Any published data on flatline bullets from applied ballistics?

[408w]

I don't own all of the books yet but have they put out data on the warne tool flatline bullets? Looking for data for my kestrel with AP. Bought a box of the 6.5's for my creedmoor. I have seen reviews and videos on them just looking for apples to apples comparison to the other bullets they have listed

 

[_Windrider_]

I just checked the AB Bullet library and I don’t see any Flatline data. @DocUSMCRetired anything from you guys?

 

[Fursniper]

Their flatline bullet data is a CDM that you can purchase on the AB ballistics app, as i recall it's like 2 dollars per bullet.

 

[jbailey]

we had real poor results with the AB CDM for the 198. So poor in fact we abandoned it. The G1 and G7 BC's published on Warner's home page much better. We had the 198 out at over 2000yds in a 308 with great results using Warner's numbers.

 

[408w]

Thanks for the replies guys. The video on this site stated .335 g7 which is higher than what is published on the warne tool site. With the cost of the bullets, I would like to find a load hopefully sooner than later and be up and running. I can push a 120g bullet over 3,200fps out of my gun. If I can get data and get them to group, I should have a winner with these kind of bc's.

 

[Jeffvn]

depending on the pill, Warner now has Doppler verified B.C.s on their site.

Jeffvn

 

[Dan Warner]

I should also point out that we have starting load data on our website to for a variety of cartridges. If yours is not listed, we are happy to run a chart just for you. We will need cartridge information (wild cats will require some details such as case capacity in H20 weight in grains) and barrel length. Call or email us anytime, as we are happy to help you get close to a practical load before you get started.

Additionally, the .335 g7 that Frank provided is 1.7% higher than what we advertise as tested by Hornady ant .318. This is noise lost in the error of the tests.

 

[408w]

How far off the lands do these bullets typically like to be seated. 6.5 bullet

 

[Dan Warner]

The 121 seems to behave better when seated closer to the lands, say 0.005 to 0.025.

 

[Gilly]

I’ve started working up a load (done after today I think) with 198 Flatline and it’s jumping a Looooonnnngggg ways on my 300 Norma but shot a nice little bughole at 100 with SD of 6. If I went to a .020 jump like I intended there would be next to no bearing surface in neck. Very happy with results at 980 so time to load some more!

Either AB g7 model was off or lab radar lied by 60 fps. 5.0 mil to 980!

 

[jbailey]

Either AB g7 model was off or lab radar lied by 60 fps. 5.0 mil to 980!

Gilly,
As I said above, the AB CBM curve for the 198 just is not good. It was shooting clear over the target on my 1500yd range in VA. I put in the Warner numbers by velocity bands and the bullets are suddenly right on the target and I mean RIGHT ON, like +/- 1-2 inches. Josh Kunz and I did extensive field testing in prep for a match and ELR shooting out west and we were very happy. (great solid impacts on the vertical dimension at 2000+ yds)

I will say you do want to make sure you 'velocity band' adjust the number. Get data here: Doppler Data
Especially if your MV is materially lower than the avg BC reported. We were shooting the 198s out of our 308s, with MVs in the 2780 range vs the 3000+ MV of this bullet in a magnum, so we needed to adjust our BC accordingly. I was hoping to use AB's CDM to avoid doing this math, but alias, it didn't produce anything near the results we needed in the field.

 

[Clearlight]

I’ve started working up a load (done after today I think) with 198 Flatline and it’s jumping a Looooonnnngggg ways on my 300 Norma but shot a nice little bughole at 100 with SD of 6. If I went to a .020 jump like I intended there would be next to no bearing surface in neck. Very happy with results at 980 so time to load some more!

Either AB g7 model was off or lab radar lied by 60 fps. 5.0 mil to 980!

Yeah I’m jumping .080 with the 198 , with freebore setup for 215 Hybrids . Any
further forward gets serious charge reversion outside the case . I did get a very
impressive ES/SD : 3 and 1.4 for 3 shots . Very tight group at 100 around 0.2 .

