260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

[EROCO]

123 scenar
3050 FPS mv
600 yd drop 9.02
1000 yd drop 21.68

139 scenar
2890 FPS mv
600 yd drop 10.2
1000 yd drop 24.0

Fired from a PACNOR 28" barrel at 4400 alt, 70 deg ambient temp

Calculations were run from my iSnipe calculator.

Does this data look right to you folks? I ask because the published bc for the 123 is .547 while the 139 has .615, yet the 139 is getting outperformed. Is the faster mv of the 123 more than enough to offset the bc advantage of the 139 within 1000 yards?

Thanks.

 

[tigerfan_9]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

The wind is where the higher mass and BC of the 139 will beat the 123. The faster initial velocity of the 123 is accounting for the better drop numbers. Drop is just something you dial, the wind is the variable that you want the best advantage against.

 

[tylerw02]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Compare your wind. We can scientifically determine range with little error, but determining wind is a best guess. I'd rather minimize drift and dial an extra .7 mil at 1k.

 

[EROCO]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Actually I did just that but forgot to include that..

At 1000 yds, 5 mph wind at 270 deg, the 123 has a total windage of 24.7 while the 139 has 31.1 which is quite a significant advantage for the 123..

Time in flight is 1.30 and 1.36 respectively..

 

[tylerw02]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Are these "real world" numbers, or just ballistic calculator printouts?

 

[EROCO]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Ballistic calculator results only using iSnipe.

I'm trying to decide which bullet to go with for 1000 yd matches.

 

[turbo54]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EROCO</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ballistic calculator results only using iSnipe.

I'm trying to decide which bullet to go with for 1000 yd matches. </div></div>

For 1000 yard UKD shooting, I'll take more drop and less drift EVERY TIME.

For 1000 yard KD shooting, I'll take more drop and less drift EVERY TIME AND TWICE ON SUNDAY.

 

[EROCO]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EROCO</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ballistic calculator results only using iSnipe.

I'm trying to decide which bullet to go with for 1000 yd matches. </div></div>

For 1000 yard UKD shooting, I'll take more drop and less drift EVERY TIME.

For 1000 yard KD shooting, I'll take more drop and less drift EVERY TIME AND TWICE ON SUNDAY. </div></div>

So with the data shown above are you saying you'll go with the 123's since the calculator is showing less drift with it?

 

[BoilerUP]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Those published G1 BCs are quite a bit higher than real-world observed BC for either the 123 or 139.

Lapua's own website shows the 123 @ 0.527 BC and the 139 @ 0.578 BC; Bryan Litz's testing has the 123 at 0.519 and the 139 at 0.557.

 

[turbo54]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EROCO</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EROCO</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ballistic calculator results only using iSnipe.

I'm trying to decide which bullet to go with for 1000 yd matches. </div></div>

For 1000 yard UKD shooting, I'll take more drop and less drift EVERY TIME.

For 1000 yard KD shooting, I'll take more drop and less drift EVERY TIME AND TWICE ON SUNDAY. </div></div>

So with the data shown above are you saying you'll go with the 123's since the calculator is showing less drift with it? </div></div>

No. I'm saying I'd choose the heavier, higher BC if it drifts less, which according to your numbers, does.

 

[EROCO]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EROCO</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EROCO</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ballistic calculator results only using iSnipe.

I'm trying to decide which bullet to go with for 1000 yd matches. </div></div>

For 1000 yard UKD shooting, I'll take more drop and less drift EVERY TIME.

For 1000 yard KD shooting, I'll take more drop and less drift EVERY TIME AND TWICE ON SUNDAY. </div></div>

No. The data shows that the 123 will drift less even though it has an inferior bc to the 139. The whole point of this thread is that according to my calculator the faster mv of the 123 seems to make up for that.
So with the data shown above are you saying you'll go with the 123's since the calculator is showing less drift with it? </div></div>

No. I'm saying I'd choose the heavier, higher BC if it drifts less, which according to your numbers, does. </div></div>

 

[BoilerUP]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Shooter app shows @ 4400' ASL and 70 degrees F:

123 Scenar @ 3050fps and published 0.527 G1 BC has 6.9mil drop/1.6mil drift @ 1000yd; the 139 @ 2890fps and published 0.578 G1 BC has 7.4mil drop/1.6mil drift @ 1000yd.

