entoptics
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2018
- Messages
- 881
Tested out some Hammers over the last few weeks, and thought I'd publish my findings on the ballistic coefficients.
Tested using LabRadar and a Kestrel for environmentals. Used JBM Ballistics online calculator (click here). I shoot in a flat dirt field, so the LabRadar tracks exceptionally well, as there is no vegetation, let alone objects, which will interfere with tracking. I discard any tracking file that is less than 90 yards, and most have 100-150 yards of reliable data.
All 0.264 bullets were fired in a 264WM, 1:8", 5R, X-Caliber Savage Prefit. I've included some other bullets I've repeatedly measured in the same rifles, to give an idea of other brands' offset from quoted.
All 0.284 bullets fired in a 7mm-08, 1:8", 5R, X-Caliber Savage Prefit.
Some commentary on my method.
I've used the LabRadar and JBM to calculate the B.C. of hundreds of shots, for perhaps 20 different bullets of various calibers and weights, in half a dozen different rifles. So far, the calculated B.C. allows me to shoot closer to reality than the generic B.C.s published by manufacturers. This has held true out to 1400 yards, though the vast majority of my shooting is from 500-900 yds. It's not perfect by any means, but it usually gives me a VERY good place to start confirming real world performance.
In other words, I trust the LabRadar within it's tolerances. A difference of a couple of percent from quoted is outside the LabRadar's abilities to measure, but >5% is certainly meaningful in my opinion.
Some commentary on inevitable commentary...
Not every hunter has the luxury or skill to easily confirm drop data out to maximum hunting distances. Manufacturers should strive to offer a B.C. as close to reality for the average shooter as they can. A couple of LabRadars and a decent weather meter are not that expensive to buy and use. Hornady apparently has a bajillion dollar Doppler setup, and other than the 147 ELDM above, and the 0.284 180 ELDM, every Hornady bullet I've ever measured with LabRadar has been within a couple of percent of their quoted B.C., with a couple actually exceeding the published values by a percent or two.
Every rifle is different, but the rifles used in this test should be conservative, in that they should give the best possible chance for a good B.C. Quality barrels, fast twist in the 7mm-08, and high velocity for stability in the 264. I've tested the same bullets in two different rifles/calibers/twists a few times, and the difference from rifle to rifle was never more than a percent or two, so I find "rifles are different" to be specious at best.
Anyway, hope this information is helpful.
Tested using LabRadar and a Kestrel for environmentals. Used JBM Ballistics online calculator (click here). I shoot in a flat dirt field, so the LabRadar tracks exceptionally well, as there is no vegetation, let alone objects, which will interfere with tracking. I discard any tracking file that is less than 90 yards, and most have 100-150 yards of reliable data.
All 0.264 bullets were fired in a 264WM, 1:8", 5R, X-Caliber Savage Prefit. I've included some other bullets I've repeatedly measured in the same rifles, to give an idea of other brands' offset from quoted.
| G1 (LabRadar) | G7 (LabRadar) | Quoted G1 | Quoted G7 | G1 % Difference | G7 % Difference | |
| 124 HH | 0.413 | 0.202 | 0.245 | 82% | ||
| Barnes 145 Match Burner | 0.647 | 0.321 | 0.703 | 92% | ||
| Hornady 147 ELDM | 0.662 | 0.326 | 0.697 | 0.351 | 95% | 93% |
| Berger 156 EOL | 0.660 | 0.327 | 0.679 | 0.347 | 97% | 94% |
| Barnes 127 LRX | 0.458 | 0.224 | 0.468 | 98% | ||
| Hornady 143 ELDX | 0.640 | 0.313 | 0.623 | 0.314 | 103% | 100% |
All 0.284 bullets fired in a 7mm-08, 1:8", 5R, X-Caliber Savage Prefit.
| Bullet | G1 LabRadar | G7 LabRadar | Quoted G1 | Quoted G7 | G1 % Differnce | G7 % Difference |
| 140 Absolute Hammer | 0.389 | 0.194 | 0.225 | 86% | ||
| 143 Hammer Hunter | 0.399 | 0.200 | 0.230 | 87% | ||
| Badlands 140 SBDII | 0.516 | 0.259 | 0.560 | 0.287 | 92% | 90% |
| Barnes 139 LRX | 0.445 | 0.223 | 0.470 | 95% | ||
| Barnes 145 LRX | 0.466 | 0.234 | 0.486 | 96% |
Some commentary on my method.
I've used the LabRadar and JBM to calculate the B.C. of hundreds of shots, for perhaps 20 different bullets of various calibers and weights, in half a dozen different rifles. So far, the calculated B.C. allows me to shoot closer to reality than the generic B.C.s published by manufacturers. This has held true out to 1400 yards, though the vast majority of my shooting is from 500-900 yds. It's not perfect by any means, but it usually gives me a VERY good place to start confirming real world performance.
In other words, I trust the LabRadar within it's tolerances. A difference of a couple of percent from quoted is outside the LabRadar's abilities to measure, but >5% is certainly meaningful in my opinion.
Some commentary on inevitable commentary...
Not every hunter has the luxury or skill to easily confirm drop data out to maximum hunting distances. Manufacturers should strive to offer a B.C. as close to reality for the average shooter as they can. A couple of LabRadars and a decent weather meter are not that expensive to buy and use. Hornady apparently has a bajillion dollar Doppler setup, and other than the 147 ELDM above, and the 0.284 180 ELDM, every Hornady bullet I've ever measured with LabRadar has been within a couple of percent of their quoted B.C., with a couple actually exceeding the published values by a percent or two.
Every rifle is different, but the rifles used in this test should be conservative, in that they should give the best possible chance for a good B.C. Quality barrels, fast twist in the 7mm-08, and high velocity for stability in the 264. I've tested the same bullets in two different rifles/calibers/twists a few times, and the difference from rifle to rifle was never more than a percent or two, so I find "rifles are different" to be specious at best.
Anyway, hope this information is helpful.
