any info on 6mm berger column bullets

[doc gordon]

what weight,anyone shot them yet?

 

[jonbearman]

They are 65 grains and I havent had a chance to try them yet.

 

[BoydAllen]

The Berger Column bullet is a double radius ogive, flat base design, that is made with a jacket that measures .790". The weight of the bullet will vary from lot to lot. This is intentional. Rather than holding the weight of the bullet constant, the height of the lead line (the top of the seated core) above the base of the bullet is held constant so that the balance stays the same. Different lots of jackets have slightly different dimensions and weights, and there may be slight differences in core alloy density. In order for the top of the seated core to stay in the same position, from lot to lot, the weight of the core, and bullet will vary. The reason for this approach is that it became obvious during the thousands of rounds of prototype testing, in a shooting tunnel, that this was the best approach. I have a box of pre production bullets in front of me, and the weight is given as 64.2 gr.

 

[BoydAllen]

Added later: After doing some fairly accurate measuring, I can say that with a freebore length of .060 or less, the Columns should have plenty of bullet in the case neck. In fact, they will have about .025 more than my favorite bullet (have not shot the Column yet) the Tucker #3.

 

[fdshuster]

I tried them when they first became available, bought from Powder Valley. Compared them side-by-side to my ever reliable 68 gr. Berger #24411's that I've been using since 1998. The 68's "won" every time. My first thought was "These are no better than what I've always used".

Then I learn of the recent recall of the same lot number and sold by Powder Valley.

Not too happy about the wasted powder, primers & barrel life. Hope they get their act together as it relates to the "column" bullets.

The lot that I had all weighed a very uniform 64.2 grains.

 

[Steve Blair]

I tried them when they first became available, bought from Powder Valley. Compared them side-by-side to my ever reliable 68 gr. Berger #24411's that I've been using since 1998. The 68's "won" every time. My first thought was "These are no better than what I've always used".

[br]
Frank, it is my understanding that the bullet's primary advantage is ease, tolerance and consistency of tuning, not that they are necessarily more accurate than another bullet. Did your testing show any evidence of a more forgiving nature?

 

[fdshuster]

Steve: Never reached the point of doing anything other than shooting for group sizes out of my Bat 6ppc and 2, 14 twist 6BR's.

As I do with most of my benchrest chamberings, they were seated to touch.

 

[BoydAllen]

Over time, I have noticed that different bullets have different preferences as to seating depth. I seat all my bullets longer than touch, and these days, tend to look at the nature of the marks as compared with the style of ogive, rather than getting wound up just looking at numbers. When It comes to the double radius designs, because of their higher ogive numbers, where the rifling makes contact, marks tend to get long early in the progression. Looking to try something different with some bullets that were early prototypes for what eventually became the column, it occurred to me that Since Lou Murdica had done so much testing of similar bullets, that asking him might be a smart move. He told me that he seats them into the lands, but not to an extreme, just so that he has light marks. Subsequently, I tried that, and the preliminary results looked very promising. For bullets like Berger's 68 gr. I take a different approach, They have single radius ogives, lower ogive number where they touch, and for those I have had good luck with marks that about half as long as wide, or slightly less. A couple of years ago, a friend got a new, very high quality LV 6PPC. To save him from too much thrashing about looking for a load, I set his seater by the marks, for a bullet similar to the Bergers, and asked a friend who has a lot of experience with H322 about what powder charge he would recommend. and with only a few tenths change of charge weight, he was in the high teens. (excellent conditions) To me, comparing bullets without some investigation as to their preferences as to seating depth would be like comparijng powders to determine which is more accurate by throwing the same weight of each.

 

[doc gordon]

newbie boyd thanks for all your contributions,i don't know what"double radius ogive" is!please explain for this "old" newbie.

 

[wvscorpio]

Boyd, what do they measure(diameter)at the pressure ring? I'm curious to know if these bullets will tune equally well in a cut vs buttoned rifled barrel and if they have a preference for a .236 or a .237 minor bore diameter. Is Berger back in production with them? I am aware they had a setback with the recall on one particular lot, hopefully they will get it fixed. Personally, I think it's great that a major bullet maker is trying to develop an "off the self" bullet with the short-range benchrest shooter in mind. I know they won't work for everyone, but neither will anyone else's, custom included.

 

[BoydAllen]

The part of the ogive nearest the base of the bullet is curved more gradually than the part near the tip of the bullet. If you examine the bullet's shape carefully, you can see where the transition occurs. The advantage is that with the larger radius ogive where the rifling will engrave, the contact with the throat angle (typically 1.5 degrees per side, for a target chamber) will be nearer to parallel, and this should make seating depth less critical. At least that is the theory. Berger has not released the ogive numbers on their bullets, but I do know those of a design that my good friend Del Bishop (now making bullets for that great rifle range in the sky) first made. The ogive number of back portion of the ogive is 9 while the portion near the tip of the bullet is 5. I believe that there is at least one record that has been shot using this bullet. Recently, although I have not seen one, and am not sure how it would work, or look, I have been told by a shooter that someone makes a bullet that has the lower number to the rear and the higher in front. I would like to see one of these. Getting back to the rational behind the more conventional version, if one has the same hollow point diameter, and bullet length, by the time that the ogive got to full bullet diameter, there would scarcely any shank to go in the case neck, keeping in mind that benchrest barrels are around 14" twist and that this limits the length of usable bullets to what that twist will stabilize. By only using the higher ogive number in the middle of the bullet, shank length is not reduced very much, if at all, and the smaller ogive number in the front closes the point within a relatively short length. Come to think of it, the Berger Hybrid Ogive bullets are probably the best example of the reverse situation, with the relatively smaller ogive number occuring in a very short space that encompasses where the rifling will engage, and a much larger radius typical of the VLDs secant ogive configuration in front of that. In this case the smaller ogive number makes a more gradual transition from the parallel portion of the bullet than that of the typical VLD, which "turns the corner more abruptly, which causes precise control of seating depth to be more critical. I hope that this helps you understand the term that you asked about. If not, ask.

 

[BoydAllen]

The bullets that I have are supposed to be the same as production Columns, except that they are polished. As near as my inexpert technique can tell, the pressure rings of a couple that I just measured are .0007. and the shanks measure .2430, understanding that I do not make my living measuring things to .0001. The bullets that I have the largest supply of, that have been the easiest to tune, are of similar shape on an .825 jacket, the main difference being that the front ogive (of the longer bullet) is shorter, as well as the shank .