Too much vertical with Berger Hybrids...

[eww1350]

I have tyring to tune my 6.5x284 (.297 neck) for the new Berger 140 grain Hybrids..they look good at 100 yrds but..at 400-1000 the vertical is crazy..I was shooting the VLDs with good success, not much vertical...thought I would give the Hybrids a try...I must be doing something wrong..I am just kissing the lands over 52 grains of H4831sc...(.294 neck bushing in Redding die)
Any input would be appreciated...


Thanks
Eddie in Texas

 

[jlow]

Verticals generally are caused by variation in MV which will not show up at 100 yard groups. Tell us more about your chronograph data.

 

[Rustystud]

Check the length of the bearing surface on the bullets. I have a customer who was shooting Bergers and had bought 2000 in the same lot. The meplants looked good. The weights were all with in .1 grain. the overall lengths were with in .0015" of each other. He was having unexplained verticals. He went back and measured the length of the bearing surfaces and they varied .030". He sorted them and then shot a comparison and this was the issue. He addressed it with Berger and they said they knew about the issue. They made no effort to replace the 400+ bullets that were different from the remaining 1600 bullets.
The variance in bearing surface caused a difference in muzzle velocity.
Nat Lambeth

 

[savagedasher]

For me I never got my Hybrids to work well at or near the lands..018 to .035 away from a soft touch was best. If you have..250 Vertical at 100yd the best you can expect is one inch at 400 yd.
I would try setting the off the land and adjust your vertical with bullet speed More or less powder.
Good Shooting Larry

 

[Big Bob]

I have the same issue with Berger bullets in my 243 improved.
These are 95gr VLD at 100 yds.

 

[22BRGUY]

Have you done a ladder test with different powder weights and different powders if necessary at 400?

 

[Roarke]

I think "just kissing the lands" is a bad place to be. Determining the EXACT seating depth required to be at the lands is fairly difficult due to variances inherent in the measuring process. So I suspect some of your rounds will be slightly into or out of the lands which is an inconsistency you wouldn't want. My minimums are jumping 10 or jamming 10 with plus or minus 5 my "no mans land" that no load will ever be.

As was said in previous post, I'd be checking bearing surface length. Of course all of this is assuming the rest of your loading techniques are serving to minimize MV variation.

 

[normmatzen]

I have been using 6mm Berger Hybrids for a year and a half with no problem getting a tune.
I started with 0.010 into the lands and shot that for a year with excellent results. I finally decided to try 0.020 out of the lands and find excellent results there too.
I load a ladder and shoot at 300 to 600 yd to determine load tune. The results at 100 yd, to me, is totally useless. One must consider the load requirements at 100yd for good groups, it is much less demanding on load tune than at longer ranges. But much more demanding of trigger pulling skill!

That's why I don't do 100yd BR!!

 

[Alex Wheeler]

If you are shooting long range you should be tuning at long range. Its not uncommon for a load that works at 100 to not shoot at 600 or 1000.

 

[Steve Blair]

Well, Norm and zfast, I guess I've been doing it all wrong. All my load development is done at 100 yards, over a chronograph. I have never had a load that grouped well at 100 with low ES and a reasonable tolerance window fail to perform at 1000, as a result of the load. Prior to leaving for Raton, the longest distance fired for that load was 300 yards and that was to obtain a zero. Everything else, including tuner setting, was done at 100 yards. I finished fifth in the Nationals, won Match 5 and shot two 1000 yard cleans. So, I think the load was performing. [br]
Developing at longer ranges is equally valid and can be just as effective. It's just not the only way to do it.

 

[jlow]

I am curious why no one else seems to wonder about his ES and SDEV....

 

[6BRinNZ]

Just kissing is a bad place to be be - I would change that first, I would go in the direction of jump. Yes ES/SD numbers shed light on the issue.

Can you define crazy vertical? Does that mean every shot is different or just the odd one throwing the whole group out?

 

[Steve Blair]

A lot of folks use cheap chronos and then, understandably, do not trust the results.

 

[jlow]

Fair enough, but if one don't even look...

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Steve,
Why do simple comments in these forums lately get people so offended, and defensive? Jeez, I never said you were doing it wrong. I am very very sorry. Of course we all know there are may ways of doing something. But when I want to know how a load will shoot at 600, I shoot at 600. It is not the only way, but it is the most fool proof.

 

[Steve Blair]

Steve,
Why do simple comments in these forums lately get people so offended, and defensive? Jeez, I never said you were doing it wrong. I am very very sorry. Of course we all know there are may ways of doing something. But when I want to know how a load will shoot at 600, I shoot at 600. It is not the only way, but it is the most fool proof.

