Hornady A-Max

[WildRose]

part of the problem with this discussion is that not all a-maxes are created equal.

You need to consider the sectional density of a bullet for a true comparison/performance evaluation.

The 6.5 140 has a much higher SD than the 178 gr 308 or the 162 grain 7mm.

Thus you can predictably say the 6.5 140 will penetrate deeper and hold together better at similar impact speeds on similar targets.

Lumping all bullets of one design into a general class is iresponsible weather it is a b-tip, game king or a-max. All 3 of these are non bonded cup and core bullets, that have killed more game than swift bullets could hit targets.

That dosen't make any of them poor designs or the hunter who uses them irresponsible. The game kings rulled during the time of most cartriges shooting 2600-2900 fps. and under those conditions the cup and core bullets will work great as long as you don't go too light for caliber.

wildrose, a-maxes have there place, that is undeiable, we understand you don't agree.
But don't tell me I'm irresponsible for using them, when I have 13 consecutive one shot kills from 75 to 600 yards. I like many here know what works based on experience.
That my friend you can not take away.

Perhaps you should actually read my posts. I didnt' call you or anyone else irresponsible for using them at those ranges or applications.

There are however better bullets for those ranges and applications such as the Scirocco, Interbond, and Nosler Accubond particularly in the caliber we were discussing.

While to some 600yds certainly seems like long range I pretty well consider that to be where we start talking in terms of long range. Beyond 1000yds is where I consider we get into the realm of extreme long range.

 

[WildRose]

Phew WR, you're getting a little heated there!
The 162gn A-Max is probably the most used long range deer bullet in New Zealand, and is one of the quickest killing deer bullets around beyond 400 yards on deer sized game. I personally have seen several hundred deer (too many to count exactly) cleanly and quickly killed at ranges from 300 to 1000 yards with it out of 7mm SAUM's up to 7mm RUM's. It has limitations, especially on say a big Red stag or Wapiti bull inside 300 yards depending on the impact velocity close up, but so too do the controlled expansion bullets at long range. I have again personally seen more deer and Himalayan bull tahr hit and lost at long range from AB's and Sirocco's penciling through a behind the shoulder shot than I've seen lost with A-Max's. If you need to anchor a long range bull tahr right there because if he moves or falls off the ledge he's on, he will be unrecoverable, then the A-Max would be one of the best for the job from what we've experienced in the mountains.
Each is better at a specific task, and why we always run 2 loads in our hunting rifles that will be shot at close and long range. AB's, TTSX's, E-Tips or similar at closer ranges, and A-Max's, Bergers or SMK's at longer ranges. The Berger Hybrids are our current long range favorite due to their awesome BC and good terminal performance, but the minute Hornady comes out with a 300gn 338 A-Max, we'll certainly be giving that a real work out on the long stuff due to its guaranteed long range expansion characteristics.
Horses for courses!
Greg

Naa I don't get heated over silly discussions.

I shoot at least four to five days a week at game or predators, and have guided thousands of hunts over the last forty years for everything from quail to large boars.

I don't settle on a bullet because I'm in love with the manufacturer, I settle on them because of seeing them in action and couint out others for the same reason.

I've seen so many animals run off and have to be tracked with bullets similar to and including the Amax I simply will not use them any more. Now if I were shooting the big 338's my opinion would almost certainly be different because you start off with such a massively large bullet that even if it looses 80% of it's mass there's still enough to come out the other side.

As for "dead right there" shots, no one will convince me that any bullet is going to consistently deliver those kinds of kills unless it's breaking both shoulders and/or the spine. To do either of those a bullet must be able to hold together long enough for good penetration to do that.

Most of us here plan for long range shots, but you can read through the enormous number of threads here where the planned long range hunt very quickly ended up producing shots inside of 400 yards all too frequently. At high velocities in the sub .338 calibers the thin skinned target bullet is just not going to perform as well as a designed hunting bullet that is specifically engineered for controlled expansion. The end result is all too a wounded animal or one with a tremendous hole on the backside and a lot of wasted meat. Neither appeals to me at all.

 

[WildRose]

Friend,

Do we really have to start name calling? Let's try to keep this informative and polite.

No where did I call names. I made an accurate statement.

Swift's to 1700 is news to me. I have been told 1900 fps+ by Swift and my experience with them shows about the same. The original scirocco's were even higher. I will contact them for more info. The scirocco is one of my favorite hunting bullets in 6.5 and I am planning on building a 338-06AI carry gun around their 338 210 grain bullet. Glad to know I may have missed something.

Good.

I am not rewriting history. I originally said that numbers "at" 1000 yards and beyond are even more favorable of the high BC bullets than the 750 yard figures I quoted. That is the only time I mentioned 1000 yards until you started the comparison. My original numbers were based on 750 yards because that distance is approximately where the Interbond, Accubond and Scirocco type controlled expansion bullets (your favorite bullets) hit the 1800-1900 fps range which is typically the cutoff fps for expansion.

Yes you are attempting to do just that. As I showed I set a max limit of 900yds at which the Interbond and Scirocco have higher energy and velocity than the Amax at 1000. Beyond 1000 (as you stated) it gets even worse.

Your quote: "Yes they are, that is why I didn't base my decisions based solely on hogs at long range. As I stated most of the were not shot beyond 450yds."
This is where I got the idea that most of your shots with A-max's were under 450 yards. What did I miss?

Apparently you are lacking comprehension. I excluded most of the hogs because they were killed at shorter ranges.

You are basing your experience with A-max's with most shots under 450 yards.

No where did I make such a statement.

Some of those were on hogs. I am simply saying that for the long range game I would not use any data shot on hogs or shot under 450 yards to determine LR success with the A-max bullet.

Nor would I, nor did I.

Again, not rewriting history. You said this, "Before I'd use the Amax in the scenarios you describe I'd either go to the Scirocco or Berger Hunting VLD's. Much better choices of bullets." I was just simply trying to find out why you are theoretically ok with the proven issues with the Berger's either penciling through game or blowing up on the front shoulder but you aren't with the A-max's. Again, I was simply inquiring.

As I said not a bullet I favor, but I would choose it over the Amax due to it's better construction and BC.

Their design IS more similar to the A-max despite them having thicker jackets. Berger's are desinged to come apart and shed 40-80% of their weight. Based off my experience A-max's shed about 50-60% of their weight in 6.5,7mm, and 30 cal. Your original concept of the perfect bullet, Interbond, Accubond, Scirocco, is designed to maintain a very high percentage of their weight.

Yes they are, which is why I prefer them.

In the end I think a very good summary of my experience with the A-max can be summed up by reading Michael Eichele's post #11 to this thread. Very good info and I guess I should have left this thread there. Didn't mean for this to get out of hand and turn into a ****ing match.

Mine does not. I've seen too many animals walk away from a good hit with the Amax and similar target/varmint bullets.

 

[WildRose]

If I was shooting 6.5, 7mm or 30 cal A-max's in the upper weight class of bullets, (middle class for the 30 cal as well) and I was shooting deer I personally wouldn't hesitate and would expect a 100% kill ratio. But I shoot for the lung and heart or high shoulder and stay far away from the point of the shoulder. Shooting elk I would be more cautious as well as they are tough critters. I will say this though about elk. IME they are much more likely to show their toughness with a bullet that pencils through, even 2 or 3 bullets, than one that tears up their vitals. Also, I don't shoot RUM's and similar heavy weights. If I was doing this I would be more cautious as well at close range.

But the key to all of this is what a number of guys have mentioned on this thread. Use the 2 bullet system. It really does work very well. The hornady bullets shoot very similar and between the Interlock, Interbond, and SST you can usually find one that shoots very close to POI of the A-max. Then you don't have to settle for a middle of the road bullet. You get the best of both worlds. I have even had partitions and Accubonds shoot very close to the A-max so there are a lot of options to try.

Carry your short range bullet in the magazine or chamber ready for a close range shot. If you end up going long range then just single feed your A-max and you are ready to go.

Regarding the Berger vs A-max comparison, my point was simply that their style of terminal performance is much more similar than if you were comparing the berger to a controlled expansion bullet. Bergers and A-max fragment into multiple pieces and usually end up shedding 50%+ of their weight. They aren't expected to provide pass through penetration results. In that respect they are similar.

Hope this Helps,

Scot E.

Emphasis mine.

No, they are not similar in that. The Amax is designed to start breaking up on contact. The Berger hunting VLD is designed to begin opening up after it's penetrated 2-3" which makes for a considerable difference in terminal performance. That 2-3" is enough to get inside of the rib cage on nearly all game which means it's energy is disappated in proximity to the vital organs rather than the musculature and ribs.

Neither however are bullets I recommend.

 

[Pdvdh]

Pretty sure the Amax users wouldn't continue to use or recommend them if they were experiencing miserable results on large game at the ranges they're shooting their game animals. LRHs that have used the Amax, and continue to use and recommend them for LRH. Why would they do that if they weren't happy with their first hand experiences?

 

[NZ Longranger]

WR,
Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree!
Greg