162 A-Max VS 180 Berger HB

[Terry]

How does the 162 A-Max compare to 180 Berger at 600 to 1,000 yards.
The 162 has a slightly lower BC but should be faster. Are their ballistics's equal?

 

[Drop Port]

No real world, but I was specking out a 7 RSAUM for tactical matches and ran the same numbers on JBM. If you drive a 162 at 3050 and a 180 Hybrid at 2950 the Hybrid has .4 moa less wind at 1K.

 

[jamesh]

Terry,
Shooting the 162 Amax at 3120 and the 180 VLD at 3005 out of a 7 SAUM I had the exact same point of impact and wind drift at 1000 yards with either. Ballistic programs would indicate the VLD should have a slight advantage but real world I saw no difference. The Hybrid does have a slightly higher BC than the VLD thought.

James

 

[OttoVonMog]

Terry,
Shooting the 162 Amax at 3120 and the 180 VLD at 3005 out of a 7 SAUM I had the exact same point of impact and wind drift at 1000 yards with either. Ballistic programs would indicate the VLD should have a slight advantage but real world I saw no difference. The Hybrid does have a slightly higher BC than the VLD thought.

James

Well, the reason why is that you pushed the lower BC bullet nearly 120FPS fast than its high BC counter-part. So, basically you found a velocity for the 162grain A-Max that nearly duplicated the ballistics of the superior hybrid style Berger Bullet. I think what would be interesting is to see how the A-Max does at 3005FPS against the Berger Bullet. According to JBM Ballistics the trajectories are within 1.0MOA of each other. And that is probably within 3% margin of error which I would expect to see with any calculation like this. So, yeah, I could see the bullets having the same points of impact. For example the A-Max BC might be stated on the low side. The Berger BC could be on the high side. I mean basically the program is telling me that both cartridges are going to maintain a pretty effective flight path given the 120fps difference between the A-Max and the Berger 180VLD.

However, if both were shooting at 3005fps-- the difference is still in the same margin of error... However, this time the 162 A-Max was 1 MOA greater than the VLD counter part. However, where it became noticeable is after 1200 yards. The 162 A-Max started to really show a difference that by 1500yards drop was over 3 MOA greater for it when compared to the 180 VLD.

 

[jamesh]

Why on earth would you download the 162 Amax to the same velocity as the 180 VLD, that makes absolutely no sense.

 

[OttoVonMog]

Why on earth would you download the 162 Amax to the same velocity as the 180 VLD, that makes absolutely no sense.

When you compare things-- you have to keep all the variables the same expect for the one you want to see the affect of upon the bullets' flight. I this case the BC is the critical issue the original poster is concerned with. So, if you want to see real world confirmation of the bullet's BC's effect on the trajectory-- you have to have exactly the same velocities. Then you can really talk about the two bullets in a meaningful manner. That was my entire point. That if you want to see if your ballistic software is giving you accurate data when comparing bullets of different BC's you need to keep all the other data as similar as possible.

 

[jamesh]

No. We know that the 180 has a higher BC than the 162. What Terry is asking is if the increased velocity you can push the 162 will make up for the difference, it does. It is a total no-brainer that at the same speed the 180 will outperform the 162 in every way.

I am done with this conversation!

 

[OttoVonMog]

No. We know that the 180 has a higher BC than the 162. What Terry is asking is if the increased velocity you can push the 162 will make up for the difference, it does. It is a total no-brainer that at the same speed the 180 will outperform the 162 in every way.

I am done with this conversation!

Actually, the data I've collected using various Ballistic programs would say otherwise.

The JBM Ballistic Data is as follows:

162 grain at 3005 FPS G1 BC .625 Sights- 1.5 inches
1000y Drop -24.3 MOA Wind Deflection 5.7MOA 90degree 10mph Wind
1500y Drop -50.1 MOA Wind Deflection 10.1 MOA 90 Degree 10 mph Wind

180 grain Match Hybrid 3005 FPS G1 BC .674 1.5 inches
1000y Drop -23.4 MOA Wind Deflection 5.2 MOA 90 Degree 10 mph Wind
1500y Drop -47.0 MOA WInd Deflection 9.1 MOA 90 Degree 10 mph Wind

162 grain 3120 FPS G1 BC .625 Sights 1.5 inches
1000y Drop -22.3 MOA Wind Deflection 5.4 MOA 90 Degree 10 mph Wind
1500y Drop -45.9 MOA Wind Deflection 9.6 MOA 90 Degree 10 MPH Wind

What that says to me given the initial velocity obviously the velocity of the bullet is the key factor... Which is what we would expect to see the lighter bullet exhibiting less drop and as long as it has the extra 115 FPS over the 180grain bullet it will always have less drop than the 180 grain. And of course as suspected the deflection value is always better with the heavier bullet. Pretty much what you would expect. But as you noticed with the muzzle velocities identical at 1500yards the 180 VLD is clearly showing the superior BC with greater retained velocity leading to less drop and deflection in the process. So, then you would go to the range fire test ammo with identical velocities to confirm the BC values by calculating the drop values for a given initial muzzle velocity. Then you after you confirm the true BC's of the bullets (usually done best with RADAR--but you can do it mathematically and if you can create a big enough chronograph you can test for velocities across distance)-- which will then allow you to actually determine just how important the increase in velocity is to the bullet's BC Value. Because if you use G1 BC 's you have to adjust for velocity ranges. I would have preferred to have used a G7 BC number for both bullets. However, Berger is one of the few company's that supplies the G7 Bullet Form BC Numbers...

