Barnes Response to Berger

[bwaites]

I shoot both Barnes and Berger bullets.

I shoot Barnes bullets very effectively in my midrange gun, a 6.5 Grendel. It is the bullet of choice for me for various reasons, not the least of which is its abililty to penetrate and perform effectively at the ranges I would hunt at. It is a sub-MOA bullet in the Grendel, and Mark LaRue took an elk at greater than 400 yards with one shot shooting a Barnes TSX. The shot was a pass through with devastating terminal ballistics, even though it did pass completely through.

My point is that the Barnes bullets are well made, and Barnes does not need to overhype their bullet to sell them. They are an excellent bullet in all respects.

I personally wish Barnes would make some high BC bullets for long range target shooting. I think that bullets made in a monolithic method are the future of long range shooting, because the tolerances for those bullets can be extremely tight, and they can be brought to an extremely sharp point. That has an added long range benefit. Bryan Litz can add more on that than I will ever know, but he hand points the Berger bullets he uses in competition, I believe.

Berger bullets are my bullet of choice in F class, though, because they shoot incredibly well out of my 7mm WSM. The higher BC's of their bullets, along with the JLKs, allow me to wring more out of my rifle. Indeed, with these bullets, the rifle shoots better than I am capable of achieving, though I am slowly improving.

I am impressed by Bergers commitment to improving their breed, and by Eric Steckers willingness to re-examine their products and lower their BC's when Bryan showed that there was a better way to measure the BC of long range bullets. That kind of leadership, when it might damage the sales in the short run is commendable.

I do wish that Berger would produce a 115-120 grain VLD in 6.5mm, for use in the Grendel, though!

AND, I wish that Berger would get some data for the 168 and 180 7mm bullets with RE17! Come on guys, the powders been available for more than a year, and it was DESIGNED for the short magnums!!

All that said, I wish ALL the manufacturers would actually create a SAAMI type database for the benefit of the consumer. A place where everyone used the same methodology to determine the BC of their bullets, and where the consumer could then go and fit the bullet to the rifle.

Standardization of the methodology would greatly improve the whole process, and allow everyone to compete on the same playing field.

In the long run, it would also improve the competition among manufacturers, as they saw what one company had done and tried to improve their products to keep up.

Bill

 

[dmgreene]

I have hunted with Barnes and Berger bullets. They will both kill deer, period. For the folks that say that Bergers won't do a good job deer, they don't know what they are talking about. Most people repeat what they read in magizines, see on hunting shows or read on the internet, not from personal experience. People say that a bullet failed because it came apart or didn't retain a certain amount of weight. If it kills quickly does it matter? When I hunted with Barnes bullets I had to track 80% of the deer that I shot but they penetrated clean through and killed the animal every time. So far with Bergers I haven't had to track one yet. Sometimes I get pass throughs with the Bergers and sometimes I don't. I don't care as long as the animal goes down fast. To me this is what determines bullet performance, not what somebody tells me its supposed to do. Why do you need a bullet that retains 90%+ to kill any thin skinned game? I am not putting Barnes bullets down, they do what they were intended to do, but for long range hunting there are better options IMO.

And by the way, 50 Barnes bullets=$30, 100 Berger bullets= $32 I can shoot almost twice as much and actually afford to practice with the same bullets that I will be killing with. And the bottom line is putting the bullet where it counts.

David

 

[MontanaRifleman]

I'm not getting defensive at all. Just making a generalized comment from reading various posts over the years on here, that is all. I'm speaking from a generalized standpoint. There are some rather opinionated people that certain products are all that should be used and if somebody offers a different opinion, then here comes the other comments on how they are wrong. It all comes down to that a certain product might work great for their applications, but not for somebody elses.

Just look at all these threads about Barnes vs Bergers and its a good example of the wolf pack mentality around here. The Berger fans seem to be foaming at the mouth. It's all about who's right and who's wrong.

What it all comes down to it is shoot and use what is best for your application and be happy about it.

