Why Berger?

bigngreen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
8,187
Location
SW Montana
Before this gets too sideways and of track, there are MANY of us who have had a better track record with Bergers than what we previously used, we try other stuff and keep coming back to the terminal performance we get from the Berger. There is also many who don't get along with them and their just not their cup of tea, that's fine, there are a pile bullets out there for a reason we all like what we have the best performance out of and that why you get so much strong opinion. I have had crap luck with Barnes, decent with Accubonds but blood shot everything regardless of hit so I tried the Berger and have seen a LOT of elk one shot killed with them from inside 100 yards to over 1000 one shot kills with boring consistency even when I do have to punch through a shoulder I have yet to see one not make it to the of side but after years of shooting Barnes with a shoulder hit I'm still ready to do a mag dump on them.
Bottom line we all have preferences and use what fits in them and give us the terminal performance we need!!
 

ronstone09

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
348
Location
portland, oregon
Hi All,
I don't post a lot but I read a lot here. I thought this is the perfect place to ask something I have wondered for a long time. Please school me on why Berger is so popular? I know they are crazy accurate with great B.C's but If I am correct they are rapid expansion and I was thinking if you get a bad shot (shoulder) you wouldn't get penetration especially at longer distances.
I use the following bullets and please feel free to critique or compare what I typically shoot (whitetail & some mule deer).
Blaser R8 30/06: 150gr Barnes TSX
Kimber 270wsm: 130gr Swift Scirocco

Thanks!
I use the 140 vld in my 700 rem for 600 yard competition as they perform well and have good tolerences
 

Sako284

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2020
Messages
198
Location
Tennessee
Sort through a box of ELD or ABLR and you will see why we shoot bergers. Plus they are absolutely deadly.



I have had trouble with them on small bodied deer as impacts dip towards 1900 FPS. But on anything larger they are absolutely phenomenal. Bergers are excellent.
 

Scott E Ames

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
274
I started using Bergers after arriving in Africa with about 40% of the Accubond tips separated from my cartridges during the flight over. When that happens your bullets shoot more like pop bottle rockets than the "precision ammo" you reloaded. I now use Berger as you don't have to worry about anything falling off. I will use Nosler Partition but have not felt good about going back to Accubonds although the problem has reportedly been resolved.
From my limited perspective Bergers are extremely accurate killers without any more meat destruction than any other bullet. Meat destruction to me is usually related to impact velocity and shot location unless you want to talk about FMJ or monolithic solids.
 

Coyote_Hunter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2019
Messages
261
Location
6491 feet above sea level
Hi All,
I don't post a lot but I read a lot here. I thought this is the perfect place to ask something I have wondered for a long time. Please school me on why Berger is so popular? I know they are crazy accurate with great B.C's but If I am correct they are rapid expansion and I was thinking if you get a bad shot (shoulder) you wouldn't get penetration especially at longer distances.
I use the following bullets and please feel free to critique or compare what I typically shoot (whitetail & some mule deer).
Blaser R8 30/06: 150gr Barnes TSX
Kimber 270wsm: 130gr Swift Scirocco

Thanks!
I wouldn't change a thing if you are happy with the way the TSX and Scirocco work. I'm a big fan of the TTSX and LRX in all my rifles (not the TSX) and the Scirocco II have been very good for me in my 6.5-06AI as well.

I refuse to use Berger or other thin-skinned bullets for my big game hunting. Everything I shoot is withing 600 yards and my longest has been a cow elk at 487 yds. Barnes TTSX/LRX, Nosler AB, Swift Scirocco II and North Fork SS all work just fine for me. I've seen what thin-skinned bullets can do (and failed to do) and have no use for them.

What I want is bullets that have fast and reliable but controlled and limited expansion, with high weight retention for deep penetration, and provide good accuracy. High B.C. values are nice so long as the other characteristics are not compromised. And the fact is that the benefit of high B.C. values is way more important past 600 yards than inside it.

Last week I was at the range shooting my 243 with 95g SST (B.C. 0.355) launched at a nominal 3000fps. Hit a clay pigeon at 600 yards on the third try (first shot was a sighter, second barely missed, third destroyed it). I use this load for antelope (and have no doubt that it would have been effective on antelope at that range) but wouldn't consider it for elk or mulies, simply because I have much better options.

Among those better options are the bullets I listed above and I'll include the new Federal Terminal Ascent bullets. I'm working up a 155g TA for my .280 Rem and 7mm RM. Turns the .280 Rem into a viable 700-yard elk rifle with a nominal 2100fps and 1500fpe at that range and 7000 feet altitude and gets the 7mm RM to 875 yards. Better yet, the TA does it with a bullet using design characteristics that I know work very well from years of personal experience - the tip for higher B.C., a bonded front core and a monolithic rear core. That, 700+ yard effective range for elk, longer for smaller game, relatively mild recoil and no worries about bullets splattering on close range, high-velocity impacts - not much to dislike.

YMMV
 

KurtB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
538
Location
Colorado
I had a bedded whitetail buck that was in a patch of yuccas at 360 yards. Took a rest off a fence post and only shot I had was right on the shoulder. 140 vld penciled in, left a bullet diameter hole in the meat up to the scapula, hit that and on back side of scapula was about a nickel sized hole and then it went to pieces and shredded the lungs. Lost maybe 4 ounces of shoulder meat.

Busted a mountain goat shoulder to anchor it without rolling down a mountain, again 140 vld and very little meat lost.
Just a couple of examples of shooting shoulders on purpose. No worries with a 140 vld 6.5 caliber.
 

25WSM

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,235
Location
New Castle PA
One nice thing about Berger's is the vld hunting bullet is usually more accurate also. Most of the guys shooting 1000 yard matches use the hunting vld. The thinner jacket on the hunting bullets are more consistent. Anybody know how thick the hybrids jackets are compared to the hunting vlds.
Shep
 

nicholasjohn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2019
Messages
694
Location
Vancouver, WA
Who would shoot anything in tbe shoulder on purpose?
There are lots of situations where I prefer a shoulder shot. Sometimes you need to knock them down right now, so they don't run onto a neighboring property where you can't go to drag them out, other times maybe you don't want them to run down into some nasty canyon where it's tough to pack them out. Where I grew up, there were so many deer hunters in the woods that if you didn't knock the buck down on the spot, somebody else would be taking your deer home with him. A shot through both shoulders generally took care of that problem, but there goes a bunch of eatin' meat. Often the shoulder is all you can see through a small hole in the brush, and it's a shoulder shot or no shot at all.
 

6.5-300 BEE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2020
Messages
341
Location
florida
As I said, many pages ago, no reason to use thin jacket bullets at ranges most game is shot,
 

6.5-300 BEE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2020
Messages
341
Location
florida
You may recall, before Bergers became "kool", many were using mach bullets. Same construction, same results.
 
Top