Gel Test Data part 2

[Jonoton]

Shooters and ballistic analysts compare the comprehensive performance of any one particular manufacturer's different grain bullets within the same product line for a given rifle as a matter of course, to say nothing of comparisons between separate manufacturers equivalent construction bullets. And while there do exist some counterintuitive examples of a lighter grain bullet within a C&C product line having a higher BC than the next heavier, the tradeoffs between each are more readily understood than a comparison between a C&C and a copper solid.

 

[doverpack12]

Thank you for sharing these results. I've been shooting hammers for years and slowly moving each rifle or those I load for to hammer. Typically I choose shock hammers because most hunters will never need or be capable of taking a shot at distance where it would matter.
Myself I have been working on some combo loads in my 7mm STW with a 1:9 twist. 143 HH and 195 Berger are both as much bullet as I can shoot and fully stabilize. Steve's test at a minimum shows there is little to no need. In my rifle with my mild 143 load (3350 fps, can push it 250 plus fps faster if I want to) I get 1800 fps at 1025 yards wind drift 4.7 moa calculated or 52". The 195 (3023) I get 1800 fps at 1250 yards wind drift 4.0 moa calculated or 53".
Now yes I could push the hammer faster but it shoots incredible where I load it and has proven extremely effective terminally for me so I'm not touching that. What the above info combined with Steve's testing info shows me is that terminally these two bullets are pretty close at 1025 yards. Berger there is 2000 fps (equal terminal estimation to hammer at 1800 fps) however, wind is 3.1 moa or 34" estimation. Now who knows what wind hold or correction would really be but to me we have to acknowledge there is likely a little wider margin for error on wind correction with the Berger at max terminal range in my rifle.
This really changes my thinking and am extremely tempted to just stick with 100% hammer 143 because increased terminal performance range is what I was chasing with 195s but do I really get that increased distance? MAYBE it would take gel testing these two bullets below 1800 impact to see where the Berger and hammer each become unpredictable and fail.
In Steve's test the 215 didn't have much more distance or velocity drop before it pencils through the animal (on a deer it might have been a long slow death). Steve's 199 test was consistent at close to 1800 so how much lower can it go before performance terminally is unacceptable for the intended purpose of incapacitation?
Therefore in my rifle I now have 100 Berger 195s to compare at distance and see if they increase my hit percentage or not, but terminally I consider them equal to a slight advantage for the 143 at low end impacts and a landslide up close where shot angle simply isn't a factor with the 143 but I have to be selective with the 195. Previous thought was to carry 143s and if needed pull out 195s for the right long range opportunity.
Thank you again Steve for sharing openly and to those who provided great discussion on this thread. Selfishly I would like to see the same test next with 7mm 143 HH and 195 Berger possibly the 190 Berger because in a 9" twist they both stabilize and would be max or best bullet in each line for long range.
Follow that up with 6.5 mm simulation 124 HH and the Berger equivalent that stabilizes in a factory 8" twist barrel.

 

[ButterBean]

Thank you for sharing these results. I've been shooting hammers for years and slowly moving each rifle or those I load for to hammer. Typically I choose shock hammers because most hunters will never need or be capable of taking a shot at distance where it would matter.
Myself I have been working on some combo loads in my 7mm STW with a 1:9 twist. 143 HH and 195 Berger are both as much bullet as I can shoot and fully stabilize. Steve's test at a minimum shows there is little to no need. In my rifle with my mild 143 load (3350 fps, can push it 250 plus fps faster if I want to) I get 1800 fps at 1025 yards wind drift 4.7 moa calculated or 52". The 195 (3023) I get 1800 fps at 1250 yards wind drift 4.0 moa calculated or 53".
Now yes I could push the hammer faster but it shoots incredible where I load it and has proven extremely effective terminally for me so I'm not touching that. What the above info combined with Steve's testing info shows me is that terminally these two bullets are pretty close at 1025 yards. Berger there is 2000 fps (equal terminal estimation to hammer at 1800 fps) however, wind is 3.1 moa or 34" estimation. Now who knows what wind hold or correction would really be but to me we have to acknowledge there is likely a little wider margin for error on wind correction with the Berger at max terminal range in my rifle.
This really changes my thinking and am extremely tempted to just stick with 100% hammer 143 because increased terminal performance range is what I was chasing with 195s but do I really get that increased distance? MAYBE it would take gel testing these two bullets below 1800 impact to see where the Berger and hammer each become unpredictable and fail.
In Steve's test the 215 didn't have much more distance or velocity drop before it pencils through the animal (on a deer it might have been a long slow death). Steve's 199 test was consistent at close to 1800 so how much lower can it go before performance terminally is unacceptable for the intended purpose of incapacitation?
Therefore in my rifle I now have 100 Berger 195s to compare at distance and see if they increase my hit percentage or not, but terminally I consider them equal to a slight advantage for the 143 at low end impacts and a landslide up close where shot angle simply isn't a factor with the 143 but I have to be selective with the 195. Previous thought was to carry 143s and if needed pull out 195s for the right long range opportunity.
Thank you again Steve for sharing openly and to those who provided great discussion on this thread. Selfishly I would like to see the same test next with 7mm 143 HH and 195 Berger possibly the 190 Berger because in a 9" twist they both stabilize and would be max or best bullet in each line for long range.
Follow that up with 6.5 mm simulation 124 HH and the Berger equivalent that stabilizes in a factory 8" twist barrel.

Finally.......... A guy who "Gets It"

 

[cohunt]

Sooo.. back to the wind drift part- regardless of mono vs cup and core --here are my thoughts.

