PDA

View Full Version : Shot the 35 Whelen today-HUGE surprise!!



outdoorfan
11-29-2010, 06:12 PM
Deer season is over, and I wanted to see where this thing was hitting down range aways. First, I shot a five-shot group at 235 yards, which is about where I usually see most of the deer that come by; so therefore that's about where I try to zero.

I didn't shoot at the gun range, as there is no range in the area that offers shooting beyond 100 yards. I went out to my deer hunting spot and shot from my stand. Not exactly benchrest. I had the target set up on the shooting lane/trail. For the first five shots the wind was at 3 O'clock and between 5-12 mph or so. For the next five, shot at 375 yards, the wind was probably between 3-7 mph.

It was tough for the first five, as the wind was blowing hard enough to move the tree. I felt like I only nailed maybe 2 or 3 (at most) of the five shots. The other 2 or so were off by a good bit. Sure enough, I had three shots into a 2.5 inch area, and the other two were way left (low and high), opening the group to 7-8 inches (I didn't measure).

I then moved the target back to 375. The wind had calmed down a bit, and I fired those next five. I aimed for the upper right hand corner of the board, figuring there would be quite a bit of drop and some windage. I felt reasonably good about those five, and then I checked the target. All five went into 4 1/16inches. :shock::shock::shock:

I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes.

Now, this load is pretty slow. A 250 grain bullet at 2350 fps. With a 235-240 yard zero, it dropped 36 inches at 375 yards. Makes for a .21 BC. Way too low. Makes no sense to me. According to the BC program, it should be up around .27.

Anyone got any idea why the BC is so low? The bullet is .955 long (naked) with a .295 long ogive and .21 meplat. Estimated fps at 375 yards is only 1100 or so.

Pictured is the bullet, the group, the target board, and the bench rest...stand. The 375 yard group is on the upper right hand corner of the lower target paper.

HangFireW8
11-29-2010, 07:46 PM
The BC might appear to be low because the ballistic table/program you are referring to assumes a different zero point than your rifle is currently sighted too.

BTW nice shooting!

-HF

outdoorfan
11-29-2010, 07:59 PM
The BC might appear to be low because the ballistic table/program you are referring to assumes a different zero point than your rifle is currently sighted too.

BTW nice shooting!

-HF


I was using jbm ballistics to calculate it. I punched in my actual zero, etc. I wasn't using any other ballistic table(s).

Larry Gibson
11-29-2010, 08:06 PM
Nice shooting BTW and that is a very good looking bullet. Two things to consider in answer to your question; is the 2350 fps actually chronographed or is it guestimated? Also most BCs for cast bullets are figured with velocities under 2000 fps. Having the ability to actually measure the BC of bullets fired over 100 yards (M43 Oehler with screens at 15' and just in front of the 100 yards target) I have found that the BCs drop off quite quickly over 2000 fps, especially those with a flat meplat. I'm not the least bit surprised that the BC of that bullet might be .27 below 2000 fps and .21 at 2350 fps.

What is the twist and barrel length, if you don't mind?

Larry Gibson

outdoorfan
11-29-2010, 08:20 PM
Larry, that makes more sense.

I was using this website to figure out BC:

http://www.uslink.net/~tom1/calcbc/calcbc.htm

Now, even the RCBS 35-200 is listed at around .230-.240 BC if memory serves me.

I chronographed the load when I was doing load work-up shortly before deer season. So, yes, that 2350 is what my cheap chrono told me over the course of several groupings at that charge level. ES's were usually 20-30 fps.

The barrel is 24 inches 1-14 twist.

home in oz
11-29-2010, 08:31 PM
Good Shooting!

Dan Cash
11-29-2010, 08:39 PM
Fergeddaboudit. Shoot that fine looking slug and fix your elevation staff to accomodate it. Uffdah, that is a good shooting combo with dead tigers and buffalo and other big beasties on the menue.

outdoorfan
11-29-2010, 08:49 PM
Fergeddaboudit. Shoot that fine looking slug and fix your elevation staff to accomodate it. Uffdah, that is a good shooting combo with dead tigers and buffalo and other big beasties on the menue.


Thanks. I am tickled that it shoots this well. However, a little flatter trajectory would be nice. I shouldn't complain so much. :killingpc[smilie=b::groner::holysheep:-P

runfiverun
11-29-2010, 09:56 PM
the flatter trajectory and 250 gr boolit aren't really compatible, unless you are shooting a 358 norma mag.
then flatter trajectory and rediculous recoil go hand in hand.
wish my 358 shot flatter too the saeco i use is accurate enough but wouldn't be the first choice in a hunting boolit.

