ELDX Wow

dfanonymous said:

I was using YOUR words and YOUR links. I'm not the one with the problem in the discussion.


However the rest of what you are saying is a good discussion, back on topic.
No I'm not saying chamber pressure has anything to do with anything. I'm looking at the velocities. Some powders obviously give you more velocity with less pressure, non of which being the point, what I'm saying is that there has been a set of guidelines, with listed and tested velocities, with listed and tested twist rates that when deviated from, can, but not always, but has caused issues with bullet structure. Again, these elds have different bearing surfaces and different density thickness in jackets, then like stated in my previous example, a Sierra match king

If deviating, from what's factory recommended then things like this happens.

So you saying that 2800s to 3000s is regular velocities for a 147 gr is not accurate. velocity to projectile grain does effect structure. So you laughing at my logic means you are misinformed if you think otherwise.

A 130 gr .264 Winchester mag...I say again 130 grain....magnum....is only getting around 3100 FPS....if you are getting that in a heavier grain...hot rodding.

Extremely high velocity can cause bullet problems with fast twist barrels because of the inertia of the bullet not wanting to rotate causing engraving issues and in extreme cases jacket separation from the core. The heavier the bullet is at the same velocity, the worse the problem.

However even with proper twist barrels, depending on bullet design, velocity, can still cause structural issues. Especially bullets commonly used today where the body is very short placing more load on the surface of the bullet body.
There are only three things that cause bullets blowing up besides manufacture defects....cartridge/bullet/twist combinations.
There's good combines and bad.

Click to expand...

Yes, velocity can (and does) cause structural failure. However, your assertion that is the cause of the reported failures is based on ZERO evidence. Your claim that 2750 from a 7.5 twist is sufficient to cause this failure is baseless and STUPID. Extrapolating that claim from max velocity quoted in a reloading manual, which is only a reflection of PRESSURE LIMITS at a given OAL, is just plain ignorant.

Hornady, themselves, have not asserted that the design limits of the 147 ELD-M were met or exceeded. On the contrary, they have stated they couldn't duplicate the issue and replaced the bullets. Maybe you should enlighten their engineers? I am sure there is a lot that they don't know about behavior of their bullets that you can explain to them.

You're the only one saying things about pressure and OAL. Your bending the point of me showing from simple reloading data that people are hotroading and placing words that aren't there.

Sounds like people thought they knew better and shot them to fast. You have yet to provide any other useful and ACCURATE information to the contrary thus far. All you've done is distort a reloading manual page to something outside the point, and say what I say back to me lol all while claiming not to be bootytickled

YOUR claim that is a manufactures bullets is bad regaudless of name brand has no evidence.
The only evidence I see is people doing things too hard. I'm not judging trying to squeeze velocity. I know why certain people do it for their application. I've done it. However, my assertaion of historical fails being relevant to the here and now when it comes to dusting a bullet is sound, and again you keep saying pressure, I'm showing recommended max velocity. To spell it out is this: Drop it down. For the purpose of this thread I don't care about a kaboom or anything to do with pressure. I am saying slow it down. What is in writing, that's where it is suppose to at: Not at 3000 FPS or whatever.

Your right, they can't duplicate it because they aren't doing stupid stuff in the lab.

I can make bullet blow up right now. Let's load a 147 at 2.5 times recommended velocity in a burnt out barrel, twisted at 1:2.

Truth be told, I don't know how hornady did their testing, but I know internal ballistics and I still standby the overwhelming examples, information and even a "link" from the same website you posted from that all agree that velocity needs to get turnt down.

Hence, don't hotrod.

What next?

"Pressure ahejsje Dndnnenebrbfnsnskj?" What doesntnsidneoep pressure
And velocity have to do with the bullets
Coming apparat?"

Want me to copy and paste it all again? Should I dumb it down a little more?

