Not Just A New Tip Color…

[antleredacres]

Yes sir. So far most everything has been running with a .9 form factor. So if our final bullet weight for an 8" twist 7mm comes in at 155gr, that would be a g7 bc of .305.

May be minor but I hope the tips come installed.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

May be minor but I hope the tips come installed.

We are still waiting on our tipping machine to come in. Was supposed to be here back in Aug. Hopefully soon. We are getting less patient.

 

[sambo3006]

What is the required twist rate for the 6.5 mm bullet?

 

[TheSouthpaw]

Yes sir. So far most everything has been running with a .9 form factor. So if our final bullet weight for an 8" twist 7mm comes in at 155gr, that would be a g7 bc of .305.

That's estimated. Perhaps customers will finally get Oehler or radar verified BC? You've said you would do it in years past, yet here we are.

 

[JayR01]

Not final on the 7mm yet. For 1-8" will be in the 150's range.

Looking forward to these, Thanks for the update

 

[snox801]

That's estimated. Perhaps customers will finally get Oehler or radar verified BC? You've said you would do it in years past, yet here we are.

You do know that both of those are still not "correct" hence why it's rare to punch in that number and it be correct?
I agree it's nice to be close but even extensively tested applied ballistics numbers are not spot on. You have to make adjustments to all your of them.

 

[JAYgs8163]

You do know that both of those are still not "correct" hence why it's rare to punch in that number and it be correct?
I agree it's nice to be close but even extensively tested applied ballistics numbers are not spot on. You have to make adjustments to all your of them.

Agree but… there are many MFGs of projectiles that are VERY, VERY close to being spot on with their stated BC's, some requiring no adjustment at all for me. Some have "estimated BCs" that are garbage, not even close to being accurate. Personally I've had experience with 2 and won't use their products anymore. For me if a MFG is moving into making a Precision Long Range hunting projectile, and going to market it as one, I sure hope it's been thoroughly tested with VERY accurate data in all categories, BC included!

 

[snox801]

Agree but… there are many MFGs of projectiles that are VERY, VERY close to being spot on with their stated BC's, some requiring no adjustment at all for me. Some have "estimated BCs" that are garbage, not even close to being accurate. Personally I've had experience with 2 and won't use their products anymore. For me if a MFG is moving into making a Precision Long Range hunting projectile, and going to market it as one, I sure hope it's been thoroughly tested with VERY accurate data in all categories, BC included!

Well the opposite can be true. In my applied app it has the hammer 124 gr so far on the low side it doesn't line up with anything I've shot. So by your means you would never use them? They are apparently done the right way. I agree I don't like when they overstate the bc as that lends to people making the wrong purchase based on what they think is the highest bc. But that show also falls on the other foot.
Line is yes I agree would be nice for them to be very close to help choose the correct bullet. But you still need to validate and that changes with rifles. Hence why the bullet you wanna shoot may not be what the rifle shoots. So many people have Berger bullets that simply won't shoot in a rifle Berger says they will. Only way to know is to test.

No one should take a rifle and load to the field "hoping" the bc is correct. No matter the bullet maker.
I want higher bc but to say you won't buy a product because you got lower bc than stated is ridiculous. If that was the fact I wouldn't be able to shoot many of the great products we have out. Or be able to use AB solutions cause they got the bc wrong for my rifle.