Doc Highwall
11-29-2010, 10:16 PM
You also have make sure of the sight height setting is correct do-not assume it is 1.5" actually measure it.

outdoorfan
11-29-2010, 11:25 PM
You also have make sure of the sight height setting is correct do-not assume it is 1.5" actually measure it.


What little difference there is is inconsequential according to the ballistics formula.

Three44s
11-30-2010, 01:03 AM
RIP ROARING great shooting there!!!!


I'd figure out how to cope with the Kentucky windage you've got and go with it!

If you change anything you will not be happy!!!

I'd look at a scope with dots or lines and a laser range finder for those longer shots and call it meat on the table!!!

I'd bench rest in something other than a tree on the windy day too ........ but that's another story .........

Best regards and hang onto that rifle!!

Three 44s

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 01:16 AM
RIP ROARING great shooting there!!!!


I'd figure out how to cope with the Kentucky windage you've got and go with it!

If you change anything you will not be happy!!!

I'd look at a scope with dots or lines and a laser range finder for those longer shots and call it meat on the table!!!

I'd bench rest in something other than a tree on the windy day too ........ but that's another story .........

Best regards and hang onto that rifle!!

Three 44s


I've got a Burris ballistic plex on this one. Yep, got the Leica RF too. I'm so used to hunting with jacketed and having point blank range out to 300 or so that this is a big adjustment for me. All a part of the learning curve, and I enjoy using cast. Don't know that I'll even go back to jacketed. [smilie=p:

John 242
11-30-2010, 09:33 AM
Outdoorfan,
Whats the recoild like on that 250 grain bullet at 2350 FPS?
Pretty stout?

I'm curious because I've been reading a lot about the .358 Win and it seems like it's kind of a mule. I would assume the .35 Whelen would be worse.

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 10:20 AM
Outdoorfan,
Whats the recoild like on that 250 grain bullet at 2350 FPS?
Pretty stout?

I'm curious because I've been reading a lot about the .358 Win and it seems like it's kind of a mule. I would assume the .35 Whelen would be worse.


My load is pretty tame. It starts to kick hard with another two or three grains of powder and another 100-150 fps. I would say it's about like a regularly loaded (not hot) 30-06 with 150's or 165's.

Three44s
11-30-2010, 11:27 AM
outdoorfan,

I've spent some time with a .338-06 lately and am VERY impressed with that cartridge as well.

The '06 case is sure handy!!!


Three 44s

RobS
11-30-2010, 12:05 PM
Well there now you've gone and done it....................I'll have to start working up loads for the 375 H&H now. Darn you!!! Nice shootin

Tom Myers
11-30-2010, 01:02 PM
Anyone got any idea why the BC is so low? The bullet is .955 long (naked) with a .295 long ogive and .21 meplat. Estimated fps at 375 yards is only 1100 or so.

Pictured is the bullet, the group, the target board, and the bench rest...stand. The 375 yard group is on the upper right hand corner of the lower target paper.

There are many variables that will affect the calculation of the BC of this particular gun/bullet/load combination.

While each variable, alone, does not contribute to a large change in the BC, when they are all added up, it can make quite a difference.

A 10 yard error in the range distances will cause a 4% difference in this combination.

The amount of error in measuring the drop from the group center of the near target to the group center of the far target that would cause the difference between a 0.27 BC and a 0.21 BC would be from a -36 inch drop to a -28.735 inch drop.

The difference between chronograph velocity and muzzle velocity could be around 15 fps. In this cast it would indicate a 1.72% difference in the BC.

All of these taken together would not account for the 0.06 difference in your calculated and the actual BC.

Atmospheric conditions and terrain elevation also cause a considerable variance in the BC.

In my experience, the largest contributing factor toward BC reduction is Bullet Instability. A good example is my Black Powder 40-65 Long Range load using the Lyman Snover Bullet. The Calculated BC for this bullet is 0.4521. My first attempts at a 1,000 yard load needed a calculation BC of 0.320 to match the real world trajectory of the load (and it was not very accurate)
I discovered that the holes in the target were indicating a lot of bullet tipping which indicated that the bullet nose was precessing around the axis of the trajectory. Examination revealed the the bullets were not concentric with the cartridge (A few being as much as 0.005" off of center.). Changing my loading equipment and procedures to produce concentric ammunition with zero to 0.001" run-out of the bullets increased the accuracy of the load considerably and increased the calculation BC needed to match the actual drop values up to 0.445.

Your 375 yard target holes show scuff marks toward one side of the hole which could indicate considerable tipping of the bullet. Most probably, the low BC that is needed to match the actual bullet trajectory is caused by a certain degree of bullet instability causing more air resistance than a perfectly stable bullet with it's axis always nearly parallel to the trajectory path.
(This instability does not always cause large groups. If each bullet is unstable to the same degree, some good groups can result)

By the way, good shooting.

