New Berger 375 bullet 410 hybrid

where is this data sheet from?

My most recent QL update is only a year old and the 410 was not part of it

I'm getting just over 2900 w 35" barrel and 135 of H50BMG. Assuming 20 fps per inch, that would put me right at about 2800 with the 410. Unless my barrel is just a little faster, I'll have to see.

The ONLY way this is going to be the way forward is if the BC variability truly is way better than the 390 Atips.

Time (and my 24x36" plate at 2500 yards) will tell.
It’s from Capstone. I’m fairly certain they are using QL as well, but slightly different inputs(?). I started a profile with Gordon’s Reliading Tool, but have more work to do. I have a 36” on order and I’ll probably send a few dummies for them to chamber with. No time rite now and bbl is on back side of hill.
 
IMG_7933.jpeg
 
I'm gonna load some of these up. Where do they like to be in relation to the lands? Are they like the old Bergers and they're finicky about seating depth?
Appears the answer is yes. They are classified as VLD, which means Berger suggest using CBTO(😫). .010 jam, .040 jump, .080 jump, .120 jump. Best 3 shot group wins the chance to tweak by .002-.005”, bla bla bla. I’m sure you’ve read it somewhere.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: secondofangle2
It’s from Capstone. I’m fairly certain they are using QL as well, but slightly different inputs(?). I started a profile with Gordon’s Reliading Tool, but have more work to do. I have a 36” on order and I’ll probably send a few dummies for them to chamber with. No time rite now and bbl is on back side of hill.
That's from Berger, but it's not from QL, it's from an actual test barrel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: secondofangle2
That’s interesting considering they’re marketed as a hybrid but you say they’re a vld
Yep, looks like they're LRHT to me, too. They typically aren't that sensitive to seating depth, but usually do best with a little jump. I believe their typical recommendation is to start at .015 off, and try in additional .015 increments - 0.30 off, .045, and up to .060 off the lands, then fine tune on either side of the best result. (However, I have no experience with these - most of what I shoot are their 230 and 245gr .308 dia., and 300gr .338 dia. LRHTs in 300PRC, 300NM, and 338NM).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Geno C.
That's from Berger, but it's not from QL, it's from an actual test barrel.
Berger suggested the charge weights may have come from QL and may be a bit conservative.
Maybe they use(d) QL to work up a profile before they shot them? I don’t know, just going off a friendly call to them for info and sharing it here. Getting a little hot in here, time for me to go out and shoot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vh20
I have a dummy round loaded to 0.020 inches of the lands.

I’m actually very happy with my 390ATIP load so if these things give me any grief at all, I’m gonna quit messing with them

If they shoot decent, I will try them at 2500 yards and see how big of a vertical group there is measure each velocity and then do the same thing with the ATIP and make up my mind
 
Berger suggested the charge weights may have come from QL and may be a bit conservative.
Maybe they use(d) QL to work up a profile before they shot them? I don’t know, just going off a friendly call to them for info and sharing it here. Getting a little hot in here, time for me to go out and shoot.
Possibly. I’ve never known them to actually publish data from QL, but they do use it because Bob ran a theoretical load through it on the phone with me last week. But, he was careful to distinguish it wasn’t their data and was purely theoretical. If they published it (ie sent it out to you), I’d be surprised if they hadn’t shot it, but you could be right. I just know he was very careful to distinguish their data (which he sent me) vs what he told me he got on QL with a different load (which he did not send). This was 300NM data with a 245 LRHT.
 
Possibly. I’ve never known them to actually publish data from QL, but they do use it because Bob ran a theoretical load through it on the phone with me last week. But, he was careful to distinguish it wasn’t their data and was purely theoretical. If they published it (ie sent it out to you), I’d be surprised if they hadn’t shot it, but you could be right. I just know he was very careful to distinguish their data (which he sent me) vs what he told me he got on QL with a different load (which he did not send). This was 300NM data with a 245 LRHT.
I’m confused. Not sure who Bob is. I was just sharing what I found out about the new 410gr hybrids bc no one seemed to have any published data. I’ve been getting load data tables from Berger for a ton of their bullets including the 245LRHT for years. I also use XXL Reloading and am feverishly trying to get the hang of GRT. Please know I am self taught and only started hand loading 5 years ago with 6.5CM.
 