I need to update my comment. Barnes shoot well, Noslers shoot well, Swifts shoot well and I'm sure Berger's shoot well too. I'm sure there are some other bullets out there that shoot well too. Now I'm politically correct. Jeez. Enough said.

idig4au,

I see you are getting a few replies and I am not trying to pile on. I do want to say, I just don't see what you seem to be reporting. There are a lot of opinionated folks on this site including me and you. I see very few people bashing other people because of the Cartridge, Bullet, Scope, etc. they use. A lot of guys might say, "I think that xxxx is the best thing since sliced bread", but that's not hammering the other guy just because he chooses yyyy.

This discussion IS NOT about Berger hammer Barnes because they have an inferior bullet. In fact, if you go back and read the original Barnes article, Barnes is the one who is implying that their bullets are superior to the Bergers, and using data that does not stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. The Berger guys merely defended themselves and in doing so, pointed out what appears to be made up data.

So the question to you is, Is Barnes data in that article accurate? There are a few other subjective statements and conclusions that also appear to be very questionable if not out right over the top.

For short to medium range, I will use a Barnes bullet before a Berger for taking game, especially large bodied and/or dangerous game and especially with smaller calibers. But not because of their article.

In that article, they imply that the Barnes bullets are a better long range hunting bullet than the Bergers. Depending on the definition of long range hunting, it is for the most part ridiculous. Bergers are more accurate, they go farther, they buck wind better and they do expand and cause lethal damage. As already mentioned, they should stick to their strong points and appeal the hunters who like those points and stop trying to be something they aren't unless they are willing to actually change the design of their bullets.

Nosler has come out with a better LR monometal than Barnes and other monometal makers are busy developing LR bullets. But this is going on a tangent.

Barnes started all of this, so maybe you should ask them if what they say is true. I plan to.

-MR

 

[Eric Stecker]

Bill (bwaites),

I want to address a few items you mentioned. Some is a bit off topic but important.

I do wish that Berger would produce a 115-120 grain VLD in 6.5mm, for use in the Grendel, though!

Visit our website to see that we are making an 85 gr FB, 100 gr BT and 120 gr BT in the 6.5mm. The 100 gr and 120 gr are shooting well in the Grendel. This is a relatively recent development but they are available.

I wish that Berger would get some data for the 168 and 180 7mm bullets with RE17

Send an email to Walt Berger at [email protected] asking him for this data as he may have it now. I am not certain of this but if he can get this for you he will. Walt has been working on our first loading manual for several years and we expect it to be released in 2010.

I know that we have been saying "the manual is coming" for years but I can relay that at this point we have a known amount of work to be done and it should not take more than 9-12 months. Much of the early delay in publishing our loading manual was sorting out how we were going to test all the data. This has been resolved.

I wish ALL the manufacturers would actually create a SAAMI type database for the benefit of the consumer

I have the same desire. I met with all the major bullet makers at the SHOT Show to discuss our working together on projects to enhance the shooting sports. A version of this is one of the projects. Something like this will take a lot of resources to produce properly. I am willing to do this on our own but it will take much longer. One way or another a version of this will become real.

A place where everyone used the same methodology to determine the BC of their bullets

Bryan Litz' book lists the results of his testing the BC of I believe over 170 long range bullets of every major brand. All this information can be found in his book along with a wealth of information on long range shooting. Every long range shooter should have a copy.

I know that when I say "Berger is committed to enhancing the shooting experience" it sounds like marketing hype. The fact is that we are actually doing real work to enhance the shooting experience. We are actively pursuing several projects that will enhance the shooting experience. Bryan's book is a recent example of a completed project.

Other projects are ongoing and many include all major brands not just Berger. I believe very strongly that if the shooting experience is enjoyable more people will shoot. This not only strengthens our freedom to own and use firearms but it also increases the size of the market for all manufacturers.

As I've said before I believe the firearms industry is uniquely required to band together if we are to survive. If the shooting sports weaken to the point of collapse we have so much more to lose than our jobs.

