My thoughts on solid copper bullets and in comparison to other bullet types.

[xsn10s]

Love it.

Sling never handicapped me.

Just another tool for the toolbag. I can see the usefulness of some of those bags for certain applications. Probably for either hunting or other "duty" use. I'm just not going to lug that stuff while hunting. I carry more than I need already lol.

 

[Hard rock]

I have used hammer bullets and I have to say, its way better than anything else I've used and it's not even close. Better than lead and other copper bullets. These are mostly geared for hunting though. But they do carry a few calibers for target shooting as well. Its not cheap, but you'd be hard pressed to find bullets that will shoot better.

It's true it's true , they are in a class of there own.

 

[bigngreen]

I've never used them either. What is it that keeps them from being in vogue or promoted a lot by hunters on here? Not looking for emotional beef - just facts. Trying to learn.

They were very popular here when they first started, a lot of us shot the MTHs and gave them a go then, well, we moved on. If I were shooting something other than game they would probably be one of the first I'd look at though I would also be hot on the Badlands but the only reason I'm not is I've see in terminal performance from people I know aren't sponsored to really get me pumped to run them.

I got pretty deep into the industry and can tell you sponsorships and free stuff talk WAY more than results, I got completely out and that was one main reason!!

 

[HARPERC]

I've never used Cutting Edge Bullets or even shot them so I have no skin in the game. But here's a pretty good thread on using them on bulls and buck. And some thoughts on their ELR use. https://www.longrangeonly.com/forum/threads/cutting-edge-bullets-terminal-performance-reports.6326/

Another one.

Official Hammer bullets Terminal Performance (picture heavy)

Let’s try to keep Discussion to a minimum in this. Details-animal, distance, caliber/cartridge, bullet and weight. Animal weight if you know it. I’ll kick it off, Water buffalo, 60 yards-full broad side 300AX Hammer hunter 181@3490fps Dressed without the hide, head and guts 902lbs.

www.longrangehunting.com

 

[Hand Skills]

That is a great thread @HARPERC thank you for providing the link.

Given all the hype on this forum, I would have expected more than 31 pages in 3 years.

Goes to show, when all is said and done, a lot more gets said than done

 

[Creedmoor shooter]

I fully intended on staying out of this, but going through the terminal performance thread of Hammer bullets I've noticed most of the photos that actually show the vital organs (not just holes) the vast majority of the organs are mainly intact with just a hole through the middle. I'm used to seeing much more damage to the organs with cup and core bullets that shed a little more weight. Me personally i put way more emphasis on internal damage vs exit holes. Am I missing something? I understand the Hammers would be much more forgiving in the penetration department and going light for caliber has its advantages. I've been on the fence for awhile about trying them. Just can't seem to quite pill the trigger on them yet.

P.S. please nobody take this as an attack your projectiles of choice. It's just a few observations I've made whether right or wrong

 

[Northkill]

They were very popular here when they first started, a lot of us shot the MTHs and gave them a go then, well, we moved on. If I were shooting something other than game they would probably be one of the first I'd look at though I would also be hot on the Badlands but the only reason I'm not is I've see in terminal performance from people I know aren't sponsored to really get me pumped to run them.

I got pretty deep into the industry and can tell you sponsorships and free stuff talk WAY more than results, I got completely out and that was one main reason!!

That's what I was after. Somewhere I had picked up the inkling of enough mixed terminal results to give me pause on trying them myself.

I posted a thread where the focus with Cutting Edge was on hunting. By knowledgeable hunters.

Yeah, I had looked through that. It's a bit inclusive as all threads like that tend to be. Here's how they compare:

6.5mm 124 HH - G7 .245 (1.407")
6.5 CE 125 Lazer tipped - G7 .243 (1.443")

Now we need a sxs test.

Edit:
Might add to this that my go-to guy at Unknown Munitions says the Lazers tend to pencil through if not hit right. He's taken 3 elk with them. Not a huge sample size for sure, but enough for him. You'll see on the LRO thread that one of the conclusions was that it's best to hit bone with them.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

I fully intended on staying out of this, but going through the terminal performance thread of Hammer bullets I've noticed most of the photos that actually show the vital organs (not just holes) the vast majority of the organs are mainly intact with just a hole through the middle. I'm used to seeing much more damage to the organs with cup and core bullets that shed a little more weight. Me personally i put way more emphasis on internal damage vs exit holes. Am I missing something? I understand the Hammers would be much more forgiving in the penetration department and going light for caliber has its advantages. I've been on the fence for awhile about trying them. Just can't seem to quite pill the trigger on them yet.

