Please elaborate. Are you saying that when a PVA Cayuga 178 (1.45", G7 .300) and 178 HH (1.49", G7 .205) are propelled with the same amount of powder (same load configuration) that the Hammer will yield more speed?
Least fussy mono-metal bullet?
- Thread starter Totoro
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
I appreciate your honest opinion and for sharing them.
That is always nice to know.
Last edited:
littlebighorn
Well-Known Member
I used to shoot Barnes TTSX but I've switched to Hammer Hunters as my go to bullet. In every case I have tried them, they have been more accurate and easier to work up
Peter Morton
Well-Known Member
I'm a Barnes TTSX fan. Easy to load. Effective on game when velocity is within specs. I want to try Hammers.
Hard rock
Well-Known Member
You won't regret it I used too load Barnes what you will find is a 100 fps gain with theHammer Hunters and a 2 too 3 hundred fps velocity gain with the absolute Hammers easier load development less fouling less sensitive too seating depth and better accuracy and terminal performance what's not too like
Wedgy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2013
- Messages
- 3,225
I have not shot either of those bullets but the Hammer being a softer alloy, more like a lead bullet, and have the bands cut in the bearing surface should give less pressure and yield more velocity, but you would have to add more powder to get that velocity gain. It seems the Hammers like a little more neck tension .003.-004(I don't crimp) to get them going as well. I forget if it was PVA or Badlands that Cody was talking to said they were going to try a softer alloy.
My reasoning for softer alloy is specific to long range shots and mono performance at ~1,000 yards. If you remember Cody's 275 SBD at 882 yards that didn't seem to open up(still baffled by that) and my 227 Hammer at 987 yards that blew a nice exit hole. I think we are looking for something with similar properties to lead for a bullet medium regardless of launch velocity. The softer to alloy and the bigger the hollow point will give a lower speed for expansion extending the range of the shot. Keep in mind most bullet makers list the minimum twist to stabilize their bullets and more twist on monos is a good thing. My .338 is an 8 T, .30 is a 7T, 6.5 is 7 &6.5 T which will probably vaporize lead bullets but I'm in a lead free state. Just my reasoning and why I'm working with these two bullets, Hammer & Cutting Edge.... I'm here to learn just like everyone else !
Last edited:
Hard rock
Well-Known Member
The Hammer bullets are spot on with their recommended twist rate and minimum impact velocity of 1800 fps but it definitely doesn't hurt too spin them and drive them faster a crimp helps also with .003 too.004 tension
I read your response a couple of times, and you did not address why Hammer bullets yield more speed over Barnes, Badlands, PVA as you noted in #28. All three bullets have different band configurations on the bearing surface to help reduce friction. As @highdrum noted in #27, Cayugas band reduces pressure and allows it to be propelled faster. If the claim is that the Hammer bullet can be pushed faster than cup/core bullets because of the bands reducing friction, then yes. But the generalization that Hammer bullet yields faster over Barnes, Badlands, and PVA Cayugas require empirical evidence/testing.
Unless somebody beat me to it or somebody already did it and just hasn't shared it with us yet, I will be experimenting with the Cayuga 117 (1.365"/G7 .282/1:8") and Hammer AH 117 (1.33"/G7 .210/1:8.5") out of my .257 WBTY with 1:7" twist. The load configuration will be the same for both. Now, if I can only find the time to do it.
I am a continuous learner, I guess that's why I am still going to school. 
Wedgy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2013
- Messages
- 3,225
The harder alloys have more engraving pressure and will hit max pressure before a softer alloy. I think the Cayugas have a bore rider like the Cutting Edge Bullets do, CEB calls it a "Seal Tite Band", not sure if they have relief cuts in the bearing surface. I think it comes down to the Hammers having less bearing surface and being softer, more like lead, that yields higher velocities via less friction than a comparable hard alloy bullet. You will have to add more powder to get that speed though, almost like it was a lighter bullet. It is similar to the concept of the Absolute Hammer line.....less friction and more speed.
Last edited:
Bucklowery
Well-Known Member
Hammers have been the answer to all the issues with other Bullets so far. I have not shot Barnes or other monos. I have always been a cup and core guy but not anymore
Thanks
Buck
Thanks
Buck
IHFarmer07
Well-Known Member
Probably a 4 year old buck taken at 156 yards with 6.5 prc shooting 125 Badlands's at 3167. Little low, later found that it was shooting low. Ran probably 20-30 yards of that, not much of a blood trail.
Tonight's does, 76 and 135 yards, dropped, one even expired with the legs up in the air.
Never had found a bullet yet, found a tip but no bullet, every kill has had an exit. First gen badlands minimum speed is 1800 and the new ones are 1700 but the did test lower around 1650 but they recommend 1700fps. One thing I've noticed is the lack of blood trail, they are awesome otherwise, my load is a .3 moa load all the way to 794 yards.
Tonight's does, 76 and 135 yards, dropped, one even expired with the legs up in the air.
Never had found a bullet yet, found a tip but no bullet, every kill has had an exit. First gen badlands minimum speed is 1800 and the new ones are 1700 but the did test lower around 1650 but they recommend 1700fps. One thing I've noticed is the lack of blood trail, they are awesome otherwise, my load is a .3 moa load all the way to 794 yards.
Last edited:
IHFarmer07
Well-Known Member
Lol I can't afford lazers….would love to try them but wowzers they high $$$!!
codyadams
Well-Known Member
The PVA's have a very, very short bearing surface, and you can get them screaming fast. In a 24" supressed 7 mag we are running the 151 at 3390 fps, and first pressure signs didn't show up until way, way faster than that in the form of lightly increased bolt lift and a faint ejector mark. We are also running a 127 Cayuga at 3425 fps from a 25" .270 Sherman, also a good bit under any pressure signs. I got the 170 7mm Cayuga up to 2970ish fps before any pressure signs at all from a 20" 7 Sherman Max. Getting accuracy from these bullets has been easy and forgiving for me.
In my experience hammer bullets are much the same. You get faster velocities than a comparable c&c bullet just like the PVA's, and accuracy is very easy to achieve.
The Badlands bullets, from my testing, seem to reach the same velocities as c&c bullets, but not exceed them. The first gen bullets are a harder alloy than the others mentioned, as stated from the owner George "the hardest available", and while my elk had very strange results, all the other animals I shot with them performed very well and did extensive damage. This year I tried the gen 2 SBD's, and they have done really good in a .270 Sherman and took 1 pronghorn in my .338 Norma. The SBDII's seem to be a little more picky as far as finding good accuracy, but I have only loaded them in 2 guns so far. One thing to consider, is with these bullets, you generally reach pressure with less powder than a c&c of the same weight. Thus, you can consider slower burning powders than you would usually consider for a given bullet weight. I'm using RL26 in a .270 Sherman with the 140 SBDII, and there is significant room left in the case. I may even try a powder like N570. As far as the copper alloy being used in these gen II's, I do not know, but they do seem to be doing more damage than the gen I's did. This is only from 7 animals so far, so it is far too early for me to make a judgment.
I have not used Barnes and do not intend to.
I have not tried cutting edge bullets, I may try them one day.
In my experience hammer bullets are much the same. You get faster velocities than a comparable c&c bullet just like the PVA's, and accuracy is very easy to achieve.
The Badlands bullets, from my testing, seem to reach the same velocities as c&c bullets, but not exceed them. The first gen bullets are a harder alloy than the others mentioned, as stated from the owner George "the hardest available", and while my elk had very strange results, all the other animals I shot with them performed very well and did extensive damage. This year I tried the gen 2 SBD's, and they have done really good in a .270 Sherman and took 1 pronghorn in my .338 Norma. The SBDII's seem to be a little more picky as far as finding good accuracy, but I have only loaded them in 2 guns so far. One thing to consider, is with these bullets, you generally reach pressure with less powder than a c&c of the same weight. Thus, you can consider slower burning powders than you would usually consider for a given bullet weight. I'm using RL26 in a .270 Sherman with the 140 SBDII, and there is significant room left in the case. I may even try a powder like N570. As far as the copper alloy being used in these gen II's, I do not know, but they do seem to be doing more damage than the gen I's did. This is only from 7 animals so far, so it is far too early for me to make a judgment.
I have not used Barnes and do not intend to.
I have not tried cutting edge bullets, I may try them one day.