Honestly, what is there something I missing that I don't know as to why YOU think these bullets are turning to dust out of the examples that YOU posted...? That can't be explained by shooting a heavy bullet and running up the rpms/velocities faster then maybe it should be?

benchracer said:

No one is butt hurt. Get over yourself. I used YOUR words. If you have a problem with that, it is YOUR problem.

Even in a 7.5 twist, there is NO WAY that is enough to cause structural failure of a bullet and 2750 is NOT hotrodding by any definition.

Link #1: 2750 in a 7.5 twist. NOT excessive. Even Hornady hasn't asserted that and THEY would be in a position to know.

Link #2: Three different rifles with 8 twists (Hornady's recommended twist) @ 2880, 2915, and 3061. ALL well within typical 6.5 velocities for the respective cases. Are you really going to assert that the structural integrity of a given bullet is based on the case from which it is fired?

There is ZERO link between chamber pressure and bullet integrity. I defy you to prove otherwise. Your insistence that your assertions are fact based are laughably ignorant.

BTW, I HAVE done my own testing with this bullet, up to mid-2800's from a standard .260 with RL-26, in a Savage 8 twist. Fortunately, no structural failures as yet. My concern is that the problem may be related to specific production lots. Waiting to see how this issue shakes out before buying more 147's. I have a few hundred more of the 147's left, which I will continue to shoot while waiting for answers to the reported problems to emerge. Until then, 143's seem like a reasonable substitute. I know of others using them with good results.

The fact that this problem has also manifested with ELD-M's in other weights and diameters seems to hint at some sort of issue with the jackets. Given that I have personally witnessed jacket failure with early production AMP-jacketed 178 BTHP's, at sedate velocities in a .308, I suspect an issue with the manufacturing process. This is a phenomenon that did not seem to be common with the previous AMAX designs, which were pre-AMP process bullets.

Click to expand...

AMAX bullets are more accurate in my 3 , 30 caliber rifles and they preform great for me also, I do slow them down for close range hunting, and near max them for long range hunting ! Everything that I have shot with the AMAX has been dead on arrival of these bullets ! They came out with the EDL- X and bragged them and the tip up so they could get more sales, along with the discontinuing of the AMAX almost assured making a person buy the EDL-X ! I think this was and is B.S. I bought a few boxes of the AMAX when they got scarce and if I ever run out I will go to another make, probably Sierra, because I feel this was greed and an unfair act by Hornady!

Buck Buster said:

AMAX bullets are more accurate in my 3 , 30 caliber rifles and they preform great for me also, I do slow them down for close range hunting, and near max them for long range hunting ! Everything that I have shot with the AMAX has been dead on arrival of these bullets ! They came out with the EDL- X and bragged them and the tip up so they could get more sales, along with the discontinuing of the AMAX almost assured making a person buy the EDL-X ! I think this was and is B.S. I bought a few boxes of the AMAX when they got scarce and if I ever run out I will go to another make, probably Sierra, because I feel this was greed and an unfair act by Hornady!

Click to expand...

They replaced the Amax with the ELD-M which is an updated Amax with the new tip and improved designs, this is why the Amax was discontinued. There was no need to waste the extra money producing a near identical bullet. Considering the millions they probably spent developing the plastic tip, all the production equipment, developing the new ammo lines, the Doppler radar investment and developing a free Ballistic app all centered around the emerging trend of long range shooting I'm not sure charging a couple extra bucks a box really constitutes as greed.

The Amax was cheap because the development costs have long since been paid for so as long as the price of lead and copper stayed low they didn't need to raise the price. The same will happen with the ELD, the price you see now will be constant for quite a few years rather than starting low in getting increased every couple years.

CMP70306 said:

They replaced the Amax with the ELD-M which is an updated Amax with the new tip and improved designs, this is why the Amax was discontinued. There was no need to waste the extra money producing a near identical bullet. Considering the millions they probably spent developing the plastic tip, all the production equipment, developing the new ammo lines, the Doppler radar investment and developing a free Ballistic app all centered around the emerging trend of long range shooting I'm not sure charging a couple extra bucks a box really constitutes as greed.

