They're here! Correction..... They're there! :shock:

[AlanF]

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2015/08/game-changer-berger-7mm-195gr-bullet-with-0-755-g1-bc/

[williada]

How long before people get sick of hitting the same spot at will? Sort of saps the challenge a bit. Won't be long before we see the advocates lining up for a rifle weight change due to recoil and faster twists. I got very bored using the machine rest, except to say the data was enlightening.

I suppose I will have to see the light, ... err....I mean, just worry about apparent aiming mark shifts, as I imagine shooting in a vacuum might become lonely. No wind and a falling population of fellow competitors. Can see a resurgence in F Standard and a growth in FTR and maybe the new rookies will be given an FO rifle just to point and shoot.

Will you be able to get the most out of the cases equipped to handle them such as the SAUM and 7mm WSMs and Magnums given the speed limits on some ranges? Barrel replacement in 700 rounds?

World championships will mean that aspirants will have to totally re-kit and will they be able to find a range to practice with full bottle competitive equipment which will break speed limits on quite a few. David.

[Brad Y]

Looking at a basic calculation on an iPhone here in Singapore, I'm not seeing much ballistic improvement of these at 2820 out of say a saum, compared to the 180 hybrid at 2950 in the same cartridge. Agreed for rough weather they may be the ticket over a 180. But it's still not going to make a bad wind call an instant x. Be interesting to see when they arrive who pilots them to success first.

[Matt P]

They could end up just like the 115grn 6mm, great on paper but not real flash in the real world, I think I'll wait and see what the real world results are like in the Southern Hemisphere, the groups are always smaller and the chronys always faster in the Northern Hemisphere.
Matt P

[AlanF]

I think the best way of comparing the real world wind performance between 180s and 195s is firstly to assume that the 3500ft-lb limit will apply to both. Also in most situations the advantage of high BC in the wind is when you misjudge the velocity of the wind. So I've made a table showing the figures for the 180VLDs, 180Hybs and 195s.

180 VLD
G7 BC : 0.337
Vel@3500ft-lb : 2960fps
1 mph wind estimation error at 1000 yd causes windage error (in) : 5.71

180 Hyb
G7 BC : 0.345
Vel@3500ft-lb : 2960fps
1 mph wind estimation error at 1000 yd causes windage error (in) : 5.54

195
G7 BC : 0.387
Vel@3500ft-lb : 2844fps
1 mph wind estimation error at 1000 yd causes windage error (in) : 5.10

Amusingly, the 195 will still touch the 6 ring, and the other two won't! . But its just coincidental that my arbitrary choice of a 1mph wind reading error and 1000yards shows the 195 in such a good light. In the vast majority of situations, the advantage of the 195 will make no difference on the scoreboard.

[Longranger]

How long before people get sick of hitting the same spot at will? Sort of saps the challenge a bit. Won't be long before we see the advocates lining up for a rifle weight change due to recoil and faster twists. I got very bored using the machine rest, except to say the data was enlightening.

I suppose I will have to see the light, ... err....I mean, just worry about apparent aiming mark shifts, as I imagine shooting in a vacuum might become lonely. No wind and a falling population of fellow competitors. Can see a resurgence in F Standard and a growth in FTR and maybe the new rookies will be given an FO rifle just to point and shoot.

Will you be able to get the most out of the cases equipped to handle them such as the SAUM and 7mm WSMs and Magnums given the speed limits on some ranges? Barrel replacement in 700 rounds?

World championships will mean that aspirants will have to totally re-kit and will they be able to find a range to practice with full bottle competitive equipment which will break speed limits on quite a few. David.

One of the things I do like about F Class standard is that it isn't so much an equipment/component race compared to F Open ( still want to have a crack at that class also ).

The caliber and projectile constraints are a great leveller and it often boils down to just wind/condition reading skills. It may be ballistically inferior but it sure tests your skills. If the sport goes ahead with super performing projectiles it just may become as boring as bat shit.

Technologically, bc development is a good thing along with equipment improvements etc, but real marksmanship is what keeps it interesting. Target sizes might have to get smaller and if you want to be competitive, be prepared to put up with supply/cost problems of imported components out of the US. That has already become an issue. If these new pills show considerable advantage then it will mean that there will be a lot disparity between those lucky enough to get hold of a supply and those not so lucky using a lesser performing pill. Results then get skewed at comp's, again, boring...

