Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Bullet Construction vs Lethality
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="comfisherman" data-source="post: 2891150" data-attributes="member: 8394"><p>I'd argue the partition was darn near perfect until we add distance over 500 yards or lead bans. Made a believer out of me since my youth. Soft enough to expand but tough enough to push and retain mass. But they have a less than stellar ballistic coefficient. Back a decade and a half ago you could get sps partitions really cheap in seconds form. For kicks and giggles we shot ground squirrels with a 7 rum loaded with partitions(had a barrel that shot them well and nothing else all that stellar) the misgivings in bc showed up as range increased and much more so as the wind progressed. </p><p></p><p>Truth be told each bullet has an application, i prefer a frames in only Moose and bear territory. I skew towards lighter jacket higher b.c. bullets as the Bears go to sleep or I'm hunting in areas with low bear interaction. </p><p></p><p>Heck in the 338 heydeys we saw in the early 2000s I saw a lot of 300 grain smk bullets harvest game. Doesn't mean I'd recommend all smks for Cow elk or white tail, just that a large mass of lead at the proper impact range can be very effective. Same could probably be said for bergers. Doesn't mean it's a good choice to harvest your next Brown bear with one in your 6mn creed....</p><p></p><p></p><p>Our forefathers hunted with much less tech for man years. Bullet tech will always be second to bullet placement.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="comfisherman, post: 2891150, member: 8394"] I'd argue the partition was darn near perfect until we add distance over 500 yards or lead bans. Made a believer out of me since my youth. Soft enough to expand but tough enough to push and retain mass. But they have a less than stellar ballistic coefficient. Back a decade and a half ago you could get sps partitions really cheap in seconds form. For kicks and giggles we shot ground squirrels with a 7 rum loaded with partitions(had a barrel that shot them well and nothing else all that stellar) the misgivings in bc showed up as range increased and much more so as the wind progressed. Truth be told each bullet has an application, i prefer a frames in only Moose and bear territory. I skew towards lighter jacket higher b.c. bullets as the Bears go to sleep or I'm hunting in areas with low bear interaction. Heck in the 338 heydeys we saw in the early 2000s I saw a lot of 300 grain smk bullets harvest game. Doesn't mean I'd recommend all smks for Cow elk or white tail, just that a large mass of lead at the proper impact range can be very effective. Same could probably be said for bergers. Doesn't mean it's a good choice to harvest your next Brown bear with one in your 6mn creed.... Our forefathers hunted with much less tech for man years. Bullet tech will always be second to bullet placement. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Bullet Construction vs Lethality
Top