Hornady 208gr AMAX For Hunting

[Michael Eichele]

It's hard to EVER go wrong with behind the shoulder hits. Shoulders can be a good thing but can also be a bad thing.

In my experience with the 208, at least with a mature Alaskan/Yukon bull moose, the shoulder is not the place to put a 208. A cow elk or average bull elk might be another story but big moose and the 208 is not a good combo. Lets just leave it at that. All that said, there's not a lot of bullets that I trust for shoulder shots on mature Alaska bull moose. Ribs, a lot if good bullet choices. Shoulders, not so much.

I love the 208 amax for hunting but it has limits like everything else. Use it accordingly.

 

[Jud96]

It's hard to EVER go wrong with behind the shoulder hits. Shoulders can be a good thing but can also be a bad thing.

In my experience with the 208, at least with a mature Alaskan/Yukon bull moose, the shoulder is not the place to put a 208. A cow elk or average bull elk might be another story but big moose and the 208 is not a good combo. Lets just leave it at that. All that said, there's not a lot of bullets that I trust for shoulder shots on mature Alaska bull moose. Ribs, a lot if good bullet choices. Shoulders, not so much.

I love the 208 amax for hunting but it has limits like everything else. Use it accordingly.

Thank you for this great honest info. I had planned on shoulder hits for deer and the rest behind the shoulder but just wanted to see what others were doing. If I ever go moose hunting I would probably bring a heavy caliber rifle like a .358 Norma, which I plan to build for bear and moose, but knowing where to place the shot ethnically on a moose with an A-MAX is valuable info in case I take the .308 Norma moose hunting. Thanks again.

 

[Michael Eichele]

You won't have any trouble with the 168-208 amax regarding deer and shoulders. We've hit coues deer which are small but also mature dall sheep rams through the shoulders with 168 amaxs. Flawless.

Just a guess, the 168 amax may be a hair lean if the target is the shoulder of the largest of mature mule deer bucks but I think they'd still do alright. Especially at longer ranges after they slow down a bit.

 

[Jud96]

You won't have any trouble with the 168-208 amax regarding deer and shoulders. We've hit coues deer which are small but also mature dall sheep rams through the shoulders with 168 amaxs. Flawless.

Just a guess, the 168 amax may be a hair lean if the target is the shoulder of the largest of mature mule deer bucks but I think they'd still do alright. Especially at longer ranges after they slow down a bit.

Thanks! I figured I'd be ok on deer. Now one other question, my cousin just bought a Remington 700 .308 and we want to get him set up for close range deer hunting in the woods and field hunting out to 700yds. Do you believe the 168gr A-MAX would fill both these roles? I know it will work for the far shots but worried about it for those close 50yd shots. Originally was going to use 165gr SSTs but they don't have the BC to carry their energy out to 6-700yds, now that I'm turned onto these A-MAXs I'd like to have him use them too.

 

[Michael Eichele]

Thanks! I figured I'd be ok on deer. Now one other question, my cousin just bought a Remington 700 .308 and we want to get him set up for close range deer hunting in the woods and field hunting out to 700yds. Do you believe the 168gr A-MAX would fill both these roles? I know it will work for the far shots but worried about it for those close 50yd shots. Originally was going to use 165gr SSTs but they don't have the BC to carry their energy out to 6-700yds, now that I'm turned onto these A-MAXs I'd like to have him use them too.

I think they'd do pretty good but I would favor the 178. I think the 308, 178 were made for each other and will do better up closer. My only wish is that hornady made a 190 class amax. I've killed a number of Sitka black tails with the 178 at high velocity. I trust them for sure. If his rifle favors the 168, I'd go with it but I'd try the 178s 1st.

 

[elkaholic]

Thanks! I figured I'd be ok on deer. Now one other question, my cousin just bought a Remington 700 .308 and we want to get him set up for close range deer hunting in the woods and field hunting out to 700yds. Do you believe the 168gr A-MAX would fill both these roles? I know it will work for the far shots but worried about it for those close 50yd shots. Originally was going to use 165gr SSTs but they don't have the BC to carry their energy out to 6-700yds, now that I'm turned onto these A-MAXs I'd like to have him use them too.

