Bullet failure 130 grain nosler partition with 6.5 creedmoor

RockyMtnMT said:
Energy is pretty meaningless if the bullet disintegrates and doesn't penetrate or didn't deform at all and pencils or flattens out to such a large dia that it stops too rapidly and doesn't penetrate far enough to break through a bone. Impact velocity and proper bullet performance are much more important. Energy is only good for comparing one cartridge to another.

Larger caliber higher sectional density proper deforming bullets arriving with more vel do everything better.
Click to expand...
All I'll say here is to add "Depending on their construction". A mono with a lower BC and sectional density will still out perform a cup and core bullet of similar size for penetration.
 
ATH said:
Shouldn't that experience have taught you something about shooting an elk with a 6mm? The FACT is, if you didn't retrieve the animal, you do NOT know where you hit it.

I've lost count of the number of animals I have tracked for others, which where "lung shot" and turned out to be anything but.
Click to expand...
You know where you hit it if you can spot your hits or have a spotter whether you recover the animal or not in most cases.
 
I would suppose a .243 is legal in some states for elk and think it is here in NM. Minimum cal. In Colorado I think is .270. Point is that in terms of killing power the Creedmoor is more at the shallow end. Game departments make these judgments based on results they've seen in terms of performance. I've killed many elk in my life with a.270 using 130-140 grain bullets. I would not want to push that caliber past 450 yards maybe 500 under the best circumstances on elk. I stepped up to a .300WM recently for improved performance and range on elk

OP I applaud you for taking your son hunting. I took both of my daughters elk hunting but neither really took to it. Do you think she could handle a heavier caliber with a muzzle brake? Aside from that it would seem that reducing her range limit would be advisable from a caliber standpoint or bullet change to a mono if your set on keeping the creed.
 
WildRose said:
All I'll say here is to add "Depending on their construction". A mono with a lower BC and sectional density will still out perform a cup and core bullet of similar size for penetration.
Click to expand...
I used to think this but there are some wrinkles in it, if the mono is constructed like a Barnes where they won't shed frontal area there are some bones in an elk shoulder they stop dead on where a cup and core will blow through.
A mono will stop dead on a steel plate way sooner than a Berger will, I have pictures of a steel plate that 140 Cutting edge monos we're stuck half way through and 140 Berger's we're punching through and skipping up the hill behind it.
A bullet that opens only by pressure meaning it has a tip to activate expansion right out of the gate looses some ability to punch through an elk shoulder because it's blown open before getting into the bone.
IF the mono gets past the shoulder and blows the nose of it will definitely out penetrate on average but the right heavy for cal cup and core will get through the shoulder more consistent than a light fast Mono.
In the 6.5 I've never failed to have a 140 Berger make it through every bone in and elk shoulder and I'll find a little was of copper and lead in the of side and I've never had one move more than a few steps due to internal damage. I've had mono bullets similar weight and smaller faster not make it all the way through the shoulder bones and the ones that did went clean through exiting but the wound channels we're 3/4 of an inch and I've shot all but one a second time. Ranges from a couple hundred yards to over 800.
The ONLY reason I tried Berger's years ago on elk was all I had been shooting were light fast Mono bullets, I'll never go back, the change in lethality and the number of animals I have shot twice or dispatched dropped to zero. I still shoot Monos but they are only the heaviest I can and the type that will shed weight so they plow through bone and track through the animal cause significant internal damage.
 
Last edited:
I agree, Bergers are incredible but my wife kills elk with zero issues, using a GMX and I'd wager that GMX = Barnes (tipped) = Hammers in performance. It's hard to turn down a bullet with no core concentricity issues, has excellent accuracy and velocity and sheds very little. That combo along with placement, has been an effective elk killer.
 
CO_Guy said:
I agree, Bergers are incredible but my wife kills elk with zero issues, using a GMX and I'd wager that GMX = Barnes (tipped) = Hammers in performance. It's hard to turn down a bullet with no core concentricity issues, has excellent accuracy and velocity and sheds very little. That combo along with placement, has been an effective elk killer.
Click to expand...
Every mono out there is most definitely different the same way for every other bullet construction. Alloy makes a huge difference the method of initiating expantion is different.
I want and need a bullet to shed weight, I don't always shoot an elk at a range where you'll see any effect other than mechanical injury to the internal organs. A Barnes that is shot to far will open just fine but you'll have a wound channels the size of the bullet and no more, takes a cow elk better than a half hour to succumb to a hit with a slow but open Barnes. A Hammer bullet with the right alloy and tip let's the bullet, down to the hole turn into large chunks of frag and an elks lungs will look like they snorted a grenade with excellent mechanical injury making a quick kill. Barnes will deflect on an elk shoulder sometimes because of not shedding all that frontal area, I saw about a 30 percent failure with Barnes 168's in a 300 WBY to penetrate into the chest, Hammers are the ONLY mono I've not seen a deflection or failure to penetrate an elk shoulder.
On the bullet core concentricity issues you replace that with issues from bullet to bullet consistent metelurgy that effects balance, a mono will ONLY be as good as the alloy supplied, this is why you aren't seeing monos crushing 1000 yard bench rest, I wish they could because the exterior dimensions can be contolled to the tenth and teeeked as needed.
 
