Bullet construction

[Petey308]

Have to add my thanks for the time you put in and the way you presented the information. I would add a comment that may not be that well received. I've been hunting for 70 years now, have never killed an animal farther than 300 yards (with one exception) and in general terms, using 7mm RM and 300 Wby and 375 H & H mags, they pretty much fell where they were shot. Good velocity at those ranges, fortunately good shot placement and bullet performance always adequate. I suspect (here comes "opinion", not researched or experiential fact) that as ranges grow, bullet performance decreases along with precision of shot placement. Just sayin'.

Actually performance can be terrible at any range if you use the wrong type of bullet, the wrong weight of a particular bullet, place your shot in a location with too much or too little impact resistance, etc.

The bullet is always the hero. The cartridge is simply the vessel. Picking the right bullet for your task, and placing it in the right spot is what matters most. As ranges increase, the type of bullet you use becomes just as detrimental as for close range shots. You need to be using an efficient bullet with good BC for retained velocity and minimal wind drift, and a bullet that will still adequately expand at whatever distance it is. If it's going to be below like 1800fps, it needs to be a bullet that will perform below that speed.

So it's not as simple as you make it sound. Sure, with only maybe one bullet type in mind, what you said could be true, but that's why it's important to understand bullet construction and how it affects things and how to select the right bullet.

 

[Sasman]

The partition is another tougher constructed bullet. It has a thinner jacketed area of the ogive that is it's own compartment, essentially, separated from the rest of the base. Once the ogive area is gone, you're typically left with just the base to pencil through. Lighter is typically better for such a bullet so that it balances better as far as expansion versus penetration. If it's all you have, it can work, just be picky with your shot placement if you can. If impacting above 2600fps, I'd say avoid shoulders, if impacting below that, especially below 2400fps, but above 1800fps, you should be able to place it in any good spot and be ok. If you're closer to that 1800fps mark, aim for the shoulder to increase resistance upon impact and to ensure adequate expansion.

Thanks again for the reply . I have until next year to try and find the TMK , ill continue looking over the winter months and see what i can find. I may even have some Barnes TSX and tipped TSX , i just gotta search in my re loading den

 

[Petey308]

Thanks again for the reply . I have until next year to try and find the TMK , ill continue looking over the winter months and see what i can find. I may even have some Barnes TSX and tipped TSX , i just gotta search in my re loading den

No worries. Good luck!

 

[Coues110]

So bullets, particularly bullet construction and composition, is sort of a thing for me. I enjoy the science and how it plays such a crucial role in the terminal performance of said bullet. I've done a lot of research, testing, dissecting, etc of a lot of bullets now, and I've tried sharing that experience and knowledge as much as possible. I wanted to make a new post regarding it with a few updates to the bullets I've looked at.

I have used Hornady AMAX bullets for long range hunting, and for close range work, for a very long time. It's the first non-marketed for hunting bullet I actually used for hunting. I had tremendous success with them too. Before that, the Hornady SST was one of my go-to's. When the ELD lines were introduced from Hornady, it didn't take long to realize that terminally the ELD-X was essentially a higher BC version of the SST and that the ELD-M was a better and higher BC version of the AMAX. They perform nearly identical, terminally, and dissected, they have a lot of similarities, to the point of literally being just improved versions of AMAX and SST, respectively.

The SST has a cannelure, bonding/interlock ring, and an inferior polymer tip that was proven to melt in flight, degrading its external ballistics performance. The ELD-X has a bonding/interlock ring, but no cannelure, which increases accuracy potential in itself. It also has the newer acetyl resin tip, which does not melt from the friction in flight. Both the SST and ELD-X feature jackets that are thicker near the bases and taper out at the ogive. The average jacket thickness is .051" for both bullets- at their thickest point. That, along with the bonding/interlock rings and cannelure of the SST will limit them to around 1800fps minimum impact velocity, according to my experiences.

The AMAX and ELD-M both have a uniform jacket thickness of around .024" and do not feature a bonding ring. The thinner jacket will produce a lower minimum impact velocity, around 1300fps, depending on amount of resistance upon impact and bullet weight.

I used to favor the AMAX/ELD-M, specifically in the 178-208gr range, for 308 and especially the latter in the 300wm.

I finally decided to try the Sierra Tipped MatchKings (TMK) about 4-5 years ago now, after some earlier success with them in 223 and 22-250, and have been extremely impressed and pleased with their overall performance. I've had a few customers and friends that have used them with nothing but success as well. Initially, I went with the 195gr in my 308, for the most sectional density since I also shoot close range with my 308. Load development was a breeze, and accuracy was excellent, producing 1/4 to 1/2 MOA without issue or messing with jump.

