OTM vs Scenar

[fe1]

What’s the difference between a Lapua OTM and a Scenar bullet?
TIA

 

[Bc'z]

Verbage, it's the same bullet.

 

[284winner]

Basically

 

[Laurie]

Scenars are all hollow-point match boat-tail designs; the sole OTM the company produces is a hollow-point flat-base. It's the rear end that's the difference here I suspect.

Other companies such as Berger, Hornady, and Sierra increasingly use the OTM designation when the product is designed for military or LEA applications. Generals, lawyers, and senior police officers have a dread fear of the term 'hollow-point' as it might suggest to journalists or the public use of an expanding projectile, or to use the 'loaded' terminology such critics prefer 'Dum-Dum bullets'. So the 30 year old 308 175gn Sierra HPBT MatchKing magically morphs into being a harmless OTM when loaded into military sniper ammunition.

 

[Kracken McGraw]

I was reading in the archive’s that the Scenar bullet was very hard and prone to ricochet. Has anyone noticed this compared to other match bullets?

 

[Laurie]

I was reading in the archive’s that the Scenar bullet was very hard and prone to ricochet. Has anyone noticed this compared to other match bullets?

No. (Until Bergermania set in, Scenars were the most widely used match bullets in the UK and still see very widespread use across all of Europe. Never heard of this, or seen it when pulling targets.)

Edit: I wonder on reflection if this comment actually referred to Lapua's older match quality FMJBT designs, the famous D-series rebated boat-tail models and the B-series 'Lock-base' models. I could well imagine some of these bullets being 'hard'.