Berry's Plated Bullet's Quality

[Unsub]

Just been out to the reloading room to check my batch of Berry's and they are the same as yours. I have been shooting them in my Ruger super redhawk with great results out to 200m in metallic silhouett.

 

[parabarbarian]

I use Berry's, Rainier and Xtreme plated bullets in 38/357 and 45 ACP. I never had any problems with Berry's but you are right. The difference in diameter front-to-back should not be so pronounced.

 

[FishingPilot]

I've never checked my bullets for parallel so today I was thinking about this thread and thought (Just for s&g) lets see what my Rocky Mountain Reloading bullets look like. I grabbed a random dozen or so out of the tub and they all looked like this. Good enough for me. I used to use Berry's but the only reason I changed was availability. RMR seems to always have bullets when everyone else is backordered and they're about the same price (8-9 cents each depending on quantity)

I have loaded thousands of RMR's bullets (.38, 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 acp and just got a batch of pulled .224s) and have a few thousand on the bench now. After reading this thread I also went to check some and got great results. These have always produced great groups for me.

 

[KingArthur]

And I'm not sure I understand why the dismissal of the sizing concern of this, at least. How many times has it been discussed about proper bullet sizing. Slugging your barrel & cylinder throats to find the proper sized bullet for your gun. These bullets are supposed to be .429" & there's hardly a point on it that's .429". In fact, the majority of the bearing surface is .0010 to .0020" smaller dia.
What's the sense of doing those checks & then buy bullets that are of this quality?
Is it asking too much for a bullet to have parallel sides & be of uniform diameter?
Should we be happy with what ever a manufacturer wants to stick in a box?
And because they didn't admit to anything being out of specs with the bullet, doesn't mean there isn't.
The 41's & the 44s are the same Berry's model/style but the 41s don't have this issue.

I agree with that statement 100%. I use to buy Berry's and they are too expensive to be getting junk.


Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

[BLUEDOT37]

Comparision

Thought I'd share this related story. I recently bought a 396NG & did my usual dimension/tolerance checks & found the throats were .4285"-.4290". While the (5) chambers are not identical they are all very close. After thinking about the size I decided to drop some bullets in the chambers to see just how tight they were. I put (5) Sierra bullets in & noticed how far they went in, then (5) Hornadys. For some reason I thought about the Berry's so I tried (5) & was surprised at the difference.

While the bullets are the same weight & general shape, they obviously are not identical. Ignore how much each brand extends from the end of the cylinder, but rather the consistency to which they extend. All bullets were lightly tapped into their chambers with a pencil just enough so they wouldn't fall out (the chambers are tight & the bullets can not be pushed thru easily) when it was turned over for the pictures. All (5) bullets were pulled at random from each brand's new box. The Sierra & Hornady are very uniform with no real noticeable difference between chambers. The same can not be said for the Berry's. (The two Berry's pictures are of the same bullets, just turned one place to try & show the differences between the cylinders better as the macro focus's depth of field was too narrow.)

.

 

[blujax01]

So when you crimp the bullets into cases at a prescribed depth, did they seat correctly and stay in that position? Do you have pictures of how they grouped when you shot them from a rest? Perhaps comparison data of Hornady XTP ($30/100) and Sierra jacketed ($27/100) vs Berry's plated ($18/100) using the same powder and load via Chrono results?

 

[novalty]

Wow, that is terrible.

So did you take Berrys up on the refund they offered you yet?

Any target pics between the three manufacturers?

 

[ozo]

Since following this thread for weeks......I am NOT gonna measure any of my Berry's plated. I don't think I want to know.....[if ?]
I have 1000's and 1000's of them, and have been shooting them for years in .38 and .32 calibers.......
I have great results with all aspects including accuracy. I surely don't need any stress caused by measuring them. If they are as messed up as yours appear......I don't wanna know, I'm deeply invested.
A note about Berry's CS.......I found a warning on Berry's 148gr HBWC .38cal that said "must be loaded for 800fps minimum" and thought that was strange......called them, and they could not explain squat about it !!!! I called back 2 more times, for a different CS, got the same "DUH"......
I still like them [bullets] and have had no problems......but my favorite projectile is still Penn Bullets, altho not plated.
P.S. May not matter, but all the Berry's plated I have were bought at least over a year ago.