[br]
I'm not offended, but frustrated when advice like the following is given and I know it is, at best, misleading. The inverse of the statement is that long range loads should not be tested at 100. No apology is necessary but please consider wording statements as alternative approaches when there is more than one potential success path. [br]

If you are shooting long range you should be tuning at long range. Its not uncommon for a load that works at 100 to not shoot at 600 or 1000.

[br]
I repeat; if a load groups well at 100, has low ES and shows a reasonably wide node, why would it not shoot well at 1000 yards? I'm a 1000 yard competitor who thinks that load development is best done under controlled conditions with excellent instrumentation, followed by results analysis. But, I would not tell someone that they should not conduct ladder tests at 600 or 1000. I know that can work, too. If an accurate chronograph is unavailable and longer range is available for testing, the approach that should be used is obvious. [br]
Now, given that the OP did not cite chrono results, as Jlow noted, a ladder or simple testing at longer range may be indicated.

 

[Lbart]

Eddie,
" Any input would be appreciated..."

OK, I am hesitant to say it but there is not much hard data in the OP. What size is "look good"? What is "crazy vertical"? What type of shooting do you do? How many rounds through barrel, etc?

IMO if you are happy with the VLD's, then I would save barrel life, components, etc and just go back to VLD's. There is only about a 1% increase in BC using the Hybrids. That is not worth pulling hair out about.

I agree with poster who wrote "Just kissing is a bad place to be". Go into the lands or out of them. When I shot my 6.5-284's using VLD's before the Hybrids came out I would move the bullet out 0.001" every 50 shots since I was jammed and wanted to stay there.

Good Luck,
Larry Bartholome

 

[Steve Blair]

I agree with what you say, Donovan, but would add this. If the shooter cannot correctly identify, characterize and manage the conditions at 600 or 1000, the results are just as misleading as using a cheap chrono at 100. We do have a 300 yard range but it's almost never without wind, located in foothills and has swirling, unpredictable changes, both horizontal and vertical. I shoot over Rick Graham's flags and they certainly help but that is just as much an acquired skill as working the instrumentation at 100 or assessing conditions at longer ranges. [br]
No matter which approach is used, there are strong and weak points. Either requires experience and knowledge. To the practitioner who uses one approach, the other may seem difficult and fraught with pitfalls.

 

[expiper]

Hi Eddie,,,you are gettin some very good advice here from some seasoned competitors,,,my advice is as others hav said,,,either jam em at least .007-.010 or jump um ..020-.040".....get them shooting bug holes at 100 yds and then PRACTIC a LOT ovr flags at 500-600 ,,,,Roger

 

[6BRinNZ]

I agree with what you say, Donovan, but would add this. If the shooter cannot correctly identify, characterize and manage the conditions at 600 or 1000, the results are just as misleading as using a cheap chrono at 100. We do have a 300 yard range but it's almost never without wind, located in foothills and has swirling, unpredictable changes, both horizontal and vertical. I shoot over Rick Graham's flags and they certainly help but that is just as much an acquired skill as working the instrumentation at 100 or assessing conditions at longer ranges. [br]
No matter which approach is used, there are strong and weak points. Either requires experience and knowledge. To the practitioner who uses one approach, the other may seem difficult and fraught with pitfalls.

+1

Off topic but Erics thread on 100 yard development is the most useful I have seen in how to approach load development. Sure it doesn't list all of the caveats, but it does provide some basic principles that can be easily interpreted. Chances are; it will produce a load more than good enough that the newer shooter is better focused on gun handling and wind skills than tweaking further.

For a newer shooter explaining flyers etc is way too easily done when shooting at distance (IMO a shooter finds it easier to explain a flyer at 1000 than 100)...lets face it, a lot of newer shooters will get one good group at distance and call it done. This aspect is why I like the 100 yard load dev thread - it moved the emphasis away from a small group to a consistent vertical POI across a charge range....again newer reloaders won't have their reloading practices down pat so arguably load tolerance is a greater factor in making choices.

Once the shooter is more proficient - you choose ya poison.

From my experience when I first started out I was quite despondent thinking I needed to develop loads at distance, there is no range I can do that, the most I have is 200 yards and F-class goes to 1000. The key thing I learnt was - you have to make do with what you have, document lots, be patient, and most important of all - be methodical.

My bias and experience is F-class.

All up I disagree with none of the proposed approaches.