Regards,
Eric

 

[Pdvdh]

Bill (bwaites),

I know that we have been saying "the manual is coming" for years but I can relay that at this point we have a known amount of work to be done and it should not take more than 9-12 months. Much of the early delay in publishing our loading manual was sorting out how we were going to test all the data. This has been resolved.

Regards,
Eric

Thanks for sharing the information on the Berger loading manual. I didn't know such a manual was even in the works. Something to look forward to.

 

[bwaites]

Eric

Bill (bwaites),

I want to address a few items you mentioned. Some is a bit off topic but important.

Visit our website to see that we are making an 85 gr FB, 100 gr BT and 120 gr BT in the 6.5mm. The 100 gr and 120 gr are shooting well in the Grendel. This is a relatively recent development but they are available.

I had seen those bullets, I was hoping for something in the 110-115 grain range, as I am beginning to think that might be the ideal. But my best shooting bullets to date have been the 100 and 120 grain Nosler BT's, so I have every intent of trying the Bergers. Bill Alexander is impressed by them, and I've talked pretty extensively with him about them.

Send an email to Walt Berger at [email protected] asking him for this data as he may have it now. I am not certain of this but if he can get this for you he will. Walt has been working on our first loading manual for several years and we expect it to be released in 2010.

Will do, I called last week, but was told there was no RE17 data.

I know that we have been saying "the manual is coming" for years but I can relay that at this point we have a known amount of work to be done and it should not take more than 9-12 months. Much of the early delay in publishing our loading manual was sorting out how we were going to test all the data. This has been resolved.

No one understands better than me the hidden snags that come up in a project like this. I'm just gratefull that it will be available some day!

I have the same desire. I met with all the major bullet makers at the SHOT Show to discuss our working together on projects to enhance the shooting sports. A version of this is one of the projects. Something like this will take a lot of resources to produce properly. I am willing to do this on our own but it will take much longer. One way or another a version of this will become real.

Bryan Litz' book lists the results of his testing the BC of I believe over 170 long range bullets of every major brand. All this information can be found in his book along with a wealth of information on long range shooting. Every long range shooter should have a copy.

Bryan's book is on my "to buy" list, and I'm hoping that I'll understand it!

I know that when I say "Berger is committed to enhancing the shooting experience" it sounds like marketing hype. The fact is that we are actually doing real work to enhance the shooting experience. We are actively pursuing several projects that will enhance the shooting experience. Bryan's book is a recent example of a completed project.

Other projects are ongoing and many include all major brands not just Berger. I believe very strongly that if the shooting experience is enjoyable more people will shoot. This not only strengthens our freedom to own and use firearms but it also increases the size of the market for all manufacturers.

As I've said before I believe the firearms industry is uniquely required to band together if we are to survive. If the shooting sports weaken to the point of collapse we have so much more to lose than our jobs.

I appreciate the response, it was more than expected. I'm intrigued that someone else sees the need for the shooting sports manufacturers to be more consistent with their marketing and testing.

Regards,
Eric

Thanks!!

Bill

 

[elkaholic]

I make my own bullets and have done a lot of testing as well as with various manufacturers bullets. First of all, you can't kill what you can't hit and I have never found Barnes bullets to be that accurate for the type of hunting I do. Secondly, I think Barnes, and several of the other manufacturers that are copying their solid copper design, for the most part are coming to some wrong conclusions. When you are talking about 1 ton animals at 50 yds, maybe. People using solid copper on deer and elk and sacrificing accuracy are wasting their time (in my opinion). The bullet only harms the animal when it is inside the animal. The time it spends flying through the air after it exits is wasted energy. I've found that you want the bullet to expand greatly, or even come apart, as long as it has penetrated through the vitals. That being said, there is no perfect bullet for all situations and ranges. I started making my own when I began shooting elk 1000 yds accross a canyon and found that you might as well use solids as a lot of the popular hunting bullets with heavy construction. Thats why Bergers and some of the other target type bullets work well. I personally use a high b.c., thin nosed, bonded bullet with great results on elk, deer, moose and bear from close in to over 1000 yds.
MY OPINION.........Rich

 

[Michael Eichele]

Not convincing.

