Flatline Bullets

[trout bum]

I had this debate with a respected colleague a few years ago. My contention was that the 175 or 178s that I shot were superior because they were heavier and wind didn't blow them as much.... He insisted his 155s were superior because they got to the target faster, and thus spent less time being blown around.... The real thing about the speed, is this - my "efficient" 175s kept more of their original velocity - but was it enough that they crossed the finish line before the 155s, which start faster, but bleed off more velocity going downrange? A computer model could have told us, but it was more fun to bicker on the firing line. The trouble with comparing them, was my rifle had 1:10 and his a 1:13 twist - so of course, each rifle had a preference. We both fired pretty good groups with our respective rigs, and when we shared wind dope, we were quite often with 1/4 MOA for wind corrections....

I rebarreled a few years ago with a 1:12 to be able to shoot 155,168 and 175s, and hoping to favor the 175s... But the new barrel inexplicably has a BIG preference for 155s instead of 175s.

I still debate things with my colleague - but I won't argue with the gun. I shoot 155s now.

These fancy new bullets look like something I'd be interested in. Two questions come to mind:

1) It sure as heck won't fit in my SA mags - so maybe I'm not TOO interested, and;
2) There's a 155 - but it's so much longer than the Sierra "Palma 155" I wonder if it would need a faster twist to stabilize it, perhaps a 1:10?

I've generally understood or perhaps assumed, that longer bullets with a light density were more easily moved around in the wind due to much higher area for wind to push against, and lower energy density of course.
But I'm probably wrong.

It'll be interesting to see some real world user experience/data on them and how it affects fouling and so on. Probably means different load data as in the case of most other solid copper bullets.
Pretty surprising they're able to turn them that cheap and consider it a worthwhile business opportunity.

 

[peterdobson]

When it comes to ballistics all that matters is velocity and drag(B.C.) Getting there is the complicated part.

 

[308BAR]

From the article:

"The 155.5gr 30 caliber bullet has the velocity of a 125-135gr bullet and has the BC of a 185-200gr bullet. The 255.5gr 338 caliber bullet has the velocity of a 225gr bullet and the BC of the 300gr bullet."

Is this possible without increasing chamber pressures? Do they seal better than other bullets? I'd like to see future results from these.

If you take a closer look at the photos the bullet seem to have bands like the Barnes bullet but the bands are much more rounded in profile less channel like. This is probably to reduce preassure like the Barnes

 

[trout bum]

Agreed - but there has to be consistency in manufacturing. I mean -- I would shoot sierra 155s all day long instead of a "better" ballistic bullet that just didn't group as well. So - Let's assume these new bullets are very top quality, and group demonically well.... there's still a matter of price. I might be inclined to stick with Sierra if I can shoot twice as much for my dollar - - good ammo is important - but it only needs to be "good enough" (after a point...) - My skills and performance are still a bigger variable in the shot and time and effort I dedicate to training each year pays bigger dividends (to me) than money I pour into better equipment. (assuming my equipment and ammo is at least "better than my skills" and frankly - Sierra generally does well enough...) This isn't a paid ad for Sierra, btw, just using them as an example. If I had money to burn, or if I ever train so much that I consistently outperform my ammunitions grouping capability - I would definitely consider these bullets. As it is right now, they're a curious "want" rather than a "need."

When it comes to ballistics all that matters is velocity and drag(B.C.) Getting there is the complicated part.