More high BC solids

[coolbox]

PVA has these on their website. Higher claimed BC than the Warner Flatlines (for the 198gr 30 cal).
Any reviews on them yet?

 

[Ned Ludd]

I've run both the 180 and 198 Flatlines using .308 Win. For the 198s, I used a 30" 8.0-twist barrels at ~2650 fps. An 8.0-twist was suggested by the Berger Twist Rate calculator as the minimum twist rate necessary to achieve an Sg of 1.5. Frankly, I think that is an underestimate and a minimum of ~7.5-twist would be better.

PVA's Seneca 198 gr bullet is 0.082" longer than the 198 Flatline, but they recommend a minimum 9.0-twist, which is way too slow for a bullet that long. Anyone wishing to run these and get the most out of them ought to be thinking about at least an 8-twist, and probably more like a 7.5-twist barrel. The velocities attainable with larger capacity cartridges than the .308 Win will certainly help, but increased velocity is usually a poor substitute for a faster twist rate.

 

[coolbox]

I've run both the 180 and 198 Flatlines using .308 Win. For the 198s, I used a 30" 8.0-twist barrels at ~2650 fps. An 8.0-twist was suggested by the Berger Twist Rate calculator as the minimum twist rate necessary to achieve an Sg of 1.5. Frankly, I think that is an underestimate and a minimum of ~7.5-twist would be better.

PVA's Seneca 198 gr bullet is 0.082" longer than the 198 Flatline, but they recommend a minimum 9.0-twist, which is way too slow for a bullet that long. Anyone wishing to run these and get the most out of them ought to be thinking about at least an 8-twist, and probably more like a 7.5-twist barrel. The velocities attainable with larger capacity cartridges than the .308 Win will certainly help, but increased velocity is usually a poor substitute for a faster twist rate.

Thank you for the feedback.
I tend to agree with the faster twist requirements, and these should require 8 or faster for optimum stabilization.
Lets see when someone reports how these perform. The Warner flatlines do not seem to have picked up a following despite their amazing BC.

 

[Ned Ludd]

One issue with the 198 Flatlines in .308 Win F-TR rifles has been unexplained vertical that users don't seem to be able to tune out. Obviously they're pretty pricey, but that wouldn't stop quite a few F-TR shooters if the results were there. I know at least a couple other F-TR shooters besides myself that experienced the same phenomena with 198s using 8.0-twist barrels.

Might they have fared better out of a 7.5-twist barrel? Maybe. I certainly don't think it would have hurt anything. Nonetheless, that's an expensive proposition when you've already purchased the 8-twist barrel and gone through quite a few bullets testing it. It will be interesting to hear whether someone using a cartridge with a little more horsepower such as a .300 WSM or .300 Win Mag notices any issues with vertical using these bullets. They're some long-a**ed boolits, no question about it.

 

[coolbox]

Unless we get positibe amd encouraging real time reports, we cant be sure if they work. With your experience, its evident that are NOT smooth sailing, and might have some issues. Could tight bore 308 be helpful in better sealing of gases etc?
What intrigues me is that solids seem to work pretty well for the ELR, Ko2M categories in the 375s, 408s and 416s. Why not the 30cal then?

 

[Ned Ludd]

Unless we get positibe amd encouraging real time reports, we cant be sure if they work. With your experience, its evident that are NOT smooth sailing, and might have some issues. Could tight bore 308 be helpful in better sealing of gases etc?
What intrigues me is that solids seem to work pretty well for the ELR, Ko2M categories in the 375s, 408s and 416s. Why not the 30cal then?

