I am very dissapointed with Berger bullets regarding the 338 hybrid bullet.
- Thread starter Marine sniper
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Marine sniper,
Out of curiousity, what are the gains of a .9 BC over a .818 BC ?
At what range does the additional BC really make a big difference in trajectory ?
Are we talking extreme longrange of say over 1500 yards, or is it closer ?
Also, what purpose are you using these bullets for, as maybe some solids might be more what you are looking for.
Take no offense to the questions, just curious about the gains of the BC.
Out of curiousity, what are the gains of a .9 BC over a .818 BC ?
At what range does the additional BC really make a big difference in trajectory ?
Are we talking extreme longrange of say over 1500 yards, or is it closer ?
Also, what purpose are you using these bullets for, as maybe some solids might be more what you are looking for.
Take no offense to the questions, just curious about the gains of the BC.
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
I started a thread about this very subject a while back. The general consensus was the wind drift, not the drops. I agree with the tone of your post, that sometimes we all get a little too caught up in the bc is everything.
I am not really bent about this Berger bullet thing. I am a little disappointed. What I find fascinating is how I have witnessed members here tear other bullet makers to shreds over similar things. But, now that it is Berger it seems to be OK. Perhaps those that were so vocal before are just not participating this time. I don't think that Berger needs to be ripped by members here, I just find it interesting.
Steve
canyonman1
Well-Known Member
Bryan,
You say you're replacing the current bullet with a tougher one. Is the current bullet still in production or have you halted operations until the new one is figured out?
I shoot 338 Edge @ 2,750 and love this bullet, and need to know if they will be available until Gen. 2 is manufactured, or I need to get my hands on what I want NOW.
Thanks.
You say you're replacing the current bullet with a tougher one. Is the current bullet still in production or have you halted operations until the new one is figured out?
I shoot 338 Edge @ 2,750 and love this bullet, and need to know if they will be available until Gen. 2 is manufactured, or I need to get my hands on what I want NOW.
Thanks.
Canyonman,
We have stopped making the current design, and production will resume with the new design once it's established. However there is a large stockpile of the current design so they'll be available for some time.
-Bryan
We have stopped making the current design, and production will resume with the new design once it's established. However there is a large stockpile of the current design so they'll be available for some time.
-Bryan
Marine sniper
Well-Known Member
The practical difference between .818 and .9 at 3000 fps are minimal until around 1000 yards, and do not in my opinion become crucial until around 1500 yards. But that is not the point. What if for 2 years GM advertised the new corvette would come with a 600 hp engine and when it debuted it was actually 10% less at 540. A lot of car folks would be very upset. To make matters worse Bryan is avoiding answering specific questions regarding the future BC of these bullets. As a long time Berger customer and advocate of theirs for 15+ years I gotta be honest and say it ****es me off. I can guarantee I have shot thousands of their bullets and been responsible for friends and customers (I built custom sniper rifles for a while) shooting ten of thousands more. I can get over the BC issues with this bullet, but don't BS me and don't ignore valid questions.
I do not like solid bullets, I shot them for a while when I was still teaching at sniper school (at 1000 yard 50 cal benchrest). They are too hard on barrels and are not practical for hunting. To date they have not proven themselves to be more accurate either, at least in smaller caliber stuff.
With all due respect, you can't have it both ways. First you criticize Berger/Bryan for publishing bc before thorough testing and confirming and now you want future BC of these bullets before thorough testing and confirming.
What valid question are you talking about that's been ignored?
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
+1 On that!! Bryan is danged if he does danged if he don't
I'm setting up a rifle to shoot a bullet that has not yet been released, if it don't pan out the responcebility is mine alone for not waiting till it's been shot out of many different variations of that cal. and proven. I also have a couple back up bullets to go to, I planned ahead for disappointment!!
A little Perspective
First off I normally shoot Hornady bullets but occasionally shoot Bergers so I am not posting this just because I am a Berger fan.
Below is a list of some of the lowest G7 form factors from Bryans book.
6.5 140 JLK .878
6.5 136 Hoover .888
6.5 140 Berger VLD .918
6mm 95 Berger VLD .923
6mm 105 Berger VLD .933
7mm 162 A-Max .936
7mm 168 Berger VLD .942
7mm 180 Berger VLD .946
6mm 105 JLK .950
I belive that catches all the bullets in the book with .950 and low G7 forma factor.
The original estimate for the 300 Hybrid was .822 (pulled that from the book don't know the original number after beginning production)
All along that seemed very optimistic to me, but by my calculations using the new G7 BC of .419 the form factor for the new .338 300gr Hybrid is .895 which is very respectable. That will put it third in the book. Bryan's G7 form factor for the 300 SMK is .986.
Of course the "nose slump" is a totally different issue.
James
First off I normally shoot Hornady bullets but occasionally shoot Bergers so I am not posting this just because I am a Berger fan.
Below is a list of some of the lowest G7 form factors from Bryans book.
6.5 140 JLK .878
6.5 136 Hoover .888
6.5 140 Berger VLD .918
6mm 95 Berger VLD .923
6mm 105 Berger VLD .933
7mm 162 A-Max .936
7mm 168 Berger VLD .942
7mm 180 Berger VLD .946
6mm 105 JLK .950
I belive that catches all the bullets in the book with .950 and low G7 forma factor.