Like I said, shoot some 200 lb sandbags and tell me how acrobatic the bag is in response to your 25-06 bullet impacts. Better yet, take one of your dead deer after rigor mortis sets in - stand it on its feet and blast away. The results will be truly boring. If you don't want to sacrifice a deer for the cause of science, send a PM to 'royinidaho' and ask him how far his dead pig jumped into the air from bullet impacts from his 270 Allen Magnum, which generates a lot more energy than your 25-06.

Hear are Roy's threads covering the bullet tests he performed on a culled porker:

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/bullet-performance-test-chapter-3-winner-32566/
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/bullet-terminal-performance-test-want-31872/

You could take some video, but it wouldn't be any more impressive than still photos. Take the nerves/muscles away and so go the acrobatics.

The sand bag theory doesnt work. It has no legs nor a neck. Put a bullet in the first or second vertebre of a deer, then coment.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

The sand bag theory doesnt work. It has no legs nor a neck. Put a bullet in the first or second vertebre of a deer, then coment.

Tell ya what guys... take a dead deer and prop it up on its feet somehow and shoot it anywhere you like. I really doubt that you will "knock" it off its feet. You might push it over... but "knock it off its feet"? Nahhh.....

 

[Pdvdh]

The sand bag theory doesnt work. It has no legs nor a neck. Put a bullet in the first or second vertebre of a deer, then coment.

Not impressed.

Michael, I hate to have to be the one to tell you that you're establishing a reputation that you don't know what you don't know. Open your mind. Take a physics course or two.

If you didn't like the sand bag proposition, you could have bit on the propped up deer, goat, sheep, pig, or dog experiment. Shoot them in any neck vertebrae of your choosing. Shoot them anywhere that thrills ya. You won't even get a rigored adult Lab to do acrobatics. Take some video. It will be b-o-r-i-n-g. Now if you'd like to video barn rats, red squirrels, or ground squirrels, then you'll have something worth watching. Let me know and I'll tune in.

You display a touch of arrogance. And presume to know too much about me, or my history of harvesting deer or other large game. Been at this hobby with a passion for 41 years now. Not that it matters. You'd still be plain old-fashioned wrong. Time to eat crow.

And as I suggested - you could have PM'd Roy before 'correcting' me. His porker had those all-important legs and neck vertebrae. Watch his video and learn. Will you object if the porker's legs are pointed up rather than down? It won't matter - not if the bullet energy/impact alone is responsible for the acrobatics you've observed. But if you're convinced that it matters, then prop a dead 200 lb animal up on it's feet and blaze away.

 

[Pdvdh]

Tell ya what guys... take a dead deer and prop it up on its feet somehow and shoot it anywhere you like. I really doubt that you will "knock" it off its feet. You might push it over... but "knock it off its feet"? Nahhh.....

MR,

Michael's apparently most interested in salvaging his credibility because of his original post and comment on this matter. Oops. I forgot. He's an expert in shooting deer in the first or second neck vertebrae. Not to be questioned. I guess I should apologize for my lack of respect. And I'd consider it, except he began the disrespect.

 

[BryanLitz]

Not to take sides, but here are some numbers that may shed some light.

The law of conservation of momentum is derived from Newtons third law: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Momentum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In words, conservation of momentum says that the product of mass and velocity is constant when something hits something else. So if a 200 grain bullet moving at 3000 fps hits a 150 lb deer, assuming all the bullets momentum is absorbed by the deer (bullet doesn't pass thru), the deer will reach a top speed of 0.51 fps when the bullet stops.

The above example assumes the bullet strikes the deer in it's center of mass, and the resulting motion is purely linear. However, there is a good case to be made for strikes that hit somewhere other than the center of gravity. In this case, the deer will get less linear velocity, and will have some rotational velocity caused by the 'torque' of the impact. The farther the strike is from the center of gravity, the more torque will be generated. It wouldn't be too difficult to calculate the torque generated by a spine hit or a front/rear hit, but the resulting rotational velocity would be very difficult to calculate because you would need to know the deer's moments of inertia.