I'm in the same boat as Steve --- wind drift is an extremely difficult aspect to calculate that os not based solely on BC.

BC changes drag- which can reduce some wind effect and also time of flight-- yet a greater velocity also reduces the time of flight.
Less time in the air-- less time for wind to change the bullets vector.
BUT a larger/longer bullet would have more surface area for the "side" wind to affect its flight path. BUT a heavier bullet will be less affected by wind than a lighter one (newton's law of motion/inertia)- BUT we also know that gyroscopic stability ( twist rates/rpm's) will affect straight line paths in 2 different aspects-- the higher the spin- the more stable ( think football spin) - BUT the faster the spin the more spin drift at distance.
Then throwing in the inconsistencies of actual wind speed and direction over distance in the real world ( up drafts and different vectors due to terrain or temp changes)
You could start throwing in the Coriolis effect for further distances too.

ALL of these things will affect a bullets flight path --- and the further the distance is- the longer the time of flight is- the more all these things will change the ultimate poi vs the poa ---- drop can be calculated fairly accurately as long as the data input is accurate--- but the wind drift has so many variables it gets harder to calculate accurately the further the distance/time gets.

I like the "real world" testing he is doing -- I would prefer to see bullets on paper vs rocks too so we can get a better idea of any change it might show on an animals vital area ( since we are talking hunting)

I read and view the info presented and draw my own conclusions

The more people that can participate in "testing side by side comparisons" -- the more conslclusions we can draw.

The most difficult part of the testing is the duplication of weather variables in my mind.

 

[adam32+P]

The light and fast vs slower and heavier debate has been going on for decades, starting with Weatherby and again with Lazzeroni. Time and time again it's proven that heavier and higher BC is better for long range. Under 600-700 yards, flip a coin, it doesn't matter, just about any bullet can kill deer at those ranges. But at LONG range, BC wins every time.

 

[ButterBean]

The light and fast vs slower and heavier debate has been going on for decades, starting with Weatherby and again with Lazzeroni. Time and time again it's proven that heavier and higher BC is better for long range. Under 600-700 yards, flip a coin, it doesn't matter, just about any bullet can kill deer at those ranges. But at LONG range, BC wins every time.

You will need to hold for wind regardless of what bullet you shoot, I'll hold the extra 5 inches for a bullet that I know will be lethal, Hammer Bullets have changed the game

 

[HARPERC]

Wind calls are largely a guess until the bullet arrives.

As much as I respect many peoples ability to make educated guesses at range, I'm not convinced anyone can tell me with any certainty what the ACTUAL wind velocity is at the top of the bullet arc in the middle of a cross canyon shot.

Meaning absent accurate inputs it's very difficult for us end users to state with any certainty if one bullet fired at a different time encountered the same conditions. Thus we have these discussions, based on legitimate experiences with different outcomes.

We write down our misses, and share our successes. The variables rifle to rifle in "real world" BC solutions with the SAME bullet can have one pulling their hair, much less comparing side by side.

If you missed the part about respect for ALL those putting in work, and sharing experiences I meant it.

 

[eoperator]

My experience for reference- 300wm throated 1:8 26" r26, -1gr from pressure, hornady calculator default environmental, published bc

215 berger @3025mv
1000yd
velocity 1833fps
wind 50in
-234traj

199hh @3150mv
1000yd
velocity 1738fps
wind 58in
-234traj

Easy accuracy with both

 

[Ucsdryder]

Extremes are what's fun. Whether it be extreme speed, or extreme distance.

Leave @Creedmoor shooter alone! He shoots a creedmoor. He's the definition of boring! I'm kidding of course!

 

[Ucsdryder]

My simple brain understands it like this…bc allows you to maintain velocity. If you start it significantly faster you can overcome a lot of the advantages of BC. There's more that goes into it of course, but that's the dumbed down version.

So here's my questions. What happens if you have speed AND bc? Let's see a 143HH and a 145 CEB lazer single feed (which feed out of 7saum mag box just fine).

How does hammer overcome the same bullet and similar speed with a higher bc? I assume it doesn't, but that's just a guess.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

My simple brain understands it like this…bc allows you to maintain velocity. If you start it significantly faster you can overcome a lot of the advantages of BC. There's more that goes into it of course, but that's the dumbed down version.

So here's my questions. What happens if you have speed AND bc? Let's see a 143HH and a 145 CEB lazer single feed (which feed out of 7saum mag box just fine).

How does hammer overcome the same bullet and similar speed with a higher bc? I assume it doesn't, but that's just a guess.

With terminal performance.

 

[adam32+P]

You will need to hold for wind regardless of what bullet you shoot, I'll hold the extra 5 inches for a bullet that I know will be lethal, Hammer Bullets have changed the game

Yes Hammers are lethal, as you know I've killed animals with them too.

But, basically every other hunting bullet in existence is also lethal.

I won't call anything "the best" because they all have their goods and bads.

 

[Ucsdryder]

With terminal performance.

What part was that answering? The part about overcoming same speed and higher bc? Does a hammer have better terminal performance than a ceb? The way they shed pedals I assumed they have similar terminal performance? Is that assumption wrong?

 

[Creedmoor shooter]

Leave @Creedmoor shooter alone! He shoots a creedmoor. He's the definition of boring! I'm kidding of course!

Hey man I'm calling racist! To add to my boring nature, I not only own 1 creedmoor, I actually have 3! 1 in 6.5 for generic hunting, then 2 6mms for competition.

If you looked up the word boring in the dictionary, you'd find me