet expectations, report that, FACTUALLY and politely. If they do match expectations, report that as well just as honestly and politely. Its all information that is valuable to us and in the end, its the most useful data we could get. The more that test, the larger the data base, the more valuable the information is.
Just my opinion, simply from being raked over the coals for the same thing MANY, MANY TIMES!!!!
You can call BC values into question, but there is no way, NO WAY one can discount accurate honest bullet drop numbers, especially if they come from a mass of shooters.