So, what you can do is once you've actually created a decent baseline information for the bullets and rifle in question using this method-- then you increase the velocities and then you talk about how much of advantage and at what range it will happen for a specific bullet type. Otherwise if you do what you say well I shot bullet x at 100+ FPS faster MV than bullet y with the slower MV but greater stated BC-- it doesn't really give you enough information to claim well if POI's are similar the bullet with the two different bullets the BC's differences aren't that important for specific velocities.. Well, I agree that at 1000yards with either the 162 A-Max or 180 VLD (target match hybrid) the bullets trade off basically the same 1 MOA advantage either in elevation (162 grain advantage) or wind deflection (180 grain advantage area)... So the choice comes down to the shooter does he want to push a lighter bullet faster or heavier bullet slightly slower? For me it is a no-brianer heavier bullet slightly slower with great BC will actually I think pay off in the end better.

But, accurate use of the Scientific Method will always help you out to find the proper solution.

 

[Keith Glasscock]

Otto,

Not a good start friend.

You might serve yourself well by doing some reading on this site. It is fully inhabited by world-class long range shooters that know an awful lot about long range ballistics.

If you are looking for G7 numbers for bullets, Bryan Litz publishes them in his books - pick one up, they are chock full of great information. The book describes, in detail, the difference between the Berger 180 VLD and the Hybrid bullet.

Terry,

I don't have first-hand knowledge of the 162 Amax. I, however, would want to consider the BC improvement available to the Berger by pointing it. It might skew the calculation bit.

My apologies in advance for how grouchy this sounds...

 

[Drop Port]

 

[Raptor]

Terry I shoot the 162 in the 284 and have shot them out to a mile and accuratly too.

I had the same questions as you did and the reason I went with the 162s over the 180s was because of my barrel length. I am shooting a 28" Kreiger for tactical matches and (After some good advice on here) I went with the 162s.

I think your decision should be based on the kind of shooting your doing and your barrel length. In my humble opinion you really need the 30" barrel to get the real advantage of the 180s plus you will get more recoil in a lighter gun with the 180s.

I don't feel I gave up much with the 162s they are VERY accurate and shoot well to 1 mile for me. Good luck with your quest. I am sure you will be happy with either, plus when you can find them the 162s are CHEAP!!

 

[Terry]

Thanks to all!

I was hoping for a meaningful discussion, and that is just what I got.
It is incredible to post a question and get all the varied responces.
It greatly aids my learning.

I shoot 600 and 1,000 benchrest. For the last two years I have shot the 180 Berger HB.
I bought some 162's to try in my 7-08. Now I will try them in my .284 Shehane.
3,000 + fps should be easy with RL17. Has anyone had any success with higher nodes
with the 162's?

Thanks again to each of you!

 

[TonyR]

Thanks to all!

I was hoping for a meaningful discussion, and that is just what I got.
It is incredible to post a question and get all the varied responces.
It greatly aids my learning.

I shoot 600 and 1,000 benchrest. For the last two years I have shot the 180 Berger HB.
I bought some 162's to try in my 7-08. Now I will try them in my .284 Shehane.
3,000 + fps should be easy with RL17. Has anyone had any success with higher nodes
with the 162's?

Thanks again to each of you!

I shot the 162s out of my Shehane with IMR7828SSC at over 3000 fps without problems. I also have a friend who is a very successful long range BR shooter who shoots them well at over 3300 pfs with a 7 Mag varmint rifle. It is worth checking the run-out at the bullet tips for outliers. I only shot them out of the same barrel etc against the 180 VLDs, but the 162 would consistently tune 100 fps faster than a 180 VLD.

I have also tried the light/ heavy trade-off with the 105 and 115 6mm Berger VLDs from the same barrel etc. As it happened, the tuned loads would shoot into the same group. I stayed with the 105s because my barrel was a 1:8 twist which was marginal for the 115s but perfect for the 105s.

IMHO, the most important comparison is between two tuned loads, regardless of powder or any other differences, because that is how they are going to be shot and there is no guarantee that the two bullets will tune equally well in the same barrel with the same powder. For example, H4350 has performed very well with the 180 Hybrids while the 180 VLDs liked slower powders like IMR7828SSC., at least in my guns.

 

[OttoVonMog]

Otto,

Not a good start friend.

You might serve yourself well by doing some reading on this site. It is fully inhabited by world-class long range shooters that know an awful lot about long range ballistics.

If you are looking for G7 numbers for bullets, Bryan Litz publishes them in his books - pick one up, they are chock full of great information. The book describes, in detail, the difference between the Berger 180 VLD and the Hybrid bullet.