While the 123 and 139 have the same MILs worth of drift, the 139 is 57.0" while the 123 is 59.2" drift.

Using Litz G1s with your stated velocities, the 139 is 7.5mil drop/1.7mil drift while the 123 is 6.9mil drop/1.7 mil drift. Actual drift is 60.5" for the 123 and 59.8" for the 139.

My opinion is use neither Scenar and instead go with the 130gr Berger VLD @ 3000fps (easily achievable from a 28" barrel)

6.9mil drop and 1.5mil (55.7") drift

 

[EROCO]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Thanks BoilerUp!!

I'll take a look at the Berger's.

 

[Mike]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

When shooting at distance the heavier bullet will always perform better in wind. This is true with just about every caliber. The 123 is fine bullet and does extremely well out to 700-800 but after that the heavier 139 will win out. I'm not saying the 123 doesn't perform well, just a heavier bullet will perform better farther out.

Look at every popular caliber for LR shooting. Heavier bullets are always the choice...and for good reason.

Ignore the ballistic calculators and go out and shoot. That will be your only proof.

 

[S_Lunsford]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Does anyone have any experience comparing the 140 berger hybrid with the 139 scenar? If so, which one performed better?

 

[jrob300]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Steven Lunsford</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Does anyone have any experience comparing the 140 berger hybrid with the 139 scenar? If so, which one performed better? </div></div>

I've shot quite a few of both. The Berger runs about .3 to .4 mils less elevation at 1000 yds. than the 139 with about .1 mil less wind. Real numbers.

I have not been able to get them to shoot consistently as well as the Lapua 139 or the Hornady 140 BTHP.

John

 

[RobertB]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

I have had great results with the 142 SMK. Does the SMK fall behind any of these? Looking for real numbers. In La I got about 27.5 MOA and 6.5 MOA at a grand. Over 45 Grn of H4831SC in win 7-08 brass, I shoot the 123 scenar out of my x47lapua but have yet to try them in my 260. I don't like changing anything in my reloading tools once I find good results. Good luck

 

[Mike]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RobertB</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have had great results with the 142 SMK. Does the SMK fall behind any of these? Looking for real numbers. In La I got about 27.5 MOA and 6.5 MOA at a grand. Over 45 Grn of H4831SC in win 7-08 brass, I shoot the 123 scenar out of my x47lapua but have yet to try them in my 260. I don't like changing anything in my reloading tools once I find good results. Good luck</div></div>

IME, I think the 142SMK is a very under appreciated bullet. It has been-and continues to be-used very successfully in many 6.5 cartridges. I don't think you would be behind by using the 142smk against many others. I doubt more than a handful can out shoot the difference between the two.

 

[ashland]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Shot my 260 today. Conditions were 95 degrees, +3,000 DA, Baro. 29.67, 50' ASL. Took me 9.1 mils to get to 1,000 yds. shooting 139s at about 2,775 fps. I couldn't tell the difference when shooting the 142s vs. the 139s.

 

[Barney88PDC]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

Same here,
Louisiana basicly Sea Level last Friday Hot about 90
9.1 Mil to 1000
139 Scenar runnIng right at 2800.

 

[260shtr]

Re: 260 cal, 123 VS 139 Lapua scenar

I started out with the 142's, then decided to shoot a Lapua bullet because they were cheaper (ya, it's been a while). I choose the 123's because my ballistic calc said it was pretty much a toss up. I have shot them since 04 and don't regret it for a minute. I also shoot it in a 6.5X47. Pick a bullet. Learn the ballistics and go shoot the piss out of it.