Heavy for caliber vs. high velocity monos

[Paladin300]

They are just turned on a lathe solids. I have never tried to use them as a hunting round. In my experience a lot of solids tumble once they make contact causing massive amount of damage.

My long range hunting bullet of choice right now is looking like the ABLRs which also follow the philosophy of both/and. They shoot great in both my 6.5 and 338. Just loaded some in 270 165gr. If they function as advertised and expand close up and at range down to 1300fps they are going to be the end all solution for everything North America. Loaded some up in my 338 .050 off the lands and shot a .029 5 shot group. 2850fps w/81grains of IMR 4350. .661 BC.

Are they a hunting bullet?

 

[ndking1126]

Since I won a Winchester 270 last fall I've been converted to light higher velocity monolithic pills. I'm running a stock (less triggertech) Savage axis II Overwatch with 20" barrel that happens to be a tac driver with the 110gr TTSX. This rifle and bullet has dropped Two coyotes, one buck WTD and one medium sized black bear. All were DRT with one shot. There's always a situation for heavy pills but I've come to realize that this situation no longer exist for me here in the north east of Canada. I wouldn't hesitate for a second to drop a large bull moose here either.

Starlite, you have a Triggertech on a Savage? How did you do this as they don't have anything listed on their website for Savage.

 

[FEENIX]

Starlite, you have a Triggertech on a Savage? How did you do this as they don't have anything listed on their website for Savage.

Perhaps he meant Timney Trigger.

 

[ndking1126]

Perhaps he meant Timney Trigger.

Perhaps. I've got two Timneys on my Savages, but I always wanted TT. I've asked them many times, and get the same response.. not enough demand. They have enough demand for Kimber and Weatherby Mark V? Seems unlikely, but I certainly could be wrong.

 

[FEENIX]

Perhaps. I've got two Timneys on my Savages, but I always wanted TT. I've asked them many times, and get the same response.. not enough demand. But they have enough demand for Kimber and Weatherby Mark V? Seems unlikely, but I certainly could be wrong.

Yeah, I have Timneys and Rifle Basix on some of my Savages. I have a couple of factory triggers that I could take down to 2.5 lbs safely. TTs are definitely nice triggers. Perhaps someday they will.

 

[codyadams]

They are just turned on a lathe solids. I have never tried to use them as a hunting round. In my experience a lot of solids tumble once they make contact causing massive amount of damage.

My long range hunting bullet of choice right now is looking like the ABLRs which also follow the philosophy of both/and. They shoot great in both my 6.5 and 338. Just loaded some in 270 165gr. If they function as advertised and expand close up and at range down to 1300fps they are going to be the end all solution for everything North America. Loaded some up in my 338 .050 off the lands and shot a .029 5 shot group. 2850fps w/81grains of IMR 4350. .661 BC.

You have to be careful, they would not be legal to use in Wyoming, and likely other states. Law requires that you MUST use an expanding bullet. Doesn't matter if they tumble, a solid copper bullet with no hollow point isn't going to expand as the law dictates.

Besides, I am not going to take a chance on an animal "hoping" that a solid bullet is going to tumble, especially when there are many other great high bc expanding options available. That's just me though.

 

[Send it 284]

Besides, I am not going to take a chance on an animal "hoping" that a solid bullet is going to tumble, especially when there are many other great high bc expanding options available. That's just me though.

Than you'd better stay away from those PVA Cayuga bullets, there's basically no expansion and they claim there's massive internal damage from tumbling
No thanks

 

[ButterBean]

Than you'd better stay away from those PVA Cayuga bullets, there's basically no expansion and they claim there's massive internal damage from tumbling
No thanks

Hammers

 

[Paladin300]

You have to be careful, they would not be legal to use in Wyoming, and likely other states. Law requires that you MUST use an expanding bullet. Doesn't matter if they tumble, a solid copper bullet with no hollow point isn't going to expand as the law dictates.

Besides, I am not going to take a chance on an animal "hoping" that a solid bullet is going to tumble, especially when there are many other great high bc expanding options available. That's just me though.

