true bc of barnes 180 tsx?

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by rufous, Aug 21, 2004.

  1. rufous

    rufous Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2001
    I have a load worked up for my 300 Win Mag using the 180 Barnes TSX. From a zero of 250 yards I had to go up 102 clicks to be rezeroed at 965 yards. This was a bit crude but it shows the BC to be more like 0.410 rather than 0.55 which is what Barnes has published. I had thought earlier that the BC would be 0.510 based on some I had done out to 600 yards but adding another 365 yards gave me much more drop than expected. The only way the drop makes sense is if the BC is much lower than I had thought. Have any of you done more extensive testing than I on this bullet to establish the true BC? Thanks, Rufous.
     
  2. Fiftydriver

    Fiftydriver <strong>Official LRH Sponsor</strong>

    Messages:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    Rufous,

    That is pretty typical but I would not say it is all the bullets fault.

    Often the click value of a scope is not what it is listed and it takes more or less to cover a desired correction.

    First thing to do is figure out exactly how far the point of impact is shifted by each click and then you will be able to get a better idea of exactly how much correction you are dialing into your scope.

    Good Shooting!!!

    Kirby Allen(50)
     

  3. chris matthews

    chris matthews Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    838
    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Something you guys are forgetting here- the BC changes constantly with velocity. That's why you get a lower BC with the added distance. It probably started out near the advertised BC (most companies are optimistic about their BCs) and then the first range you shot (600) the bullet maintained enough velocity to keep a higher BC then over the next 365 yards out to the final disatnce of 965 the velocity dropped off enough to lower the BC even further.
    Look at Sierra's website and you'll notice they give three BCs for every bullet.
    The only way you are going to get a true BC is to shoot it over a chronograph at the muzzle and at say 100,300, 600 and 1000. Then you can get an accurate BC. The "reverse engineering" method you are using will give you an estimate but is tough unless you know velocity.
     
  4. Jeff In TX

    Jeff In TX Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    408
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    I'll piggyback on what Chris Matthews stated. The G1 BC advertised by the bullet manufactures were taken using an average test velocity. Depending on your load and the velocity of your bullet, it may be higher or lower and will change over distance.

    The best things to do is to chronograph your load and get an average velocity at the muzzle from 7 to 10' away. Then move your chronograph out to exactly 100 yards and get an average velocity reading there. Any good ballistic program will let you plug in those numbers and get your true BC for your bullet load combo. Then depending on the bullet type, convert the G1 BC to a G5 or G7 BC

    Then move the chronograph out to 2, 3 and 400 yards and get your average velocities as well as how much bullet drop there was. You can then start to work with your ballistic program to get a very accurate track of your bullet. I like to track and record how much actual drop in inches my bullets experience at 2, 3 and 400-yard distances.

    I use the RSI ballistic lab and it has features that most ballistic programs only dream of. One of those features is the “Estimate Drag Coefficient”. This feature allows you to compare your actual range data to all the different drag models and determine which drag model best matches your bullet. Once you determine the best drag model for your bullet, it will show you all the different BC changes your bullet experiences as it’s velocity decreases.

    I use two CED Millennium chronographs when I’m working on my range data. One chronograph is always at the muzzle and the other one at precise 100-yard increments. Once I had my range data at 300 and 400 yards, the RSI ballistic lab predicted my bullet velocities out to 700 yards within a few feet per second. 700 yards is the farthest I’ve been able to use my second chronograph with my .308. This method has worked very well for me.

    Hope it helps
     
  5. Jon A

    Jon A Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Maybe people will start paying attention when I say not to believe Barnes' advertised BC's.

    Rick Jamison tested the 180 TSX on his Oehler and found it to have a BC 12% lower than the 180 AccuBond and 19% lower than the 180 Scirocco. Of course Barnes advertises it higher than both...as if its less aggressive nose and big hollow point on the front can defy the laws of physics somehow. [​IMG]

    Give one of the plastic tipped bullets a try at that range and see how many fewer clicks it takes....
     