P.S. please nobody take this as an attack your projectiles of choice. It's just a few observations I've made whether right or wrong

Brian and I entered into this as hunters. Terminal performance was the whole reason we started. We didn't know a lot about why or how it happened when we started. We just knew how quickly animals died when terminal performance was good. In our quest for better bullets, for hunting, we found copper bullets. We liked how they worked on game and the less meat damage associated with copper. Every copper bullet we tried had some sort of issue and the opportunity popped up to try our hand at making our own. At that time we were similar to @Petey308, thinking that copper was copper. We would just get the most pure copper available and everything would be great. Well, it didn't work. Remember that he most important thing to us was terminal performance. Brian and I are absolutely like minded on this. We just aren't good with "thats pretty good". It was a monster hard learning curve when we started impact testing our bullets and trying to find a copper that would do what we wanted. When we found the copper that we use now, it was a game changer. This is when we started seeing exceptionally fast clean kills. Like we had never seen from any other bullet that we ever hunted with. Between the two of us we have used a lot of diff bullets for hunting big game. I am very careful not to say or insinuate that if you use Hammers you will have your animals drop to the shot. Some animals just simply run. It happens. I will say with confidence that you will see better overall terminal performance from Hammers, in a greater range of impact velocities, than you will with any other bullet. If you try them and are not happy with them I will refund your money. Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back.

I posted the money back guarantee not too long ago and someone said they didn't think that was true, for some reason. Our ad that runs here on LRH says exactly that. Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back. I think over the last 7 years I have refunded twice. So, @Creedmoor shooter give them a go. I'm pretty confident you will be very happy with Hammer Bullets.

 

[dogz]

Nicely said Steve

 

[Creedmoor shooter]

Brian and I entered into this as hunters. Terminal performance was the whole reason we started. We didn't know a lot about why or how it happened when we started. We just knew how quickly animals died when terminal performance was good. In our quest for better bullets, for hunting, we found copper bullets. We liked how they worked on game and the less meat damage associated with copper. Every copper bullet we tried had some sort of issue and the opportunity popped up to try our hand at making our own. At that time we were similar to @Petey308, thinking that copper was copper. We would just get the most pure copper available and everything would be great. Well, it didn't work. Remember that he most important thing to us was terminal performance. Brian and I are absolutely like minded on this. We just aren't good with "thats pretty good". It was a monster hard learning curve when we started impact testing our bullets and trying to find a copper that would do what we wanted. When we found the copper that we use now, it was a game changer. This is when we started seeing exceptionally fast clean kills. Like we had never seen from any other bullet that we ever hunted with. Between the two of us we have used a lot of diff bullets for hunting big game. I am very careful not to say or insinuate that if you use Hammers you will have your animals drop to the shot. Some animals just simply run. It happens. I will say with confidence that you will see better overall terminal performance from Hammers, in a greater range of impact velocities, than you will with any other bullet. If you try them and are not happy with them I will refund your money. Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back.

I posted the money back guarantee not too long ago and someone said they didn't think that was true, for some reason. Our ad that runs here on LRH says exactly that. Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back. I think over the last 7 years I have refunded twice. So, @Creedmoor shooter give them a go. I'm pretty confident you will be very happy with Hammer Bullets.

I understand that animals run. It's very rare I have one that doesn't run 10 or 20 yards. I'm thinking about giving the 110 hh a go in my hunting rifle (22in 6.5 creed). Just whitetails and blackbear with I've used the 140 eld-m on very successfully

 

[fordy]

I fully intended on staying out of this, but going through the terminal performance thread of Hammer bullets I've noticed most of the photos that actually show the vital organs (not just holes) the vast majority of the organs are mainly intact with just a hole through the middle. I'm used to seeing much more damage to the organs with cup and core bullets that shed a little more weight. Me personally i put way more emphasis on internal damage vs exit holes. Am I missing something? I understand the Hammers would be much more forgiving in the penetration department and going light for caliber has its advantages. I've been on the fence for awhile about trying them. Just can't seem to quite pill the trigger on them yet.

P.S. please nobody take this as an attack your projectiles of choice. It's just a few observations I've made whether right or wrong

Gday creedmore shooter

Great observations & i for one don't see that as a attack on hammers I see it as a question that's legit but I also believe I better put my position & journey forward to show how I formed my opinion & if this labels me bias so be it but no guru or professional am I

Now I don't know the physics behind what's going on in the correct terms so accept my apology for being pretty dumb on that side & then my English to paper sux

In my journey I've been puzzled on what kills & tsourced where I could info & roughly 40 yrs ago ) throughout the next 10 yrs

I hounded so many vetenarians & done as many autopsies with them as I could & my knowledge grew along with word of mouth, asking the ones around me along with publications I could find & little by little my understanding grew over the subsequent years ( also had discussions with a few military doctors & 2 gentlemen who worked in morgues & throughout my shooting ( not hunting) I started to see patterns emerge & some extremely good results with frangible so that's what my go to pills were for good reason they worked & when your getting paid for results a lost animal dosent do you any good ( either kilograms of meat or tails is mainly how I was paid )
Shooting was my middle job of 3 wishing it was my number 1

