McGuire ballistics review

[gabenzeke]

It would be much longer than any traditional lead bullet do to the less dense copper. Still those bcs are likely wishes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Even the 160 is listed at .700. How many people have verified that with drops? Is it anywhere close? If it is, I might be on board with paying that much. With a 7 PRC, that's a legit 1000 yard plus bullet.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[28bang]

Even the 160 is listed at .700. How many people have verified that with drops? Is it anywhere close? If it is, I might be on board with paying that much. With a 7 PRC, that's a legit 1000 yard plus bullet.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

Haven’t gotten to the 160s yet. If his numbers are off it won’t be by much if at all. He tests at something like 75ft above sea level.

 

[gabenzeke]

Haven’t gotten to the 160s yet. If his numbers are off it won’t be by much if at all. He tests at something like 75ft above sea level.

Well, I'm following along for your testing. I'm in the process of building a 7 PRC and will have it +p'ed as well. If these BCs are accurate, these may well end up being my projectiles in lieu of 180s or something else.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[28bang]

Well, I'm following along for your testing. I'm in the process of building a 7 PRC and will have it +p'ed as well. If these BCs are accurate, these may well end up being my projectiles in lieu of 180s or something else.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

I’ll post results when I get it done.

 

[NK Hunter]

How is he achieving a bc that high when traditional match bullets in that weight class aren't even close to that?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

He seems to be a fair guy, though I've only played with the 6.5 cal. Those seemed to be close to advertised BC. It'll be interesting see what real testing reveals. I'm glad @28bang is giving the 160 a shot. I'm really interested in seeing the results.

 

[Justin Crossley]

Weight plays a part in how much wind drift you'll experience. Keep that in mind when choosing the lighter, copper bullets.

 

[wind gypsy]

Weight plays a part in how much wind drift you'll experience. Keep that in mind when choosing the lighter, copper bullets.

Interesting topic of discussion. All the ballistic calculators I've used say differently but I have seen reputable people indicate that part of the calculators is wrong.

When crunching #'s, a 160 grain bullet with 0.3 G7 at 3000 FPS shows the same wind deflection as a 200 grain bullet with 0.3 G7 at 3000 FPS. Have you seen that to be demonstrably false?

 

[NK Hunter]

Weight plays a part in how much wind drift you'll experience. Keep that in mind when choosing the lighter, copper bullets.

Yeah, the BC factor alone isn't always indicative of drift resistance when you factor in the cross-section size differential from C&C due to the density variation. Unless there's a velocity gain enough to overcome it...

 

[wind gypsy]

Yeah, the BC factor alone isn't always indicative of drift resistance when you factor in the cross-section size differential from C&C due to the density variation. Unless there's a velocity gain enough to overcome it...

I'm a long way removed from physics class but that makes sense. I wonder if the calculators are based on common cup and core lead density in that regard?

Still, the big copper bullets do well in the ELR comps.

 

[NK Hunter]

Interesting topic of discussion. All the ballistic calculators I've used say differently but I have seen reputable people indicate that part of the calculators is wrong.

When crunching #'s, a 160 grain bullet with 0.3 G7 at 3000 FPS shows the same wind deflection as a 200 grain bullet with 0.3 G7 at 3000 FPS. Have you seen that to be demonstrably false?

I haven't personally verified it but, like you, have heard from reputable competition shooters who have made the observation. It's just my "common sense" theory that a lighter bullet with the same size/length and cross-section profile as a heavier one will be more influenced by the crosswind factor when travelling the same velocity/flight time. I'm happy to change my theory if I can be taught otherwise.

 

[NK Hunter]

..I just don't have the time and resources at my stage in life to do all the shooting/testing I'd love to do.

 

[gabenzeke]

My experience is anecdotal, but I have experienced shorter bullets, with a slightly lower BC but much higher MV, perform better than a longer bullet, with a slightly higher BC and much lower MV.

How does this translate when the longer bullet is lighter though? Genuinely curious if going with, say, a 7mm 168 berger is ballistically superior to the 160 McGuire with the significantly higher BC.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[Justin Crossley]

Interesting topic of discussion. All the ballistic calculators I've used say differently but I have seen reputable people indicate that part of the calculators is wrong.

