Marine sniper
Well-Known Member
180.5 and 210 HAT testing
A visual inspection of the HAT's revealed they have a rough, pitted exterior jacket compared to the very smooth Berger's. At the rebated boatail junction they have noticeably worse "fit and finish" than the Berger's. I can not say that the rough exterior hurts accuracy, but probably does not help.
I weighed 50 of the 180.5's (RCBS 1500) and recorded the following.
150.4-8
150.5-8
150.6-10
150.7-11
150.8-9
150.9-4
Per recommendation of HAT I loaded the rounds .030 of the lands, confirmed length via Stoney Point OAL gauge, average of 5 tries varying from 4.1670-4.1830 (.016) variance. Also per HAT I started at a slightly reduced load. My normal load for my Berger 210 is 80.0 of 7828. For the 180.5's I loaded 80, 80.5, 81, and 81.5. For the 210 I loaded 78.0
Conditions at the range were near perfect, 60's no wind, sunny.
I shot 3 rounds of my 210 Berger's and then switched to the HAT's (100 yards). In short the rifle did not like the HAT's. See results of targets. One positive thing about the 210's is that they appeared to stabilize at 100 yards. My chronograph was not working, so no data on velocity.
I do not mean this to be a conclusionary test of the HAT's, and I understand that they will probably be finicky to get to shoot, exotic bullets usually are. I can say that my rifle will normally shoot anything into no worse than 3/4 MOA. Attached is a 300 yard group that measured .942, shot on the same day with the Berger 210's. This is pretty typical for this rifle if I do my job, since I shoot off a bipod normally, it is tough for me to hold this level of accuracy all the time, but the rifle will do it.
I welcome comments / suggestions from LV or Greyghost, I would gladly try anything they suggest to get these bullets to shoot accurately in my rifle.
John
A visual inspection of the HAT's revealed they have a rough, pitted exterior jacket compared to the very smooth Berger's. At the rebated boatail junction they have noticeably worse "fit and finish" than the Berger's. I can not say that the rough exterior hurts accuracy, but probably does not help.
I weighed 50 of the 180.5's (RCBS 1500) and recorded the following.
150.4-8
150.5-8
150.6-10
150.7-11
150.8-9
150.9-4
Per recommendation of HAT I loaded the rounds .030 of the lands, confirmed length via Stoney Point OAL gauge, average of 5 tries varying from 4.1670-4.1830 (.016) variance. Also per HAT I started at a slightly reduced load. My normal load for my Berger 210 is 80.0 of 7828. For the 180.5's I loaded 80, 80.5, 81, and 81.5. For the 210 I loaded 78.0
Conditions at the range were near perfect, 60's no wind, sunny.
I shot 3 rounds of my 210 Berger's and then switched to the HAT's (100 yards). In short the rifle did not like the HAT's. See results of targets. One positive thing about the 210's is that they appeared to stabilize at 100 yards. My chronograph was not working, so no data on velocity.
I do not mean this to be a conclusionary test of the HAT's, and I understand that they will probably be finicky to get to shoot, exotic bullets usually are. I can say that my rifle will normally shoot anything into no worse than 3/4 MOA. Attached is a 300 yard group that measured .942, shot on the same day with the Berger 210's. This is pretty typical for this rifle if I do my job, since I shoot off a bipod normally, it is tough for me to hold this level of accuracy all the time, but the rifle will do it.
I welcome comments / suggestions from LV or Greyghost, I would gladly try anything they suggest to get these bullets to shoot accurately in my rifle.
John
Last edited:
