10-4. Just to remind, "BC improves speed down range": velocity is not linear. therefore, one might want to consider velocity at POI rather than at muzzle. Long range hunting succeeds with the use of higher BC bullets: less velocity degradation and better wind and flight performance. I hope I said that correctly and meant not too offend. I am currently considering re-barreling my 28N from 1X9.3 to 1X8 twist.
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
Redundant cartridges
- Thread starter Andrew Massi
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
3230 fps from a 28 Nosler, better than a dozen on elk from every angle and inside 200 yards to 600+.
Andrew Massi
Well-Known Member
I've ran the numbers off of hammers estimated g7 bc and the 177 wont pass the 143 in velocity until 790 yards. It doesnt catch the 155 until 877.
Since roughly 99% of my shots are less than that its moot. Both bullets carry hammers recommended velocity to 1k.
The difference in come up at 1k is 1.6 moa more for the 177.
The 10mph wind difference at 1k is 5.1/5.9 moa with the nod going to the 177.
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
I'm not shooting them stupid fast, there is more room, I've caught two in elk so far, I want the most bullet possible for a given twist rate!
Andrew Massi
Well-Known Member
I u understand that sentiment completely.
Did you have to ream for the 177? How long are you loading, that 177 is a long sob
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
Same throat that works for 195 Berger, 180 ELDM also does great for the 177 Hammer.
dougduey
Well-Known Member
I love the 177 Hammer in my 7 STW. It's the reason I went with a 1:8 twist when I replaced the barrel. I didn't get to use it this year since I was 0 for 3 on drawing an elk tag in 3 different states. See the attached photos of how accurate Hammer bullets are. I use the 177 and 143 gr.
Attachments
the444shooter
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2001
- Messages
- 730
Your negative experiences with Barnes are well-documented on here; what is the difference in terminal performance between the Barnes and Hammers? I've always been a fan of Barnes, and could see myself getting some 144s to try in my 7 Rem mag after my 155 TLRs run out.
dougduey
Well-Known Member
Hammers are devastating on game. The front petals shear of and become shrapnel while the rest of the core is a jagged piece of copper that bores through the body cavity. Vitals get destroyed. Close or long shot doesn't show any difference in performance. I've shot quite a few hogs and a couple whitetail deer. Everything either died where it stood or was dead within 10-15 yards. I killed a Kodiak Island mountain goat last year using the 213 gr Hunter in my 338 Lapua. Had to put it through the shoulder. It went through both shoulders and left a 1.5-2" exit wound. The billy did a 180 when hit, the fell over dead before I could tack another round.
lancetkenyon
Well-Known Member
I will be starting load workup using a 28 Nosler and 177 Hammers soon.....watch out AZ elk.....we are coming for you!
Dr. Vette
Well-Known Member
Have you tried any Hammers at all in your 7mm Wby?
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
The Hammers are more lethal, across everything we've shot them in, ranges, shot placements the Hammers are more deadly and are made to penetrate and do mechanical damage to the things that matter in the chest. You don't see a star burst pattern of frag through an animals lungs with a Barnes like a Hammer, you might get a jello hole but only at the right impact velocities and hits, the Hammers open a little later but then when they do they do it fast and big making for excellent permanent wound channels which is what kills! I have had 100% of them track straight through an animal too which is great!!
Andrew Massi
Well-Known Member
Only a sample of the 143
Dr. Vette
Well-Known Member
1:10 twist, or do you have a faster twist barrel?