The TMK features a slightly thicker jacket than the AMAX/ELD-M, at around .026", but they also feature a slightly larger meplat and cavity below their polymer tip (also made of acetyl resin by the way). Those two things together create an excellent balance in penetration and expansion. They still expand well down to 1400fps, and produce increased wounding. They're my current favorite, but unfortunately there's still limited selection in all calibers- particularly heavy for caliber options that provide adequate sectional density for closer range shots where impact velocity is higher.

Here are some sample measurements taken, measuring the jacket thickness (base thickness) among several popular bullet designs:

* Nosler BT, AB, LRAB– .185" (tapering out to .028").

* Hornady ELD-X and SST – .051" (tapering to various thicknesses).

* Hornady Interlock SP - .037".

* Hornady AMAX (also ELD-M) - .024"

* Hornady A-tip- .022"

* Hornady .338 AMAX (also ELD-M) – .051"(tapers .030"). This version also has an interlock ring

* Sierra SMK, TMK, GK – .026".

* Sierra Tipped GameKing- .046"

* Berger VLD- .035" (ogive up to .047"). The ogives became thicker after changes to the manufacturing process in 2011.

* Berger Hybrid ogive- .026" (has internal ribbing at the ogive). The ribs measure .031"

* ALCO Rebated Boat Tail Aluminum Tip (RBAT)- .022"

Also, it's very important to mention that the width of the meplat (tip) has a major effect on terminal performance. A wide frontal area meets more resistance on impact. A deep hollow point (cavity) also helps weaken the ogive (the front tapering section of the bullet). Depth of hollow points vary from bullet design to bullet design and not just from manufacturer to manufacture. You can easily test the depth of a hollow point (cavity) by inserting a needle into the open point and observing the depth. As for the shape, a very long and slender ogive has greater strength than one that has a measure of radius (secant vs tangent ogives). An open tip match (OTM) style bullet generally features a small hollow point as a means to maximize BC. Unfortunately, this type of bullet may not expand and any gain in BC is soon lost via poor terminal performance at extended ranges. Generally speaking, to ensure full fragmentation at low velocities (1600fps or less), a meplat diameter of .100" is ideal, though this can have a negative effect on BC. A meplat diameter of .070" can work as a compromise. Any smaller and long range wounding potential may be greatly reduced, especially if the copper jacket has been drawn thick at the ogive, such as the post 2011 Bergers. The Berger Hybrids, on the other hand, do not have the same issues as the VLDs and feature a very large cavity below the hollow point opening, along with uniform jacket thickness. This allows for the tip to buckle into itself, rather than neck over like other OTMs, and initiate excellent expansion.

Here are some samples of meplat opening diameters:

•210gr ALCO- .182"

•230gr A-tip- .128"

•200gr ELDX- .115"

•195gr TMK- .114"

•208gr ELDM- .076"

•178gr AMAX- .065"

•215gr Berger Hybrid- .030"

All of those are .308" caliber bullets, and it's just to show comparisons among similar size and weights. These measurements will vary from caliber to caliber (bullet diameter).

I wanted to keep this kind of brief, so hopefully everyone would have the time to read it.

Below are many samples of bullets and you can see how they compare and contrast. I focused on the most recent ones I've dissected. Since it'll only let me attach 10 at a time, I'll post more in the comments. Please hit me up with any questions or other comments if you have them.View attachment 308472View attachment 308473View attachment 308474View attachment 308475View attachment 308476View attachment 308477View attachment 308478View attachment 308479View attachment 308480View attachment 308481

Great info! Thanks for the work to post this. I love the ELD-M killing performance too. Devastating explosive wounding and forgiving on a couple high angle entrance shots that an ELD-X probably wouldn't have worked on. On deer, chunks of lead and jacket still pass thru. I'd rather lose meat than lose an animal. Wanted to try the Sierra TMK, but the great ammo component shortage hit. I learned about the ELD-M terminal performance on ballisticstudies.com, an awesome knowledge base

 

[Petey308]

Great info! Thanks for the work to post this. I love the ELD-M killing performance too. Devastating explosive wounding and forgiving on a couple high angle entrance shots that an ELD-X probably wouldn't have worked on. On deer, chunks of lead and jacket still pass thru. I'd rather lose meat than lose an animal. Wanted to try the Sierra TMK, but the great ammo component shortage hit. I learned about the ELD-M terminal performance on ballisticstudies.com, an awesome knowledge base

I absolutely agree. Those types of bullets are definitely more forgiving for shot placement errors. I found terminal performance between the TMK and ELD-M to be extremely similar. I lean more towards the TMKs though only because they're a bit less finicky to get shooting well and Sierra is like right down the road from me lol.