I'll let Michael speak for himself, but I would say go for it! The 308 should be perfect for that round and what you want to accomplish. Not too much velocity for close up but enough to expand at 700 yards.......rich

 

[elkaholic]

I use 178's in my 'o6......Rich

 

[Jud96]

Thanks to both of you. He only has a 24" barrel, good for 168s, but a 1-10 twist which is where the 178gr bullet would work best. The 168s will work in the 1-10, hopefully, because my Dad's M1A .308 was originally a 1-10 before he rebarreled to a 1-12 Hart and it shot 168s great so we'll have to see. Thanks again guys, really appreciate it!

 

[elkaholic]

Thanks to both of you. He only has a 24" barrel, good for 168s, but a 1-10 twist which is where the 178gr bullet would work best. The 168s will work in the 1-10, hopefully, because my Dad's M1A .308 was originally a 1-10 before he rebarreled to a 1-12 Hart and it shot 168s great so we'll have to see. Thanks again guys, really appreciate it!

The 10 twist should work just fine.......rich

 

[Michael Courtney]

Wow! Thank you so much for this info! This is exactly the kind of information I need. Do you happen to have any pics of the gelatin that you shot with the A-MAXs? Also what kind of damage did this bullet do to bull elk? One last question, do you prefer to shoot animals straight on the shoulder or behind it? I've heard people say they like shoulder hits and others that said behind the shoulder. Thanks again!

Sorry I can't answer all of your questions or post pictures or the video we have. Most of our work is covered by non-disclosure agreements, and I am often limited to discussing material that has been approved for public release.

I can say that one of the reasons why we like the 208 AMAX so much is that once it has slowed to velocities where it no longer expands, it tumbles reliably and creates a lot of wounding, both a sizable temporary cavity and a sizable permanent cavity. There is no impact velocity from 2900 ft/s down to 1000 ft/s where it fails to penetrate at least 18".

When hunting, I almost always aim for the shoulder (if available) on deer with any rifle bullet, because the odds of dead right there are so high. With bigger stuff, I prefer to aim behind the shoulder, not because I don't trust the bullet to penetrate, but because there's a lot more meat to ruin with a shoulder hit, and I don't mind a short tracking job. We've tended to hunt deer in thickets, swamps, and densely vegetated places where a 100 yard tracking job can take a lot of time and be confounded by insects and sub-optimal conditions. We've also done a lot of deer culling where killing 5-10 deer in an evening was common, and we preferred not to have to track them. When you have 7 deer to recover, skin, quarter, and get into the coolers on one summer evening, you like to eliminate tracking. Same for hog culling which we might be doing soon.

We've tended to hunt bigger stuff in wide open spaces where you're likely to see an animal fall even if it runs 100 yards first. Tracking is less of an issue if it's only one animal a day.

Never hunted moose.

 

[Jud96]

Sorry I can't answer all of your questions or post pictures or the video we have. Most of our work is covered by non-disclosure agreements, and I am often limited to discussing material that has been approved for public release.

I can say that one of the reasons why we like the 208 AMAX so much is that once it has slowed to velocities where it no longer expands, it tumbles reliably and creates a lot of wounding, both a sizable temporary cavity and a sizable permanent cavity. There is no impact velocity from 2900 ft/s down to 1000 ft/s where it fails to penetrate at least 18".

When hunting, I almost always aim for the shoulder (if available) on deer with any rifle bullet, because the odds of dead right there are so high. With bigger stuff, I prefer to aim behind the shoulder, not because I don't trust the bullet to penetrate, but because there's a lot more meat to ruin with a shoulder hit, and I don't mind a short tracking job. We've tended to hunt deer in thickets, swamps, and densely vegetated places where a 100 yard tracking job can take a lot of time and be confounded by insects and sub-optimal conditions. We've also done a lot of deer culling where killing 5-10 deer in an evening was common, and we preferred not to have to track them. When you have 7 deer to recover, skin, quarter, and get into the coolers on one summer evening, you like to eliminate tracking. Same for hog culling which we might be doing soon.

