Range Report BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

[captrichardson]

Anyone have a "good" G7 BC for the new Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match Bullet?

I have tried the factory G1 BC of .580, and it is close, but it seems to be off at distance.

I need to do some more shooting with my new load, but figured I might save some time, bullets, and headaches, if someone has a good number that is holding up in the real world.

Thanks,
M Richardson

 

[25MAN]

Re: BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

There is a thread in the reloading section asking about 142s vs the 139s.

This was a response from Rob01:

<span style="font-weight: bold">140 AMAX is another bullet you should put in the mix as it's very accurate and also less money than the 142 SMK. Here are the average BCs for the three bullets per Litz's book

139 Scenar- G1 .557 G7 .285
142 SMK- G1 .588 G7 .301
140 AMAX- G1 .584 G7 .299</span>

 

[captrichardson]

Re: BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

Thanks,

But I am looking for the BC on the NEW 140 GR BTHP Match, versus the OLD 140 AMAX.

Hornady lists the 140 AMAX with a G1 of 0.585, where Litz lists it at .584, so they were close.

Hornady lists the 140 BTHP Match with a G1 of 0.580, but it is a newer bullet which was not in Litz's book. I would guess the Hornady & Litz numbers should be close.

I would really like to get a "Litz or Real World" G7 BC because they tend to do better in the calculations at the longer ranges.

I had a limited chance to fire some rounds at 1,000 yards, but it was just at steel and the wind was blowing 10 mph plus, so it was hard to determine the accuracy of the BC Calcs that I had. As usual, it seemed like I was off 1-2 MOA, which I am now trying to figure if I need to tweek the BC number or the velocity number?

Thanks Again,
M Richardson

 

[mattj]

Re: BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

Raising thread from the dead...

Going to be trying out the ("new") Hornady 140gr BTHP -- did you have any luck nailing down a G7 that worked well for you?

...if so, would you mind sharing?

 

[Blanman]

Re: BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

I use a G1 BC of .55

works for me out to 1000

 

[bohem]

Re: BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

The shape is a dead ringer for the 139 Scenar when I measured them via optical comparator.

I have not had the opportunity to shoot them over our Acoustic Chronograph, however Bryan Litz has shot the 139 Scenar and published data for it (IIRC around 0.55-56 but don't quote me on that).

I've shot several hundred of them and they shoot GREAT from my 6.5CM

The price is a little better than the Amax's and the consistency at 600yd and less is still fantastic. I've got 1500 Amax's on the floor for longer matches and I just ordered another 2000 of the BTHP's to use as well. The $3/box difference paid for about 300 bullets when I bought 2000...

 

[jrob300]

Re: BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The shape is a dead ringer for the 139 Scenar when I measured them via optical comparator.
</div></div>

Josh,

Perhaps you got two of the same bullet?

The lot of Scenars and BTHP's I have are significantly different. The ogive to tip of the BTHP is about .030" longer (no... I don't have access to your expensive toys...

). The meplats are roughly 60% the size and the boattail is .050"-.060" shorter making the bearing surface of the BTHP longer than that of the Scenar.

However, I dropped them into my Scenar load and they shot a best 5 shot group of 2" and worst of 2.5" at 600 yds. with vertical in the 1.25" to 1.5" range for min/max. We used a SWAG g7 of .295 and lined up very close to 1000. Then I ran the std. numbers for G1 provided by Ballistic FTE and got first round hits on MOA rocks out to 1080 on Saturday. I'm quite impressed with this bullet.

John

 

[Froggy1129]

Re: BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

Is the Hornady 140 BTHP a secant or tangent ogive?

 

[jrob300]

Re: BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

Tangent...

John

 

[bohem]

Re: BC for New Hornady 140 GR BTHP Match?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jrob300</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The shape is a dead ringer for the 139 Scenar when I measured them via optical comparator.
</div></div>

Josh,

Perhaps you got two of the same bullet?

The lot of Scenars and BTHP's I have are significantly different. The ogive to tip of the BTHP is about .030" longer (no... I don't have access to your expensive toys...

). The meplats are roughly 60% the size and the boattail is .050"-.060" shorter making the bearing surface of the BTHP longer than that of the Scenar.

However, I dropped them into my Scenar load and they shot a best 5 shot group of 2" and worst of 2.5" at 600 yds. with vertical in the 1.25" to 1.5" range for min/max. We used a SWAG g7 of .295 and lined up very close to 1000. Then I ran the std. numbers for G1 provided by Ballistic FTE and got first round hits on MOA rocks out to 1080 on Saturday. I'm quite impressed with this bullet.

John </div></div>

I measured it off of Scenars that are probably 7-8 years old at this point with the new AMP jacketed hornady's. The Hornady's that I have get a secondary pointing operation at the factory and so do the Scenars. I don't know if they're doing that to new Scenars or not.

Perhaps they've changed in the time between? I don't know, but they were damn near twins when I measured them.

The G1 that I stuck in there allowed me to cold bore clay birds at 635yd and I'm using 0.555

Next time I get the Acoustic Chrono rolled out I'll shoot some of each to see what the actual measured BC's come out to and I'll let you guys know.

 

[orkan]

Just thought I'd update this thread, as I wasn't able to easily find an accurate G7 BC for the Hornady 140gr HPBT.

Today I did some testing with a .285 G7 BC, and found it to be dead on at 1000yds and 530yds. Comparative to a Berger 140VLD with Litz numbers, the .285 G7 I came up with seemed quite accurate, and lined up with my calculated and actual dope.