Energy or bullet diameter most important?

[FEENIX]

When all else fails.....shoot these:

CORE-LOKT

They'll kill anything!!gun)

I'm proud to admit, they too were responsible for some awesome venison on my table.

 

[WildRose]

A lot of assumptions being made here. Not the context my post was used in or intended to be.






Closer. This was the root of my comment advising that if meat loss was a problem you should look at where you are shooting the animal.

Shot placement is the easiest solution to meat loss. You can change that and keep everything else the same with amazing results.




Bingo. Thats exactly what i said, and exactly what i meant. It wasnt aimed at anyone in particular, which is the reason i why i only quoted RMulhern, and that was simply to agree to his comment that texas heart shots are effective at killing and waste very little meat.




Exactly. Those discussions always spiral back around to "bergers ruin meat." Its true, they do if you smash em into a shoulder bone. Id like to see a bullet that doesnt. The one that doesnt better go right into the heart, because i can assure you the wound cavity will be small.

Some of my favorite controlled expansion bullets have completely trashed shoulders. I dont bash the bullet, i stop shooting directly into the shoulder. To me its as simple as my statement in bold.

If conditions of the shot dictate its shoulder or nothing, ill take it. Ill also stay on the scope a lot longer, because ive seen some animals pop back up ****ed off and limping. Thats not a bullet problem, thats a shot problem, and was just an inconvenient side effect of a less than ideal opportunity.

Texas heart shots, shots to the head or neck, and shots right through the sternum are my three go to shots for pigs and deer. They have served me well and waste very little if any meat. With bergers it gives em just enough time to expand, and when they do there is nothing to protect the important stuff. These shots dont usually exit, animals will typically drop and not kick, and everything between the shoulders is ruined.

No, you simply use a bullet designed for controlled expansion such as some of the monometals that are out today along with the Accubond, Interbond, and Swift Sirocco II.

You get a nice hole all the way through with any broadside shot that destroys the vitals and leaves you a nice, neat exit wound usually the size of a golf ball or slightly larger depending on the caliber and weight of the bullet used.

There are no magic bullets that give the exact same performance at all ranges and all velocities but if you use them as intended the results are very predictable and consistent.

In many ways we are incredibly lucky living in this age because there are so many options for us which simply didn't exist even a decade ago much less thirty, forty, fifty years ago when many of us were new to this sport.

If I could only shoot one bullet for the rest of my life no matter what the application it would be the Nosler Accubond LR or Hornady Interbond.

They are simply two bullets which have never failed to deliver and have high enough BC's to make them a good choice for long range.

Next to them I'd have to include the Peregrine Plainsmaster line of bullets. While I have very limited experience with them I was incredibly impressed with their performance on some very tough African game and I will be shooting a lot of them over the next few years to build a database by which I can do a completely fair comparison.

On the latter Hermann told me last week that they are in the final stages of development of a 7mm between 160-170gr with a very high BC for it's weight class.

The resistance to develop one sooner was they were afraid most of us over here would not have 1:9 or faster twist barrels to stabilize them. Introducing them to this forum I think has gone a long way towards easing those worries.

I hate it but it looks like we're probably within a decade of lead free being required on all federal lands so the bullet manufacturers with an eye on the future are trying to get ahead of the game in developing monos that will meet our needs.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

Steve, I have thought long and hard about this every since you called and asked me to hunt with your bullet this season. Yes, I have, and may still be considering it. But think this through and here is where my thoughts have lead me.
First and hard to get by. And you have very seldom heard this from me, if ever. I use to hunt with solid copper bullets. No not yours, No not your new technology. But 9 years ago I changed to what I shoot now from a solid bullet. The reason was 2 back to back bull elk that didn't go down. And one other. One I watched the hid ripple the hit I believe was good we lost the bull. The second I recovered the next morning after a search till late hours. Very little blood, exit hole the same size as the entrance, double lung. He went miles. The coyotes and birds ruined 80% of the meat. The 3rd I tracked with the shooter for 4.7 miles and we got lucky and finished him at dark. In a snow storm. Same deal exit same as entrance, double lung. I also struggled with the copper fouling of these bullets in my Weatherbys. I know times have changed but I need to get past these bad experiences. I can proudly say we have not lost one animal or even tracked one I have shot since I changed bullets.