The 198 has a long double angle boat tail , needs to be considered when speccing
freebore . I’m wondering about the specs on the barrel AB used to Doppler the 198 ,
all other CDM’s I’ve used are bang on , this one is high on target vs Warner’s number .

 

[TripleBull]

I did get a very
impressive ES/SD : 3 and 1.4 for 3 shots .

I'm assuming ES and SD are reversed there?

 

[McCrazy]

Probably not. The ES is higher than the SD.

 

[Hoffer]

Warners stated BC's are about as good as it gets

 

[TripleBull]

Probably not. The ES is higher than the SD.

Duh, without glasses I read that at 3 and 14. Old eyes suck.

 

[LastShot300]

Gilly,
As I said above, the AB CBM curve for the 198 just is not good. It was shooting clear over the target on my 1500yd range in VA. I put in the Warner numbers by velocity bands and the bullets are suddenly right on the target and I mean RIGHT ON, like +/- 1-2 inches. Josh Kunz and I did extensive field testing in prep for a match and ELR shooting out west and we were very happy. (great solid impacts on the vertical dimension at 2000+ yds)

I will say you do want to make sure you 'velocity band' adjust the number. Get data here: Doppler Data
Especially if your MV is materially lower than the avg BC reported. We were shooting the 198s out of our 308s, with MVs in the 2780 range vs the 3000+ MV of this bullet in a magnum, so we needed to adjust our BC accordingly. I was hoping to use AB's CDM to avoid doing this math, but alias, it didn't produce anything near the results we needed in the field.

Have been checking Warner Doppler tables. What BC did you use? An average? A different value for each Mach zone? Or the highest velocity number is good ? Very good report!

 

[Gilly]

I had a calibration add 65 fps on the 198 3207 vs 3145 on lab radar at 1580 yards using AB g7 of .382. Looking at Doppler I may need to be around .4 g7 and my actual velocity. .382 and 3145 put me over the berm at 1580 using 11.3 mil. Ended up at 10.8!

 

[jbailey]

Have been checking Warner Doppler tables. What BC did you use? An average? A different value for each Mach zone? Or the highest velocity number is good ? Very good report!

LastShot300-
I used an average of the BCs based on the Mach speeds that my bullet would be in. Its on my lap top computer at home so I can't get the actual numbers right now. Dan Warner sent me the data in excel, so I did the calculations there. I also calculated the G7 BCs from the CDs so I could get the data out to the thousandths. My 308 is starting these 198s at 2780ish, much slower than the magnums.

I had a calibration add 65 fps on the 198 3207 vs 3145 on lab radar at 1580 yards using AB g7 of .382. Looking at Doppler I may need to be around .4 g7 and my actual velocity. .382 and 3145 put me over the berm at 1580 using 11.3 mil. Ended up at 10.8!

Yes, I had similar results with the AB number as you. AB CDM was spitting out a come-up that was about 0.5mil higher than Warner number at a very similar range (~1540 yds). I had both numbers in front of me when I shot - and I went with the Warner number first, just because I had done all the calculations myself. I was super thrilled to see the bullet impact within an inch or two of the POA. After that, I put the AB number in the trash. Since then, I have used the Warner number out to 2100yds with success. 2100yds is a pretty good distance for a 308

 

[Dan Warner]

I think it appropriate to point out at this point that all of the Doppler test numbers and drag curves are on our website for your use in downloadable pdf format. I will also go so far as to say that we will be heading to a facility to further test some newer bullets that have not yet be run through the Doppler and re-test some that had but need to be done at higher speeds. Thus, we will be publishing the updated results when that is complete.

 

[Gilly]

LastShot300-
I used an average of the BCs based on the Mach speeds that my bullet would be in. Its on my lap top computer at home so I can't get the actual numbers right now. Dan Warner sent me the data in excel, so I did the calculations there. I also calculated the G7 BCs from the CDs so I could get the data out to the thousandths. My 308 is starting these 198s at 2780ish, much slower than the magnums.



