Need bullet suggestions! 300rum

I dont have a 300 rum, however my friend does. He is just getting into reloading as of a week ago. In factory ammo he swears by the Barnes 180 ttsx. I agree with many of the posters here, in that If I wasn't shooting at least 200 grains, I would have just stuck with the 300wm. The 300 rum is an great caliber, but to me shines in bullets 200 gr and above.
 
Same here I must be envisioning the Barnes. So you're saying the petals breaking off is what you want? I think Barnes has the right idea but I have not used either. Steve do you have any videos or other data that would depict that your idea of bullet performance is a sound one? I've heard some on here like your bullets, but I'm just not seeing how losing your expansion diameter would be a good thing at any point as the bullet travels thru an animal?
We all grew up being told that the bigger in dia the bullet deforms the better. The old classic rounded mushroom. The fact is the larger the bullet mushrooms or opens compared to caliber and sectional density the faster it slows down. As the bullet slows down it does less and less damage up until the point that is slows to a stop at which point it does no damage. The next problem is the nice rounded mushroom shape vs a flat frontal area. The rounded shape will part its way through the soft tissue not imparting as much disruption as a squared off flat frontal area the displaces soft tissue perpendicular to the direction of travel. So if you think about it the faster the deformed shape continues to travel the more damage it will do. If I could make a magic bullet I would want it to instantly deform on impact and then travel through the animal without losing any vel. That way the tearing of tissue would stay consistent all the way through the animal and not become less and less as the bullet slows down. This brings us to the next fallacy that we all grew up accepting as fact. Energy. It is really a small part of the equation, not nearly as important as we have all been lead to believe. I obviously takes energy to get the bullet to the target and energy to make it deform and move through the animal. The idea of "energy dump" is nothing more than campfire lore. If we take it to the logical end you can see the problem. If a bullet hits and flattens out to the point that it is stopped on the entrance hide of a deer, all of the energy of that bullet was 100% absorbed by that deer, yet he will run off with a nasty bruise. Now that we all agree that would be bullet failure with 100% "energy dump". If a bullet hits the deer and is unable to use it's energy to deform properly and parts it's way through the animal in its ballistic form doing little damage to the vital soft tissue. That is another obvious bullet failure, not because it failed to "energy dump", but because it did not disrupt enough vital tissue because of the shape or form of the bullet after impact. I think we can all agree on the these two obvious scenarios.

Brings me to the next marketing ploy. We've been lead to believe that bullets are smart. They have the ability to sense when they have penetrated 3" at which point they deploy their energy as they travel to the far side and then hit the brakes to stop leaving all of the energy in the animal. This is truly marketing hype at its best. Bullet deformation is a product of target density, bullet construction, and impact vel. Bullets do not have depth sensors in them. The rate of deformation is a function of how fast fluid is pushed into the hollow point to make the bullet deform from the inside out. The faster it is going the faster it deforms. Stands true for the converse. All bullets are a form of a hollow point. They all need fluid to enter the nose and cause the expansion needed for good terminal performance. We have three basic types of hollow point. An open hole, a tipped hole, and a lead filled hole. The old lead filled soft point bullets are quite effective since the lead acts as the fluid necessary for expansion from the inside out. Tipped hollow points have been marketed as an aid in terminal performance. The fact is the tip has to be evacuated from the hole to let fluids enter the hole and cause the bullet to properly deform. Unless the tip is of a more robust construction than the bullet there is no way for the tip to initiate deformation. Once the tip is evacuated from the hole then the hollow point is relatively large and deforms easily as fluid enters and causes the bullet to deform from the inside out. Fact is, remove the tip and that bullet will deform much more rapidly and consistently without the tip. The tip is a plug in the hollow point that aids in bc and durability in the magazine, not in terminal performance. Then last we have the open hollow point. The larger the hollow point the easier it is to get fluid into the hole and cause the proper bullet deformation. If an open hollow point bullet has yaw the size of the hole is reduced in relation to the direction of travel making it more difficult to get the needed fluid into the hole. The larger the hollow point the greater the margin of error can be and still achieve proper deformation.

221g sxs shot.jpg This is a 221g 8mm Hammer Hunter recovered from a blacktail shot end to end. This is perfect bullet performance. With our copper we are able to get this result throughout the range of impact vel. They always deform to the depth of the hollow point and square up the front of the bullet. What we are after, is this bullet deformation as fast as possible, in order to have that terminal form all the way through the animal. We want the bullet to change from its ballistic form to its terminal form as quickly as possible. Kind of like when the old timers used to load bullets backwards for dangerous animals. We want our bullets to take on that dangerous game form as quickly as possible after impact.

That is about as well as I can explain it. If you want a better scientific explanation, check out this link. http://rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html If you truly want to expand your knowledge of how bullets work, this is worth your time.

Hope this was helpful.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top