Bullet Pointing
- Thread starter rwj
- Start date
Anecdotal, but I've pointed my bullets for a match, once. It was the highest score I've ever shot.
I guess it takes a little work but done right it is very rewarding, maybe you shouldn't say anything it makes them easier to beat.... lol.. jim
Did he conclude that if you are not an elite shooter shooting at 1000 yards, it wasn't worth the effort?
Ned Ludd
Silver $$ Contributor
As I mentioned previously, I did a lot of the direct comparison I carried out between pointed and unpointed bullet performance at 300 yd. The main reason for this was a particular match we shot at that distance (300 yd Reduced Palma Match was the title) in which 12" Shoot-N-C targets were used to overlay the 300 yd reduced NRA target. The 15-shot groups on Shoot-N-C targets made for very easy visualization of any difference between pointed and unpointed loads.
To address your question above, pointing bullets required a decrease in scope elevation of one to two clicks (0.125 to 0.250 MOA) at 300 yd to keep the groups centered. This result was pretty consistent for both .223 Rem and .308 Win loads with various bullets. My point is that any increase in BC will decrease the elevation required to center a group at some distance. If you can detect a reduction in elevation at a distance of only 300 yd, it will only get larger as the distance increases. So you could definitely detect a difference at 600 yd. Any decrease in elevation required to center on target means higher BC, which means less wind deflection, and that might possibly save a point or two in a match. A point or two in a match can make all the difference in where you finish, no matter what level shooter you may be. Points are points.
Any experience or thoughts on the Sierra 107 or 183 factory pointed bullets? They seem to have got there pointing right on a mass scale..
Did you sort the bullets? By bearing surface? did you trim the bullets? then did you measure the the shank and the pressure ring in setting up the pointer? also do you in set up measure the length of the bullet you are pointing to insure it is growing and stop when it the length stops growing in the set up?.... jim
Ned Ludd
Silver $$ Contributor
All I will say about bullets pointed at the factory is that I have not personally been satisfied with the uniformity of the points in the Lots I have tried. That is largely due to how the bullets are pointed (i.e. not length sorted). I'm sure the BCs are higher than if the bullets weren't pointed at all. However, if I have to re-point bullets that were already pointed at the factory (which I have done), I'd much rather they weren't pointed at the factory in the first place. I can do much better with my own setup at home.
See my post #11. The SMK 6.5 150 and the 7mm 183 are the bullets I was referring to.
I hope this helps,
Lloyd
he covers a lot of ground in the chapter. I think he wants people to come to their own conclusions on whether it is worth it for themselves. Might borrow or buy the book and decide for yourself
Last edited:
These Modern Advancements volumes cover HUGE amounts of ground - hundreds of rounds fired in scores of tests in several calibres / cartridges. Each section is so detailed it is like reading a research treatise in itself with multiple results tables.
What they don't do as a general rule is look at groups which is understandable given the variables involved. So they are generally but not always about what a good chronograph tells you - the effects of doing a, b, and c on MVs and particularly ESs and SDs. Many findings are quite counter-intuitive and this is one of the best things about these tests and the books.
On bullet pointing, I would have to put a few hours aside to re-read just what Bryan's team found and make sense of it again as there are so many messages / conclusions not all of which are in agreement with each other. (ie cartridge / bullet A and B gave such and such a 'message' trending towards such and such a conclusion; cartridge / bullet C and D saw little or no effect, or even a contradictory effect etc.)
My (probably flawed) memory though is that the drag reduction benefits turned out to be smaller across the board than Bryan had originally postulated in Applied Ballistics for Long Range Shooting which had estimated BC improvements of 3-7% depending on a) the degree of meplat diameter reduction and b) calibre, the smaller the bullet diameter the greater the likely benefit for any percentage meplat diameter rerduction. The lower end of that range was generally as good as it as got, and some test subjects saw no drag reduction benefits, IIRC even one or two being slightly worse than in out of the box form.
