Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 81 to 94 of 94

Thread: Need New Bullets for 65G!

  1. #81
    Warrior Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Pondwater Colorado
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by BluntForceTrauma View Post
    Yet another "Photo-chop" mockup combining best features of Hornady's existing 6.5mm 143 ELD-X and 123 ELD-M. Take the very nice nose ogive from the 143 and stick it on a 123 — with a better boattail than both.

    There. Now, was that so hard? I honestly don't know what these bullet manufacturers are thinking. It's like an automotive engineer gets a brilliant idea and says, "Hey, I know, let's put a Pinto engine in a Camaro!"

    Bullet makers: Keep those ogives long and those bearing surfaces short and finish with slippery boattails.
    Surprised you have not molestered a Nosler RDF yet.
    Sticks

  2. #82
    Nosler RDF is on my Happy List cuz of that new 130 RDF, which seems perfectly designed for a 130 target bullet. I ordered a box; due Monday — or Tuesday if the mail doesn't come on MLK Day.

    I wanna see what these sleek bullets in 110-115gr versions can do from the 65G. When makers think lighter bullets, they think they have to blunt the nose. No! Keep the exact same damn nose! Lose weight by cutting excess bearing surface or shank. Arrrgh! So simple yet seems so hard for them to grasp.
    :: 6.5 GRENDEL :: Make ARs Great Again ::

    :: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::

  3. #83
    Chieftain sneaky one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    mpls., mn
    Posts
    2,786
    BFT, No Shiite ! What have I faced all these years with my hunt pill tweaks- that you have shot a few of. Leave it skinny on frontal, reduce wt. in non-critical areas.

    When I contacted Bill A long ago---- he stated that the 95-110 grn. class was best for the grrr. That's what lead me to my hunt pills trials with gmx's.

    Yes , a nice pointy version of this 130, in a 105-110 version is what's really needed for the Grrr.

  4. #84
    Warrior biodsl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Monmouth OR
    Posts
    512
    Quote Originally Posted by BluntForceTrauma View Post
    I wanna see what these sleek bullets in 110-115gr versions can do from the 65G. When makers think lighter bullets, they think they have to blunt the nose. No! Keep the exact same damn nose! Lose weight by cutting excess bearing surface or shank. Arrrgh! So simple yet seems so hard for them to grasp.
    Stepping into the waaaay back machine...wasn't there a bullet group buy on this forum years ago? Perhaps the posts were lost in one of the hacks. IIRC, a manufacturer produced a limited run of bullets to our spec. Would Nosler make a 6.5 115gr RDF, to our spec, if we bought, say, 10,000? What would be an estimated BC on this bullet?
    Paul Peloquin

    God didn't make all men equal; Colt did.

  5. #85
    B, back in the day Bill Alexander got Berger to do a 115gr version based on their 120gr, if memory serves. Their 120gr is nothing special and anything based on it is nothing amazing. Didn't sell.

    Berger also did a 100gr that didn't sell that well, either.

    What can we learn from these attempts? DON'T THROTTLE PERFORMANCE! Long ogives. Short shanks. Long boattails. You have to do it if you have limited case capacity. Need to strike a balance between weight, velocity, and form factor.
    :: 6.5 GRENDEL :: Make ARs Great Again ::

    :: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::

  6. #86
    Bloodstained
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    57
    What about this?

    CB-MKZ-6.5-105-1.jpg

    I remember them being mentioned earlier in this thread and thought I would wander over to their website to take a look. http://www.cavitybackbullets.com/category-s/107.htm

    They make them in 105 and 118 grain models and the 118 expands down to 1600 fps. Price range is in the Barnes neighborhood or a bit higher.

  7. #87
    Warrior Randy99CL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by sneaky one View Post
    Yes, a nice pointy version of this 130, in a 105-110 version is what's really needed for the Grrr.
    Whatever caliber I'm shooting I always go for the lighter bullets. Highest possible velocity + lighter recoil + extreme hydrostatic shock works for me. For example, my favorite load in .220 Swift fired 52g HPBT Match bullets.

    So I'd love to see more slippery bullet designs in the 100-110g range. And a group buy so we could get them for less than $0.70 per.

  8. #88
    Bloodstained
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    West Lafayette, IN
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by BluntForceTrauma View Post
    B, back in the day Bill Alexander got Berger to do a 115gr version based on their 120gr, if memory serves. Their 120gr is nothing special and anything based on it is nothing amazing. Didn't sell.

    Berger also did a 100gr that didn't sell that well, either.