Terry,

I don't have first-hand knowledge of the 162 Amax. I, however, would want to consider the BC improvement available to the Berger by pointing it. It might skew the calculation bit.

My apologies in advance for how grouchy this sounds...

Science is what I do.

 

[XTR]

Otto,

Not a good start friend.

You might serve yourself well by doing some reading on this site. It is fully inhabited by world-class long range shooters that know an awful lot about long range ballistics.

If you are looking for G7 numbers for bullets, Bryan Litz publishes them in his books - pick one up, they are chock full of great information. The book describes, in detail, the difference between the Berger 180 VLD and the Hybrid bullet.

Terry,

I don't have first-hand knowledge of the 162 Amax. I, however, would want to consider the BC improvement available to the Berger by pointing it. It might skew the calculation bit.

My apologies in advance for how grouchy this sounds...

Science is what I do.

Anyone with even a modicum of ballistics understanding knows that two bullets pushed at the same velocity the heavier higher BC bullet has less windage; however, that's not how we load bullets. The information we are looking for is for the loadings that we use, or can achieve, is the faster lighter bullet a better or equivalent but lower recoil, or simply available* option? The constants in our evaluation are range and wind, the bullets and velocities are variables.

* I don't think anyone has seen any 162 Amax's in a yr.

 

[MrMajestic]

* I don't think anyone has seen any 162 Amax's in a yr.

Just the ones in my basement! ;D Sorry, I couldn't resist. :-[

 

[OttoVonMog]

Otto,

Not a good start friend.

You might serve yourself well by doing some reading on this site. It is fully inhabited by world-class long range shooters that know an awful lot about long range ballistics.

If you are looking for G7 numbers for bullets, Bryan Litz publishes them in his books - pick one up, they are chock full of great information. The book describes, in detail, the difference between the Berger 180 VLD and the Hybrid bullet.

Terry,

I don't have first-hand knowledge of the 162 Amax. I, however, would want to consider the BC improvement available to the Berger by pointing it. It might skew the calculation bit.

My apologies in advance for how grouchy this sounds...

Science is what I do.

Anyone with even a modicum of ballistics understanding knows that two bullets pushed at the same velocity the heavier higher BC bullet has less windage; however, that's not how we load bullets. The information we are looking for is for the loadings that we use, or can achieve, is the faster lighter bullet a better or equivalent but lower recoil, or simply available* option? The constants in our evaluation are range and wind, the bullets and velocities are variables.

* I don't think anyone has seen any 162 Amax's in a yr.

Well, the method I use to determine my loads always starts off at the same velocity so I can really tell if the bullet's BC is close to the manufacture's claim in my rifle. Then, I have an idea how to model the cartridge as I increase the velocity. I'm basically using the same method they use for testing artillery rounds.

 

[normmatzen]

Terry,
I'm glad you asked your question.

I am bringing my barrel and reamer to my gunsmith within a couple weeks so I will have a 30" 284 WIN for a new 1000yd gun for next year's Sacramento national.

I don't think you have anything to fear from me, I just want to finish in top 10!

My reamer is designed for the 180 Bergers and I will be loading for a conservative speed. I use a barrel tuner so tuning should not be a problem.

I have my first box of Hybrid 180's and I still have the remnants of the box of 162 A-MAX I use in my 7X57 hunting rifle built on a VZ24 action and military barrel. I found out last season that the A-MAX may be too much bullet for California blacktails as well as small pigs so I may revert to the 140 gn Barnes.

I might as well try the A-MAX's in my new BR gun! I figure the 284 WIN is just on the edge for powder capacity and I will be trying RL-17 as well as 4831. The added velocity with the A-MAX may make them a close equal to the 180 gn Hybrid.

 

[TonyR]

Well, the method I use to determine my loads always starts off at the same velocity so I can really tell if the bullet's BC is close to the manufacture's claim in my rifle. Then, I have an idea how to model the cartridge as I increase the velocity. I'm basically using the same method they use for testing artillery rounds.

Fair enough. I have skipped that step by using the BCs Bryan Litz publishes in his Applied Ballistics books. He determined these values by shooting bullet samples and I have found the results to be very accurate for Bergers and other brands. I believe that Berger's uses these figures for its product info.

 

[OttoVonMog]

Well, the method I use to determine my loads always starts off at the same velocity so I can really tell if the bullet's BC is close to the manufacture's claim in my rifle. Then, I have an idea how to model the cartridge as I increase the velocity. I'm basically using the same method they use for testing artillery rounds.

Fair enough. I have skipped that step by using the BCs Bryan Litz publishes in his Applied Ballistics books. He determined these values by shooting bullet samples and I have found the results to be very accurate for Bergers and other brands. I believe that Berger's uses these figures for its product info.

No, I agree Bryan Litz's work is top notch. And most of data was within 3% of his claimed BC's. Sierra's were a little wider about 4-5% but, the gun really likes the Sierra's so that is what I shoot out of it. I was just talking about testing methods. How, I attack the problem. It is a time consuming method and it is not for a rifle like a 7SAUM because it would take too many rounds to do. It would be great to have a real ballistic lab.