I understand. I wasn't suggesting you would. I don't. I was just making the observation that there could be a compromise between heavy monolithic solids and light weight bullets. Which I think was the question. Most monolithics used on dangerous game are non expanding. They are just big heavy slow deep penetrating bullets made to stop man eaters and such, ie woodleigh etc.

If I am not mistaken Buffalo bore at one time manufactured 308 ammo with high BC solids for hunting that where actually designed to tumble on impact. I had a box 4 or 5 years ago but they did not shoot well in my rifle at the time. I remember the store had a display of the damage they did in ballistic jelly. It was impressive.

Anyway, again I am really liking the ABLRs for hunting purposes. I have traditional shot Amaxs and eldxs in my hunting set ups. Primarily 168s and 178s in 30 cal. 308 and 300 WM but I am really pleased with the 210 ABLRs and will be shooting them this coming season.

I like the solids for ELR they are great for shooting stuff a long way and shoot really well in my three ELR rigs. However, most places don't like you shooting there steal with them. They will leave a hole or a significant dent! But, they do shoot well if loaded just off the lands much like Bergers. And you are correct most states require expandables, so someone needs to get to work designing a solid that expands reliably in a medium to heavy weight for caliber ultra high BC bullet. Wait I think cutting edge has some? Not sure, never used them, but I think they do.

 

[Send it 284]

And you are correct most states require expandables, so someone needs to get to work designing a solid that expands reliably in a medium to heavy weight for caliber ultra high BC bullet. Wait I think cutting edge has some? Not sure, never used them, but I think they do?

I haven't been able to test them yet but check out the Badlands BD2
I have a box of 205s and they're a sleek little missile, might just bridge the gap

 

[codyadams]

Than you'd better stay away from those PVA Cayuga bullets, there's basically no expansion and they claim there's massive internal damage from tumbling
No thanks

The PVA cayugas have a hollow point and are an expanding bullet. I know he describes them as tumbling, but I honestly don't think that is what they do. Looking at the design of the hollow point they are similar to hammers with only a slightly smaller hollow point, depth was similar as well. Also in the one elk we shot with them so far, we got multiple exit wounds, very similar to hammers with their often observed nose petal exits. Not saying it's the same by any means, but it appears it does expand.

Unless a bullet is ran in a twist specifically meant to give marginal stability, or is built off balance or with some other physical attribute, all of which would likely affect accuracy, a stable bullet will not suddenly become unstable, and impacting an animal will not change that any more than it does to a Berger, nosler, barnes, hammer, or any other bullet that expands. That's why I don't think the bullet just starts tumbling on it's own, at least not if it is properly stabilized

 

[codyadams]

so someone needs to get to work designing a solid that expands reliably in a medium to heavy weight for caliber ultra high BC bullet. Wait I think cutting edge has some? Not sure, never used them, but I think they do.

There are a couple, the same guy that was part of the flatline bullets, Jason, is the owner of PVA and makes some mono expanding bullets with high bc, and also Badlands fills in any gaps with their bullets as well. This next year we have quite a few bullets of PVA's and Badlands that we are gonna be testing!!

Off topic, sorry....

 

[SammySTW]

I agree with what your saying and wasn't trying to indicate that energy is more important, as it is a by-product of velocity and weight and BC. Trying to understand if a faster and lighter bullet kills more effectively, all things being equal except weight and BC, generally speaking(ie, does a 7mag shooting 120's kill better at 200 yards than a 7mag shooting 170's at 200 yards does? What role does bullet type play in this if any? I don't dispute the argument for speed as it relates to flat shooting and point of aim out to a specific distance either. I like zeroing at a point where my bullet neither rises above or falls below 3" out to 300yds. I'm not very good at range estimation so this gives me a little more room before i have to grab the range finder, and usually i have time for that if their that far away. I will try to listen to podcast and appreciate your responses.

Sounds like a light mono is a perfect choice for you. I've been thinking about trying a 120 hammer in my 7 stw, but I'm not sure if that might be too light? The 143 seems to work good, and it's still fast

 

[ButterBean]

Sounds like a light mono is a perfect choice for you. I've been thinking about trying a 120 hammer in my 7 stw, but I'm not sure if that might be too light? The 143 seems to work good, and it's still fast

It wont be................. Trust Me