Berger BC's

[aramarine6]

I'm curious as to how many of you have verified the "claimed" BC of Berger bullets. I feel that for every given caliber they have a better BC than all the other major manufacturers. While all those other companies(Sierra,nosler,hornady etc.) have similar claimed BC's. What is Berger doing that other companies are not? And why wouldn't the other companies attempt to follow suit? IDK if its just me but their numbers seem alittle high. What are your thoughts?

 

[Carlsbad]

That sounds like a reasonable question. I too wonder what is different. However, doesn't each manufacturer have incentive to publish the most accurate BC they have so that your calculations are as accurate as possible causing you to hit more targets and buy their bullets again?

--Jerry

 

[JeffVN]

I think most see BC as a selling point. Lots of folks will try to buy the most efficient bullet (the one with the higest BC) when trying to decide between two bullets and manufacturers. The computer-based method they use to predict BC has been found to be pretty inaccurate, when compared with actual testing of bullet performance in real life.

I have found that the bullet BC given by Sierra and Lapua are very realistic.

Another part of the learning curve is at what distance you are going to shoot the bullets. Most manufactuers don't test thier bullets to subsonic transition, which means if you shoot them fairly fast at great distances (for me its most noticable at distances beyone 1,500 yards) the BC they publish will be too high. The only thing you can do is track your own results and keep the data. Some of the Ballistic software programs allow you to taylor the program to match your actual results. I know Field Firing Solutions is one of those.

I'm sure everyone has their own ideas, those are some of mine on the topic of BCs...

Jeffvn

 

[M67]

When you hold a Berger 140gr VLD up next to the Lapua 139gr Scenar, or a 140gr Nosler CC, it is in my opinion very easy to imagine the Berger having a higher BC - i looks quite a bit more slippery - and it is.

The bullets i shoot regularly at long range
- Hornady Amax .224" 80gr
- Lapua Scenar .264" 123 and 139 gr
- Berger VLD .264" 130gr
- Lapua Scenar .308" 155gr
- Berger VLD .308", 155gr
- Berger VLD .284" 180gr
- Berger OTM .338" 300gr
- Lapua Scenar .338" 300gr
- Barnes TTSXLRBT (at least..) .338" 265gr

All have very close to their advertised BCs. Given correct velocity (hard to obtain wo. LR-shooting given consumer grade chronographs) within 1-2 clicks at all ranges supersonic are the norm. Usually within 0.1mrad unless dodgy conditions - further than 1km, up- and downdraft will render shooters own data innaccurate very often.
All of these bullets exhibit better than advertised BCs when shot far into subsonic range, both the 7mm and the 338 Berger will hit high at extreme flight times.

This was shot at 600m using Lapua 123gr factory ammo, sighted in at 100m and using velocity posted on box, corrected for barrel length. The first shot past 100m is on this piece of paper.

Earlier Lapua BCs vere grossly inflated, and at least the Sierra BCs have been prone to odd things happening - but today, i guess not.
The worst example of an inflated BC i have seen, was the GS Custom 267gr 338 bullet. I remember not the advertised BC, but it was better than everything seen elsewhere by far. In reality, it was less than that of a 250gr Scenar.

When one starts fudging with these things, i would recommend using at Bryan Litz's BC, together with the advertised ones - and when in need to correct velocity or BC to match real data - correct the velocity, not the BC.
The BCs are measured to a far greater degree of accuracy than the average shooter/chronograph setup will measure velocity.

K

 

[Joe King]

Bergers BC's aren't claimed, their calculated by rounds down range. Where the major manf's design their bullets to function in factory rifles and fit saami spec constraints Berger does not do that (except for the Classic Hunter design). Berger diesign their bullets to fit a different set of criteria that does not comply with saami specs. Most of the major manf use calculated BC's which are almost always optimistic, so yea sure they use that as a marketing ploy. Berger doesn't though, Walt has different approach which is to provide us with the best they can give and let the results speak for themselves. Top it all off with an industry leading bullet engineer, and top notch customer service you get some pretty neat stuff that's pushes the limits.

 

[Mikecr]

The computer-based method they use to predict BC has been found to be pretty inaccurate, when compared with actual testing of bullet performance in real life.

This is the only part I doubt in what you've said.
I am sure Bryan Litz can predict design BC, barring any issues with dynamic stability, from his laptop.
Then there is the field validation, and then he's averaging BCs to velocities -for us.

Some bullet makers don't even bother to quess about their BCs. In fact, some of the bullet makers out there, touted as the best, are clueless about many ballistic attributes of their bullets. And they didn't design them.
Some pull any reasonable number out of their behinds(as asked for one). Some play with numbers, providing only the highest 'potential' BC, at very high MVs, and non-std atmospheric conditions(or stds that favor higher numbers).

Berger uses ICAO and expected velocity ranges which is conservative, and trust me they could claim considerably higher BCs if they wanted to play games.
But instead, they're setting a usable more accurate standard for us.
They're leading the way here and should be rewarded for the efforts.

 

[aramarine6]

Where the major manf's design their bullets to function in factory rifles and fit saami spec constraints Berger does not do that (except for the Classic Hunter design). Berger diesign their bullets to fit a different set of criteria that does not comply with saami specs. Most of the major manf use calculated BC's which are almost always optimistic, so yea sure they use that as a marketing ploy. QUOTE]

Now this makes sense to me. If they are able to produce something that is outside saami guidelines then I understand why they can/do produce better BC bullets. Maybe I'll have to pick up a pack of 338's and see what they do in the RUM. I'm getting excellent results with the Hornady 285 BTHPs but I'd like to build a load to compare them too.

 

[M67]

Some bullet makers don't even bother to quess about their BCs. In fact, some of the bullet makers out there, touted as the best, are clueless about many ballistic attributes of their bullets. And they didn't design them.

Lapua currently test fire their bullets on a test range, measuring every inch of bullet path with doppler radar.
"Lapua Ballistic" ballistic software contain bullet specific drag functions and predict Lapua bullet ballistics with scary precision.

About a month ago the Scenar L line of bullets was doppler radar measured, and BC-data should become available soon.

K

 

[Joe King]

This is the only part I doubt in what you've said.
I am sure Bryan Litz can predict design BC, barring any issues with dynamic stability, from his laptop.
Then there is the field validation, and then he's averaging BCs to velocities -for us.

Some bullet makers don't even bother to quess about their BCs. In fact, some of the bullet makers out there, touted as the best, are clueless about many ballistic attributes of their bullets. And they didn't design them.
Some pull any reasonable number out of their behinds(as asked for one). Some play with numbers, providing only the highest 'potential' BC, at very high MVs, and non-std atmospheric conditions(or stds that favor higher numbers).

Berger uses ICAO and expected velocity ranges which is conservative, and trust me they could claim considerably higher BCs if they wanted to play games.
But instead, they're setting a usable more accurate standard for us.
They're leading the way here and should be rewarded for the efforts.

This right here ^ How many companies does the 2nd in charge get on a forum to interact with their customers, and bend over backwards to resolve any possible issues?

 

[Mikecr]

It's a **** good business model. And Lapua has done a lot for us also.