2: Just as you reacted earlier. What if I didn't like the performance of your bullets? Am I to keep that a secret? If I stated what I didn't like would it be addressed as I am one of the "Berger Crowd"?

3: I am hunting with Christensen Arms this year. I have 3 of their rifles. I need footage of these hunts. I want DRT kills. Changing would be hard for me to do right now.

4: I hunt long range 90% of the time. BC is a big deal to me. Less drift in any wind is very important. My choice there would be to shoot a Hammer offering with lower BC, and lighter weight, or rebarrel all my rifles with tighter twists. Rifles that are dialed in and ready to go. That is why I told you there simply in not enough time and I needed to think on this.

5: I think I could get past the copper fouling (if there even is any) with HBN coatings. I am fond of this and that should work. Or at least be a big help.

There are these things and many others to consider for me to change. But as you can see I have and still am considering it. Maybe only one rifle at first, but at least give it a shot. But know. I will as always call it as I see it.

Thanks
Jeff

We did some extensive testing today with the new copper that we are now using. It is softer than any we used in the past. One of my big worries with this copper was that it may cause fouling. I did not find any copper fouling today breaking in a new barrel and getting 50 shots through it. This was a 27 Nosler and we got it performing very nicely with our 168g and a vel of 3250fps. This rifle is a 7" twist.

The density difference between copper and lead is another physics issue. Weight being a necessity for bc gives the advantage to lead core bullets. Simply can't beat physics. We have our design that you have seen that we have not marketed yet, and in testing so far it shows to increase bc. It is pretty drastic in design and warrants us waiting until the market and us are ready to release it.

We have chosen to start our bullet line with the most forgiving, easiest to load design to start our company with. Having a reputation for highly accurate bullets regardless of the bc is our plan. I think if we started out with bullets that are difficult to tune for accuracy, but have high bc's, it would be a bad idea.

We did some testing today with a short for caliber .284 due to an 11" twist. We made this bullet specifically for this rifle, and made it as heavy as we could. Long bearing surface, short nose, very little bt. Just enough to make it easier to seat than a true flat base. Shooting it for drops out to 620y it did better than we expected. We will be spending some time with this type of design for more standard twists and making bullets as heavy as possible. Weight makes more difference than form for bc. Generally.

Got a text today from a Cal customer that harvested a 3x4 blacktail and recovered the bullet in the animal. The pic looked perfect. He was shooting an 8mm with our 221g at nearly 3300fps. Shot the buck at 250y running away. Hit him in front of the hip and lodged in the far shoulder. Buck was cresting the hill on impact and slid 60y down the other side. I believe he is a member here, so hoping he will post his pics.

Schedule is tough for us right now as we are going to be adding another lathe to meet demand for a ammo manufacture that we supply. Starting to look tough for us to make our normal hunting trip this year. Hoping we can get a late season trip in. If you would like to develop a rifle this fall let me know and one or both of us will run out to your place and bring the loading trailer and see if we can develop one of those rifles to your satisfaction.

Steve

 

[RockyMtnMT]

Hey Steve, I've got a few questions. Not knowing much about your bullets but reading through this thread along with everyone else, I'm curious what sets you apart from a company such as Barnes. For close range, <300 yards, I love the TTSX Barnes pushed at high velocity. I also prefer VLD style bullets at longer range to maintain energy and buck the wind better. It seems the copper solids have a tough time competing with the extremely high BC of the VLD style bullets in similar bullet weights and to achieve that higher BC, the copper solid would need to have significantly more length and no longer fit into a repeater action without eating up valuable powder space.
*Sorry for the rambling and I know I didn't list off my questions well. Hopefully you're able to decipher them from the jumble.

I guess the short answer is because we machine our bullets they are more exact. We use softer copper which aids in terminal performance. Our design has less pressure in the rifle giving better velocity for bullet weight.

