RWS Pellets – Are they any good? What about their Ballistic Coefficient?

[JungleShooter]

RWS Pellets – Are they any good? What about their Ballistic Coefficient?


I just came across a signature of a forum poster that said among other things: “If you havent tried RWS pellets in a while give them a try. RWS pellets rock.”



Well, now that made me I wonder. I’m working in .22 cal, and I hadn’t considered RWS pellets – so this signature made me go back and check why!




Well, it is what is is... –– Their ballistic coefficient reaches the far bottom of the BC barrel.
(For that I won’t be looking at the Superpoint (0.013 BC) or the many wadcutters that RWS produces for the 10-meter target shooters.)



• Hollow Point:  Super-H-Point, 14.5gr –– 0.012 BC
Of course, this is a hollow point and thus does not have such a high BC. But compare RWS’s BC of 0.012 to the BC of its fellow hollow points:
0.017 H&N Crow Magnum
0.020 H&N Terminator
0.021 H&N Hornet
0.023 Crosman Premier Hollowpoint
0.024 JSB Predator Polymag
0.025 H&N Baracuda Hunter
0.026 H&N Baracuda Hunter Extreme




• Flat Domed:  Superdome, 14.5gr –– 0.016 BC (HardAirMagazine has it at 0.012 BC)
For a domed pellet this is just a lousy BC. Look at these domed pellets of similar weight:
0.023 H&N Baracuda Green (12.35gr)
0.023 JSB RS (13.43gr)
0.024 Crosman Premiere Domed (14.3gr)
0.030 JSB Express (14.35gr)




• Round Domed: Superfield, Version 1, 15.9gr –– 0.028 BC (BC is hard to find; this number is from a 2010 video)
The Superfield I have a hard time finding! And there must have been a change in this pellet sometime before 2014 that RWS did not care to announce to its customers. Cf. the following post:
“The situation with RWS Superfields appears thus: Some years ago RWS introduced their Superfield pellet in .177; which many suspected was a re-branded JSB Exact. As many will concur, the Exact is an excellent pellet and the Superfield rightly won a lot of fans based on its excellent performance. | Some time later the Superfield pellet design changed and many abandoned the pellet; citing a lack of performance compared to the old variant, poor product consistency / continuity and perhaps a slight feeling of betrayal towards RWS for continuing to sell what appeared to be a completely different pellet in the same packaging with no explanation to the customer. | Like many others I'm a fan of JSB pellets and with no local supplies of Superfields, never bothered trying them out. Recently I blagged a few to test and earlier in the week got up the club with the chronos to assess the performance of the "new" Superfields against the JSB Exact.”
Source: http://www.airgunforum.co.uk/community/index.php?threads/new-177-rws-superfields-versus-jsb-exacts-a-velocity-decay-test.183328/
Link to video that contains the BC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8-m0MGybAA



The BC of this pellet is actually pretty good, but this seems to be a hard to find pellet....




• Extremely Heavy: Power Bolt, 24.7gr –– and in an extensive search I haven’t found any BC.... Anybody got a number for me?
It’s torpedo-shaped, 9.1mm long, and looks like it could do some “good” damage. Could it be a competition for the JSB Monster?
Here’re a couple of links to German websites with photos of this pellet:
https://www.4komma5.de/RWS-Power-Bolt-55-mm-fuer-Luftgewehre
https://www.versandhaus-schneider.de/product_info.php/cPath/49_242_0_40_95_157_1330/products_id/34797

––––––––––––––––––––––




What do you make of this?
● Why are the BCs so low in comparison to other manufacturers?
● Or are the other manufacturers simply lying to us about the performance of their pellets, and RWS is truthful about it?

● Could it be that RWS does (or does not) use a ballistic calculator that takes into effect atmospheric conditions and the GA drag curve instead of some fixed drag value?




––––––––––––––––––––––




For a comprehensive list of BC numbers in .22 cal, cf.
https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/bc-table-22cal-comprehensive-internet-wide-collection-of-ballistic-coeff-data/







.

 

[SMH77]

I didn't read your entire post, but did want to answer one prominent question for you really quickly: it's really hard to compare BC's across different testers because there are several factors that affect the BC number-specifically what is the near and far distance used to calculate the BC? Was it shot indoors (no head or tail wind) or outdoors? What was the temperature and pressure (which combine to form what is known as the 'density altitude' at the time of testing-which has an effect on the BC results)?

Without going into too much detail, my gut tells me they used something like the muzzle velocity and then something closer (like maybe 10 yards, or 15 yards) and you're comparing data of other tests that were more like muzzle and 30 yards (HAM's db), etc. The calculated BC will be different across those different distances. Unless the two manufacturers used the same conditions and distances, you're not really comparing 'comparable' test results for BC-that's what makes it tough to compare manufacturer posted data for BCs. I end up just testing them myself, in my particular gun / setup. I have also standardized at 1 yard and 50 yard readings for my testing, but that's a different subject from what you're asking about...

Hope that sheds a little light on why the numbers aren't quite matching up? I've done quite a bit of BC testing (in .25 and .30 cal) and can try to help answer some of the questions you have-I'm just a bit tired at the moment to type a whole lot more...