[macguru]

I will have a go, they might suit my setup (saum/8.5twist)

Still, thats what I thought about the 90gr pills and they were no good for me in my 223

[Norm]

David,

You may think F-Open is boring and too easy but it still has to be mastered just like any other discipline.
I can tell you that it wasn't too easy at Rosedale on Saturday. Not too many X's shot for the day but plenty of 5's and a few 4's.

With regards to the 195gn Berger. I'm not convinced it will have any real advantage. The longer the bullet the harder they are to get to shoot bug hole groups consistently. By all means buy some and give them a go in your rifle. But I would still run with the bullet that offers the better accuracy on a consistent basis.

I won't be using them in my .284 win but after reading about these new bullets, I suddenly feel the need for a 7mm RUM.
If your going to go big, you may as well go all the way.

[DenisA]

An interesting point to note is that the high BC 230gn and 215gn 30cal bullets never really took off in F-Open even when they were run FAST from magnums prior to public knowledge of ME restrictions.

I gave both above mentioned bullets a red hot crack for quite a while and couldn't master them. Quite a few reasons for this in my opinion.

I don't think the results of the 195gn 7mm's will be as rewarding as their specifications.

[williada]

Norm, I never said FO was boring. In fact, I am captured by its intricacies. I was a bit tongue in cheek. But I am a realist, because we have to share the venues with other disciplines and we have to share the venues with the community perceptions.

Sure I can break out my 7STW or my 30-378, but the range templates as are most ranges in the country were determined by the Defence Department way back using military ammunition, and I can't use them. However, if I was hunting, I don't want to worry about wind, just hit my target. That is a different motivation.

But yes, I do think it will become boring if the challenges of wind are significantly taken out of the equation as determined by average scores, not one day out. I can see, if using bigger crackers at full bottle loads will lead to heavier rests because there is a reluctance to move away from free recoil techniques because of years of habit, to firm grip techniques. This may lead to heavier rests being used to assist repositioning after recoil. It may require using a forklift to take gear to and from the mound to the inconvenience of other disciplines and the smooth running of a days shooting because there are no limits to that.

Would people like to be able to afford the superior equipment to remain competitive? Yes. You would lose a few because they can't.

Is the timing right, as we are struggling to fill FO teams now, if cost becomes a barrier to entry?

If the gear became the norm, would there be pressure to shrink the targets? Yes.

Would shrunken targets have to be negotiated with other disciplines? Yes.

Now, Alan's realistic assumption is the only way to analyse this stuff. Its no good owning a Porsche if you can only drive it at 60 kph.

The problem I see given that there are speed limits, is we start to develop a list of ballistic inefficiencies for cases designed to take more. In that sense, the performance of the Holden can match the Porsche. So those FO shooters on restricted venues need not worry too much; and there is plenty to tinker with given the current range of what we use.

I will give the cartridge variables further thought and come back with some information. David.

[macguru]

In the real world , you will have to test and get a really tight group, consistently. We will see. On paper, you would be looking for a speed of almost 2850fps to use anywhere, and i think that would be plenty to get the job done, and feel ok in a 10kg rifle

[AlanF]

Another thing, this projectile must be very long. It will need to have a considerably longer point than the 180 hybrid to get that sort of advantage in BC for just a 15gn increase in weight.

If you look at the 7mm VLDs, the 180 has a 6.6% higher BC then the 168, and it is 7.1% heavier, and they have virtually the same ogive shape.

Whereas the new 195 has a 12.2% higher BC than the 180 hybrid, but is only 8.3% heavier!

I am going to make a prediction that this projectile will not be successful for F-Class, because if the published BC is correct, then it will not be accurate enough (anyone remember Lost River projectiles - very impressive BCs, completely unacceptable accuracy). I think this theory is supported by the fact that it has only been released as a "Hunting" grade projectile. Is this because Berger are not confident it is accurate enough for Target?

[williada]

I’ll keep away from too much technical stuff because I don’t have the bullet configuration. So let’s deal with what we know and take a line through the recent Belmont experience of some, seeing it’s our National Range.

The first thing that comes to mind, is when do we pull out the big gun? Is it past 700 yards when special tuning characteristics are required or low SD’s because we have to be mindful of its limited barrel life and window of opportunity aside from the cost factors? You will have to develop your tune on rations due to barrel life if using it on ranges at full throttle. If you are not using the full throttle to reduce velocity, then you jeopardize the high load density required for slow burning powders to be efficient and your ignition and elevation will suffer particularly at long range where you want to use it.