I’m confused. Not sure who Bob is. I was just sharing what I found out about the new 410gr hybrids bc no one seemed to have any published data. I’ve been getting load data tables from Berger for a ton of their bullets including the 245LRHT for years. I also use XXL Reloading and am feverishly trying to get the hang of GRT. Please know I am self taught and only started hand loading 5 years ago with 6.5CM.
Bob is Phil’s Tech Support cohort at Berger. You have a 50% chance when you call, Bob, or Phil (unless they have someone new recently). You mentioned Phil, so I figured you knew Bob as well. And all I am saying is that the chart you posted is most likely their own data, not QL. I mean it could be QL, but they don’t usually make complete charts like that and publish them until they’ve run them and collected their own data. But I could be wrong…
 
Phil at Berger suggested to use their(Berger’s) VLD(very low drag)seating method. Personally, I don’t use CBTO and don’t wish to use 24 rounds for the process.

The VLD method seemed to me to be not correct for a hybrid design. I reached out to Berger this morning and Phil responded that the standard hybrid method should work. I usually start at .015" off the lands then go up at .003" increments - because you can usually find a sweet spot within ~15 to 20 thousandths. He said their standard hybrid method is to go up at .015" increments, pick the best, then go to .005" on either side to see if it gets better.

So, some conflicting information.
 
Yeah, I don’t play seating depth games in 5000s increments. That is within the variability of the base to ogive of the bullet: noise

If these ones I loaded up at approximately 0.020 inches off don’t shoot tomorrow, I will try some at 0.075 or so and then call it quits if it’s not shooting acceptably

As I have said before, if loads were sensitive to 0.005 inches of seating depth, factory ammo would never shoot good

I do admit that it was quite a surprise to me that the 390 likes to be 0.1 inches off. But that is probably a result of over 30 years of brainwashing to believe that being up there in the lands is where I need to be

IMG_7943.jpeg
 
Yup. I feel your pain. Bought 3 last week.
View attachment 8684989
If I loaded to 4.515" in new Peterson brass, the junction of the shank and the boattail would be up in the neck about 0.100" - that is, it would be loaded too long, with too little neck support. Maybe even 0.150" too long. So this reported COAL demands some explanation.
 
If I loaded to 4.515" in new Peterson brass, the junction of the shank and the boattail would be up in the neck about 0.100" - that is, it would be loaded too long, with too little neck support. Maybe even 0.150" too long. So this reported COAL demands some explanation.
So yeah, I THINK most are having their 375CT barrels custom chambered to their own liking. I have two and they were both chambered for the CE400 LAZER. One is too shallow for reasonabe thinking, and the other has the 410’s touching at 4.465”. So I loaded several powders at 4.450”. RL-50 got me the best group and speed. 5 shot pressure test produced 11.8/4.0 and 45fps shy of my target speed of 2950. I agree the 4.515” seems a bit ambitious, but haven’t played with those numbers yet.
 
The VLD method seemed to me to be not correct for a hybrid design. I reached out to Berger this morning and Phil responded that the standard hybrid method should work. I usually start at .015" off the lands then go up at .003" increments - because you can usually find a sweet spot within ~15 to 20 thousandths. He said their standard hybrid method is to go up at .015" increments, pick the best, then go to .005" on either side to see if it gets better.

So, some conflicting information.
Yeah, still confused. I only use data sheets for guidance. To be honest: If It Is To Be, It Is Up To Me(ten two letter word sentence I live my life by)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7692.jpeg
    6.4 MB · Views: 2
  • IMG_7693.jpeg
    8 MB · Views: 2
You can make the throat as long as you want, but that doesn’t make the bullet shank longer or the case length longer, which means you’re going to have the boattail up in the neck with an insufficiently supported projectile

It doesn’t matter how long your throat is, you can’t load them to 5 inches long because the projectile won’t even be in the neck at that length.

As I said, in a factory new unfired Peterson case, at 4.515 inches overall length, only about 3/4 of the neck is occupied by the shank and the other quarter is occupied by the boattail which isn’t making contact with the neck
 
You can make the throat as long as you want, but that doesn’t make the bullet shank longer or the case length longer, which means you’re going to have the boattail up in the neck with an insufficiently supported projectile

It doesn’t matter how long your throat is, you can’t load them to 5 inches long because the projectile won’t even be in the neck at that length.

As I said, in a factory new unfired Peterson case, at 4.515 inches overall length, only about 3/4 of the neck is occupied by the shank and the other quarter is occupied by the boattail which isn’t making contact with the neck
I get you. I think not everyone strives for 100% bearing surface in the neck. The trade off is more case capacity which may produce a desired velocity. I do start with 100% plus around additional .010” into the shoulder. But I’ll also chase the lands as erosion dictates. I rarely get to 3/4 before barrel is shot out. I am fairly new to this, and feel you may be outta my league. I ran some today, cleaned and prepped the cases and gonna go shoot/test some more tomorrow, and next day too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: secondofangle2