Then came the mono craze & some pretty interesting cup & core with really no improvement on the impact to tipping of animals & some actually worse ( yes monos mainly ) still reading & studying where I could but always asking even dabbled in guiding a bit but that's not for me as some people just irritated me on the need to kill not hunt

Had some pretty good discussions with bow hunters that shifted my thoughts on that but I'm still yet to hunt with a bow & never will but if we can step back & understand how that kills it will help along with the handgun shooters ability to drop animals like they do

Lots & lots of shooting & one that still had no peer to the frangible yes they were king
Moved to bonded & monos & back to frangible as they were still king
Thought I was good @ longrange till I seen some real good guys @ it & one I respect the most is a guy on here & dare I say hammertime as from personal chats & sharing of videos I finally realised I was crap @ it although I hadn't shot longrange for a lot of years

In my shooting & hunting I found that I was having trouble on certain angles & resistances with wounded animals or even worse lost & used all methods & pills I new how to try & stop but as I got to a different weight to create more resistance or less to fix the problem I created others it's so hard to get the balance correct & by this how many times do we here great pill just keep off bone @ x velocity or you need to hit the crease to avoid the loss of meat yep there's where frangible are more likely to fail as if you go outside that pills comfort zone it's one that can ruin your day in so many ways

In real life there is no animal that offers that perfect broadside shot & dosent move on squeezing the trigger or is quarter more than we think ( or am I just the unlucky one ) so while the frangible works well it's also not the holy grail & has some restrictions you step out side of its parameters & it becomes obvious really quick ( shooting culling springbok & the trophy eland of a lifetime comes along no 25-06 with my load was going to work so that animal walked ) & when hunting my go to load was the accubond as I could rely on it to cover more angles -resistances than any other pill I used but still searched as I had reservations with some Shot placements so the what ifs still lingered in my head


Then the game changer for me I read the publication shooting holes in wounding theories by rathcombe & it basically put together in my mind what a pill needed to combine a lot of parts from so many styles to come up with a extremely good pill ( it also had differing points from other resources I could see had holes in it & was once again my opinion but I tried to clear my head ) & the search continued moved to cutting edge , Leigh defence , impala , tiger shark etc etc & while I got good preformance @ high velocity ( except mth ) the lower velocity they just plain sux & it wasn't until I came across hammers that more pieces of the puzzle was filled in & it's still got a bit to go & even the new shiny pills out there have not addressed what I believe hammers do so well & no cross section or metalergy tests will show them ( this is not having a crack @ petey308 it's before his time ) what they are looking for as with all respect they are putting their known thoughts & applying them to hammers & one you can't ( been there done that & I was wrong also ) tas they are in a league of their own with 2 things that no other pills do & I've brushed over this in previous posts & accused of holding back for which I am as I've seen the inroads in trying to poach ideas & then apply this to their pills or gain traction of oh they no best & are a guru when really they are leaches & turncoats so I'm protective of what I do know but will give snippets if people will clear their heads if they won't what's the use or agenda base no grudges held though but really this is not just relayed from me as Steve's let you guys in with one of the 2 parts just clear your heads & study it's that simple

Now once we understand that & look @ pictures we look @ them in a different light although I love the mush hammers get when you get the combo correct yep it's identical to a good frangible yet I can get that from multiple resistances & angles in one pill with even more consistent results
But pictures are only like gel as it still dosent tell the full story & to me it's the fur calculator that dosent lie & not a cns shot is taken into account with my results & on average the hammers are dropping animals quicker across the board than anything else I've ever witnessed
Just my journey & what I witness
Others may disagree & like other brands which is cool but don't tell me I'm bias as if a better pill comes along I'll praise that as it deserves to be but for now I'm greatful I have the chance to test theories that hopefully lifts the bar once again as it keeps my mind active & lots of laughs along the way for what time I have left I'm more than happy to stay helping out Steve & Brian with no perks or getting the name of my hunting property out or myself yes I like to stay pretty private
I'm privileged to know some things in the wind that Steve & Brian are working on that potentially will lift that bar but time will tell as once they are put in animals the truth will become apparent I also know a couple of other bullet makers that have devolved their personal info & asked my advice but really I'm not the one as I just shoot & mine thoughts on improvement is just a theory but I do no where pills will fail to give great results & the potential pitfalls , I also don't relay that info into the public domain so it's not just hammer to me it's how I do things

Sorry for long winded post & most likely back to my rabbit hole
No offence intended to anyone & keep a civil discussion & you lot may get a better answer to what will suit your needs the best but keep bickering & getting nasty will have the outcome of division when really no need from bench rest , sporting clays , short range / longrange hunting etc as we all have a common interest so take a chill pill is my best advice

Stay safe & shoot straight
Cheers

 

[GLTaylor]

I fully intended on staying out of this, but going through the terminal performance thread of Hammer bullets I've noticed most of the photos that actually show the vital organs (not just holes) the vast majority of the organs are mainly intact with just a hole through the middle. I'm used to seeing much more damage to the organs with cup and core bullets that shed a little more weight. Me personally i put way more emphasis on internal damage vs exit holes. Am I missing something? I understand the Hammers would be much more forgiving in the penetration department and going light for caliber has its advantages. I've been on the fence for awhile about trying them. Just can't seem to quite pill the trigger on them yet.