My belief is that is likely to be an issue with the design of that specific bullet, rather than a general issue to be expected with all copper monolithics. I have tried to understand, or at least get some handle on the excessive vertical issues, but haven't had much luck. In the quest to generate higher BC numbers, increasing length is one obvious way to increase bullet weight within the confines of a given caliber. Perhaps there is a design limit for a given caliber beyond which it's simply not feasible to stabilize a given bullet with uber-fast twist rates and they begin to exhibit undesirable behaviors. Nonetheless, the ELR shooters have clearly been using them successfully for some time. However, my understanding is that they are typically using large steel targets, with which the vertical may not be as obvious as it is on a target with a 1 MOA 10-ring (i.e. a hit is a hit). In that case, the extremely high BC may outweigh certain other factors, but I don't shoot those disciplines, so I'm only guessing. What I can tell you from personal experience is that dropping points in an F-Class match to unexplained vertical, even at a distance of only 600 yd, markedly reduces the benefit of windage gains the high BC bullet offers.

When you start shooting these bullets, there are a few things that become noticeable. Their extreme length and the underlying reason for requiring such fast-twist barrels is one. They also have extremely sharp points/tips. Another observation is that these bullets aren't as compressible as a lead core bullet. Another is that they tend to have pretty short bearing surfaces for their length, substituting drive bands in order to keep the bearing surface contact to a minimum. In the grand scheme of things, there are quite a few differences between the copper monolithics and traditional lead core bullets. I think it's not surprising that these differences might also make them behave a bit differently with regard to load development. So in the end, you pretty much have to shoot them and see how they work in a given setup. If you have to do a lot of tuning and tweaking like I have, it can become a pretty expensive prospect.

 

[coolbox]

I have dropped points to vertical (mixed two different loads in a match). No, it does not feel good at all.
Interested in whats different with the PVA 198gr solids with even higher claimed BC than the Warner flatlines.

 

[Ned Ludd]

I have dropped points to vertical (mixed two different loads in a match). No, it does not feel good at all.
Interested in whats different with the PVA 198gr solids with even higher claimed BC than the Warner flatlines.

The only thing you could realistically do would be to measure and compare them. The fact that the PVA bullet is 0.082" longer than the FL198 for the same weight suggests it may also be "pointier". I routinely estimate bullets BCs using LabRadar velocity data, and for lead core bullets at least, the numbers are surprisingly good. The estimate I obtained for the FL198 G7 BC was 0.425. PVA lists two different G7 BCs for their Seneca 198 bullet on the same webpage; first they state it is 0.461, and right below that it is listed as 0.421, so I really can't tell which is the correct value. Nonetheless, an extra 0.082" bullet OAL ought to be worth at least some increase in BC, although a faster-than-8-twist barrel would likely also be a necessity.

 

[Ranger188]

Drop Josh an e-mail, joshk@patriotvalleyarms.com
Decent guy and hopefully he will be able to answer your questions.

 

[coolbox]

The only thing you could realistically do would be to measure and compare them. The fact that the PVA bullet is 0.082" longer than the FL198 for the same weight suggests it may also be "pointier". I routinely estimate bullets BCs using LabRadar velocity data, and for lead core bullets at least, the numbers are surprisingly good. The estimate I obtained for the FL198 G7 BC was 0.425. PVA lists two different G7 BCs for their Seneca 198 bullet on the same webpage; first they state it is 0.461, and right below that it is listed as 0.421, so I really can't tell which is the correct value. Nonetheless, an extra 0.082" bullet OAL ought to be worth at least some increase in BC, although a faster-than-8-twist barrel would likely also be a necessity.

Yes I noted the two different BCs as well on their webpage.
They claim it is easier to load/tune. Only testing can help determine that.
Cant quite go down that route of testing and verifying multiple solids, most of which are probably not quite suited to sub half moa accuracy at F Class distances, over 20 shots.
Might be pretty useful in pinging steel at 1k and beyond, as you mentioned earlier.

 

[XTR]

With regard to solids in F-TR I will just say that my experience mirrors what is written above.

Regarding steel, one comment I've heard from people who shoot steel at range is that if you don't have the light up hit indicators solids can be a bit harder to ID hits. They don't have visible splashes compared to lead core bullets, something to consider for playing games.