    What can we learn from these attempts? DON'T THROTTLE PERFORMANCE! Long ogives. Short shanks. Long boattails. You have to do it if you have limited case capacity. Need to strike a balance between weight, velocity, and form factor.
    I just stuck a 140 Berger Hybrid in a case. It looks to me that an ogive that long suffers the same fate as the most aerodynamic bullets in a .223 case- their ogive is below the neck when seated at 2.260".

    The magazine length of an AR is a big hurdle to overcome. Every major company has a bullet in .224" that is designed to be as aerodynamic as possible and still fit in an AR magazine. I'd bet that the various 123's that already exist are as close to as aerodynamic at 2.260" as possible, while still having the ogive close enough to the lands to be accurate.

    If you want more aerodynamic, load up some 140's and single load them. They'll still catch a 123 ELd by 600 yards, even with a 200 fps muzzle velocity handicap.

    If you want more speed, load up some 107 TMK's. They can be pushed fast enough that a 123 ELD doesn't catch one until they're both subsonic anyway, and the difference in wind drift is negligible.

    We've already got about as good of bullets as we're gonna get. Any further refinement would result in a basically insignificant difference that would appeal to what is not a very significant market for the bullet companies.


    But who knows. We're still in the middle of the Great Arms Race in bullet development that I've been waiting on for decades. After the manufacturers have maxed out their offerings for all the competitive guys shooting their .223's and .308's, or their 6mm Dashers, x47's, and Creedmoors, maybe they'll trickle some of those designs further down their product lines. But I wouldn't count on it. I don't see the 6.5 Grendel becoming a popular competitive cartridge anytime soon. A 6mm Grendel would be preferable, and it isn't different enough/doesn't offer an advantage to the Dasher to ever get popular without some rules changes. And if we're all honest with ourselves, none of us really shoot a fraction as much as the competitive guys that the manufacturers are catering to to try and earn a profit. Heck, the only bullet I really see a gaping hole in the market for would be one of those 85 grain GMX's but mass-produced, and I'd bet $100 that you couldn't sell 10,000 of them in a year if you priced them the same as regular 120 GMX's.
    Last edited by jason miller; 01-14-2018 at 05:29 PM.

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by jason miller View Post
    I just stuck a 140 Berger Hybrid in a case. It looks to me that an ogive that long suffers the same fate as the most aerodynamic bullets in a .223 case- their ogive is below the neck when seated at 2.260".
    Yep. According to Berger's Quick Reference Sheets the 140H nose is 0.768 so you'd need to load it to 2.288 to keep ogive out of case mouth.

    Quote Originally Posted by jason miller View Post
    I'd bet that the various 123's that already exist are as close to as aerodynamic at 2.260" as possible, while still having the ogive close enough to the lands to be accurate.
    I think they can do better, and do better easily — as I've been trying to show in this thread. Hornady, for example, can just as easily put the 143 nose on 123. That's all. Not rocket science.

    Quote Originally Posted by jason miller View Post
    We've already got about as good of bullets as we're gonna get. Any further refinement would result in a basically insignificant difference that would appeal to what is not a very significant market for the bullet companies.
    Yes and no. As I've been describing, I think we can still do better. But, yes, I suppose all changes in bullets can be described as "insignificant." And yet there's that bullet "arms race" to get 10% more consistency and 10% more BC.

    Quote Originally Posted by jason miller View Post
    I don't see the 6.5 Grendel becoming a popular competitive cartridge anytime soon.
    My goal is here, however, is to push it to the max and for that we need optimized bullets.

    Quote Originally Posted by jason miller View Post
    A 6mm Grendel would be preferable, and it isn't different enough/doesn't offer an advantage to the Dasher to ever get popular without some rules changes.
    For competition, yes, and that project also interests me. See my post on designing such a cartridge in the Variants section.
    :: 6.5 GRENDEL :: Make ARs Great Again ::

    :: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::

  10. #90
    Bloodstained
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by BluntForceTrauma View Post
    Yep. According to Berger's Quick Reference Sheets the 140H nose is 0.768 so you'd need to load it to 2.288 to keep ogive out of case mouth.


    I think they can do better, and do better easily as I've been trying to show in this thread. Hornady, for example, can just as easily put the 143 nose on 123. That's all. Not rocket science.

    Yes and no. As I've been describing, I think we can still do better. But, yes, I suppose all changes in bullets can be described as "insignificant." And yet there's that bullet "arms race" to get 10% more consistency and 10% more BC.

