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

[Lee Goodwin]

I put 180 grain Woodleigh bullets in a 270. I don't recommend it. Best to stick to the parameters the cartridge is designed for. The 180 turn the 270 into a 150 yard rifle in my hands. 150 nosler partitions 250 yards. But I paid for #50 180s and I'm gonna shoot or give away #50 180s.
P.s. looks like a pencil sticking out of the brass.

 

[FEENIX]

I put 180 grain Woodleigh bullets in a 270. I don't recommend it. Best to stick to the parameters the cartridge is designed for. The 180 turn the 270 into a 150 yard rifle in my hands. 150 nosler partitions 250 yards. But I paid for #50 180s and I'm gonna shoot or give away #50 180s.
P.s. looks like a pencil sticking out of the brass.

LOL! I propel the 175 Matrix VLD at 2996 FPS out of my .270 AI H4831SC. I reached near 3100 FPS, but the group opened up and started to show unwanted pressure signs.


150 NAB .270 Win and 175 Matrix VLD .270 AI

 

[bigngreen]

These Corbin design bullets are fun to shoot but it is critical to work out on game with them, depending on the jackets and if their being drawn down a cal to get longer jackets you can easily create solids. When Matrix was working on the 160 6.5 bullet it took over a year to get them to open correctly, once they did they were excellent.

I have a couple boxes of 270 cal 180 gr Matrix that are sleek and heavy but then Paul sold so we couldn't get that one dialed.

Actually one of the best guys with this design bullet and made some inovative stuff, that I think I still have a stash is Rich Sherman, he was making bullet well before wildcatting and a great source for bullet making.

 

[Phil Rizzo]

I want to know how well these small batch bullets hold tight groups at distance.
It's a tall order comparing to Berger precision, and that's all I'll be comparing to as of now, anyway.

 

[Bghunter338]

These Corbin design bullets are fun to shoot but it is critical to work out on game with them, depending on the jackets and if their being drawn down a cal to get longer jackets you can easily create solids. When Matrix was working on the 160 6.5 bullet it took over a year to get them to open correctly, once they did they were excellent.

I have a couple boxes of 270 cal 180 gr Matrix that are sleek and heavy but then Paul sold so we couldn't get that one dialed.

Actually one of the best guys with this design bullet and made some inovative stuff, that I think I still have a stash is Rich Sherman, he was making bullet well before wildcatting and a great source for bullet making.

If you ever want to get ride of those matrixs send me a pm.

 

[bigngreen]

I want to know how well these small batch bullets hold tight groups at distance.
It's a tall order comparing to Berger precision, and that's all I'll be comparing to as of now, anyway.

They can be more precise than a Berger because each bullet is hand made and at a volume you won't see changes due to die wear BUT there is more of a risk of lot to lot changes so I like to buy enough to cook a barrel on one lot.

 

[AZShooter]

Feenix: Thanks for adding the wind drift data. I will add what my weatherby is doing. You put in the velocity of 3300 for the 115. I am getting 3676 fps from a 27.5" 3 goove barrel using RL-33 and moly coated 115 Berger. Custom reamer has .100" freebore and uses a 1 1/2 degree throat.

I wanted the OP to know that the lighter bullets can work well but begin to lose to the heavier high BC bullets as the distance increases. Velocity helps when BC is lower to keep the down range performance similar for a while. Your bullet begins to pull away somewhere around 650 yds. (I duplicated your data, using JBM for 3300 ft, 59 degrees, 10 mph 90 degree crosswind.)

Range	Drop	Drop	Windage	Windage	Velocity	Mach	Energy	Time	Lead	Lead
(yd)	(in)	(MIL)	(in)	(MIL)	(ft/s)	(none)	(ft•lbs)	(s)	(in)	(MIL)
Calculated Table
0	-1.5	***	0.0	***	3676.0	3.293	3450.0	0.000	0.0	***
100	1.0	0.3	0.3	0.1	3511.7	3.145	3148.5	0.083	14.7	4.2
200	0.7	0.1	1.4	0.2	3349.3	3.000	2864.1	0.171	30.1	4.3
300	-2.7	-0.3	3.2	0.3	3189.5	2.857	2597.1	0.263	46.2	4.4
400	-9.6	-0.7	5.8	0.4	3032.5	2.716	2347.9	0.359	63.2	4.5
500	-20.2	-1.1	9.3	0.5	2879.0	2.579	2116.1	0.461	81.1	4.6
600	-35.0	-1.7	13.7	0.6	2729.2	2.444	1901.6	0.568	99.9	4.7
700	-54.5	-2.2	19.3	0.8	2583.4	2.314	1704.0	0.681	119.8	4.8
800	-79.2	-2.8	25.9	0.9	2442.0	2.187	1522.5	0.800	140.8	5.0
900	-109.8	-3.5	33.8	1.1	2305.1	2.065	1356.6	0.927	163.1	5.1
1000	-146.9	-4.2	43.1	1.2	2172.8	1.946	1205.3	1.061	186.7	5.3

 

[bigngreen]

Somewhere there is a thread from years ago where Litz explained this type bullet and what each attribute added or subtracted from its ballistic potential, but I can't find it. I think was in the Alco bullet time frame.
It amazing to see how many times we've been through this with the same basic bullet, the first I remember was the Wildcat bullets, about 20 years ago.

 

[Lee Goodwin]

LOL! I propel the 175 Matrix VLD at 2996 FPS out of my .270 AI H4831SC. I reached near 3100 FPS, but the group opened up and started to show unwanted pressure signs.


150 NAB .270 Win and 175 Matrix VLD .270 AI

That's moving. Best I could do was 2550 out of 270 case.

 

[MOA or bust]

Magnum mania, Please explain why, in your opinion, heavy for caliber bullets must have a muzzle velocity of at least 2800fps.

 

[IridiumRed]

Ill add to this discussion my view that heavy for caliber bullets tend to be very good performers for big game, in terms of -internal ballistics- anywsys. They seem to kill well. A lot of the "classic" bullet dia / weight combos had high sectional densities (today those can be topped, bc in general we're talking faster twist rifles today, particularly bc we're now looking at much more aerodynamic bullets which mean longer length and therefore need that faster twist to stabilize).

Anyways, classic combos from long ago got that way because they were found to work in the field. .264/160 .284/175 .308/220 .338/250 .375/300 .416/400 .458/500 i think the SDs for those bullets are pretty similar. Oh yeah, those are classic numbers particularly for AFRICAN hunting. And in may ways, the african fields are some of the harshest / set the highest bar*, so if a combo works well there, it will work anywhere.

*African hunting is often of particularly hard to kill big game, its time consuming / expensive to get there, so people dont want to risk bullet failure, there are usually trophy fees involved, if you shoot an animal you have to pay fee, whether it is recovered or not, african game also often involves things that bite back, so bullet failure gets straight up dangerous when wounded game must be pursued.... all of which tends to mean, if it works in africa it will probably work anywhere.

To be fair, african hunting usually happens at short ranges compared to what is usually is discussed on LRH, but i think its still valid experience for this discussion, bc we are talking about what happens after the bullets impact. Weve swapped out the old Roundnose bullets for VLDs... which we can get away w now due to faster twist, and NEED the high BCs to get the long range ballistics... and now we have the setups to be able to HIT at long range (bullets, barrels, bedding for the mechanical accuracy, far better optics for being able to SEE where the bullet is to go, rangefinders and windgauges + ballistic programs on smart phones to show where to hold, far better reticles or target turrets to help w that holdover / adjustment of POI, etc)

Personally i find it interesting that there have been SO many improvements in modern rifles, bullets, ammunition, optics, support gear... so much has changed... and yet we find ourselves coming back to heavy for caliber bullets. I think that indicates that there is something about heavy for caliber bullets that just seem to work well. For terminal effectiveness id put myself in the camp of believing they work very well on game.

To be fair, a lot of the guys who might obsess over the details in regards to small differences in one bullet vs another, like losing sleep over choosing betw two bullets 10 grains apart, or a berger VLD v hornady ELDM or ELDX... a lot of those guys would probably be bringing down just about the same amount of meat if you gave them Core Lokts to shoot with their current setup... assuming accuracy was there. A man knowing how to shoot, knowing how his rifle hits in the field, knowing where to hit an animal, that still trumps everything else. Of course, those guys arent running core lokts because they wsnt every advantage they can get, and want to try to ENSURE performance rather than just HOPE for it.

