Bullet Pointing

[timeout]

Since the "Great American Race" was rained out yesterday, I spent some extra time studying my new found hobby. On this site I read an article on bullet pointing http://www.accurateshooter.com/gear-reviews/whidden-bullet-pointing-die/ Sure sounds like it has some benefits at longer yardages. My question for some of you that may have done the testing: Hornady makes an A-Max pointed, plastic tipped, bullet. In 75 gr. BT with an advertised BC of .435. Berger makes a VLD HPBT in 75 gr.with an advertised .423 BC. If all of the advertising is correct, why would I want to spend $200 + for pointing equipment (not to mention the extra labor) to point the Berger bullets? I'm betting someone on this forum has tried testing the Hornady A-Max alongside the Berger (both pointed and unpointed). If so, what were your findings regarding point of impact, verticle dispersion and groupings? Thanks in advance for sharing your opinions/findings.

 

[Terry]

BC is only one component. The bottom line for most of us is accuracy. Bullet accuracy can be different for every gun. While most guns will shoot most bullets well. We search for that one combination that is just a little better.

When it comes to pointing, we are seeking consistency.

You will need to answer the question for yourself. What accuracy do you need? Will your gun shoot A-Max bullets good enough?

Best Wishes!

Terry

 

[spclark]

If all of the advertising is correct...

That's the rub. Numbers can be misleading.

Bullet pointing (and meplat trimming, another avenue for increasing bullet dimensional uniformity requiring additional tooling) is worthwhile for those seeking even greater uniformity of performance at 600 yards & beyond.

Hornady's plastic-tipped products are popular enough & don't require such a step, but then they've been known to fail to reach the target too if the tips are loose or go missing during flight.

It's not necessary to go the extra steps, the popular bullets are outstanding right from the box. Nice to know though you can take them to a higher level if you're both willing to do the work (and spend the $$ for tooling) and your equipment and shooting discipline will permit seeing an increase in accuracy on target.

 

[timeout]

If all of the advertising is correct...

That's the rub. Numbers can be misleading.

Bullet pointing (and meplat trimming, another avenue for increasing bullet dimensional uniformity requiring additional tooling) is worthwhile for those seeking even greater uniformity of performance at 600 yards & beyond.

Hornady's plastic-tipped products are popular enough & don't require such a step, but then they've been known to fail to reach the target too if the tips are loose or go missing during flight.

It's not necessary to go the extra steps, the popular bullets are outstanding right from the box. Nice to know though you can take them to a higher level if you're both willing to do the work (and spend the $$ for tooling) and your equipment and shooting discipline will permit seeing an increase in accuracy on target.

Thanks for both replies so far. I was assuming that it will take independent testing of my own - in my rifle - to reach a definitive conclusion. I was just hoping that someone on the site has tried the A-Max versus pointing a similar weight bullet. With all of the buying and rebuying of equipment, it gets expensive. Being retired, I have all kinds of time to tune and test. I also want to get maximum results. I have not read before of the plastic tips coming loose/out. How common of an occurence is this? If this is something more than EXTREMELY rare, I will not waste any time and money to test with them.

 

[DennisH]

Brass prep probably has a greater effect than bullet pointing. I know a few well know shooters who use A-Max's in match's and practice!

Brass neck consistancy, primer pocket consistancy, trimming, and neck tension I personally fell has helped me more so than pointing! JMO

BUT in the end, all process will help.

I will have to mention we have one person in the group shooting a BRX. He wipes the fired brass off with scotch brite, cleans the primer pocket-uniforms, uses a FL neck bushing die, takes bullets straight out of the box, loads them up and pretty well kicks everyone's behind! ??? He cleans his barrel about every 200 rounds!

So you be the judge!

 

[FroggyOne2]

My new. 223 is holding two inches at six hundred yards with the Berger 90's. I see now need right now to point them up, but work on the brass is crucial to reducing the verticle.

 

[timeout]

My new. 223 is holding two inches at six hundred yards with the Berger 90's. I see now need right now to point them up, but work on the brass is crucial to reducing the verticle.

My wife has a factory chambered .223 that I am going to try and wring the most possible out of. I have some Lapua brass on hand. Would you recommend neck turning enough to "clean them up"?

 

[Keith Glasscock]

Not unless they are measuring a significant difference. In a factory chamber, you need all of the consistent neck diameter you can get.

Are you seeing significant total indicated runout on the loaded rounds?

I would take a micrometer to the loaded rounds and see if the loaded necks vary more than .0003" Likewise, a ball mic would tell you if the necks are inconsistent around the case neck.

I agree with Froggy, case prep makes a difference. It makes more of a difference with a properly fitted chamber though.

