Fellas,
As someone who has been trimming meplats sinse 2001 when Dave Tooley made his first prototype trimmer for my 338, the MOA drops you are seeing are NOT from the meplat.
The issue I see here is that some shooters here are intepreting the trim meplat = massive loss of BC and that simply isn't the case.
We have a Oehler M43 with 300yds of coax cable to measure differences in BC and I've never seen that big of a difference when trimmimg the meplat only. Several years ago we did some testing for a bullet maker across that same M43 and we shot 100s of rounds in one day using everything from 6mm up to 338 caliber and all sorts of bullets. With tips, without tips and trimmed, trimmed only, not trimmed at all, A-Maxes etc etc etc. We never saw that amount of BC loss ever.
MikeCr is correct in that opening up the hole in the meplat "shouldn't" effect the aero that much either if my research is correct. But obviously something is happening. I use an tip made for my dremel tool to debur that hole inside the meplat, but I have never opened up the hollow point to help with expansion like you guys are talking about. I would be interested in hearing exactly how you open up that holow point. How the bullet is held, how it's drilled how deep, etc etc??
What I suspect is that how you are opening up the hollow point may not be centered causing a dynamic yaw in the bullet which in turn causes a bigger drop in MOA. But I haven't heard anyone mention that their groups opened up that much in the groups that dropped a lot more. So I'm not convinced that is the case either. But something is happening.
Just don't claim that trimming the melpat .005" is causing this or that there is no increase in accuracy in doing it either. I've done to many to know it's not the case. In regard to accuracy gain of just trimming... beleive me I've heard it all. But I've also seen it measured repeatidly in test conditions to know that the BC variation is improved on trimmed bullets. Not much but the numbers are there to support it. So even though you may think you can't see it on paper it is there. Remember the distanses we shoot here gentleman. The condition changes at these ranges mask a lot of small things. Don't over estimate that. I wish it was as simple as shooting a group without trimming the meplat and another group right behind it with trimmed bullets and the second group was 50% smaller. But it isn't that simple with the equipment we have available to us these days. Let's face it the groups that we shoot at long range are awesome. There is no more "big" improvements to make. So if it can be measured and the numbers show an improvement, it is there even if you can't readily "see" it.
Just like at Indy. It use to be what speed barrier are they going to reach the next year during time trials. Then when they went over 200mph barrier it slowed down to only a couple mph difference per year until it plateaued around 230mph before the big rules/organizational changes.
Same with our guns, we have come a long ways in the last 10-15 yrs in long range equipment and it's good stuff. Small changes are not going to be glaringly obvious on the target anymore. We have reached into the area of statisical control with smaller sample sizes.
hope this helps. I would definetely like to know exactly how you are drilling out the hollow points though. That is where this drop is coming from. Just a matter of figuring out why.
Just like the ones in BR who are pointing thier bullets with a secondary point die and closing up the meplat. Some have reported worse accuracy, some reported more drop, some reported less drop. It was found that when bumping the nose to close up the meplat was squashing the ogive of the bullet and causing a lot of issues. So too much of a good thing. But right now the jury is still out as to whether pointed meplats are more accurate than trimmed meplats. Another experiement for another day.
Steve