When the New Precision Ballistics Software is ready for release, a Ballistic Coefficient calculator from bullet drop will be incorporated in the module. This is a screen snapshot of the input and calculation results.

http://www.tmtpages.com/LinkSkyImages/forum_images/Test%20Bullet%20BC.jpg

Hope this helps.

Larry Gibson
11-30-2010, 02:26 PM
outdoorfan

Now, even the RCBS 35-200 is listed at around .230-.240 BC if memory serves me.

RCBS lists the 35-200-FN's BC at .243 and i assume it is measured or calculated somewhere in the nominal 1500 - 2000 fps range of the velocities listed in their manual for that bullet. At 1850 fps out of my .35 Rem that bullet gives a measured (Oehler M43) .439 BC so their figures are very close. At 2150 fps the same bullet out of the same rifle gets a measured BC of .228 and at 2250 fps it is .224. You can see how the BC is going down as the velocity goes up. This declining BC as velocity increases runs true with every other cast bullet I've measured the BC on. Having used the computer program to estimate the BC your initial estimate could have been high because of the many variable mentioned in another post. Additionally most BC calculation programs do not take into count the additional shock waves made by driving bands. These also lesson the BC on cast bullets.

I chronographed the load when I was doing load work-up shortly before deer season. So, yes, that 2350 is what my cheap chrono told me over the course of several groupings at that charge level. ES's were usually 20-30 fps.

The barrel is 24 inches 1-14 twist.

Excellent velocity for that barrel twist and length for a cast bullet. It is right under the RPM threshold and it's excellent accuracy is speaks well of your loading and shooting ability. If I was you I wouldn't get too excited about the BC, I'd just keep on shooting that excellent load:-)

Larry Gibson

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 03:15 PM
Tom,

Thanks for giving your thoughts on this matter. The bullet holes do look like the bullets had a yaw in them. The paper was not tight up against the board, so that may explain it. However, it may not. The velocity was pretty danged low by that 375 yard point.

The actual chrono readings were 2340 fps. I figured actual muzzle velocity was pretty close to 2350. Not a big difference, but I did take that into account.

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 03:23 PM
Larry,

Thanks for pointing out that BC's differ with velocity. I had forgotten that.

I know I have egg all over my face by now for making a big deal over the lack of a flatter trajectory 'cause afterall, this is cast we're talking about. I was genuinely surprised that it was that bad. And, I kind of had it in the back of my mind that maybe that big lube groove was creating extra drag. I didn't know what I was doing when I designed that bullet, so I was a bit insecure about it. It does shoot fine, so I'll learn to live with it if indeed it's trajectory is fairly normal for that weight, diameter, and design. I'd like to try another design, though, just for kicks'n'giggles, just to see if there is any appreciable difference.

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 03:54 PM
Well there now you've gone and done it....................I'll have to start working up loads for the 375 H&H now. Darn you!!! Nice shootin

Well, what do they say, that even the sun shines on a dog's hiney sometimes! :) :Fire:

Wayne Smith
11-30-2010, 04:10 PM
How did you figure your range? Remember, your range is the hypotenuse of the triangle, not the distance from the base of the tree to your target.

dverna
11-30-2010, 04:14 PM
One group does not always tell the whole story. Still, that is excellent performance by you, your rifle, your load and your bullet. It is too bad you cannot test it off a proper bench at long range.

Range estimation becomes the crucial factor with low velocity bullets. Add a low BC and things get worse. At a range up to 250 yards you have a heck of load. Let's face it, how much shooting do we get at over 250 yards?

Again, nice job!

Don

Don

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 04:29 PM
How did you figure your range? Remember, your range is the hypotenuse of the triangle, not the distance from the base of the tree to your target.


The line of sight from the stand to the target is close enough/flat enough to not have to worry about that, if I understand you correctly. I used the Leica LRF from the stand to the target.

Here's a picture of the shooting lane that I did this shooting on. I put some black lines down there to mark the 235 and 375 yard points. The black line on the lower left is an oops.

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 04:33 PM
One group does not always tell the whole story. Very true, and after the snow we got last night I'm not about to go back out there anytime soon. Still, that is excellent performance by you, your rifle, your load and your bullet. It is too bad you cannot test it off a proper bench at long range.

Range estimation becomes the crucial factor with low velocity bullets. Add a low BC and things get worse. At a range up to 250 yards you have a heck of load. Let's face it, how much shooting do we get at over 250 yards?

Again, nice job!

