Badlands Precision Bullets thread - From BC to terminal ballistics

[Northkill]

Your results seem counterintuitive. They sure leave you scratching your head and wondering WTH? All else being equal, case, charge ,primer, jump etc. Less surface contact, less friction, correct? But it appears not.

Was engraving force the difference? Were the diameters exactly the same? Different alloys?

This has been discussed and debated at length in another thread.

 

[nralifer]

This has been discussed and debated at length in another thread.

Could you name the thread? I would like to look it up.

 

[FEENIX]

If you have a Lab Radar you can measure the G7 BC pretty accurately by using the JBM velocity BC calculator. I've compared those G7 BCs with bullets whose BCs were measured by AB's big Doppler and got values within 5% of what they measured over 1500 yds. G1BCs aren't accurate because they are too velocity dependent.

Yes, Sir, I do!

 

[nralifer]

I have no 30 cal. at this point. So far 6.5mm, .277, 7mm...

Same charge with two different bullets of the same weight resulting in two different velocities generally indicates the lower velocity bullet is at lower pressure. The lower engraving pressure bullet when pushed at the same pressure as the higher engraving pressure bullet will generally show more velocity.

Thank you for that information. I could repeat the same experiment in the 6.5 caliber. I have a 6.5x47 with a 7 twist barrel.

 

[BEEMAN]

Thank you for that information. I could repeat the same experiment in the 6.5 caliber. I have a 6.5x47 with a 7 twist barrel.

I'd like to see the experiment with the 6.5x47. Both of mine are 8 twist though.

 

[Northkill]

Thank you for that information. I could repeat the same experiment in the 6.5 caliber. I have a 6.5x47 with a 7 twist barrel.

I'm not biased for or against, but a test like that doesn't mean much to me. BC results are common science. For the velocity comparo you would have to prove the exact same pressure for each projo to offer satisfactory conclusions. We've played extensively with the 125 BD-2 in 6.5mm along with quite a few other projos so we are not uninformed on the possibilities and differences...

I'd like to assure you that I'm not on here to hijack or distress the thread or bash your product. I use your product and know it's strengths and weaknesses. They are fine-looking projos for sure. If they work, they sell themselves. That test just kind of hit me sideways as a marketing ploy. Comparisons can and are done to promote products all the time. There's lots of ways to play with numbers.

 

[Northkill]

Could you name the thread? I would like to look it up.

Hopefully someone else can help. I don't recall the thread title or what the original intended thread topic was. So many hit the ditches and no one remembers where it started or was headed in the first place. Should have flagged it. My apologies. (Not sure we want to reopen that can of snakes anyway.)

The pressure factor is for sure an interesting dynamic. It can give some seemingly counter-intuitive results. I would love to get some equipment and do some pressure testing comparos on my own, but this stage of life doesn't give me the time.

I appreciate what you do in developing and bringing a product to the market. The inputs of $$$$$, effort and stress are significant for sure.

 

[RH300UM]

Hopefully someone else can help. I don't recall the thread title or what the original intended thread topic was. So many hit the ditches and no one remembers where it started or was headed in the first place. Should have flagged it. My apologies. (Not sure we want to reopen that can of snakes anyway.)

Amen and 100% agree

I appreciate what you do in developing and bringing a product to the market. The inputs of $$$$$, effort and stress are significant for sure.

Again 100% agreement

 

[nralifer]

Yes, Sir, I do!

I'm not biased for or against, but a test like that doesn't mean much to me. BC results are common science. For the velocity comparo you would have to prove the exact same pressure for each projo to offer satisfactory conclusions. We've played extensively with the 125 BD-2 in 6.5mm along with quite a few other projos so we are not uninformed on the possibilities and differences...

I'd like to assure you that I'm not on here to hijack or distress the thread or bash your product. I use your product and know it's strengths and weaknesses. They are fine-looking projos for sure. If they work, they sell themselves. That test just kind of hit me sideways as a marketing ploy. Comparisons can and are done to promote products all the time. There's lots of ways to play with numbers.

You are right about not having pressure data, but if you have a $3000 piezoelectric pressure system, then you are in a position to repeat the experiment as outlined and generate simultaneous pressure data. I tried to minimize as many variables as possible. In science differing labs try and reproduce others results. One thing I admire about AB is that they try and generate data that is as objective as possible.
I don't know what you are insinuating with your comment about "there are lots of ways to play with numbers." I've reported the data as truthfully as possible and I was actually a little surprised at the result. Early on we also "played" with grooves in the shank to improve muzzle velocity but found that they prevented us from achieving the BCs we wanted and did not improve MV much. I found a Schlieren high speed photo of a bullet showing the shock waves around it. It happened to have a crimp grove in the shank which also generated a shock wave. I assume you know that a shock wave is compressed air that results at supersonic speed because the air flow cannot get by in a laminar way by an abrupt change in surface curvature and is thus a point of increased drag. Also the ridges in Bullet #1 are about 0.0005" over the nominal caliber. The BD2 bullet used for the test were 0.00015" over nominal caliber. These data indicate that multiple over caliber groves on bullets needs more development and understanding.