 

[jlow]

I am no expert on this but I will tell you my experience with pointing smaller bullets i.e. weight around 75 gr. I did a test a few years ago with some 77 gr Nosler CC with a Whidden Gunworks bullet pointing system and monitoring bullet runout with a NECO concentricity gauge. What I found is that the bullets as they come from the manufacturer is quite concentric with runouts of around 0.25 thousands, as one dial down the pointing system increasing from 5 to 15 on the die’s scale, there is little problem. However, past 15 i.e. 20, 25, 30, etc, where you start seeing the bullets being pointed, the bullet runout increase linearly with an average runout of 0.65 thousands was found at a setting of 30.

Comparing this to the same system but using a 175 gr SMK, you see little or no runout at dial ranges required to point the bullet. My conclusion is that the smaller bullets do not have the internal capacity to accept the pointing and this in turn cases runout which is not good and as a result I do not use the pointing system in the small bullets.

 

[bozo699]

I am no expert on this but I will tell you my experience with pointing smaller bullets i.e. weight around 75 gr. I did a test a few years ago with some 77 gr Nosler CC with a Whidden Gunworks bullet pointing system and monitoring bullet runout with a NECO concentricity gauge. What I found is that the bullets as they come from the manufacturer is quite concentric with runouts of around 0.25 thousands, as one dial down the pointing system increasing from 5 to 15 on the die’s scale, there is little problem. However, past 15 i.e. 20, 25, 30, etc, where you start seeing the bullets being pointed, the bullet runout increase linearly with an average runout of 0.65 thousands was found at a setting of 30.

Comparing this to the same system but using a 175 gr SMK, you see little or no runout at dial ranges required to point the bullet. My conclusion is that the smaller bullets do not have the internal capacity to accept the pointing and this in turn cases runout which is not good and as a result I do not use the pointing system in the small bullets.

jlow,
I don't disagree with your basic statement but I think you have your decimal point in the wrong place 0.25, that's two hundred and fifty thousands (1/4") ?? don't you mean .0025?


Timeout,
I am not sure if you understand what the bullet pointing system is doing, you can't compare a plastic tipped bullet to a hollow point bullet that your just closing up the meplat a little, it isn't going to be pointing a bullet that wins a match, it is all the little things combined that you do that makes the big difference and bullet pointing is just one of them, some say they are seeing as much as 2" less vertical at 1000 yards by pointing there bullets, I'll take that, but there are many other factors involved so you would have to be the judge of it, if it would be worth it to you. If your shooting 4" and 5" groups at 1000 yards pretty steady and the bulk of that is vertical, you may benefit from pointing but if your shooting 20" at 1000 yards then you have more then pointing to work on! IMO plastic tip bullets are built for varmint hunting, I know some have had pretty good luck with them out to 600 yards in matches with them, I myself in my limited experience have not seen them being used in competition at 100o yards and there definitely not what is winning where I shoot. I am new to pointing myself and as a matter of a fact I am just getting ready to do some testing with pointed bullets, I sure am not going to point a 1000 bullets and head for a match, I am going to work up my best load for my new 6brx and then I will point some and try them, if I can improve my groups by any at all then I will point them, if I don't see a improvement I of course will not waste my time, I will be shooting my matches at 1000 yards so I won't waste my time or components trying them at 400 yards, I will do all my testing at 1K. I am hoping to see some improvements for my $250 investment and I hope if you spend the cash you get some returns as well, best of luck to you.
Wayne.

 

[jlow]

Hi Wayne,

As mentioned in my post, the starting runouts were in the 0.25 thousands which would be 0.00025”. After pointing, they were at 0.65 thousands which would be 0.00065”.

 

[bgodbold]

Guys, am I the only one who tries the A-max or H-match and consistently groups worse than a SMK? I've had it twice on my son's 308 and then on my 284W. On both we are a consistently few points lower on a 600 yard f-class target with red box bullets than green box bullets and the bullet drop is about the same (where adv numbers should put us higher with the red)...

 

[mdavis78102]

Hi Wayne,

As mentioned in my post, the starting runouts were in the 0.25 thousands which would be 0.00025”. After pointing, they were at 0.65 thousands which would be 0.00065”.

Jlow,

What type of instrument are you using to accurately measure 6.5 ten-thousandths?

 

[bozo699]

Hi Wayne,

As mentioned in my post, the starting runouts were in the 0.25 thousands which would be 0.00025”. After pointing, they were at 0.65 thousands which would be 0.00065”.

jflow,
I misunderstood,...heck I wouldn't even worry about that little amount, I don't even have a way to measure that small,.. I can measure to the nearest .0005
But if your runout increases probably so would your group size so why bother
Wayne.

 

[Stickman]

That is correct. 25 thousandths is .025

 

[jlow]

Guys you are all rushing to correct me which is usually good if I stated something inaccurate, but unfortunately none of you are reading my post accurately first before putting the correction. I wrote “0.25 thousands” not “65-thousands” or “65+hundretht-thousands”. The “0.25 thousands” as I wrote in my post is in fact 0.00025”.

Also for mdaivs78012 – I also clearly stated in Reply #8 that I used a “NECO concentricity gauge”?