The Amax was cheap because the development costs have long since been paid for so as long as the price of lead and copper stayed low they didn't need to raise the price. The same will happen with the ELD, the price you see now will be constant for quite a few years rather than starting low in getting increased every couple years.

Click to expand...

I don't agree but that is me, we all have are own Ideas ! I have read all the information on the doppler B.S. and don't believe it is better, because they don't shoot as accurate in my guns as the AMAX 178 and 168 grain bullets do ! And the cost is greater for the ELD-X compared to the AMAX that I have bought. Again all I see is a gimmick to sucker in more and newer sales. I use what works" best" in my rifles, if the ELD brand bullets work best in someone else's guns by all means us them ! One more thing all guns do not shoot a particular bullet the same way, they have different likes ! In closing I just have to say that each of us have to evaluate each bullets performance in our own guns and that is what I have found to be true in mine! Good luck with whatever you are using, I have great success with the AMAX and will not change from them as long as I have them .

Buck Buster said:

I don't agree but that is me, we all have are own Ideas ! I have read all the information on the doppler B.S. and don't believe it is better, because they don't shoot as accurate in my guns as the AMAX 178 and 168 grain bullets do ! And the cost is greater for the ELD-X compared to the AMAX that I have bought. Again all I see is a gimmick to sucker in more and newer sales. I use what works" best" in my rifles, if the ELD brand bullets work best in someone else's guns by all means us them ! One more thing all guns do not shoot a particular bullet the same way, they have different likes ! In closing I just have to say that each of us have to evaluate each bullets performance in our own guns and that is what I have found to be true in mine! Good luck with whatever you are using, I have great success with the AMAX and will not change from them as long as I have them .

Click to expand...

I have first hand experience with the 140 a-max and 140 eld-m along with the 162A-max and 162 eld-m. The eld-m is legit. The bc is definitely higher on the eld-m bullets. Of course the eld-x costs more than the amax. It's a hunting bullet. The eld-m is what replaced the a-max not the eld-x. The amax treated me well, but I wouldn't go back in favor of the higher bc on the eld-m.

I'm coming in late here and don't know what all the fightings about. I see all these number being shown around but no real results. Heres some numbers for you and some REAL results!

I've shot deer from 50-300y with an eldx out of a 6.5C. All dead. From high shoulder to double lung, great performance. I've heard stories about guys losing deer with them, but with my personal experience I just assume that their shot placement was poor.
No complaints from me. I've got them in 7-08 now. Can't wait to see what they do there.

Three Precision Hunter ELDX 143gr. from my XBolt in 6.5 creedmoor at 100y

Holycity73 said:

Three Precision Hunter ELDX 143gr. from my XBolt in 6.5 creedmoor at 100y

Click to expand...

Again, they appear to shoot great in the 6.5's, but I also remember seeing 5 shot groups you could cover probably with a dime that were shot with AMAX bullets, and I add that I am shooting 30 Calibers, and have tried both type bullets out of all three guns ! I had some good groups with the ELD-X bullets but the AMAX had more consistent groups out of the 30's . I do not have a 6.5 and probably never will, I don't feel a need for one. I have always liked the 30 calibers energy and wind resistance at long ranges and my 308 Norma magnum is still kicking up plenty of dirt with the 178 gr AMAX when I am at my maximum clicks down range and that is at 1550 yards.

Holycity73 said:

Three Precision Hunter ELDX 143gr. from my XBolt in 6.5 creedmoor at 100y

Click to expand...

That is a great group ! I would not change a thing !