The copper vs lead issue regarding weight is exactly as you stated. Lead is more dense and will be heavier in the same size as all copper. So a copper bullet of the same size as a lead bullet will weigh less. So if they are exactly the same form the heavier bullet will have a better bc due to the heavier weight. The lighter bullet will have better muzzle vel. The heavier, slower, higher bc bullet will pass up the lighter, faster bullet at some point down range. Question is how far down range.

There are trade offs. Two different animals really. When I started using mono's I chose them over the lead core bullets due to the terminal performance and lack of meat damage. I felt it was more important to me than the higher bc capability of the heavier lead bullets. We can get higher bc bullets in the copper but they tend to need a faster twist in order to stabilize them due to the extra length in order to gain the necessary weight.

Hope that helps.

Steve

 

[FEENIX]

Schedule is tough for us right now as we are going to be adding another lathe to meet demand for a ammo manufacture that we supply. Starting to look tough for us to make our normal hunting trip this year. Hoping we can get a late season trip in. If you would like to develop a rifle this fall let me know and one or both of us will run out to your place and bring the loading trailer and see if we can develop one of those rifles to your satisfaction.

Steve

Steve,

It don't get no better than that, you gotta love Montanans. gun)
I hope you and Jeff find a happy medium on this issue.

Don't work too hard ... cheers!

Ed

 

[Broz]

Starting to look tough for us to make our normal hunting trip this year. Hoping we can get a late season trip in. If you would like to develop a rifle this fall let me know and one or both of us will run out to your place and bring the loading trailer and see if we can develop one of those rifles to your satisfaction.

Steve

Thank you Steve, Generous offer for sure. But I have no doubts I could get a load worked up. We have fully tested two different Hammer Bullets, and load work up was easy in both cases. As you well know my schedule with hunting season is very busy as well. I think its best if I take this at my own pace. But I do have interest in seeing terminal performance at slowed impact velocities from the Hammer line up. Lets just give it the time it deserves and go from there. Thanks!
Jeff

 

[fmajor]

It sure is nice when wisdom prevails.

Well done lads.

 

[FEENIX]

It sure is nice when wisdom prevails.

Well done lads.

Agreed!

 

[FEENIX]

I am reviving this old thread to add Norma's excellent video on KE to add to the knowledge base.



This is a gem of a thread IMHO ... RIP, Brother Jerry.

Ed

 

[Rich Coyle]

It is easy for small calibers at very high velocity to present impressive energy figures, which may not be an indication of hunting performance.

A clean wound channel for quick bleed out should be considered above energy numbers, and this also necessarily factors in the bullet type used.

I am a little late but here goes.

The bullet I will be using next year has 7000 foot pounds of energy. But it is only 90 grains traveling at 4200 feet per second.

I would use it out to about 325 yards on elk and smaller critters.

 

[yobuck]

I am a little late but here goes.

The bullet I will be using next year has 7000 foot pounds of energy. But it is only 90 grains traveling at 4200 feet per second.

I would use it out to about 325 yards on elk and smaller critters.

Well it is important to remember what kills animals.
Energy alone isnt much of a killer, and even on animals like deer, they can simply walk away as if untouched.
But with a big enough wound channel they as a rule wont walk very far.

 

[Magnum44270]

Proper bulllet construction is the #1 factor. Energy or caliber dont mean squat if the bullet blows up, or pencils

 

[Hugnot]

Energy or kinetic energy is = 1/2MV^2 or 1/2*mass*velocity squared. This means energy rapidly increases with velocity. I have heard stories that a hit with a .220 Swift with a 50 grain at 4,000 will kill any beast - much energy with hydrostatic shock. Don't think so.

I would go with a combo of bullet construction allowing deep penetration, adequate expansion, much cavitation, & velocity. Like blow a big deep hole in the beast. Huge cavities in ballistic jelly.

Hydrostatic shock is a consideration, but my thinking is that a big tough beast stoked up with adrenaline might be able to shrug off most of the hydrostatic effects.

More info:

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0803/0803.3051.pdf

 

[FEENIX]

Proper bulllet construction is the #1 factor. Energy or caliber dont mean squat if the bullet blows up, or pencils

This is why I have always said, "the "NUT" behind the trigger remains the biggest factor," as shown in my sig line. They are responsible for selecting the right bullet and everything associated with the intended purpose.