    My goal is here, however, is to push it to the max and for that we need optimized bullets.

    For competition, yes, and that project also interests me. See my post on designing such a cartridge in the Variants section.
    A lathe + brass bar stock. Mock some up. Then see how they seat.

  11. #91
    Sierra continues their entries in the bullet "arms race." They've got a new .30 200gr using their new ogive that looks suspiciously like my mocked-up 115gr using that ogive. See photos attached below.

    The more I look at it the more I think well-designed, lighter weight 6.5mms can give the 6mms a run for their money.

    The 6.5mm 150 SMK has a 0.713 BC. What if its 115gr version had a BC of 0.550 and could be launched at 2675, or faster, from a 24" barrel? Hmmm. . . .
    Attached Images Attached Images
    :: 6.5 GRENDEL :: Make ARs Great Again ::

    :: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::

  12. #92
    Chieftain BjornF16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,656
    Quote Originally Posted by CavityBackBullets View Post
    Have you guys even tried our 105 grain and 118 grain MKZ's
    The 118 grain has a tested confirmed to 100 yards .505 G1 BC
    The 105 grain is .480 G1
    Both have been proven from hogs to Elk for over a year now.
    In a solid copper hunting bullet they are exactly what you guys are calling for.
    How fast they will run will surprise you as well.

    As far as accuracy is concerned Predatordown took them to 1000 yards at sub .7 MOA.
    He wont hunt with his Grendel with anything else, ask him.
    Hey CBB...I'll give your 118's a try; but I'm also interested in the 168 gr .308. Any BC info on those?
    LIFE member: NRA, TSRA, SAF, GOA
    Defend the Constitution and our 2A Rights!

  13. #93
    Bloodstained
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    West Lafayette, IN
    Posts
    81
    It's probably got the 27 caliber ogive that they keep using on all their newest match kings. What's suspicious about that? And if it's as aerodynamic as a Berger 140 hybrid, which it probably is, then it won't fit in a Grendel at 2.260", no matter how much it weighs. My point was that the most aerodynamic bullet you could possibly make that would fit in a Grendel at AR mag length so that the ogive is barely off the neck mouth, it's gonna be a mile from the lands and probably shoot like schit. The bullets already available probably strike the best balance we could hope for, and I'm sure that any improvement would be less significant than 10%. Ten percent would mean taking a 123 Scenar from .518 to .5695. That's higher than any 130 on the market until the new RDF proves otherwise. I'm curious to see how those 130 RDF's do for you if you plan on loading them at mag length, btw. I'm betting not well. A 129 long range Accubond is probably about as aerodynamic of an ogive that would fit at 2.260", and they'd probably shoot like crap if they weren't a bonded hunting bullet. They might shoot like crap anyway. The one rifle I tried to work up a load for with a LRAB years ago didn't like them at all, and it was one of the most accurate rifles I've ever owned.

    I'm with you in that I would like to shoot the most aerodynamic bullets possible. I've got some 130 RDF's on the way myself for my Howa, which I really hope likes them. But I just don't see the manufacturers redesigning the existing 123's or adding another intermediate weight for what would probably be a pretty small market for them- especially since Hornady just launched their ELD line and Sierra just came out with two new tipped match kings. And I'm not sure that the 123's currently available and the new 107 TMK might not already be the most aerodynamic bullets that they feel will still be accurate most of the time in most of their customers' rifles.

    Edit to add: Do you really think it's possible to design a 115 grain .264" bullet with a G1 of .550 that fits in a Grendel case at 2.260"? I do not. But I'd love to have one and run it through my bolt rifle. I just don't think I'll ever see that. The market probably isn't there.

    Edit to add more: You don't need to design a 6 Grendel and it isn't a project. People are already shooting them, and other various variants of the 6 PPC, and have been for years. The only thing "new" about shooting an improved 6 PPC(and a Grendel is just another variation of an improved PPC case) is making them fast-twist for more aerodynamic bullets that have been increasingly more available lately. If my old 6 PPC had a 1:8" twist instead of 1:12", I'd never have even considered a Grendel.
    Last edited by jason miller; 01-15-2018 at 12:31 AM.

  14. #94
    Warrior
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    SE Pa
    Posts
    842
    Quote Originally Posted by kmon View Post
    Lee offers a custom mold service where you supply the design, they do the design and make the molds on approval from what I have read, not cheap but an option. https://leeprecision.com/custom-serv...-bullet-molds/
    What a great idea. A group mold buy.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •