Berger vs Hornady bullets

[jelenko]

After needing to send the first box of H75's back, I simply decided to test each lot going forward. It was after the second box needing to be exchanged that I decided to use a different brand.
Because I don't weigh or measure my bullets, I don't know if doing that would identify bad lots without testing.

 

[David Milisock]

Somewhere did we forget that a barrel may not shoot a certain bullet? Berger's are not the fix all bullets that a lot want to believe they are.

I've seen identical rifles (supposedly identical) not like the same bullet or powder. Anyone who thinks they can get bullet A, powder A, brass A or primer A and have the best load has little experience.

This is why many people once a load was worked used to seek exact lot numbers of the components.

I have to rework loads for all my custom rifles when I get new components no matter the brand.

 

[RegionRat]

The loads were identical except for just the bullet.

Is this possible???

The target isn't telling lies.

A BC is an indirect derivation that makes our math convenient. It is more of a curve fitting parameter than a characteristic like mass or dimension.

Since the curve fit tends to only work through a limited velocity range, you are always better off verifying your drops and dope than just taking a published number at face value.

All sorts of little things like the CG offset and your bbl's engraving can affect the actual BC, so don't get too upset when you take a published value and find it is off a little.

If you only have the muzzle velocity and the drops at several distances, try and also get your environmental data too. That helps when trying to back into an effective ballistic solution that will work at different air densities. Many of the better ballistic solvers will then be pretty good at extrapolating under conditions at different altitudes and weather.

 

[CA_Shooter]

The top competition shooters in 1K Benchrest and F-Class Open have put just about every long range target bullet out there thru the ringer with extremely rigorous testing and tuning. Yet for some reason you don’t see these top level shooters running Hornady bullets in their rifles. Usually using Berger or a custom boutique bullet like Barts or Vapor Trail when they win all their matches and set all the world records. Berger currently holds the world record group in 1K IBS. Berger has set many agg records over the years as well which is even more impressive. That all holds a lot of weight in my mind and I have come to the same conclusion over the last 15 years testing Berger bullets against many other mainstream brands. I have had a couple barrels where Berger were tougher to tune in but once I found the sweet spot, they outshot everything else.

This is all just my personal experience, but I wouldn’t necessarily call it an opinion because all the competition wins and world records speak for themselves.

The one exception for me personally is the Sierra 39gr BK in 20 cal. For some reason that bullet just shoots flat out in everything I have tested. Arguably the most ‘consistently’ accurate 20 cal bullet across the board in all chamberings and powders used.

Not saying Berger isn't great.

That said, why aren't most world records held by custom bullets? Or maybe they are (I don't know)

 

[David Milisock]

The target isn't telling lies.

A BC is an indirect derivation that makes our math convenient. It is more of a curve fitting parameter than a characteristic like mass or dimension.

Since the curve fit tends to only work through a limited velocity range, you are always better off verifying your drops and dope than just taking a published number at face value.

All sorts of little things like the CG offset and your bbl's engraving can affect the actual BC, so don't get too upset when you take a published value and find it is off a little.

If you only have the muzzle velocity and the drops at several distances, try and also get your environmental data too. That helps when trying to back into an effective ballistic solution that will work at different air densities. Many of the better ballistic solvers will then be pretty good at extrapolating under conditions at different altitudes and weather.

I agree the target does not lie.

I recently had built a 6MM ARC AR, I used the published data to calibrate my iron sights. Let's be straight with a military sight at 400 yards you WILL NOT get David Tubbs accuracy. With me shooting I'm sure I'm not getting David Tubbs accuracy with any iron sight.

With that said the data was OK enough to get a 400 yard zero and plot drops back to the muzzle in South Central PA. That's good enough to keep a man sized target above the front post out to 500 yards without sight adjustment.

I've been shooting if I remember correctly before I learned to ride a bike and this BC stuff is useful theoretically but in all these years (I'm 67 now) I've never found any convenient shooting situations.

The bad guys came when it was pitch black, when it rained, when I was freezing my ass off, in winds where you needed a brace to stand and so high up you could barely catch your breath. Same thing for game animals, the damn critters be it ground hogs or brown bears don't want to be killed.

In my experiance the BC is like a beautiful woman that your very happy someone else married. PRACTICE, PRACTICE, PRACTICE, get in close get good hits. The BC will take care of itself.

 

[jelenko]

David - BC's are useful when deciding which bullet to use for high precision shooting - they predict the amount of deflection due to wind. As you get out past 600 yards, the BC is also key to retained velocity - for accuracy we want the bullet hitting the target above the transonic region.

Also, for these effects, consistency is key to accuracy.

 

[Tokay444]

You can see the FPS on the right side of the target for each round. That is FPS at 1000 yd.

My muzzle FPS is 2980 ish

If muzzle velocity isn’t identical for both bullets, then you have an uncontrolled variable and must repeat the test. If they’re both, “2980 ish”, then yes, the Bergers are the better BC.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Yeah I think in the OPs case he is witnessing an exaggerated BC from Hornady. Obviously the Berger bullet is going quite a bit faster with retained velocity at the 1,000 yard mark albeit the same muzzle velocity.