My cousin is also one that has experienced the 147s come apart before hitting the target. He's using a .260--almost picture-perfect parallel to the thread that was linked earlier from accurate shooter. He pulled his barrel and had it scoped--showed a rough patch in it, and is getting another barrel. But these 147s aren't being hotrodded at all in a 6.5cm or a .260. Hell, they were designed to be the top-end weight for a 6.5x284 or 6.5 PRC, which would be pushed a lot faster. Whether it's just a fragile jacket that's ultra susceptible to bore imperfections, or whether it's a consistency problem with the jacket itself, has yet to be determined.

Buck Buster said:

I don't agree but that is me, we all have are own Ideas ! I have read all the information on the doppler B.S. and don't believe it is better, because they don't shoot as accurate in my guns as the AMAX 178 and 168 grain bullets do ! And the cost is greater for the ELD-X compared to the AMAX that I have bought. Again all I see is a gimmick to sucker in more and newer sales. I use what works" best" in my rifles, if the ELD brand bullets work best in someone else's guns by all means us them ! One more thing all guns do not shoot a particular bullet the same way, they have different likes ! In closing I just have to say that each of us have to evaluate each bullets performance in our own guns and that is what I have found to be true in mine! Good luck with whatever you are using, I have great success with the AMAX and will not change from them as long as I have them .

Click to expand...

Well the ELD-X is not the same as the Amax so it won't shoot the same because it is a completely different bullet. It's the ELD-M that is almost the same as the old Amax, have you tried any of those in the same weights?

Also I agree, every rifle is different and they all like different things. I shot the 215gr and 230gr Bergers in my .300 WM for years because Hornady didn't have a heavy .30 cal option that could match their BC. When the ELD-X was added I tested the 212gr and found my groups shrank from .75 MOA with the Berger down to .3 MOA with the ELD-X and I was getting the same velocity with less powder. As such I have switched over to the ELDs because they simply worked better in my rifle.

Also I'm not sure how Doppler radar is BS, it's simply radar that tracks the bullet in flight to measure the flight path and determine the BC rather than simply calculating it and providing inflated BCs like Nosler did with the ABLR. Berger and Sierra have been using Doppler for years and I don't see anyone complaining about the improved accuracy of their BCs.

CMP70306 said:

Well the ELD-X is not the same as the Amax so it won't shoot the same because it is a completely different bullet. It's the ELD-M that is almost the same as the old Amax, have you tried any of those in the same weights?

Also I agree, every rifle is different and they all like different things. I shot the 215gr and 230gr Bergers in my .300 WM for years because Hornady didn't have a heavy .30 cal option that could match their BC. When the ELD-X was added I tested the 212gr and found my groups shrank from .75 MOA with the Berger down to .3 MOA with the ELD-X and I was getting the same velocity with less powder. As such I have switched over to the ELDs because they simply worked better in my rifle.

Also I'm not sure how Doppler radar is BS, it's simply radar that tracks the bullet in flight to measure the flight path and determine the BC rather than simply calculating it and providing inflated BCs like Nosler did with the ABLR. Berger and Sierra have been using Doppler for years and I don't see anyone complaining about the improved accuracy of their BCs.

Click to expand...

I have not tried the ELD-M , but I think I could extend my range with the available clicks on my scope if I did like you went to the 200 + grain bullets. I set my scope to be on at 300 yards with nearly all of my clicks left for down range and my 308 Norma has a Douglas barrel that is 1&1/8th inch dia. not the heaviest barrel but holds a 2&1/2 inch group at 300 yards with the 178 AMAX. I have hit oak leaves laying on the snow at 1300 yards on the second shot, the first being low 6" and left 6" I could probably improve but am satisfied with the way it shots now. I only hunt occasionally long range the later part of the season if I haven't filled my tag yet. And what I was getting at about the Doppler was that they could still be as you said Nosler has done, inflate the numbers perhaps they are right, but by my observations of them NOT shooting better in my guns as the AMAX, tends to make me wonder! I also think it is a B.S statement about the tips melting, I have as others recovered bullet fragments, including the poly tip and never saw the slightest sign of any melting ! This also makes me wonder about the whole ELD bullet scenario !