The bullet weight demands slow burning powders in this bore size which unfortunately have short nodes due to slow burning powders as Keith has said. Leading you to doubt your tune and mistakenly do more testing when you fall off the node in variable air densities. Also, trying to find the correct powder if it is not slow enough can lead to muzzle waggle. Testing eats up more rounds.

Muzzle waggle can be reduced with reverse taper barrels, a long heavy weight behind the muzzle to stiffen the barrel or simply reducing barrel length to about 26 inches. The latter solves the powder density issues and will allow you to conform to muzzle energy limits.

Muzzle energy limits, further complicate powder density issues in the cases for which the bullet was primarily designed for use. In cases with less capacity, it will pressure them and reduce case life. This means you will be running in new cases for maximum performance of the case which you need at the longs to reduce SD’s. If velocity is reduced then difficulty will be encountered with frontals at venues like Belmont given the high mounds. There are other related reasons I will come to.

Assuming you have a throat reamer and can take out the throat, how much do you take it out? A jam won’t work because you will pop primers and be forced to run with a reduced load with a heavier pill. Testing eats up more rounds in an effort to reduce pressure spikes. This is not a primer problem.

Will a much longer throat interfere with the bullet exit timing and so will finding the correct tune become harder?

Does the heavier bullet exacerbate the upward lift of the barrel and create greater rifling torque thus upsetting optimum barrel indexing in the vertical plane, not to mention bag handling? The muzzle movement might offset a positive compensation tune given the greater barrel lift on the longer whippier barrels people are currently using.

Where the Belmont experience hits home, is in the turbulent condition, with a long nosed projectile constantly trying to re-orient itself with the wind flow. Alan has hit the nail on the head. The BC won’t matter because it is a very long VLD from his analysis.

Additionally, because it is longer, it will require a faster twist rate to stabilize it. This also reduces velocity. The shooter might use less windage because of a high BC, but from the drift diagrams below reveal, they will have to become experts at winding the elevation knob because the higher twist rate steepens the angle of drift in higher winds. The trade off has to be found. The Belmont experience was not good for those with poor elevation. Other reasons were discussed on a previous thread. The diagram does not represent actual figures and is merely posted for conceptual purposes. You should again look at Peter Smith’s site and download his simulator for practice with spin drift.

Because I have not got the specs for the pill, I can no give an exact point for the peak of the trajectory. From the second illustration in the diagram, you will note, nose wobble or yaw, starts to be a factor past the overturning moment. That’s where these big long noses get into trouble. A much faster bullet can extend the distance the overturning moment takes place. The second illustration in the diagram shows the yaw is very stable about the overturning distance and implies accuracy is too. It is very much velocity dependent.

Of course a bullet that is shorter, requiring less twist maybe better if it’s BC can be gained from its diameter for the use in long range tough conditions. Again the trade off has to be made between the slower twist with lower recoil and the higher recoil of a wider bullet if you want the same BC. Denis’s contributions are valid here.

The bigger bullets will extend the coning range a tad. I think it’s important to develop loads at the end of the coning distance. This is why I think 100 yard testing can be misleading with boat tail bullets. The longer bullet will have a longer boat tail and exposes greater surface area of its angle to other factors causing in-bore yaw. Unless the smithing is spot on and you load concentric cases, you could add to problems. While 600 appears a go range for testing due to the yaw stability, it is subject to too many other variables in weather for load development.

In conclusion, the FO will find the most efficient kit and so form parameters like all disciplines but determined from a different path because people will copy the best and in doing so it will set the benchmarks for the class. This will give effect to the maturity of all classes shooting on our venues. Longranger makes a very good point about supply, as does Macguru about the 90 grain 223 and Matt with regard the 6mm in 115. It’ll be hard to toss a 180 in 7mm across the course. David.

[Norm]

An interesting statement on the Berger web site about these new 7mm Bullets.............

We are excited about these bullets and confident that they will be successful. However, there are a couple of very important things to keep in mind. This bullet is currently being made ONLY in our Elite Hunter configuration. It is made using our thinner jacket to produce the best possible terminal performance. If the testing on these bullets is successful, then our plan is to also produce a Target version with a thicker jacket. We know that many shooters are excited to try these bullets in target competitions. Our hunting bullets are held to the same tolerances as our target bullets, but do have a thinner jacket (read HERE for more information). They are not target bullets, which are built to withstand the speeds and pressures that our target shooters demand. So if you plan to use these in your target rifles, please test them thoroughly BEFORE you go to a major competition.