My experience with the Hornady 147 ELD-M on game. *A Lot of Shot Videos and photos*

[codyadams]

I'll stand by that but Cody did have some evidence of under expanding. My personal experience so far is pretty good

I was surprised when you thought yours didn't expand at first, because of the close range. The only ones that I had not expand and pencil through were at 980 yards with an impact of under 2000 fps. All the ones that hit bone or impacted over 2000 fps expanded properly, just didn't kill as well as they should have.

The one pronghorn at 980 that my niece shot was an obvious pencil through, entrance and exit, with two consecutive shots. They didnt hit any bone other than the light ribs that pronghorn have, and impacted under 2000 fps

 

[Ed AO]

I shot a bull with a 180 eldm at close range, Im talking 30, 40 yards. It penetrated 3 or 4" with a high back shot. I know the bullet wasn't intended for short range. It didn't even get to the spine, had i not quickly put a neck shot in him, he would've been gone. High back shot because that's all i could see of him. Shot through tall swamp grass. Neck shot same thing, could just see his horns but knew where his neck was. Ill be trying out the federal edge TLR next year when the components are available.

 

[Canhunter35]

I might've missed where you said it, Cody, but I'm wondering what g7 you used for the 147eldm?

 

[codyadams]

I might've missed where you said it, Cody, but I'm wondering what g7 you used for the 147eldm?

I use the custom ballistic profile from Applied ballistics, but a G7 of .315 (what applied ballistics lists for the g7) got me just as close for pretty much all hunting purposes. There starts to be subtle differences way on out between the ballistic profile and the G7

 

[FURMAN]

I shot a bull with a 180 eldm at close range, Im talking 30, 40 yards. It penetrated 3 or 4" with a high back shot. I know the bullet wasn't intended for short range. It didn't even get to the spine, had i not quickly put a neck shot in him, he would've been gone. High back shot because that's all i could see of him. Shot through tall swamp grass. Neck shot same thing, could just see his horns but knew where his neck was. Ill be trying out the federal edge TLR next year when the components are available.

So are you blaming a bullet for poor shot placement? I am sorry I do not subscribe to the get a bullet in him just as long as I hit him I can follow up theory. I make my first shot count in all instances. 3-4" would have destroyed a lung and most likely gone farther in that part of the body. I can not tell you how to hunt but I get a little tired of people blaming bullets for poor shots. Maybe I am missing something in your post. Cody has some very good documentation. I will continue to use the 147 on deer and antelope. I never intended to use it on elk.

 

[Canhunter35]

I use the custom ballistic profile from Applied ballistics, but a G7 of .315 (what applied ballistics lists for the g7) got me just as close for pretty much all hunting purposes. There starts to be subtle differences way on out between the ballistic profile and the G7

That's making more sense, I was down to .312g7 for things to jive, but I'm pushing them slower then you are. Not much advantage though from the 143. On the same rifle, identical load with the 143eldx and I'm using .303g7 and it's been spot on.

 

[Ed AO]

So are you blaming a bullet for poor shot placement? I am sorry I do not subscribe to the get a bullet in him just as long as I hit him I can follow up theory. I make my first shot count in all instances. 3-4" would have destroyed a lung and most likely gone farther in that part of the body. I can not tell you how to hunt but I get a little tired of people blaming bullets for poor shots. Maybe I am missing something in your post. Cody has some very good documentation. I will continue to use the 147 on deer and antelope. I never intended to use it on elk.

The shot placement was on purpose. Heavily wooded area where I hunt. If I wouldn't have made the shot he would've gotten away. Just saying surprised at close distance what the bullet did. All I could see was the top of his back. If I would've waited for your perfect shot I wouldn't have got the bull. Reprod trees and forest all around me. The next shot was a good shot and put him down. Not saying anything bad about the bullet. I've heard good things at distance with this bullet from several people. I guess you would've had to been there.

 

[joe.sixfive]

Great write up, thx for the factual info.

 

[elkaholic]

That's making more sense, I was down to .312g7 for things to jive, but I'm pushing them slower then you are. Not much advantage though from the 143. On the same rifle, identical load with the 143eldx and I'm using .303g7 and it's been spot on.

I agree with the lower b.c. at around .315.
I have a little different view on how the 147 and 143 perform though. I know the 147 is a TARGET bullet but penetration has not been a problem at all with me. It has a thicker jacket than the eldx. Where most problems reported concern under expansion. I personally haven't seen it but some others have.

 

[Canhunter35]

I agree with the lower b.c. at around .315.
I have a little different view on how the 147 and 143 perform though. I know the 147 is a TARGET bullet but penetration has not been a problem at all with me. It has a thicker jacket than the eldx. Where most problems reported concern under expansion. I personally haven't seen it but some others have.

Different view on terminal performance than Cody?
In my rifle the 147 only has a .012better g7 at identical velocity. Haven't tried them on game, probably won't after Cody's thorough write up. So far with 2 antelope and a whitetail at 501yds I've been thoroughly impressed with the 143eldx performance. I think it's a little light jacketed for bigger animals, but on deer, goats, and coyotes it works very well.

 

[elkaholic]

Different view on terminal performance than Cody?
In my rifle the 147 only has a .012better g7 at identical velocity. Haven't tried them on game, probably won't after Cody's thorough write up. So far with 2 antelope and a whitetail at 501yds I've been thoroughly impressed with the 143eldx performance. I think it's a little light jacketed for bigger animals, but on deer, goats, and coyotes it works very well.

Don't get me wrong; I believe Cody's experiences. I was referring to a 147 blowing up. That's what I haven't seen! The 143 expands quicker than the 147. I'm not saying thet143 doesn't work. Just, it expands quicker!

 

[codyadams]

Don't get me wrong; I believe Cody's experiences. I was referring to a 147 blowing up. That's what I haven't seen! The 143 expands quicker than the 147. I'm not saying thet143 doesn't work. Just, it expands quicker!

I agree Rich, while thankfully you have not had any issues with the 147, the issues I have had with the 147 is certainly not over expanding, but rather the opposite. On the long range, thin skinned/boned body of a pronghorn, two in a row simply penciled through. All of them penetrated enough, with all exiting on pronghorn, one not exiting on a deer but under the skin on the off side, and out of 3 shots on elk, 1 exited (at over 800 yards) and the other two were under the hide on the off side.

 

[Canhunter35]

Don't get me wrong; I believe Cody's experiences. I was referring to a 147 blowing up. That's what I haven't seen! The 143 expands quicker than the 147. I'm not saying thet143 doesn't work. Just, it expands quicker!

Yeah I agree that it expands quickly, like a nosler ballistic tip, it's quite violent. Though The 143 is less violent than the 168eldm in my estimation

 

[JohnWess]

Wow, I appreciate all of the time you put into this codyadams!