Some time ago I read that on the average a 168 would probably be more accurate up to 500 to 600 yards and the 175 would then become more accurate. Any thought on that subject? JesseBB
Range Report 168 vs 175 VLD
- Thread starter JesseBB
- Start date
Re: 168 vs 175 VLD
for the 168 SMK versus 175 SMK what you said is correct. The 175 is the superior long range bullet, while the 168 is the superior short range bullet.
I do not believe that the 168 VLD versus 175 VLD retains that characteristic, excepting that the 175 VLD will have slightly longer supersonic range (by 50-odd yards or so).
for the 168 SMK versus 175 SMK what you said is correct. The 175 is the superior long range bullet, while the 168 is the superior short range bullet.
I do not believe that the 168 VLD versus 175 VLD retains that characteristic, excepting that the 175 VLD will have slightly longer supersonic range (by 50-odd yards or so).
Re: 168 vs 175 VLD
I shoot at steel targets from 200 to 500 mtrs and I'm still looking for the perfect combination of componets.
I shoot at steel targets from 200 to 500 mtrs and I'm still looking for the perfect combination of componets.
Re: 168 vs 175 VLD
200-500 meters I'd look at 155grn offerings. I only reload 155grn and 175grn. I like how flat shooting and fast the 155s are for short to medium engagements and I like the BC and staying power of the 175grn SMKs for further distances. I find the 168grn bullets do well, but don't do anything the best. Just food for thought. YMMV
200-500 meters I'd look at 155grn offerings. I only reload 155grn and 175grn. I like how flat shooting and fast the 155s are for short to medium engagements and I like the BC and staying power of the 175grn SMKs for further distances. I find the 168grn bullets do well, but don't do anything the best. Just food for thought. YMMV
Re: 168 vs 175 VLD
Jesse-
Don't waste time w/ VLDs for these ranges. VLDs are good for really long ranges and hunting, but they are sensitive to seating depth and that is a variable that changes as your throat wears. You don't want to mess with seating depth if you don't have too.
I like the recommendation on the 155gr class. Comparable BC to the 168gr, but lighter so you can get them going faster and with less recoil. The Lapua 155gr Scenar is a great choice.
Jesse-
Don't waste time w/ VLDs for these ranges. VLDs are good for really long ranges and hunting, but they are sensitive to seating depth and that is a variable that changes as your throat wears. You don't want to mess with seating depth if you don't have too.
I like the recommendation on the 155gr class. Comparable BC to the 168gr, but lighter so you can get them going faster and with less recoil. The Lapua 155gr Scenar is a great choice.
Re: 168 vs 175 VLD
JesseBB,
No, they're absolutely the same at all ranges, until the ballistic shortcomings of the 168 becomes apparent. Then the 175 will start to give better groups. No inherent difference in the accuracy of these bullets whatsoever at shorter ranges, which shouldn't really come as a suprise; same core alloy, exactly the same jacket (different trim length, all other specs are the same) and a nearly identical profile. They're also shot to exactly the same QC standards for acceptance, same range, same group size, etc..
Your individual rifle may show a preference for one or the other, but that's a different issue. No difference in the bullets themselves, though.
JesseBB,
No, they're absolutely the same at all ranges, until the ballistic shortcomings of the 168 becomes apparent. Then the 175 will start to give better groups. No inherent difference in the accuracy of these bullets whatsoever at shorter ranges, which shouldn't really come as a suprise; same core alloy, exactly the same jacket (different trim length, all other specs are the same) and a nearly identical profile. They're also shot to exactly the same QC standards for acceptance, same range, same group size, etc..
Your individual rifle may show a preference for one or the other, but that's a different issue. No difference in the bullets themselves, though.
Re: 168 vs 175 VLD
You can still achive good groups with 175. In short distenses.
You can still achive good groups with 175. In short distenses.
Re: 168 vs 175 VLD
What about the 168 vld with a bc of. .519??? Just curious. I didn't even know they existed until yesterday
What about the 168 vld with a bc of. .519??? Just curious. I didn't even know they existed until yesterday
Re: 168 vs 175 VLD
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JesseBB</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Some time ago I read that on the average a 168 would probably be more accurate up to 500 to 600 yards and the 175 would then become more accurate. Any thought on that subject? JesseBB </div></div>I don't see any difference between them on paper to 500 meters, after which the 175s take over anyway.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JesseBB</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Some time ago I read that on the average a 168 would probably be more accurate up to 500 to 600 yards and the 175 would then become more accurate. Any thought on that subject? JesseBB </div></div>I don't see any difference between them on paper to 500 meters, after which the 175s take over anyway.