When crunching #'s, a 160 grain bullet with 0.3 G7 at 3000 FPS shows the same wind deflection as a 200 grain bullet with 0.3 G7 at 3000 FPS. Have you seen that to be demonstrably false?

You are correct. I was mistaken and remembered that incorrectly.

 

[NK Hunter]

As a generic statement, take the BC multiply by the MV to compare. Whichever resulting number is larger will be the better performing projectile. Obviously that assumes that both BC and MV are accurate, projectiles are stable, etc.

My previous point above was that published BCs don’t always match real world. Even if the BCs are accurate, it’s important that you understand how your solver is…..solving. Even a “correct” BC is rooted to a particular point on the Mach/Cd curve. If you are way outside that point, you will see discrepancies in real life.

There are circumstances where a long (read high BC) bullet starts off slow enough, depending on the range to target, that there either isn’t enough time for the high BC bullet to cumulatively out perform a shorter (read lower BC) projectile AND/OR the BC of the longer projectile is actually lower due to the lower velocity.

Good info.

 

[J Batt]

I ran into Sam Mcguire a couple years ago hunting in the CA backcountry. Very friendly guy. He told me he was developing some monos that were supposed to have magically high BCs. This thread reminded me to check his website since I'm searching for a perfect load in 270win for CA hunts.
He offers a 128gr 277 bullet with .580 bc, and will stabilize in a 1/10 twist.
Out of a 270win with 3,050fps MV, its gonna be over 2,000fps to 700yards, at sea level...
In the mountains at 8,000ft its doing 2,000fps out to 1,100YARDS!!
To me thats worth the price tag to give them a try.

 

[28bang]

I ran into Sam Mcguire a couple years ago hunting in the CA backcountry. Very friendly guy. He told me he was developing some monos that were supposed to have magically high BCs. This thread reminded me to check his website since I'm searching for a perfect load in 270win for CA hunts.
He offers a 128gr 277 bullet with .580 bc, and will stabilize in a 1/10 twist.
Out of a 270win with 3,050fps MV, its gonna be over 2,000fps to 700yards, at sea level...
In the mountains at 8,000ft its doing 2,000fps out to 1,100YARDS!!
To me thats worth the price tag to give them a try.

Absolutely good guy. Worth the cost for me. I just received the 7mm 168s. Can’t wait to shoot them

 

[amassi]

I ran into Sam Mcguire a couple years ago hunting in the CA backcountry. Very friendly guy. He told me he was developing some monos that were supposed to have magically high BCs. This thread reminded me to check his website since I'm searching for a perfect load in 270win for CA hunts.
He offers a 128gr 277 bullet with .580 bc, and will stabilize in a 1/10 twist.
Out of a 270win with 3,050fps MV, its gonna be over 2,000fps to 700yards, at sea level...
In the mountains at 8,000ft its doing 2,000fps out to 1,100YARDS!!
To me thats worth the price tag to give them a try.

Those magic bcs are magical thinking
Cutting edge also make a high bc mono
They have a 150 gr lazer that only has a .573 bc.
How could a similarly made copper projectile have a higher bc and be 22 grains lighter ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[28bang]

Those magic bcs are magical thinking
Cutting edge also make a high bc mono
They have a 150 gr lazer that only has a .573 bc.
How could a similarly made copper projectile have a higher bc and be 22 grains lighter ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Completely different design. the 128gr is over .300” longer than the cutting edge lazer 150.
McGuire is 1.390” vs the 150 lazer at 1.069”

 

[amassi]

Completely different design. the 128gr is over .300” longer than the cutting edge lazer 150.
McGuire is 1.390” vs the 150 lazer at 1.069”

Nope
The 150 laser is 1.545
So it’s longer than the 128 McGuire
Both mode from solid copper
How is the shorter McGuire getting a higher bc?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[28bang]

Nope
The 150 laser is 1.545
So it’s longer than the 128 McGuire
Both mode from solid copper
How is the shorter McGuire getting a higher bc?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are correct. I was looking at the projection length. The design is different and there is no rubber tip like on the lazer. So that may or may not help. I think it does. Maybe you should try it out and see for yourself. That’s all you can do.