Jumping Hammers

[yorke-1]

I've used 9 different Hammer bullets between 6mm and 375 and all of them have shot well regardless of seating depth.

 

[nicholasjohn]

It would seem just the opposite to me. Hammer has produced many lighter bullets in virtually every caliber to accommodate standard twist barrels. Copper bullets are naturally going to be longer then a comparable lead bullet thus requiring a faster twist.
Simply using a lighter bullet (which is shorter) will lessen the need for a non-standard twist. Its not any different than any of the other mono-metal bullets. Heavy monos are just long.
BTW - I am shooting Hammers with exceptional results on paper in 6.5 Creed, 30 Nosler, 7 WSM and 338 RUM, all of which have standard twist barrels.

They also have a design they call the Sledge Hammer, which isn't as long & sleek as the Hammer Hunter. They don't require extreme twist rates to stabilize, according to the recommendations on their website. For example, I just bought some 143-grain .284 Hammer Hunters for my 280 Remington. Steve told me that my 1-in-9 twist is perfect for that bullet, but a little on the slow side for their 155-grain bullet of the same design.

If I get to hurting all over for something heavier, they have a 150- and a 160-grain Sledge Hammer, and they recommend 1-in-10 and 1-in-9 respectively for those. They aren't nearly as sporty-looking as the low-drag design, but I'll bet their BC's are at least as good as a standard jacketed lead-core hunting bullet of the same weight. This design has a long bearing surface, and the parabolic drag reduction would probably enable a little higher velocity to overcome some of what you're giving up in BC in going with the heavier bullets.

I think it boils down to this : If a guy likes to shoot his animals at extreme ranges with heavy-for-caliber VLD bullets, he probably needs an extreme rifle - with a faster-than-standard twist rate in its custom barrel. If he keeps his shots under 500 yards or so, he will probably do just fine with the more conventional design in the conventional weights.

Of course, there's also the option of just using a lighter bullet with the high-BC profile, like you are suggesting here. They will be going downrange at higher velocities, too - and this isn't a bad deal. I plan to do just that with the 143-grain 7mm bullets. I doubt that I'm going to miss the extra 20 grains of bullet weight, but I'll certainly let you guys know when I find out.

 

[bubbaonpc]

Contact Hammer directly. Be specific with your question/concern and you will get a reply. Who knows Hammer Bullets better than the developers... Steve has been very helpful with my questions...give em shout !

 

[middleofnowhere]

I've been looking at these bullets lately. I did notice they have come out with a 196gr .308 bullet that requires a 1-10" twist barrel so maybe they will start making a few heavier bullets for standard twist barrels in different calibers.

Seeing these new 196 gr. Hammer Hunters kind of makes me glad I have procrastinated on load development with the 181 gr. Bullets

 

[JJMoody]

I started long, groups tightened up as depth increased. Stopped here

 

[mrultramag]

Seeing these new 196 gr. Hammer Hunters kind of makes me glad I have procrastinated on load development with the 181 gr. Bullets

Well, look closely. I think the 181 has a higher BC. So you have a slower velocity with a lower BC bullet. The only gain is in bullet weight and im not sold on that benefit in a monolithic.

 

[dougduey]

I load Hammers in 6 different cartridges. I only had to play with seating depth for my 300 WSM, and seating it 0.005" deeper tightened the group right up. They are extremely accurate bullets and devastating on game. As with most monolithic bullets, you want to run them faster than standard cup and core bullets. All but one of my rifles have a standard twist. When I rebarrelled my 7 STW, I went to a 1:8 twist so I could shoot the 177 gr Hunters. I get a little under 3100 fps with those bullets, while I get a little over 3500 fps with the 143 gr Hunters. All my rifles shoot Hammers at 0.5" moa or less. Below is a photo of the 177 gr in action. The bullets are easy to develop a load for.

