Is there actually any downrange advantage for very heavy for caliber bullets?

[FEENIX]

Now show the 135 LRHT at 3200-3250, a speed easily attainable with a 71-72gr case.
Kenyon's 22" barrel isn't loose yet and he's been to 3275-3300.

People can run their own ballistic comparisons if they want. I still have room to push the 145s, but I am more interested now in the 163s at 2915 FPS with more room to spare.

 

[Phil Rizzo]

Nobody has a ballpark BC on the 163 or 180 or did I miss it?

 

[dfanonymous]

I've been seeing some extremely heavy for caliber rebated boat tail bullets being introduced by smaller bullet makers. These bullets all seem to have very long bearing surfaces. I would think that this would not only reduce ballistic coefficient significantly, but also possibly reduce velocity potential. I'm skeptical of one of these bullets having superior downrange trajectory, wind drift, and retained energy when compared to somewhat lighter VLD profile bullets with shorter bearing surfaces and longer, more streamlined ogives (when both are driven to top velocity potential). Anyone with some experience with these bullets, feel free to chime in. Thanks!
Sam

Yes, most high BC bullets are "heavier" in class.

Another way to look at weight is, and like you said; the bullet is longer.

Longer tends to positively affect form factor equations regarding BC. Edit: as well as a direct factor in sectional density. Another element of BC. I just assumed that was obvious for most on here. As far as the bearing surface, I find that consistency in the each bullet bearing surface matters more than actual length within reason.

Lastly, when talking subsonic terminal performance, actual weight will always have more momentum. If you get hit by a baseball pitch at say 50 mph…that won't hurt nearly as bad as being hit by a cast iron ball of the same size and speed…

 

[Bghunter338]

Nobody has a ballpark BC on the 163 or 180 or did I miss it?

Not yet unless you go shoot them and find out. Dale is still waiting on the machine and equipment to be able to measure all his bullets bc's. Until then we just have to sit back and wait.

 

[Phil Rizzo]

Ive heard them mentioned so many times for so long I thought surely somebody had put them to the test for verification.
I know he's got more than 2 customers!

 

[Bghunter338]

Ive heard them mentioned so many times for so long I thought surely somebody had put them to the test for verification.
I know he's got more than 2 customers!

I'm sure there is. I was working on it until I found out I needed a little more then a 7.5 twist.

 

[FEENIX]

Not yet unless you go shoot them and find out. Dale is still waiting on the machine and equipment to be able to measure all his bullets bc's. Until then we just have to sit back and wait.

LL! I agree; it is not a showstopper to me. I think I'll slice some cheese to go with the wine.

Cheers!

 

[just_jon]

It's because I left the wind speed, wind direction, and inclination blank. If you want to compare everything else with your 115 Berger load, everything else is there.

View attachment 586012
Below is the 115 Berger at 3300 FPS out 26" from Berger reloading manual.
View attachment 586013

That is correct.

 

[wilehunting]

Like Horse1 said your 1:10" twist will stabilize 165 grain solids. This thread was started talking about heavy for caliber bullets, when you get to real heavy for caliber mono's they will require a faster twist.

Yes most factory rifles don't have modern twist for heavy bullets unless the cartridge is a modern one like the 300 PRC which generally has a 1:8" twist.

Just look at the bullet manufacturers website they will tell you what twist you need.

I'm not trying to hijack the tread. I was just trying to learn. From all the information presented I got that there is not practical advantage in going to a monolithic bullet over a lead/copper even with the slightly higher bc. There is an advantage at long range for use of a heavier bullet for caliber given proper twist rate to buck wind even with a lower starting velocity. At least that's my synopsis.

 

[FEENIX]

I'm not trying to hijack the tread. I was just trying to learn. From all the information presented I got that there is not practical advantage in going to a monolithic bullet over a lead/copper even with the slightly higher bc. There is an advantage at long range for use of a heavier bullet for caliber given proper twist rate to buck wind even with a lower starting velocity. At least that's my synopsis.

Check your PM.

 

[Bghunter338]

Ive heard them mentioned so many times for so long I thought surely somebody had put them to the test for verification.
I know he's got more than 2 customers!

Phil if this helps this is where I left off with the 163s.

 

[Phil Rizzo]

Thanks ML.
Theory and advertising only go so far.
I'm ready to see some groups when you get to it, as you know.
You are using the Blackbird, right?
I see now you're running 26".

 

[Bghunter338]

Thanks ML.
Theory and advertising only go so far.
I'm ready to see some groups when you get to it, as you know.
You are using the Blackbird, right?
What length barrel?

Yes this was out of my Blackbird with a 26"

 

[Bghunter338]

Thanks ML.
Theory and advertising only go so far.
I'm ready to see some groups when you get to it, as you know.
You are using the Blackbird, right?
I see now you're running 26".

This is my load for the 145gr blackholes