 

[TXTrained]

There seems to have been rising interest in these bullets, but information is spread out and somewhat limited, so hopefully this thread will help consolidate information.

I would like to keep this thread somewhat organized, accurate, and to the point. If you have first hand experience please share it! If you want to tell us why we should just use brand x, please just save your time.

I have personally loaded two of their bullets so far. The 128 Bulldozer, in a .270 Sherman, and the 270 Super Bulldozer, in a .338 Norma Mag. From my experience with these two bullets, they do seem to reach max pressure with a lower powder charge compared to typical lead core bullets. Accuracy has been very good and easy to achieve. As far as animals taken, I have not taken anything with the 270 grain .338, though this year I will be using them. My cousin has managed to take two animals with the 128, one 6x6 bull and one California blacktail. The blacktail was hit through the shoulder on a broadside shot at around 75 yards, and made a death run 50 yards down a steep hill, leaving a significant blood trail, and piled up against a tree. The bull elk dropped dead in his tracks on the side of a very steep hill, the shot was quartering away up hill as the bull was turning to run, around 100 yards away. It entered behind the shoulder, and ended up under the hide on the neck on the off side, after penetrating around 2 foot of heavy elk. When the bull was processed, no heavy bone or spine was hit, the bullet passed just under the spine, but again, the bull dropped dead in his tracks. Thus far, terminal performance seems good, but we have no experience with extended 500+ yard shots. I should be changing that mid August....

View attachment 203603
.338 cal 270 grain Super Bull Dozer

View attachment 203604
Here are the results from a 630 yard ladder test done with the 270 SBD from my .338 Norma mag. 88.9 grains was my ending charge I went with, around 2830-2840 from my 24" barrel.

View attachment 203605
Here is the bullet recovered from the bull in the following photos. It appears to have performed in a similar fashion to the hammer type projectiles, loosing the front section causing more damage, and the remaining shank penetrating deeply. It is stated that this will happen at close range impacts, though on lower velocity impacts, the petals will remain on the bullet and expand as typically expected.

View attachment 203606

View attachment 203607View attachment 203608
And here is the California Blacktail. My cousin did not take any photos of the damage, but said the lungs were the typical bloody mess, and there was very little meat damage.

View attachment 203609
And a photo of the short and heavy blood trail.


This is only a very small sample of animals taken and bullets tested, but hopefully this thread will, over time, expand the knowledge base on these projectiles.

In talking with George, he is redesigning all of his bullets to have a higher bc. He has already done it with the next bullet I plan to test in my Wife's rifle once it is finished, a 145 grain 7mm bullet with a G1 bc of .620, or a G7 around .307. On their site, it is listed to have a .520 G1 bc, but there is a different model number for the new design and higher tested bc.

In addition, his prototypes with improved bc's are shaping up to be quite impressive. He sent some of his .338 cal 265 grain prototype solids to another long range shooter I know, and running them at 3185 fps from a 9 twist, has been using a G7 bc of .475 out to 3560 yards. The 270 Super Bulldozer, once redesigned, should have a very similar bc, according to George. This would put it in a different class than any other .338 hunting bullet, to my knowledge. Full information on the redesigned bullets should be available at shot show this year.

I will outline some of the kills that I have been told about by other members on here, I will not go into great detail though as they are not my kills, if they wish to comment further I will let them do so. These include a Kodiak brown bear taken at 50 yards with the .338 275 bulldozer, the .308 cal 196.5 grain used to take a dall ram at 225 yards, a bull caribou at 125 yards, a small grizzly at 135 yards, and a mountain goat at 525 yards, and the 145 .284 cal to take a dall sheep at 205 yards. No complaints on terminal performance, with good comments on the lack of meat damage, and also state that advertised bc's have all been relatively close to observed bc's, and all stated that these bullets do tend to pressure up with lower charges than lead core projectiles, though max speed usually isn't hindered a significant amount.

Alright, that is about all I got for now. Anyone else, please feel free to add your experiences with these bullets, and remember, photos make everything better!!

@Bravo 4 @phorwath @Swamplord @Chase723 @Corvalliscory
@Copper Guy

God Bless America - Fight for Freedom!!

