Outlaw6.0
Well-Known Member
Thanks Rich, I'm going to rock the G7 for a bit to see how it works out. I was surprised to see how little difference there was between rocking a straight up .680 G1 vs the stepped G7.
t
Test results on 264 cal 150 & 160 gr Matrix Bullets
- Thread starter BryanLitz
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Thanks Rich, I'm going to rock the G7 for a bit to see how it works out. I was surprised to see how little difference there was between rocking a straight up .680 G1 vs the stepped G7.
t
Sorry to resurrect an old thread but has anyone figured out the real G7 BC for the 142's? I've seen a reference of 318 but that's higher than the 150 at .310.
Cold Trigger Finger
Well-Known Member
That's a good question. I've been wondering that myself.
I've got 150's and 142's I intended to use in my 264 win mag. I'm doing a new 264 build so I don't want to burn them all in my current rifle. I'll do a little testing in a couple weeks for velocity comparisons, though.
Some quick calculations (using Bryan's test data) show the BC of the 150's to 93% of the 160's. Using that, I figure the 142's to be 94-95% of the 150's which makes the G7 about .293 (quite a bit lower than the Hybrid at .317). Obviously, it's fuzzy math but it might be OK for looking at performance on paper before shooting them. Anybody else got a better guess/test results?
I've got a couple elk tags this fall where I intend shoot either the 142's, 150's or 142 ABLR's in the new build. I can't find data on the real 142 ABLR BC so, at the moment, I can't get a good comparison of performance to 700 yards.
For those that have tested both the 142's and 150's, what's been the average velocity difference between the two? From working this out on JBM, the 150's need to be within 50 fps of the 142's to make them look better. Any performance difference between the two jackets on game? I'm pretty sure the 142's use the same jacket as the 160's.
Some quick calculations (using Bryan's test data) show the BC of the 150's to 93% of the 160's. Using that, I figure the 142's to be 94-95% of the 150's which makes the G7 about .293 (quite a bit lower than the Hybrid at .317). Obviously, it's fuzzy math but it might be OK for looking at performance on paper before shooting them. Anybody else got a better guess/test results?
I've got a couple elk tags this fall where I intend shoot either the 142's, 150's or 142 ABLR's in the new build. I can't find data on the real 142 ABLR BC so, at the moment, I can't get a good comparison of performance to 700 yards.
For those that have tested both the 142's and 150's, what's been the average velocity difference between the two? From working this out on JBM, the 150's need to be within 50 fps of the 142's to make them look better. Any performance difference between the two jackets on game? I'm pretty sure the 142's use the same jacket as the 160's.
parshal,
Your scaling is valid assuming the 142 is made with the same nose and tail dies as the 150 and 160.
I've got some Nosler 142 LR AB's to test. They're in the que and I'll report when we have something. They look pretty slick. Their advertised G7 BC implies a form factor of like .91 which is very realistic for the shape. However the G1 BC is out to lunch and not really consistent with the G7. Their G1 of .719 may be valid for 5000 fps or something, but as a realistic long range average the actual G1 is more likely in the .620's. We'll see.
Take care,
-Bryan
Your scaling is valid assuming the 142 is made with the same nose and tail dies as the 150 and 160.
I've got some Nosler 142 LR AB's to test. They're in the que and I'll report when we have something. They look pretty slick. Their advertised G7 BC implies a form factor of like .91 which is very realistic for the shape. However the G1 BC is out to lunch and not really consistent with the G7. Their G1 of .719 may be valid for 5000 fps or something, but as a realistic long range average the actual G1 is more likely in the .620's. We'll see.
Take care,
-Bryan
Cold Trigger Finger
Well-Known Member
Thank you Brian; ! I've been interested in the 142 ABLR for mybig game hunting up here. My 6.5 Creedmoor is primarily my caribou and predator rifle but if a 60" bull moose stands up 20 yards in front of me while I'm sneaking into position to shoot a bou. I want a bullet I can rely on to not blow to bits if I have to take a shoulder shot. With a G1 in the .6 range I'll get some and see if I can get the accuracy from them.
I've got some 142 ABLR's and as I've read more about their performance on game they aren't performing as well up close as the regular Accubond. I'm sure that's because they're designed to expand at lower velocities for long range shots.
I'd love to hear more feedback on the ABLR for up close shots if anyone here has used them.
Sorry to hijack the thread to an Accubond discussion.
I shot some of the 150 Matrix VLDs in my .264 win mag today and a got groups of .550 at .027" off the lands at 3000 fps. I got 3100 fps with the Berger 140 VLD. How is it that the 150 Matrix has a lower measure BC (.310) compared to the 140 Berger (.313). That just doesn't make sense to me.
elkaholic
Well-Known Member
It is because of the form factor difference in the two which equates to b.c. In short, the Berger has a more aggressive (more pointed) nose than the Matrix which makes it cut the air a little better. My personal opinion though is that the Matrix is a better performer on game and the slight difference in b.c. does not bother me. Also, the Matrix is less sensitive to seating depth than the Berger.....Rich
With 100 fps difference, the 140 looks better with regard to drop and wind at all distances, at least on paper. I need to shoot them both at 500 yards and see what happens. I've got some 142 Precision Ballistics VLDs that I should shoot alongside them.
I do like the idea of shooting the heavier bullet at elk.
I do like the idea of shooting the heavier bullet at elk.
Question for Bryan. While I use a G7 factor for my BC program. For a 140 Berger VLD I have found that there is no difference in my drops out to 1000 yards whether I use G7 or G1. Can I assume that if the ballistic curves for a given bullet, of the two(g7/G1) are parallel within the velocity range of your load, it then becomes irrelevant whether you use G1 or G7?
Last edited:
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
That right there is why we load the 150 or 160s ! My dad put the brakes on a bull last year that was making for another county, from the spot he hit him to where he piled up was 30 yards and there was blood every where, to shut down a moving bull with a lung shot that fast is impressive.
elkaholic
Well-Known Member
There is no question that with the same, or slightly higher b.c., the Berger will look a little better on paper, but if it shoots in your rifle, the Matrix, IMO, will look better on an elk. We have had some very impressive results with the 150 on game both in penetration and tissue damage. The minimal difference in drop and drift is easily compensated for with the knobs on top of your scope
......Rich