 

[blujax01]

...
I have 1000's and 1000's of them, and have been shooting them for years in .38 and .32 calibers.......
I have great results with all aspects including accuracy. ...

Honestly, what other aspect has any bearing? "When you shove them into a chamber with a pencil ,they look funny?" "When you use a caliper, regardless of it's accuracy or reliability, if you can see a gap holding them just so, they look funny?"

If the bullets do not shoot right, I agree that there is a problem. If the bullets shoot right, there is no problem.

The OP was offered a full refund. In return, he demanded replacement bullets, an apology and an explanation from Berry's as to why they are a bad manufacturer. Right...

He refuses to say whether he has returned them or loaded them, has no evidence that the bullets do not group adequately and then a month after his first post on the matter, offers up some bizarre "pencil push into a chamber" picture as if it were evidence of that which we already know: plated bullets look different from jacketed bullets.

And as to the 148 grain wadcutters, Berry's web site does explain the 800 fps minimum requirement in the same paragraph as the requirement itself:
"When loading for these bullets, you need to use data that will attain 800 fps as a minimum. Most of the data for this bullet weight was created using a dead soft lead projectile with velocities under the 800 fps and will not work for a this bullet at those lower velocities."

Some people just need to have a reason to complain.

I'm out...

 

[rwsmith]

I think I saw an ad today.....

I think I saw an ad today that advertized "Berry's Premium Tapered Bullets". So now you have to pay extra for the special tapered feature.

 

[scooter123]

I have to agree with Bluejax, some people just cannot be satisfied. Folks, these are economy bullets intended to be used as range fodder, not match grade bullets that cost 50 cents or more each. If they function properly and produced good accurate ammunition you got your money's worth. BTW, the 38 spl., 40 caliber, and 45 ACP I've gotten my money's worth and will purchase more whenever need and budget coincide.

 

[Forrest r]

At the end of the day I would not use those bullets.

The extreme taper on those bullets will be hard on the brass.

Decades ago there was a guy named keith (maybe some of the people here has heard of him) designed a swc bullet for the 44spl/mag. He went to a company named lyman (again maybe some of the people here has heard of them) & they used his design for bullet molds. Anyway this guy named keith got mad @ this company named lyman because they made the front drive band (tapered bullets) on his bullet design smaller. Keith knew this would effect the accuracy of his bullet design. He ended up going to a company named saeco with his design.

Lyman had another bright idea with a bullet design for the 44's, the 429360 with it's smaller front drive band (tapered bullets).

It's been proven for decades that tapered bullets in the 44spl/mag's just don't work.

If the op sent them back it's his business not mine or anyone else's.

I thank the op for pointing out that those are tapered bullets. For some odd reason I've found that tapered bullets tend to do better in tapered cases ie 9mm, 40s&w, 45acp.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

I think I saw an ad today that advertized "Berry's Premium Tapered Bullets". So now you have to pay extra for the special tapered feature.

Cool! Maybe I got the prototypes?

 

[BLUEDOT37]

The extreme taper on those bullets will be hard on the brass.

Which is one of the reasons I've decided to not load them. With the inconsistent diameters of the .44 bullets below the shoulders (which I think the cylinder/bullet pictures show) you'd never get consistent crimps, or bullet-case tension. I've still got plenty of cast bullets I can use for range day fun.

..and thanks for the respectful comment.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PS: While loading up some 44Spcl. for my 396NG I decided I'd try to load a couple of these Berry's, just to say I tried. What a frustrating waste of time. As I thought, the bullet's taper, narrower shoulder than base, made for constant readjusting of the die to trying & get a consistent crimp. But that was the least of the problems. With the base being the widest portion of the bullets, & many of them bearly .4285", there was insufficient bullet-case tension. In fact, several times the bullet slide down into the case (many with just finger pressure) well past the depth the seating die was set for making it necessary to remove the bullet & try another. The net result was a shameful product not worthy of the time & in need of being broken down. At $45 for a box of 200 bullets, this "economy range fodder" wasn't such a good deal. Again, the sad thing is I know they can make a good bullet. The box of .41" bullets are fine & I will happily use them up, but the box of .44" will be used as a ballast weight for my desk lamp. Since Berry's wouldn't acknowledge a quality issue with the sample I sent them, I have no faith in them or in trying any more.