 

[HARPERC]

I take them at their word as far as goals: 1) Higher and consistent velocity, 2) Superior Accuracy, 3) Less engraving pressure, 4) Less barrel heat and erosion, 5) Minimal game waste.

As far as how they got where they got is somewhat market driven, making what people will buy. A lot of their development has taken place with guys looking for more bullet. Like me!

In his heart Steve is a high velocity, best mid range trajectory, hunter. Call regarding advice on a .30-06-and he will likely guide you to the 166 Hammer Hunter. Currently being loaded in a camp rifle in Africa for gun less guest.

It's tough to wean someone like me off heavy for caliber. Consistent terminal performance helps, and moves me a bit though. I do think he's developing respect for the heavier Sledge Hammer line profile. I think there are more of here that don't need high BC bullets, than is suspected.

Without putting words in anybodies mouth-with a bullet that consistently performs one can go lighter, faster, and see good accuracy, trajectory, and terminal results. In 6mm my old rifle will only handle the 80 grain bullets, I've liked closer to 100 grains unless varmint shooting. Hopefully someone will plink something with it to see, but I don't think it loses anything to the heavier bullets for how I use the rifle.

The best thing so far is their willingness to build something for an individual. Don't see what you want call them.

 

[gator378]

Not seating depth sensitive from the 4 different cartridges I've tried them in

You convinced me with that statement. Time to try them out

 

[MagMan]

I just loaded some 7mm 143's tonight in a 280 Ackley. Eyeballed a seating deapth, loaded 3 starting loads and they shot .443".

 

[nicholasjohn]

I just loaded some 7mm 143's tonight in a 280 Ackley. Eyeballed a seating deapth, loaded 3 starting loads and they shot .443".

Steve told me to load them with just the boat-tail protruding below the case neck, unless the ogive hits the rifling with that seating depth. He said that often this set-up does not need to be fiddled with at all to produce best accuracy. We discussed magazine length also being a limiting factor, but I'm loading for a falling-block single shot so the origin of the rifling is the only thing limiting overall loaded length for me. I'll let you guys know how it works. It sounds like these bullets are what the fancy people call user-friendly.

 

[HARPERC]

[QUOTE="nicholasjohn,....... We discussed magazine length also being a limiting factor, but I'm loading for a falling-block single shot so the origin of the rifling is the only thing limiting overall loaded length for me.....[/QUOTE]

Surprising how long one can get with the falling blocks.

 

[snox801]

I may add that none of mine have needed seating depth adjustments.

Also I've found I have not given up anything moving to the lighter faster Bullets. Example being my 6.5 creed. I was shooting the 147 eld. Had great luck till I stepped up to African game. They worked but It seems the hammers are impossible to catch in an animal even being lighter. They simple don't care how tough the game is. Then I started to run the numbers. Yes the 147 will make up for the slower speed out the farther we go but after looking at the energy when it gets out that far a lot of rifles end up with to low of energy by the time the heavy for call come into play.

 

[nicholasjohn]

[QUOTE="nicholasjohn,....... We discussed magazine length also being a limiting factor, but I'm loading for a falling-block single shot so the origin of the rifling is the only thing limiting overall loaded length for me.....

Surprising how long one can get with the falling blocks.[/QUOTE]

I haven't checked yet to see how long they'll be when the bullets hit the origin of the rifling, but they may be out there pretty long. On the Hammer website it says that these bullets are not sensitive to seating depth, and I read somewhere ( maybe it was on this forum ) that .02" short of the rifling is minimum jump for monolithic bullets, so that will be the longest I would want to load them. The guy at Hammer Bullets told me to try them first with the boat-tail part of the bullet loaded just below the case neck, and the aft end of the bearing surface right at the neck/shoulder juncture. This is consistent with what I've read in McPherson's handloading manual. ( He discusses the reasons why this is best in great detail.) There's some heavy-duty theory involved here, most of which is way over my head. I'll leave the why's & where-for's to the engineers, and just take the advice of the bullet manufacturer and run with it. I think this is going to work.