Don

Don


Thanks

9.3X62AL
11-30-2010, 06:02 PM
I'd say you're doing a whole lotta things right, and nothing wrong with performance like that. I've had similar--but not quite THAT good--performance with my 9.3 x 62 Mauser and a self-tweaked Mountain Molds 70 grain flatnose to 200 yards. The CZ-550 uses TALL lands (.007!) in its 4-groove .366" barrel, and 3 turns/meter (about 1-13") twist rate. I'm not running the 9.3 that fast, either--about 1800 FPS at top-end.

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 06:14 PM
I'd say you're doing a whole lotta things right, and nothing wrong with performance like that. I've had similar--but not quite THAT good--performance with my 9.3 x 62 Mauser and a self-tweaked Mountain Molds 70 grain flatnose to 200 yards. 70 grains? The CZ-550 uses TALL lands (.007!) in its 4-groove .366" barrel, and 3 turns/meter (about 1-13") twist rate. I'm not running the 9.3 that fast, either--about 1800 FPS at top-end.

When I originally slugged this one it was showing .350 & .3565. I hope that groove diameter has opened up some. The bullet fills the throat (well, almost; the bullet could be a tad longer) and is snugged into the rifling.

Blammer
11-30-2010, 07:10 PM
absolutely awesome!

I hope I can shoot my 35 whelen as accurately!

little bit of yaw? heck it'd still flatten a deer easy!

I seemed to have missed the powder and load data. Care to elaborate again?

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 07:15 PM
absolutely awesome!

I hope I can shoot my 35 whelen as accurately!

little bit of yaw? heck it'd still flatten a deer easy!

I seemed to have missed the powder and load data. Care to elaborate again?


Sure. Remington 35 Whelen cases, Fed 210 primers, 52 grains RL15 (no filler)

Edit: Forgot to add the alloy. 50/50 ww/soft with a touch of tin, HT'ed to 21 bhn.

They sure are ugly boolits compared to some of the beauties I've seen posted by various people here.

HangFireW8
11-30-2010, 07:54 PM
I wasn't using any other ballistic table(s).

I had to grin at that response.

Even with software using modern calculation techniques, the moment you say "ballistic coefficient" you have to ask "who's Ballistic Coefficient", as in who's tables and who's test bullet is the BC based on, summarized nowadays as G1 through G8 or GL, cast boolits are not a good match for BC's based on jacketed bullet data derived tables.

-HF

Larry Gibson
11-30-2010, 08:20 PM
Most all BCs for standard FB and BT jacketed bullets and cast bullets are derived using the G1 bullet model. That seems industry standard and if different it usually says which G function is used. Even though most break the BC down to 3 digets more than 2 digets isn't necessary. The third digit is tatamount to asking whether the target is at 196 yards or 197 yards, i.e. not much difference across our normal shooting ranges. However, when the 2nd diget drops a couple points it does make a difference at longer ranges past 200 yards.

Larry Gibson

shootingbuff
11-30-2010, 09:53 PM
Larry,

Thanks for pointing out that BC's differ with velocity. I had forgotten that.

I know I have egg all over my face by now for making a big deal over the lack of a flatter trajectory 'cause afterall, this is cast we're talking about. I was genuinely surprised that it was that bad. And, I kind of had it in the back of my mind that maybe that big lube groove was creating extra drag. I didn't know what I was doing when I designed that bullet, so I was a bit insecure about it. It does shoot fine, so I'll learn to live with it if indeed it's trajectory is fairly normal for that weight, diameter, and design. I'd like to try another design, though, just for kicks'n'giggles, just to see if there is any appreciable difference.

[smilie=p:

Thats my thoughts anyway.

JBM gets a lot of good feed back on his programs. He is a good guy and a hell of shooter. if the vel change doesn't set well with you just drop him a note.

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 10:16 PM
[smilie=p:

Thats my thoughts anyway. What thoughts?

JBM gets a lot of good feed back on his programs. He is a good guy and a hell of shooter. if the vel change doesn't set well with you just drop him a note.

I'd like to hear all of what you have to say.

outdoorfan
11-30-2010, 10:21 PM
In the uslink website, they offer various options for figuring out BC based upon whether the bullet is jacketed or cast. If cast, then is it radius nose or round nose. I am assuming that it makes a difference which option is chosen, but I have no idea.



I had to grin at that response.

Even with software using modern calculation techniques, the moment you say "ballistic coefficient" you have to ask "who's Ballistic Coefficient", as in who's tables and who's test bullet is the BC based on, summarized nowadays as G1 through G8 or GL, cast boolits are not a good match for BC's based on jacketed bullet data derived tables.

-HF

felix
11-30-2010, 10:35 PM
Major difference for our velocities. Not as much for short ranges. ... felix