 

[Tac-O]

I absolutely agree. Those types of bullets are definitely more forgiving for shot placement errors. I found terminal performance between the TMK and ELD-M to be extremely similar. I lean more towards the TMKs though only because they're a bit less finicky to get shooting well and Sierra is like right down the road from me lol.

In that case, do you have any Intel on when they'll be making more 195 tmk, 200 gk, or tgk, all 30 cal?

 

[Petey308]

In that case, do you have any Intel on when they'll be making more 195 tmk, 200 gk, or tgk, all 30 cal?

Unfortunately no. They just told me they threw their script out the window and are just winging it lol. They're doing the best they can to pump everything out by demand and importance of contract. I have seen 168gr TMKs available now for a while and now 175gr TMKs have been popping up. I mostly shoot the 195s and can't wait for them to be available again lol. I'm down to around 500 left.

 

[Tac-O]

Haha "winging it". That's pretty funny. I'm a big Sierra fan. Glad to hear they're working hard to keep up!

I was considering going with the 175s for elk... You think it's worth waiting for the 195?

 

[Petey308]

Haha "winging it". That's pretty funny. I'm a big Sierra fan. Glad to hear they're working hard to keep up!

I was considering going with the 175s for elk... You think it's worth waiting for the 195?

You might be ok, but I'd definitely be way more confident with the 195gr. My rule of thumb for that size animal and that type of bullet is a minimum sectional density of .260, and ideally no less than .280. A 175gr .308" bullet has an SD of .264 and a 195gr is .294 so the better option is the 195gr. If you were to use the 175gr, I'd avoid shoulder shots where impact resistance would be higher. The idea there is to avoid over-expansion and shallow penetration. Lowering impact resistance with a behind the shoulder shot would definitely help.

 

[Petey308]

@Petey308

Please let me/us know if there are any bullets or supplies that we could donate to support this work.

I guess if anyone wanted to send me anything, just send me a DM. I'll get to them as time allows and either post the results here or make another post when I have enough to warrant a fresh post.

I sincerely appreciate it! This doesn't just help me, but all of us.

 

[Tac-O]

You might be ok, but I'd definitely be way more confident with the 195gr. My rule of thumb for that size animal and that type of bullet is a minimum sectional density of .260, and ideally no less than .280. A 175gr .308" bullet has an SD of .264 and a 195gr is .294 so the better option is the 195gr. If you were to use the 175gr, I'd avoid shoulder shots where impact resistance would be higher. The idea there is to avoid over-expansion and shallow penetration. Lowering impact resistance with a behind the shoulder shot would definitely help.

Yup, I'm only a crease shooter

 

[GLTaylor]

Bravo and thank you for your efforts! Your no-nonsense factual approach is very refreshing.

Many here, including myself, have switched over to Hammer bullets for their exceptional performance. I am not a LONG distance shooter. No doubt, heavy cup and core bullets excel in that realm. I limit myself to 400 and in (probably like 90+ % of hunters - at least east of the Mississippi R). I would welcome your impressions of the Hammers in particular. My experience with them has been phenomenal over the last 3 years and approximately 40 whitetails.

Don't be bashful. Hopefully most of us are very open-minded and interested in discussing your viewpoints.

Thanks again.

 

[Petey308]

Bravo and thank you for your efforts! Your no-nonsense factual approach is very refreshing.

Many here, including myself, have switched over to Hammer bullets for their exceptional performance. I am not a LONG distance shooter. No doubt, heavy cup and core bullets excel in that realm. I limit myself to 400 and in (probably like 90+ % of hunters - at least east of the Mississippi R). I would welcome your impressions of the Hammers in particular. My experience with them has been phenomenal over the last 3 years and approximately 40 whitetails.

Don't be bashful. Hopefully most of us are very open-minded and interested in discussing your viewpoints.

Thanks again.

Thank you, sir.

My post regarding my thoughts on solids, to include Hammers is here:

My thoughts on solid copper bullets and in comparison to other bullet types.

To continue the theme of bullet construction/composition from my post yesterday, I wanted to make a separate post regarding homogenous (solid/monolithic/etc) bullets. I was also asked to share this multiple times. These types of bullets were originally made to fill a simple role and purpose...

www.longrangehunting.com

 

[Coyote Shadow Tracker]

WOWWWWW!!!!!

PETEY308
I am as well as everyone else are interested on you analysis of all these bullets and the performance. There are close to a 90 posts already on your information. My question to you is how did you have the ability and resources/tools/knowledge/time to conduct such a in-depth study like you did.
I am astonished at the detail and can't fathom doing something my self. I haven't read every post so you may have already explained, but could you give us some inside info on how you were able to do this study?
I Think that it is GREAT info for all of us hunters and shooters.
GREAT JOB!!!!!!!!!
Thanks
Len & Jill
Semper Fi!!