The original estimate for the 300 Hybrid was .822 (pulled that from the book don't know the original number after beginning production)
All along that seemed very optimistic to me, but by my calculations using the new G7 BC of .419 the form factor for the new .338 300gr Hybrid is .895 which is very respectable. That will put it third in the book. Bryan's G7 form factor for the 300 SMK is .986.
Of course the "nose slump" is a totally different issue.
James
TY Chas1! Very well said.
bigngreen, I agree that anyone willing to build a rifle on a non-proven bullet should be willing to take the resposiblity rather than taking agressions out on a single person or campany.
Berger and Bryan work hard to provide accurate BC's (unlike MANY other companies). I respect the oppertunity to include the shooters in the development process, and would hate to see that end due to a few select individuals.
aroshtr
bigngreen, I agree that anyone willing to build a rifle on a non-proven bullet should be willing to take the resposiblity rather than taking agressions out on a single person or campany.
Berger and Bryan work hard to provide accurate BC's (unlike MANY other companies). I respect the oppertunity to include the shooters in the development process, and would hate to see that end due to a few select individuals.
aroshtr
Marine sniper
Well-Known Member
As for the valid question being ignored.
Marine sniper
Well-Known Member
I never asked for the BC of any future bullet. I asked if they were going to attempt to work on the issues with the BC on the current bullet.
Marine sniper
Well-Known Member
Fair enough, you and I see things differently. I expect a company, particularly with the reputation of Berger, to have done the basic testing they should have done before publishing any BC data. As I said earlier they should have had their velocity ceiling tested as well.
FWIW; If the rifle I am building just happen to not like the Bergers, while other guys were getting excellent accuracy out of them, then that would have been on me.
Fiftydriver
Official LRH Sponsor
Marine Sniper,
Not to sound snooty or anything but why would you design a rifle for a bullet that has been talked about for over two years but was still in the planning stages when you built the rifle?
I have customers all the time ask to have a rifle built around a specific bullet and every time we discuss how this is a bad idea to put all of your eggs in the same basket. Even if the Berger bullets met all their claims a certain barrel may still not care for a specific bullet and your still up a creek.
The SMK is a proven bullet in every way. There is very little to pick at it about. Why not set up a rifle to use this bullet and then down the road if the Bergers happen to actually become available, try them and see what happens. It just seems like you took a huge gamble building a rifle around a theoretical bullet is my only point.
That said, have you shot the 300 gr SMK in your rifle to see how it performs? I get 3K out of my 338 AX rifles and need to use a BC of .810 to match up with actual bullet flight. Looks like to me the projected numbers for the Berger would only improve on the drift of the SMK by around 1/2 moa at 1500 yards. Not sure why your so down and out about "HAVING" to use a 300 gr SMK.
The Berger bullets may be a bit more consistant from lot to lot but it only takes about an hour of bench time to sort 500 SMKs for baring surface length and bullet weight and everything else has been proven on the SMK.
I recently measured a box of 500, 300 gr SMKs and came up with 485 that fell within 1 thou in baring surface length range and 1 grain in weight variation. I find it hard to believe anyone could make a better batch of bullets then that. Admittedly, many lots are not this consistant but they are generally much better then most would have you believe.
Anyway, just wondering what is so wrong with the 300 gr SMK that the only reason you had a $6500 rifle made was to shoot a theoretical 300 gr Berger bullet? Just curious.
Not to sound snooty or anything but why would you design a rifle for a bullet that has been talked about for over two years but was still in the planning stages when you built the rifle?
I have customers all the time ask to have a rifle built around a specific bullet and every time we discuss how this is a bad idea to put all of your eggs in the same basket. Even if the Berger bullets met all their claims a certain barrel may still not care for a specific bullet and your still up a creek.
The SMK is a proven bullet in every way. There is very little to pick at it about. Why not set up a rifle to use this bullet and then down the road if the Bergers happen to actually become available, try them and see what happens. It just seems like you took a huge gamble building a rifle around a theoretical bullet is my only point.
That said, have you shot the 300 gr SMK in your rifle to see how it performs? I get 3K out of my 338 AX rifles and need to use a BC of .810 to match up with actual bullet flight. Looks like to me the projected numbers for the Berger would only improve on the drift of the SMK by around 1/2 moa at 1500 yards. Not sure why your so down and out about "HAVING" to use a 300 gr SMK.
The Berger bullets may be a bit more consistant from lot to lot but it only takes about an hour of bench time to sort 500 SMKs for baring surface length and bullet weight and everything else has been proven on the SMK.
I recently measured a box of 500, 300 gr SMKs and came up with 485 that fell within 1 thou in baring surface length range and 1 grain in weight variation. I find it hard to believe anyone could make a better batch of bullets then that. Admittedly, many lots are not this consistant but they are generally much better then most would have you believe.
Anyway, just wondering what is so wrong with the 300 gr SMK that the only reason you had a $6500 rifle made was to shoot a theoretical 300 gr Berger bullet? Just curious.