Yes, I had similar results with the AB number as you. AB CDM was spitting out a come-up that was about 0.5mil higher than Warner number at a very similar range (~1540 yds). I had both numbers in front of me when I shot - and I went with the Warner number first, just because I had done all the calculations myself. I was super thrilled to see the bullet impact within an inch or two of the POA. After that, I put the AB number in the trash. Since then, I have used the Warner number out to 2100yds with success. 2100yds is a pretty good distance for a 308

I went in and made a new profile with a .402 G7 and my 3145 average velocity from lab radar with all conditions for the day I shot and was spot on 5.0 mil for 980 and 10.8 for 1580 and looks to be within .1 mil on what wind ended up at 16 mph. Now it just needs to warm up out of the single digits so I can go back and try again with new profile!

 

[Fursniper]

Anyone got a real world data on the 256's?

 

[Gilly]

Anyone got a real world data on the 256's?

Buddy of mine shoots them in his Lapua @Bravo6niner maybe he'll chime in.

 

[lash]

Anyone got a real world data on the 256's?

What are you looking for Fur? I have a little bit of data on those, even though I haven't touched my .338 for 6 months now.

I do remember that the Warner Tool published BC worked out for me almost exactly up until 1 mile using Ballistic app, then I think that it was maybe an adjustment of .1 mil at 1840. I'll try to remember to dig up that databook page when I get home.

 

[LastShot300]

LastShot300-
I used an average of the BCs based on the Mach speeds that my bullet would be in. Its on my lap top computer at home so I can't get the actual numbers right now. Dan Warner sent me the data in excel, so I did the calculations there. I also calculated the G7 BCs from the CDs so I could get the data out to the thousandths. My 308 is starting these 198s at 2780ish, much slower than the magnums.



Yes, I had similar results with the AB number as you. AB CDM was spitting out a come-up that was about 0.5mil higher than Warner number at a very similar range (~1540 yds). I had both numbers in front of me when I shot - and I went with the Warner number first, just because I had done all the calculations myself. I was super thrilled to see the bullet impact within an inch or two of the POA. After that, I put the AB number in the trash. Since then, I have used the Warner number out to 2100yds with success. 2100yds is a pretty good distance for a 308

Thanks Jbailey, sorted out a lot of things now!

 

[LastShot300]

I went in and made a new profile with a .402 G7 and my 3145 average velocity from lab radar with all conditions for the day I shot and was spot on 5.0 mil for 980 and 10.8 for 1580 and looks to be within .1 mil on what wind ended up at 16 mph. Now it just needs to warm up out of the single digits so I can go back and try again with new profile!

Thanks for the field report!

 

[Fursniper]

What are you looking for Fur? I have a little bit of data on those, even though I haven't touched my .338 for 6 months now.

I do remember that the Warner Tool published BC worked out for me almost exactly up until 1 mile using Ballistic app, then I think that it was maybe an adjustment of .1 mil at 1840. I'll try to remember to dig up that databook page when I get home.

Thanks Lash. Was just wondering how many if any adjustments anyone has had to make to either the Warner BC #'s or the hornady doppler #'s based on various experiences. When you say you've had good results with the Warner BC are you referring to the Acoustic numbers on the website or the Hornady doppler numbers that are right next to them? Sorry to hear you haven't had the Savage out for awhile. I'm hoping that's only due to the limited ELR range opportunities where you shoot & not 'cause you're working yourself to death!

 

[lash]

A little of both. ?

So, I went back and looked up a couple things. First off, this was before there was more than one option on the Watner Tool site for BC choice, so I used what is now referred to as the Acoustic BC, of .450 G7, 2945 fps.

Using that in my iPhone Ballustic app at 68.2 degrees, 45% humidity, 30.34 Hg barometric pressure and 39 ft ASL actual, I got the following results:

1000 - call 6.2, actual 6.4
1200 - call 8.2, actual 8.3
1400 - call 10.5, actual 10.5
1600 - call 13.1, actual 13.2
1760 - call 15.5, actual 15.5
1840 - call 16.9, actual 16.9

So my take is that I could do a bunch of tweaking or truing or I can continue to use what I have, knowing that conditions will change and I need more solid data points before making changes.

 

[Fursniper]

Thanks again lash. As your "calls" were so close or at actuals, it would really be interesting to see how the doppler #'s stack up for you!