Sean

 

[JungleShooter]

Sean,
I fully agree with you that many testers do not specify their test setup (distances, power, drag model, atmospheric conditions, much less the barrel), and therefore their data are difficult to compare. You are a shining example of the opposite, as is Bob Sterne, and some others.
Now, HardAir Magazine and Bob Sterne tested both the Super-H-Point and the Superdome, AND they tested almost all the other ones I mention (HAM did, Bob did some).
So, there is a good comparability... 

And the BC of RWS pellets is way down... )-:



Hope you got some good sleep!

Matthias

 

[1BadDart]

After buying my 34 I bought a RWS pellet sampler pack, none of them shot well in my gun.

 

[Xbowsniper]

Guys, 

This is my opinion and views on this, I'll make it short.

I've found with most of the RWS pellets OTHER than their match wadcutter line, are accurate to some degree, but only within 30-35 yards. After that, most of them are pretty much useless in every gun I own. 

Their match wadcutter line are some of the most accurate wadcutters one can get their hands on.

That being said, I've tested every pellet known to man, through every gun that I own. Some pellets are nail drivers that have a low BC, and some are horrible with a higher BC. And vice versa. So to me, BC means nothing to me, under all circumstances. One simply cannot get a pellet with the best BC, and expect it........well to shoot the best. Just doesn't hold true. I take very little heed when it comes to BC, I think all the technical stuff that goes along with it, is way overrated. I just get a good quality domed pellet, and try it. BC is something that I pay absolutely zero attention to.

That's just me, you guys might not find the same thing in your quest of BC analysis and understanding. For me it's just something that is too complicated, and explanation and comprehension of BC's is just something that does not interest me, it just makes shooting for supreme accuracy more difficult, in my opinion. 



Tom Holland 

 

[SMH77]

Matthias,

Thanks for bringing me up to speed on the fact that those two sourced did test them-I wasn't aware of that. In that case, I suspect one of two things (or a combination of them): I wonder if the density of the RWS pellets aren't the same as other pellet 'lead' (maybe they alloy the lead to keep the cost down?), or the other factor may be in the shape factor of their pellets in regards to the other pellets (maybe they do something strange with the bottom of the skirt where the drag rolls off the pellet (intending it to be good, of course), but it causes a loss in BC due to the drag affecting their pellets differently than other pellets? Those are just two ideas that came to mine that may be affecting the BC's of these pellets compared to 'similar shaped pellets' that they are compared to... Just a couple random thoughts here, that's all...

Tom,

I totally agree with you on the fact that high BC's are NOT an indicator of accuracy for the pellet. The easiest example I have to show this is the thread where I measured the BC of two Ratsniper slugs (31.5 grain, 36 grain) against the BC of the JSB Mk I heavy pellets (all in .25 cal). While the 31.5 grain had way better BC's (0.0850) than the JSB tested (0.0565), they shot very poor groups at the same distance by comparison. The 36 grain Ratsnipers, on the other hand had an excellent BC (0.0888) and shot groups of similar size to the JSB pellets. Thus, it was very easy to conclude that BC does not predict whether a projectile will shoot accurately or not.

Having said that, let me say this: BC really becomes 'important' when someone is going to shoot over varying distances as it helps accurately predict how much vertical compensation will be needed at the target's distance when the gun has been sighted in at a different distance (because it primarily indicates how well the velocity of the pellet is retained down range of the gun). Additionally, while they don't predict accuracy, BC's do indicate how much or how little (relatively speaking) that projectile will be affected by the wind. The higher the BC, the less affected by the winds. These two factors become very important to someone wanting to shoot 'long range' with an airgun.

If someone shoots 10m, or 50 yards all the time (only) - then BC's mean absolutely nothing and are a waste of time to pursue.



Sean

 

[Xbowsniper]

Sean,

Well said, and I agree with you 100%. 95% of my shooting is done at Field Target distance, 55 yards or closer. When I find that pellet/gun/barrel combo that can put pellet on top of pellet at 55 yards, I like to play WAY out there, up to 120 yards, and pop shotgun shells and golf balls.....all with a 12 ft. lb rig. That translates to an 8.6 grain pellet at around 790 FPS.

I find it almost amazing of the accuracy even at the low ft. lb realm at that distance.

Tom Holland 

 

[JW652]

No one has mentioned the RWS SuperMag pellet which is my go to choice for Co2 rifles and pistols and springers at modest velocities. We all know that flat head match pellets are super accurate at short range, but due to light weight and head design, shed velocity quickly. Well, the .177 SuperMags are very similar to the famous R-10 pellets, but weigh in at 9.6 gr. Although the BC still sux, this extra weight allows them to carry much farther while maintaining great accuracy. My 600 fps RWS 75 loves them out to 40 yds and even 50 yds in still air. The other application where they really shine is in a CO2 or SSP pistol. These powerplants often like heavy pellets and I find that a lot of the time they shoot as well as or better than any other pellet.

Give them a try, and you might find a new, favorite pellet.