Bullet selection. (ELDX/Accubond/Barnes/Hammer/)

[dfanonymous]

Gday dfanonymous
On your first bit I got a fair amount of backlash on hammertime for this type of thing occurring now it's only a low % base but one I've been watching the % increase in other's results & my own results & until one looks into hydraulic actuated vrs pneumatically actuated ( I've borrowed those words off another person as I wasn't that smart but looked it up & i like them comparisons)
Really people are going like you had oh it's only a sample of one ( sorry snox with respect but it's the same pattern I hear time after time & shoot enough & it's not a one off )

This is not only mono related as one of the worst pills I'd seen for non opening of a hp was the Sierra hpbt & moving it to a hydraulic system basically fixed it ( still issues with that pill just different ones ) but on the hammer hh line I found it lessened the risk of a pencil occurring ( & tips also have issues )
My impacts were plus 3k on hammers & yet once i applied hydraulic system i didn't fail that pill once again I'll keep numbers out but it's in 3 figures , total numbers of all pills in 4 figures

Now even recently I was forwarded a video on the new Barnes bore rider by vortex & they were shooting into gel & hey presto a pill that penciled multiple times
& fixed by hydraulic by them so a little more information filtering through hmmm

Now I'm upto the stage of trying to understand dry & wet impacts more as I stated on hammertime back in November which some got others not but it's usually when the majority work out what the minority is on about the minority have already moved on

I mean no disrespect towards anyone on that last statement but please clear one's head & not directed @ you dfanonymous it's directed @ people in general of accepting & not questioning

Sorry for derail @shooters in your thread & would be better discussed in a different one so I'll try to refrain from any more detail but hope you understand I try to lift the bar on terminal performance & one that I get a lot of pushback from people & some companies but I'll just showing factual information so hopefully we can lessen the risk of that low % bad result occurring again as I don't live in the world of when things go right it's when they go wrong I'm concerned with

I'll go back to my hole now
Cheers

I kind of touch on the terminal testing element on post number 10. I'm assuming expansion testing is what you're talking about. Like hitting a phone book vs a barrel of water.

Assuming that's what you're talking about between wet and dry, that's easy. Physics doesn't allow wet to compress and allows the bullet to dump all its energy. The basic principle.

But, like I dun said about gelatin testing; the issue is mammals are inconsistent from penetration to exit. Using a wet medium is just that. A medium. It doesn't account for the bone density, hide and the plural space of a mammal. As far as the testing side, testing often doesn't incorporate terminal impact speeds on that "realistic" medium. This would help account for distance performance.

As far as me being a sample of one…? How did you get backlash on hammers forum if I'm the only person who's seen this happen? You don't even know which manufacture was used in the story I described…and that was only 1 story.

 

[Shane Lindsey]

Of those mentioned only tried Hammers in my RUM.

181 gr Hammer Hunter 94gr N570 3335 FPS

178 Absolute Hammer 97gr N570 3347 FPS

214 Hammer Hunter N570 3143 FPS


Of the three, the 178 shot the best. Played around with the 152 when they made it and it did well in another barrel.

 

[FEENIX]

Check out McGuire Ballistics. I'd bet the168 or 178 they make would be just the medicine needed. Call and talk to Sam McGuire. If your RUM or PRC is a faster 9 twist barrel you could run the 195. Give him a call, or better yet just PM him here @McGuireBallistics!

Sam did one heck of a job in his bullet design. I particularly like his marketing strategy.

 

[snox801]

Fordy is one person that shoots more animals than most of us could. So he is one that can be a test knowledge base.
Posts more than enough data.

 

[memtb]

But the OP says he is using 215-230s. A copper that weight (214gr HH) is going to be LOOOOONG. Requiring .308" twist rates in the 1:8.5" minimum where a 215 Hyb is a 1:10" twist. 194 Afterburner is 1:8" minimum.

True……but 215-230 are not popular except in long range shooting circles. 180's to 200's being much more common IMO. Of course I've been wrong before! memtb

 

[memtb]

Fordy is one person that shoots more animals than most of us could. So he is one that can be a test knowledge base.
Posts more than enough data.

Probably more than all of us put together! memtb

 

[FEENIX]

@shooters, I am not sure if you are aware, but Nathan Foster of Terminal Ballistic Research has an extensive knowledge base of well-written articles on various chamberings and bullet makers, including Barnes and ELD-X. He also has some excellent videos.

 

[fordy]

Gday dfanonymous

I kind of touch on the terminal testing element on post number 10. I'm assuming expansion testing is what you're talking about. Like hitting a phone book vs a barrel of water.

Assuming that's what you're talking about between wet and dry, that's easy. Physics doesn't allow wet to compress and allows the bullet to dump all its energy. The basic principle.

But, like I dun said about gelatin testing; the issue is mammals are inconsistent from penetration to exit. Using a wet medium is just that. A medium. It doesn't account for the bone density, hide and the plural space of a mammal. As far as the testing side, testing often doesn't incorporate terminal impact speeds on that "realistic" medium. This would help account for distance performance.

I think we are on the same page above but I'll start a new thread as not to derail this one anymore ( just give me a little time as got a fair bit on & my son is still away from farm duties so my days are pretty long )

As far as me being a sample of one…? How did you get backlash on hammers forum if I'm the only person who's seen this happen? You don't even know which manufacture was used in the story I described…and that was only 1 story.

On the above hmmmm
Everything is a sample of one I just like to put 1&1 together

My backlash wasn't only that part but is simple , some don't like the truth

Yep I will not be bought &/or told what to say
It's better imo that way rather than what some want to hear or portray


Cheers

 

[mrultramag]

Thank you!
Both are full builds.
The PRC is a carbon Bartlein 1:8
The RUM is a carbon Bartlein 1:9
Both are built on SAAMI but Wyatt's installed.
I'll try and figure out how heavy of hammers or cutting edge I can run.

I liked the 181 hammer hunter in 300 rum. H1000 easy shooting load at 3360fps... sub 1/2 moa accuracy. Easiest load development ever. I just loaded to max mag length which functioned properly which was 3.700 in Fierce fury.

 

[shootist7]

Before the Barnes TTSX or LRX were available, my moose bullet was a 250gr TSX from my 338 Win Mag. I have nothing bad to say about that bullet. Last moose I shot was about 200 yards away, looking straight at me. We did the stare at each other thing long enough, that it seemed forever, and I finally felt it had no intention of turning. 200 yard zero, so put the crosshairs under its chin and sent it. Moose went 5 feet... straight down, DRT. I try to always do a necropsy when I can, and found the bullet went through the chest, through both cavities, and almost completely through the pelvis. My young guide was impressed and asked if he could have the bullet, which I gave to him. Don't think you can ask more from a bullet than that. Combo worked very well on NW Saskatchewan big black bear too.