P.S. please nobody take this as an attack your projectiles of choice. It's just a few observations I've made whether right or wrong

Creedmoor shooter,
You ask very legitimate questions.
First let me say that I am a wholehearted convert to Hammers. I shot cup and core of many varieties for many years into literally hundreds of whitetail deer. My move to Hammers came after an initial try of another brand of all copper bullet which proved totally unsatisfactory.
My chief desire was for excellent and total damage to internal organs. A second wish was for minimal meat damage and reliable, consistant exit wounds. Cup and core bullets did not meet the last two requirements faithfully. I decided to try Hammers and have not gone back. All my rifles now shoot Hammers.
I'm not a big bore or long range shooter. My personal imposed max is 400 yds. My favorite caliber is 6.5 and I also shoot 243 and 30cal (this year).
I have learned that speed really kills. I think ol Roy had it right.
If you get your 6.5 CM up to 3500 with the 85gr Hammer Hunter, you will see lungs, heart and liver turned to liquid. Deer literally "slosh" when I pick them up! I've got several 6.5s. Two of them shoot light pills (85-92gr) at to well over 4k - and they are absolutely devasating. Bigger, heavier pills do significant damage and penetrate well,with little or no meat damage. The lighter pills also do not damage meat even at high velocity.
The majority of hunters still cling to our old notions that big heavy pills kill better. They do kill, but not better in my opinion. Been there. Done that. Bigger pills do damage organs and punch through. No problem. Lighter pills do organ damage on a whole 'nuther level with velocity.
I have trouble taking pictures of my lungs and heart/liver as they flow off the cleaning table if I make a good shot
Give them a try and make up your own mind based upon your results.
Regards,

 

[xsn10s]

Another one.

Official Hammer bullets Terminal Performance (picture heavy)

Let’s try to keep Discussion to a minimum in this. Details-animal, distance, caliber/cartridge, bullet and weight. Animal weight if you know it. I’ll kick it off, Water buffalo, 60 yards-full broad side 300AX Hammer hunter 181@3490fps Dressed without the hide, head and guts 902lbs.

www.longrangehunting.com

HARPERC did you tag me for a response?

 

[Creedmoor shooter]

Creedmoor shooter,
You ask very legitimate questions.
First let me say that I am a wholehearted convert to Hammers. I shot cup and core of many varieties for many years into literally hundreds of whitetail deer. My move to Hammers came after an initial try of another brand of all copper bullet which proved totally unsatisfactory.
My chief desire was for excellent and total damage to internal organs. A second wish was for minimal meat damage and reliable, consistant exit wounds. Cup and core bullets did not meet the last two requirements faithfully. I decided to try Hammers and have not gone back. All my rifles now shoot Hammers.
I'm not a big bore or long range shooter. My personal imposed max is 400 yds. My favorite caliber is 6.5 and I also shoot 243 and 30cal (this year).
I have learned that speed really kills. I think ol Roy had it right.
If you get your 6.5 CM up to 3500 with the 85gr Hammer Hunter, you will see lungs, heart and liver turned to liquid. Deer literally "slosh" when I pick them up! I've got several 6.5s. Two of them shoot light pills (85-92gr) at to well over 4k - and they are absolutely devasating. Bigger, heavier pills do significant damage and penetrate well,with little or no meat damage. The lighter pills also do not damage meat even at high velocity.
The majority of hunters still cling to our old notions that big heavy pills kill better. They do kill, but not better in my opinion. Been there. Done that. Bigger pills do damage organs and punch through. No problem. Lighter pills do organ damage on a whole 'nuther level with velocity.
I have trouble taking pictures of my lungs and heart/liver as they flow off the cleaning table if I make a good shot
Give them a try and make up your own mind based upon your results.
Regards,

Not gonna lie, I'm not comfortable slinging 85s out of a 6.5. I didn't buy a 6.5 to shoot 6mm bullet weights. There was a fella on here about a year ago that shot a mule deer with those 85s at 350 or 400 yards i cant remember exactly and if I remember correctly he had to shoot it multiple times. Just a good example of shooting outside the limits of that little bullet. Looses poop really fast. That's why I was considering the 110. Theres a balance between speed, and weight/energy. I dont subscribe to extremes. I like middle of the road, and balanced.