Canhunter35
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2017
- Messages
- 3,167
Lol if a guy really wants to nitpick, I'm pretty sure a mil at 100 is 3.6" not 3.75" lolI was gonna say 3.75 in definitely isn't right
My thoughts on solid copper bullets and in comparison to other bullet types.
- Thread starter Petey308
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Canhunter35
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2017
- Messages
- 3,167
I'm pretty sure somewhere on this forum Steve, told me they consider it a bullet failure if their bullets don't shed their petals.
It's actually 1.1 mils at 500 yards for that load, so more like 20.3" of drop, just to clarify.I was gonna say 3.75 in definitely isn't right
That's a good start on proving theory. Your stories also go to show just how unpredictable and uncontrolled things are when actually out hunting.
I did mention that bullets still show evidence of spin as they first center the animal. If they didn't, there wouldn't be plenty of evidence out there that with certain bullets, especially cup and core, higher RPMs allow the bullet to come apart more rapidly than lower RPMs of the same bullet. I've seen this many times first hand. What I see in your example of the lead core bullet is evidence of some influence to the petals of the spin, but not to the degree I was thinking when I mentioned it in my previous comment. Im talking much more aggressive angles to the petals. As long as the bullet expands fully before arresting its spin, you should definitely see angles like that on petals or other pieces hanging off. I just haven't seen anything real aggressive to support that it's still spinning rapidly all the way through until it exits or stops. I suppose though if it's too aggressive the petals will still be ripped off of the rest of the bullet, but you'd think if it were due to spin rate you'd experience that still at lower impact velocities and not just higher impact velocities. This is why impact velocity is more import in general than rate of spin as far as terminal ballistics with most bullets. It's possible having a SG higher than 2.0 helps bullets like the hammer maintain stability as it penetrates through an animal. It could be coincidence too. I like to give the benefit of the doubt though, so I'll say you're on to something.
What I'd really love to see though is a much more controlled testing of this stuff with lots of data and evidence to examine rather than theories based on a few experiences. I wish I had the time and resources myself lol. Sometimes all you have is trial and error. I applaud your efforts thus far.
Last edited:
Right, that's what I was saying
It's actually 3.43775 lol, The 3.7 was adopted as its an easier number to work with
So that's a 3.6-3.7 Moa holdover correct?Right, that's what I was saying
Creedmoor shooter
Well-Known Member
3.7 moa is not the same as 3.7 inches. 3.7 moa is about 18.5in at 500. But in this case the 1.1 mils is about 20in which is about 4 moa of drop
I got 3.9 moa at 500 yards, which is still 20.3" of drop.
Canhunter35
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2017
- Messages
- 3,167
So now ur dialing? Not holding on hair?
What are Milliradians, or MILS?
www.longrangeshootingbooks.com
Here's a link to help u out.
pPus - Don't forget the much higher twist rate/spin rate on the Hammers. This spin rate issue has yet to be fully explored.
Regardless 3.9 moa is still hold on hair at 500
No I'm not dialing I'm holding on hair to 500So now ur dialing? Not holding on hair?
What are Milliradians, or MILS?
Here's a link to help u out.
Ok 4 moa, I'm still holding on hair@500 and I never said dial, I said hold over