 

[bozo699]

Guys you are all rushing to correct me which is usually good if I stated something inaccurate, but unfortunately none of you are reading my post accurately first before putting the correction. I wrote “0.25 thousands” not “65-thousands” or “65+hundretht-thousands”. The “0.25 thousands” as I wrote in my post is in fact 0.00025”.

Also for mdaivs78012 – I also clearly stated in Reply #8 that I used a “NECO concentricity gauge”?

jlow,
I am not trying to create waves but the neco tool reads to the nearest .0005 so what type of aftermarket mic do you have on it to measure .00025 that would make the factory mic on the neco just barely noticeably wiggle to the naked eye.
Wayne.

 

[jlow]

Come on guys, people say “1 thousands” all the time? When they say that what do they mean, they mean 0.001” right? So if I say “0.25 thousands”, why is it hard to understand? I can understand misreading what I wrote since everyone (including myself) are so busy nowadays that we only skim post and so misunderstanding is certainly possible but one should not pass blame if one knows that one is at fault? Just saying it as I see it.

Wayne, fair question. The NECO tool I have comes with a GEM dial indicator that has gradation to 0.0005” and one can easily read the approximate amounts in between, a little bit like those beam balances you guys like so much. I actually use a head mounted magnifier to read them. The readings are good and I am going to post a graph I made from that study here. Each data point was calculated with 10 individual readings except for the 20, 25, and 30 which had 5 readings. As mentioned earlier but I guess I should repeat myself since no one is going to go back and read it – I did the same study with the 175 gr SMKs and the readings were rock steady all the way through i.e. the pointing had absolutely no effect.

You guys can believe what you want and it is not important to me whether you believe me or not (no sour grapes here, just telling it as I see it). I am not trying to sell anything here only trying to help people avoid spending unnecessary money and worse still making a situation that they are trying to improve actually going the other direction.

 

[bozo699]

Come on guys, people say “1 thousands” all the time? When they say that what do they mean, they mean 0.001” right? So if I say “0.25 thousands”, why is it hard to understand? I can understand misreading what I wrote since everyone (including myself) are so busy nowadays that we only skim post and so misunderstanding is certainly possible but one should not pass blame if one knows that one is at fault? Just saying it as I see it.

Wayne, fair question. The NECO tool I have comes with a GEM dial indicator that has gradation to 0.0005” and one can easily read the approximate amounts in between, a little bit like those beam balances you guys like so much. I actually use a head mounted magnifier to read them. The readings are good and I am going to post a graph I made from that study here. Each data point was calculated with 10 individual readings except for the 20, 25, and 30 which had 5 readings. As mentioned earlier but I guess I should repeat myself since no one is going to go back and read it – I did the same study with the 175 gr SMKs and the readings were rock steady all the way through i.e. the pointing had absolutely no effect.

You guys can believe what you want and it is not important to me whether you believe me or not (no sour grapes here, just telling it as I see it). I am not trying to sell anything here only trying to help people avoid spending unnecessary money and worse still making a situation that they are trying to improve actually going the other direction.

jflow,
I know see where all the confusion has come from, Donovan actually pointed it out.
Anytime on a precision site like this that is full of gunsmiths, machinists, and precision minded type people, to almost anybody on here 0.25 would be two hundred and fifty thousands, it is where you place the decimal, to write 25 thousands for 99.9% of the people on here you would write it out as such, .025 if you moved the decimal another place .0025 then it would be two and 1/2 thousands and so on a so forth, so that is where the confusion lays. It is all in the terminology like most things are.

I for one do believe you,...why wouldn't I?....I imagine others believe you as well, it was the confusion of miss terminology! The jackets on the small bullets you pointed are very thin and it is a fine line between just pointing and over pointing, what I mean by overpointing is that you will start to crush the bullet at where you are pointing it causing a donut and at the base if you continue to try more pointing will start to distort the base also and that is where your runout is coming from and also why you weren't seeing runout on the larger thicker 175's however you can as well overpoint them as well and the same thing will appear, runout! Thank you for clearing all that up for us and for your input on the subject.
Wayne.

 

[jlow]

Hi Wayne,

As usual, it is good having a discussion with you. Yes, I can understand the source of confusion about the numbering and it is not a problem for me, nobody is perfect and I will stand in that line with everyone else.

Your read as to what the problem with pointing the 223 is exactly what I think. The unfortunate thing is at least if you follow directions, and the shape of the melpat after pointing, the degree of pointing I am seeing the runout is not overpointing, more like on its way and not really there yet – that is the crux of the issue. If you look at the graph I posted above, at the 0 to 15 level, there is hardly any pointing visible on the melpat and at 35 you are not quite there yet.

So the point here is not that overpointing will cause a runout problem (that is a given), but any significant pointing will cause a problem and because of this, my conclusion is that the lighter bullet should never be pointed. This is not to say that the pointing system is bad, it is good but only for the heavier bullets. I for a fact use it on my 175s.