Bryan's latest (3rd) edition of Ballistic Performance of Rifle Bullets covers both earlier unpointed versions of some SMKs alongside the new factory pointed models treated as separate subjects, and again there is no trend towards significant improvements for those bullets that saw no other changes to their shapes. In some examples such as the 224 80gn MK, there is an improvement (0.221 to 0.235 or 6%), but other dimensions of the boat-tail, shank and nose lengths / radius change enough to make one think that Sierra did a little modification or 'clean-up' to the overall bullet design and so what is affected by that and what by pointing? The 90gn 224 SMK though has identical dimensions and nose radius between both sets so the results of the pointing work can be seen in isolation - here there is marginal change from 0.257 to 0.259. the 6mm 107gn Sierra MK has a few minor non-meplat shape changes between the versions, likely such that it is the sort seen with a new set of form-dies or between production lots. Here, the pointed models sees a BC reduction over the original! Unpointed was 0.260; pointed is 0.256 or a 1.5% decrease. That doesn't say to me that Sierra pointing its bullets reduces BCs, rather that given the small samples Bryan works with and the inevitable small variations in test results between sessions, that the pointing change is so small that it can get lost in the 'background noise' of other changes and effects.
The problem for us shooters is as in many other aspects of precision loading that we become psychologically 'hooked' on procedures, makes of tools or components, preparation methods. Before you know where you are, loading 100 rounds becomes a week's work with all the measurement, batching, trimming, annealing, weighing to 0.0000 something grains etc. (Not to mention must-have the latest bullet design that gives a 0.1 average BC increase for a 20% increase in price!) It is very difficult to do something, have a good shoot with the resulting ammo, then stop doing it, so a ratchet effect applies - always more work or expense, never less. Applied Ballistics LLC is applying a 'Mythbusters' approach to many handloading practices and received wisdoms. Some (like flash-hole deburring / uniforming) are being validated; others either not at all or left as unclear about real benefits. Lots of people are going to be unhappy when tenets they regard as having come down from the mountain on stone tablets are challenged; some are going to be angry. Bullet trimming and pointing appears to fall into this category. I reckon people simply have to make their own minds up on these issues - if they work for you, then they work for you (or not as the case may be)! As I said in an earlier post, I'm an agnostic on this issue - I like the results with some bullets not with others ..... but I'd never challenge anyone who disagreed with me on it.
What they don't do as a general rule is look at groups which is understandable given the variables involved. So they are generally but not always about what a good chronograph tells you - the effects of doing a, b, and c on MVs and particularly ESs and SDs. Many findings are quite counter-intuitive and this is one of the best things about these tests and the books.
On bullet pointing, I would have to put a few hours aside to re-read just what Bryan's team found and make sense of it again as there are so many messages / conclusions not all of which are in agreement with each other. (ie cartridge / bullet A and B gave such and such a 'message' trending towards such and such a conclusion; cartridge / bullet C and D saw little or no effect, or even a contradictory effect etc.)
My (probably flawed) memory though is that the drag reduction benefits turned out to be smaller across the board than Bryan had originally postulated in Applied Ballistics for Long Range Shooting which had estimated BC improvements of 3-7% depending on a) the degree of meplat diameter reduction and b) calibre, the smaller the bullet diameter the greater the likely benefit for any percentage meplat diameter rerduction. The lower end of that range was generally as good as it as got, and some test subjects saw no drag reduction benefits, IIRC even one or two being slightly worse than in out of the box form.
Bryan's latest (3rd) edition of Ballistic Performance of Rifle Bullets covers both earlier unpointed versions of some SMKs alongside the new factory pointed models treated as separate subjects, and again there is no trend towards significant improvements for those bullets that saw no other changes to their shapes. In some examples such as the 224 80gn MK, there is an improvement (0.221 to 0.235 or 6%), but other dimensions of the boat-tail, shank and nose lengths / radius change enough to make one think that Sierra did a little modification or 'clean-up' to the overall bullet design and so what is affected by that and what by pointing? The 90gn 224 SMK though has identical dimensions and nose radius between both sets so the results of the pointing work can be seen in isolation - here there is marginal change from 0.257 to 0.259. the 6mm 107gn Sierra MK has a few minor non-meplat shape changes between the versions, likely such that it is the sort seen with a new set of form-dies or between production lots. Here, the pointed models sees a BC reduction over the original! Unpointed was 0.260; pointed is 0.256 or a 1.5% decrease. That doesn't say to me that Sierra pointing its bullets reduces BCs, rather that given the small samples Bryan works with and the inevitable small variations in test results between sessions, that the pointing change is so small that it can get lost in the 'background noise' of other changes and effects.