A question for those who believe that deer sized animals can be picked up and/or knocked down by the impact of a bullet: How can you tell from your observations that the deers reaction is not a nervous system reaction? The dramatic shock (overpressure) caused by a high speed bullet impact must have some effect on a nervous system*. The link between the nerves an muscles is pretty quick. If a bullet hits a deer and it's legs stiffen (making it 'jump') or contract (making it fall straight down), this can create a very convincing illusion that the momentum of the bullet is what did it. The numbers suggest that the bullet doesn't have enough momentum to cause the observed reaction, so I'm wondering what else you may have seen that makes you believe that it does.

I'm just trying to get the full picture.

-Bryan

*The way in which Berger VLD's perform on impact (rapid expansion) generates greater pressure spikes within animals than bullets that don't expand as much. I think this fact is responsible for the common observation that animals shot with VLD's tend to drop immediately, or not go far. The animal may not be dead on the spot, but may be incapacitated by the shock to the nervous system, and then quickly die from the organ damage inflicted by the shot.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Bryan,

Some other things to consider. In the case of a VLD like bullet that does not exit - all that energy/momentum is being absorbed (like a shock absorber) by the animals flesh as it is fragmenting and penetrating. An even greater force is generated against the rifle/shooter when the bullet is sent down the bore (oppostie and equal reaction) of the 8 lb rifle held by the 180 lb man. If laying prone or sitting at a bench we "feel" it a lot more than standing up because our upper body by rocking back on our legs has more distance to absorb it while standing.

Another thing to consider is that the force of the bullet is parallel to the ground. To lift the deer up off it's feet requires and upward vector of force that must work against the force of gravity at a rate of 32'/sec/sec times 150 lbs. In short, it is physically impossible to knock a deer *up* off its feet with even a 88mm projectile fired from a cannon point blank. And, as soon as an animals looses its footing either from being knocked sideways or lose of power to stand, it will immediately and I mean immediately fall down. Been there done that a few times on ice, and wet slippery surfaces and it is just amazing how quick you go down and how hard you hit. The animal may be blown sideways and downward due to gravity for a distance, but there will be no upward movement of the body from the projectile. That would defy some of Newton's other observations and conclusions.

So my challange to those who think an animal can be lifted up off its feet by a bullet is to find a dead deer or some other dead inanamate object and shoot it with a 300 SMK out of a 338 Imp @ 3000 fps and see what happens. You could shoot a hundred dead deer and will not get one to do a back flip. It might rock back over collapsing rear legs, but that's it.

I shot a LARGE bull elk once, at 15 yds with a 160 NP out of a 7mm RM going about 3000 fps. It's body shook violently and it went straight up and did a 180 in mid air, took one bound and plied up.

Sorry guys, but you will never knock an animal up off its feet unless you are laying under it when you shoot it. You might knock it a little sideways and down, but that's it unless the deers nervous reaction gives it more movement.

-MR

 

[Michael Eichele]

MR,

Michael's apparently most interested in salvaging his credibility because of his original post and comment on this matter. Oops. I forgot. He's an expert in shooting deer in the first or second neck vertebrae. Not to be questioned. I guess I should apologize for my lack of respect. And I'd consider it, except he began the disrespect.

I dont hang out here to create a reputation good or bad. My credibility should come from my experience. Take or leave what I have experienced. I hang out here to share my experiences. Nothing more nothing less. Could I be wrong on the matter? Sure. I am just telling you what I have seen. What I have experienced in this regard shouldnt make me less credible whether I am right or wrong. All I was saying is to do what I have done and see for yourself. You may just be suprised. When you have long skinny legs and a long neck to flop over and start a rotating cycle when hit with multi thousand pounds of energy, cant you see how it "could" have an effect of knocking a deer off its feet? I have an open mind on the subject. Maybe you should too? No disrepect meant in either post. Sorry you took it that way.

Regards.