  6. Fiftydriver

    Fiftydriver <strong>Official LRH Sponsor</strong>

    Messages:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    Chris Matthews,

    I agree with your comments but you also need to realize that not all bullets will decrease in B.C. as they slow in velocity at longer ranges.

    Some will vary very little and others will actually have the B.C. increase at lower velocities,

    For example, selecting out of your own reference, the Sierra Manual, lets look at a few different bullets:

    Most semi-spitzers will actually increase in B.C. as their velocity drops, some of these are:

    .224" 40 gr Hornet
    .224" 40 gr HP
    .224" 45 gr Hornet
    .224" 55 gr Semi-Point
    .224" 55 gr HPBT
    .224" 69 gr HPBT MK

    Most light for caliber HP bullets will behave this way as well.

    Many bullets stay basically the same such as:

    .257" 90 gr HPBT
    .264" 120 gr HPBT MK
    .284" 168 gr HPBT MK

    And many more. YOu can not say that your B.C. will decrease with less velocity as it will often increase and just as often stay the same for all practical purposes.

    The only way to know for sure is field testing at the varying ranges.

    Good Shooting!!!

    Kirby Allen(50)
     
  7. DANTEC

    DANTEC Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    390
    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2002
    esay way to compare the truest of bullet BC is to shoot same distance same ( closely same velocity as possible ) another bullet of same class weight as 180 SMK or 175 SMK ( Sierra BC are quite right ) and compare both trajectory and BC

    BC is from now a very good way to sale bullet but real BC value are sometime disapointed for real shooter , in a confortable living roon all is laways OK but oon the range .....

    good shooting

    DAN TEC
     
  8. chris matthews

    chris matthews Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    838
    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    [ 08-23-2004: Message edited by: chris matthews ]
     
  9. rufous

    rufous Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2001
    Jon A, so what bc have you come up with for the Nosler 30 cal 200 Accubond? Thanks, Rufous.
     
  10. rufous

    rufous Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2001
    I went out today to shoot at 1000 yards (this was the first time I had ever shot at 1000 yards). I was using my sporter weight (9.3# with Leupold 2.5-8X scope) big game rifle chambered to 300 Win Mag. This time I brought my chronograph. Muzzle velocity was 3085 fps (range was 3073 to 3090 fps). It took 95 clicks of elevation (from an initial zero at 250 yards) to rezero for 1000 yards. This equates to a B.C. of 0.47. I also dialed in 10 clicks of windage to account for the 4mph breeze and fired an 8" group of 3 shots. The elevation was 3225 feet and the temperature was 33 degrees F. Pressure was 26.78". I do not know what the humidity was. The bullet was the Barnes 180 TSX. Rufous.

    [ 12-03-2004: Message edited by: rufous ]
     
  11. Jon A

    Jon A Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Sorry, I realized I never answered your question. [​IMG]

    I haven't done any instrumented-type tests, but out to 800 yds Nosler's claim of .588 has been right on for me as accurately as I can tell from drop (correcting for conditions, of course).

    .470 sounds reasonable to me for the 180 TSX--a lot more reasonable than what they advertise, that's for sure.

    However, your experiment needs a control. Otherwise it could be blamed on other things like the clicks of the scope being off, etc, as others have mentioned. Doing the same test with one of the plastic tipped bullets would put those issues to rest.
     
  12. Jon A

    Jon A Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    [ QUOTE ]
    This was a bit crude but it shows the BC to be more like 0.410 rather than 0.55 which is what Barnes has published.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    I recently did a quick test on that bullet over the Oehler at 5 and 205 yds. Not an especially sophisticated test and a small sample size so don't put faith in these numbers down to the last .001 or anything, but they are enough to give me a pretty good idea.

    The 180 TSX measured .411. In the very same test the 180 Scirocco measured .539 and the 200 AccuBond .550. All numbers corrected to ICAO.

    Like I said, I'd expect the averages to shift a little had I done 20-shot strings, etc. But the Scirocco launched at the same velocity put about 100 fps on the TSX at only 200 yds at 4400 ft altitude (the difference would be greater closer to sea level).

    FWIW, there you go.