We've tended to hunt bigger stuff in wide open spaces where you're likely to see an animal fall even if it runs 100 yards first. Tracking is less of an issue if it's only one animal a day.

Never hunted moose.

Thanks for this information. Even if you can't answer all of my questions, I appreciate what you have shared and it is great info. I'm surprised by the number of people in other threads that are completely against A-MAXs.

 

[Michael Eichele]

Thanks for this information. Even if you can't answer all of my questions, I appreciate what you have shared and it is great info. I'm surprised by the number of people in other threads that are completely against A-MAXs.

I think that's largely in part due to a lot of other match bullets being used with sub par results. Amaxs are labeled as match bullets which carries a stigma.

I believe most that are against them either have never shot game with them or did once and had a bad experience. You can have a bad experience with any hunting bullet as well. I don't hear about bad experiences with amaxs nearly as much as with other bullets. In all of the years the amaxs have been available, there seemingly has been so few complaints I can't remember the half of them.

The other thing about them, I have never heard anybody say 'they don't expand'. You'll read that a lot about the SMK, Scenar and VLD but hardly if ever an amax.

I remember a couple years ago a member here swore off ever using them again. He shot a buck with an amax and failed to recover the deer. He said it failed to perform. The question was brought up as to how he knew the bullet failed since he never recovered the deer. He never would answer the question. Who knows. He coild have missed him altogether or gut shot him. Often, the complaints about them heard are from the ignorant.

 

[Jud96]

I think that's largely in part due to a lot of other match bullets being used with sub par results. Amaxs are labeled as match bullets which carries a stigma.

I believe most that are against them either have never shot game with them or did once and had a bad experience. You can have a bad experience with any hunting bullet as well. I don't hear about bad experiences with amaxs nearly as much as with other bullets. In all of the years the amaxs have been available, there seemingly has been so few complaints I can't remember the half of them.

The other thing about them, I have never heard anybody say 'they don't expand'. You'll read that a lot about the SMK, Scenar and VLD but hardly if ever an amax.

I remember a couple years ago a member here swore off ever using them again. He shot a buck with an amax and failed to recover the deer. He said it failed to perform. The question was brought up as to how he knew the bullet failed since he never recovered the deer. He never would answer the question. Often, the complaints about them heard are from the ignorant.

Thank you for this info. I figured most people who are against them have never tried them because they're "match" bullets. Every guy that has taken game with the A-MAX loves them. I have personally only see guys criticize them simply because they are sold as match slugs and not because they failed on them during a hunt. I don't see any solid evidence that they are a bad idea. Everything that I have read and seen supports that they are one of the best long range bullets available. Even after coming to this conclusion, I'm still very much interested in hearing the experiences others have had with any A-MAX. Thanks!

 

[Michael Courtney]

The 155 AMAX is loaded by Hornady in their .308 TAP load, and this load has been extensively tested in gelatin by various agencies. It's performance in humans and deer is expected to be very very good, and it is highly recommended in .308 and 30-06.

The basic bullet design is a thin jacket, a soft lead core, a plastic tip, and excellent uniformity. As in the old days, penetration will be governed mostly by sectional density and impact velocity. If you need 12-15" of penetration for human or deer sized targets, keeping the impact velocity below 2900 ft/s is recommended for AMAX bullets of moderate sectional density (155-168 AMAX in .308). Once you get to the heaviest AMAX bullets in a given caliber (140 grain 6.5 and 208 in .308), keeping the impact velocity below 2900 ft/s will give you more like 18+" of penetration, and the issue becomes whether or not the bullet weight and impact velocity provide sufficient energy to accomplish the task at hand.

There are no magic bullets, but the high BCs and accuracy of the Hornady AMAX line tend to deliver long range performance if the sectional density and retained energy and velocity are chosen properly for the task.

I wouldn't batt an eyelash if I needed to use any AMAX above 5.56 mm in a non magnum load on deer.