Well thats about all the random rambling i have for now, think ill shut up before i start making even less sense

 

[Hugnot]

Consider Form Factor, like ---

"Of the 3 elements that make up BC, form factor is the best way to increase BC because you can improve BC without increasing weight. Adding weight to increase BC depresses your muzzle velocity so there's a trade-off. However, if you simply lower the drag of the bullet (lower form factor), you retain a high muzzle velocity while improving the BC."

Lighter bullets can be driven faster.

Form Factor

Various 6mm bullets pictures left to right: 64gr BR Column Target, 80gr Flat Based Varmint, 109gr Long Range Hybrid Target, and 115gr VLD Target A Bullet's Ballistic Coefficient is comprised of 3 basic components: Weight, Diameter, and Form Factor. The weight and diameter of the

bergerbullets.com

Excessively heavy bullets probably make for deeper trauma but zippo ballistic gain.

The Form Factor concept appears to be sort of alien.

 

[dfanonymous]

Consider Form Factor, like ---

"Of the 3 elements that make up BC, form factor is the best way to increase BC because you can improve BC without increasing weight. Adding weight to increase BC depresses your muzzle velocity so there's a trade-off. However, if you simply lower the drag of the bullet (lower form factor), you retain a high muzzle velocity while improving the BC."

Lighter bullets can be driven faster.

Form Factor

Various 6mm bullets pictures left to right: 64gr BR Column Target, 80gr Flat Based Varmint, 109gr Long Range Hybrid Target, and 115gr VLD Target A Bullet's Ballistic Coefficient is comprised of 3 basic components: Weight, Diameter, and Form Factor. The weight and diameter of the

bergerbullets.com

Excessively heavy bullets probably make for deeper trauma but zippo ballistic gain.

The Form Factor concept appears to be sort of alien.

Well part of form factor is length. Since a bullets diameter is generally fixed in this conversation, a round like the .308 BC increases with its longer length which adds to its form factor. Length= more weight.

In the same caliber, my example can be expressed between 1.006 and .993 on the chart.

 

[sambo3006]

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…

Bullets with a very long bearing surface, such as the Corbin style that I am referring to (I learned the name of this style thanks to this thread), can't possibly have nearly as high of a ballistic coefficient as a VLD style bullet of the same shape. .25 cal VLD style bullets of 145, 163 and 180 grains would have rifling twists required for stabilization that I'm guessing could induce excessive rotational stress on the bullet when driven to velocities that would allow the bullet to outperform the 135 grain VLD in terms of drop and drift. I could definitely be wrong on this, but I would love to see a side by side comparison of both style bullets driven to maximum velocity potential (I'm talking normally accepted peak pressures). Actual shooting, not estimated BC.

Consider Form Factor, like ---

"Of the 3 elements that make up BC, form factor is the best way to increase BC because you can improve BC without increasing weight. Adding weight to increase BC depresses your muzzle velocity so there's a trade-off. However, if you simply lower the drag of the bullet (lower form factor), you retain a high muzzle velocity while improving the BC."

Lighter bullets can be driven faster.

Form Factor

Various 6mm bullets pictures left to right: 64gr BR Column Target, 80gr Flat Based Varmint, 109gr Long Range Hybrid Target, and 115gr VLD Target A Bullet's Ballistic Coefficient is comprised of 3 basic components: Weight, Diameter, and Form Factor. The weight and diameter of the

bergerbullets.com

Excessively heavy bullets probably make for deeper trauma but zippo ballistic gain.

The Form Factor concept appears to be sort of alien.

Bingo.
If they made the heavy weights in VLD style, then I can believe they would outperform lighter VLD style bullets. I just have a hard time believing a somewhat heavier Corbin style bullet (a term I learned thanks to this thread) can outperform a somewhat lighter VLD style bullet in terms of drop and drift, assuming both bullets are launched to the same velocity potential from a given cartridge.