The problem for us shooters is as in many other aspects of precision loading that we become psychologically 'hooked' on procedures, makes of tools or components, preparation methods. Before you know where you are, loading 100 rounds becomes a week's work with all the measurement, batching, trimming, annealing, weighing to 0.0000 something grains etc. (Not to mention must-have the latest bullet design that gives a 0.1 average BC increase for a 20% increase in price!) It is very difficult to do something, have a good shoot with the resulting ammo, then stop doing it, so a ratchet effect applies - always more work or expense, never less. Applied Ballistics LLC is applying a 'Mythbusters' approach to many handloading practices and received wisdoms. Some (like flash-hole deburring / uniforming) are being validated; others either not at all or left as unclear about real benefits. Lots of people are going to be unhappy when tenets they regard as having come down from the mountain on stone tablets are challenged; some are going to be angry. Bullet trimming and pointing appears to fall into this category. I reckon people simply have to make their own minds up on these issues - if they work for you, then they work for you (or not as the case may be)! As I said in an earlier post, I'm an agnostic on this issue - I like the results with some bullets not with others ..... but I'd never challenge anyone who disagreed with me on it.
Ned Ludd
Silver $$ Contributor
I thought pretty much every one of us regard the specific way in which we each do something as having come from the mountain on a stone tablet LOL.
JimSC - I have been pointing the 90 VLDs for years. In my hands, it does offer a noticeable benefit. In fairness however, a good friend and fellow 90 VLD shooter also swears that pointing increased his vertical with them. I have not directly compared each of our pointed bullets to see if there is any noticeable difference in the points, so I can't really say with any certainty why his bullets seem to behave differently than mine. I'd guess there is something we each do differently in the pointing process. The easiest thing to do is simply point a few and see how they behave relative to unpointed bullets in your hands. If you like the results, pointing is pretty easy to incorporate into the reloading process. If not, it shouldn't be too hard to unload the pointing die or keep it to possibly use on some other bullet.
Last edited:
That was my result too with these bullets. BC apparently improved as less elevation was needed, but consistency decreased. I'm a cautious 'pointer' believing in too little rather than too much, so maybe I would have got better results with a tad more pointing effect. 7mm SMKs, both 175 and especially 180gn are the reverse - BTO batching, trimming and pointing transformed very poor results with the 180s into good ones, although I'd not recommend anyone to swap their 7mm Berger Hybrids for them quite yet.
From what I have read the die would not help very much on the bullets I normally use I would only see a couple of percent at most. If I shot different bullets I would reconsider.
If I had unlimited time and money I would certainly try everything. However that is not the case so I use what I have on what gives me the most results for my effort. For the last year that has meant upgrading to the next level of optics and triggers, and going through lots of components and wearing out barrels. I experimented with many reloading procedures some of which yielded significant improvements in velocity SD and some that showed none at all but I am happy with my group sizes. My problem is keeping those groups centered
My thoughts are not from what I read, sorting, Trimming and pointing done right reduces vertical, wind drift and you gain BC.of 3-5 % You are making your bullets more uniform, your ES will drop, Weigh your powder with in .02 or less and seating force with in 3 lb. this equal neck tension, Es will drop into single digits. These are things you can control, Barrel quality is a huge factor as is the wind..... jim
rwj
Gold $$ Contributor
Let me know if you have any other “interests” and I’ll gladly start another thread! No problem if you blame me to the wife for related purchases
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.