These are the same findings Brian Litz has published over the years. Berger pretty much maximized the BC with their drag model and form factor in their bullets and anyone else claiming they have produced bullets with significantly higher BCs is most likely exaggerating as a marketing tool to gain sales. (Not considering solid copper lathe turned bullets)

That being said, Berger was also guilty of exaggerating their BCs in the early days but it wasn’t on purpose. They just didn’t have all the fancy Doppler testing equipment and electronic targets back then so the BCs were mostly derived from a mathematical algorithm. It wasn’t until extensive testing was done by Brian Litz and many others that they dumbed down the BC claims closer to reality. I still have some of the original Berger 6.5mm 140gr bullets from back before there were any variations of target, hunting, hybrid, LR Hybrid, OTM, or anything else. Back then it was just one style of Berger bullet and they were called “VLD” (The original Berger bullets are basically the current “Hunting VLD” model). The original Bergers were way more consistent than today’s Berger bullets. These usually run at 97-98% consistency when sorted so I don’t even bother with them. But notice the claimed .640 G1 BC on the box. They also didn’t have their recommended twist quite right back then either because we all know now that a 1 in 8” twist works much better with the 140 class 6.5mm bullets.

 

[Dgd6mm]

So what I'm learning is that Hornaday exaggerates their B.C.'s on purpose. Okay.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

So what I'm learning is that Hornaday exaggerates their B.C.'s on purpose. Okay.

Maybe, maybe not. It’s not an exact science with the atmospheric variables and variations on barrels. But with all the testing equipment and knowledge available to Hornady and the money they have for R&D, there’s no reason that people shouldn’t be getting results fairly close to what the bullet BC equates to downrange like they do with Berger and custom bullets.

Some people do get results in line with Hornady BCs, some dont. And now we are back to the consistency issue.

 

[mikecr]

Berger was guilty of another matter too (bullet blowup denial), but competitors were guilty of worse with Bergers. For decades I watched competitors insist that VLDs had to be in the lands or at least very close to shoot well. They were so addement about it that there was no room for truths, or even civil considerations otherwise.

Bryan Litz improved Berger's numbers.
For BCs he uses reasonable/typical velocity, and ICAO air density.
He also implemented BC per stability, which nobody else has ever done.

Every once in a while, old companies need this.
Lapua comes to mind lately. They're going the way Berger would have if they don't soon listen to a fresh/objective thinker.

 

[bozo699]

I’ve used Hornaday bullets for years in hunting and varmint rigs but I have never seen them on a 1000 yard benchrest match and I doubt I do anything soon and there’s a reason for that. I know a few using vapor trails Barts and a few other customs but the bulk are still shooting Berger’s

 

[INTJ]

I’ve used Hornaday bullets for years in hunting and varmint rigs but I have never seen them on a 1000 yard benchrest match and I doubt I do anything soon and there’s a reason for that. I know a few using vapor trails Barts and a few other customs but the bulk are still shooting Berger’s

@SPJ and I did at the IBS 1000 yd Nationals this last August. IIRC, one of the Hornady guys shot a 1.8ish LG group, which was one of the best shot over the weekend. I don't remember how he agged. This was using inferior Hornady bullets and inferior Hornady brass. Sorting and tuning will make almost any bullet shoot well.

And no, I don't use Hornady brass or bullets for LR BR. Now I have used them in load development for a bunch of different rifles this year. One was a customer's Mk 5 in 300 Wby, .400" freebore and all. 212 ELDXs. I got it to .6 at 100 yds with an MV over 3000. A few days later at a different range I plugged the info into Kestrel 5700 Elite and made center of target hits at a gong at 1088 yds. So I guess this advertised BC was okay in that instance.

Generally, I have to adjust BC or MV on every bullet (Berger or any other) to make to center of target hits at 1088 yds. Berger bullets are fairly inconsistent, which could account for the variation. Generally I have to lower MC and/or BC to match the bullets path to the data.

The only increase in BC was with a 7 Allen and a Badlands BD2-150. It had an advertised G7 BC of .309. However, that was based on 1500-3000 fps. The 7 Allen's MV was 3665. I only tested it to 385 yds, but I was able to shoot a group. From a 100 yd zero it only dropped 8.5" at 385 yds. That works out to over a 1.0 BC, which isn't possible. The client was able to get it out to 1000 and found it needed 15 MOA to get to 1000. So I built a drop chart for him based on that, which we both had a lot more confidence in.

So each bullet from each barrel is going to have a slightly different BC. The only way to know what it is is to shoot it and see.

 

[ronemus]

So what I'm learning is that Hornaday exaggerates their B.C.'s on purpose. Okay.

I've found that Hornady's BCs on the bullets (BTHP & A-Max) I use in 7mm and .224 are very close to reality if used correctly. I was on in the black at 1000 yards using a 100 yard zero and the published BCs.