Hmmm.....tungsten base core and mono outer shell...I'll take a gross...

Boy do I hate dial up.

I got to play with a bullet similar in concept to the Barnes MRX, but the base was not a compressed powder but a turned piece of tungsten inserted and afixed into a rod then turned on a lathe and spun for balance, well a little more complex than that but you get the idea, wasn't a hunting bullet...but wow could it go, expensive and the reject rate was high..

I have handled a plated dense core bullet...that is then lathe turned to shape and form...but since it is only a concept...we will have to see.

I have to learn how to type and spell....fingers outrun my brain..some days
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bigngreen said:
Every mono out there is most definitely different the same way for every other bullet construction. Alloy makes a huge difference the method of initiating expantion is different.
I want and need a bullet to shed weight, I don't always shoot an elk at a range where you'll see any effect other than mechanical injury to the internal organs. A Barnes that is shot to far will open just fine but you'll have a wound channels the size of the bullet and no more, takes a cow elk better than a half hour to succumb to a hit with a slow but open Barnes. A Hammer bullet with the right alloy and tip let's the bullet, down to the hole turn into large chunks of frag and an elks lungs will look like they snorted a grenade with excellent mechanical injury making a quick kill. Barnes will deflect on an elk shoulder sometimes because of not shedding all that frontal area, I saw about a 30 percent failure with Barnes 168's in a 300 WBY to penetrate into the chest, Hammers are the ONLY mono I've not seen a deflection or failure to penetrate an elk shoulder.
On the bullet core concentricity issues you replace that with issues from bullet to bullet consistent metelurgy that effects balance, a mono will ONLY be as good as the alloy supplied, this is why you aren't seeing monos crushing 1000 yard bench rest, I wish they could because the exterior dimensions can be contolled to the tenth and teeeked as needed.
Click to expand...

I respect your post but do not agree at all, anywhere past, "I don't always shoot an elk at a range where you'll see any effect other than mechanical injury to the internal organs." The hydrostatic shock of an expanding bullet, along with wound channel, is the killer combo (you may be meaning that). The monos don't shed weight, but that has never been a desired effect of any bullet, except for how an exposed lead tip explodes and that's how it's designed. The skived tip of all monos allows excellent expansion of up 2X, as seen in the image and they have plenty of data to say that they reliably expand. As to metallurg
GMX.jpg
ical differences between mono makers... I'll do some research myself. I would wager no significant difference, but will check back with results. cheers
 
RockyMtnMT said:
All of our bullets are designed to shed a specific amount of weight. High our low vel impacts. A bullet like pictured above would be considered a failure. Not as bad as not opening, but a failure none the less.
Click to expand...

Steve - can you elaborate as to why that bullet is a failure and why shedding is preferred?

Thx
 
I'm one that is not tied to any specific bullet mfg, due to using everything from NP to Interbond, Accubond, Swift to 3 types of monos (and about ready to beg Steve for a sample of 140gn class 7mms!) and found them all to be able to perform very well, have great velocity and energy, even if any one is not grouping from any one my rifles. If you can achieve your target velocity and hit your vital area reliably, with any and all of these, you have a killer. Favoring any one or the other is splitting hairs or just choosing to favor one mfg over another, which is fine.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

Allen Kitts
6.5 140 Grain Nosler Partitions
2 3
Replies
34
Views
8K
Nomosendero
N
G
60 grain nosler partition stabilization
Replies
5
Views
8K
Cybra
C
Orange Dust
Bullet Failure???
2 3
Replies
34
Views
5K
WildRose
WildRose
6
130 grain 6mm bullets?
2 3
Replies
30
Views
8K
ZEEK
Z
M
Nosler Partition
Replies
6
Views
4K
Pulpwood
P

Recent Posts

Top