Awesome Elk...

 

[nralifer]

Hopefully someone else can help. I don't recall the thread title or what the original intended thread topic was. So many hit the ditches and no one remembers where it started or was headed in the first place. Should have flagged it. My apologies. (Not sure we want to reopen that can of snakes anyway.)

The pressure factor is for sure an interesting dynamic. It can give some seemingly counter-intuitive results. I would love to get some equipment and do some pressure testing comparos on my own, but this stage of life doesn't give me the time.

I appreciate what you do in developing and bringing a product to the market. The inputs of $$$$$, effort and stress are significant for sure.

Thank you for your comments. I've never been afraid of opening cans of snakes. How else are you going to learn what snakes are slithering in the can?

 

[nralifer]

Your results seem counterintuitive. They sure leave you scratching your head and wondering WTH? All else being equal, case, charge ,primer, jump etc. Less surface contact, less friction, correct? But it appears not.

Was engraving force the difference? Were the diameters exactly the same? Different alloys?

The diameter of Bullet#1 was .3085"and that of the BD-2 was .30815" as measured with a Mitutoyo micrometer. Ostensibly the 0.0005" on Bullet #1 was supposed to act as a gas seal, but the multiple bands aren't really reducing intrabarrel friction as one might intuitively think.

 

[KH_Outdoors]

Picked up some 205gr sbd2's for my 300 Norma. Did a ladder test while looking for pressure with h1000 from 81-86gr. could only shoot 500 yards because of rain making the fields so muddy. looked like a good node with a flat spot between 82–83gr only gained 16fps, about 1.8" vertical.got stiff bolt lift at 84gr. Loaded up a jump test with 82.5gr and went from .010 off to .070 off. .060 off printed a nice little group right around .4 of an inch at 100 yards, despite battling pretty bad mirage, with an ES of 4fps. Loaded up the same load today but wasn't able to shoot at distance just 100 yards and put 3 in almost the same hole with an ES of 3fps. Will have to wait until I can get some distance out it seems promising. Anyone else shoot these in a 300 Norma? Was kind of shocked to hit pressure so early but velocity seemed good

Glad to see this! My 300 Norma is just about finished up. We are building the rifle around shooting the 205 SBD-2. Planning on trying H1000 & N565.

 

[akmtnhnt]

I got some comparative testing to demonstrate the effect of BC in the 308 Win (24" Bartlein, Lapua Palma SRP brass, 1x firing full length sized, CCI 450 primer).
Used a Lab Radar and measured the G7 BCs from the radar data.
Load was 49.5 gr Leverevolution with both bullets loaded 0.025"off lands.
Conditions 57F, 33% humidity, 28.25 inHg
Velocity, energy and BC calculations using JBM Trajectory and JBM BC (Velocities) calculators

Bullet #1 150.4 gr average
MV= 3035 fps average of 5 shots ES=9 fps
G7BC=0.184 average 5 shots
At 600 yds 1727 fps, 996 ft-lbs

Bullet #2. Badlands 150 gr BD-2 151gr average
MV=3089 fps average of 5 shots ES=7 fps
G7BC=0.266 average of 5 shots
At 600 yds 2131 fps, 1523 ft-lbs

Results show several things
1) bullet #1 had multiple bands to redice bearing surface and claims this reduces friction in the barrel, however when shot from the same gun, with the same powder charge and the same jump using the same brass and powder and loaded to a low ES in velocity it had an MV 53 fps slower than the BD-2 which was slightly heavier. The take home message is that multiple ridges along the bearing surface to cut down surface area contact with the barrel don't necessarily guarantee a higher MV at equivalent powder charges.

2) The velocity and energy differences at 600 yds under the same atmospheric conditions are large. The Badlands BD2 retained 52% more energy than Bullet #1 which was just under 1000 ft-lbs compared to the BD2 which retained 1523 ft-lbs. the speed difference was 404 fps in favor of the BD-2 bullet. The take home message is that BC matters, and the further out you go the more it matters. The BD-2 bullet reaches the same energy level as Bullet #1 at 900 yds rather than 600.

The picture below shows no significant primer flattening or ejector marks in either bullet load. Bullet #1 case is on the left, BD-2 case on right. There is some cratering in both but this is common with Savage actions.

What's the overall length of both cartridges? Is it the same? If bullet 1 is what I think it is, it's shorter than the BD2, and with the same COAL, that would mean it's not seated as deep into the case, which in turn means less pressure.

Going off a 2.800 SAAMI COAL, modeling it in GRT, that seating depth difference(0.145") is worth about 6000psi and around 70fps. Might be more/different depending on the actual COAL.