6.5mm copper monos for Elk - LRX vs CX vs E-tip vs CEB vs Hammer vs Lehigh

[ButterBean]

Certainly everyone is entitled to have their own opinions and can choose to hang up on theoretical facts and figures, if they want to. What should be paid the most attention are the real facts and figures and real world testing of said products.
I'm sure all manufacturers test their products, but I can tell you from talking a lot to the Hammer guys, they are serious about terminal performance and heavily resisted market trends that had any potential to reduce terminal performance. If Steve recommends a certain bullet at a certain velocity, you can take it to the bank as far as the terminal performance goes. I doubt you could ever even get the other guys to take your call..... I know I'm off topic a little bit, but had to weigh in given my experiences. And I'm no keyboard ninja. I spend 50 plus days a year at the range, and have harvested all kinds of North American species.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[ButterBean]

Don't know Steve and I'm no credentialed or even self-proclaimed expert, but my advice as an hunter that has some experience with elk hunting is get a bigger gun…

 

[Old Rooster]

https://photos.app.goo.gl/xXw3ZYfbZUHRn
Still learning new technology on posting pics.
Our inside vivint panel shows -24 on panel and out out side thermometers show similar temps.
It's cool in the Helena Valley.
We have low temps due to temp inversion.
I wish I know how to show pics but don't.
Old Rooster

 

[GUNNNN]

My hats off to all the ranchers and farmers, regardless of temperature/weather conditions. You have my utmost respect. My parents made me experience farming/ranching at a young age, and I quickly realized I was not cut out for it. Thank you to all the farmers and

My hats off to all the ranchers and farmers, regardless of temperature/weather conditions. You have my utmost respect. My parents made me experience farming/ranching at a young age, and I quickly realized I was not cut out for it. Thank you to all the farmers and ranchers who help feed America.

Thank you brother

 

[Koda_]

There appears to be two designs: copper expanding bullets (TTSX, LRX, CX, e-Tip) and copper fragmenting bullets (Controlled Chaos, CEB, Hammer).

Because 6.5mm is regarded as marginal on elk and I'm necessarily choosing lighter bullets due to my twist rate's length limitations, I'm inclined toward the expanding bullets that retain the weight. Perhaps the shank of the fragmenting bullets maintains a sectional density equivalent to the heavier but expanded projectile. I don't know how that translates to actual results.

There was a theory I read somewhere that Ive never been able to find more info on. But the idea was between the same bullets except one fully mushrooms (TTSX) and one that sheds petals (Hammer) the one that sheds petals would penetrate deeper because of the fact it shed some weight to match its reduction in velocity as it travels thru.
I cant recall if that was some random forum comment or where I read that but maybe someone could validate that. Seems plausible.

 

[RedsideMT]

I've shot pretty much every mono made except badlands.
I also kill a lot of stuff so I have a large sample size.
For me its hammer is always my first choice followed by cutting edge. Both far outperformed the Barnes for me. My 6.5 creedmore with hammers took 3 elk this year. Two at 608 yards and one a young lady took one at just over 430 yards.

What hammer were you using? Do you know what the approximate impact velocity was on the 600yd shots. That's pretty sweet!

 

[HARPERC]

I see that Hammer claims on their website that their bullets need 1.5 Sg calculated at sea-level for effective terminal performance even if they're used at higher altitude. So, without more spin, does the bullet yaw and fail to open or the shank yaw and fail to exit? It looks like their adamant their bullets won't perform in my twist rate, so I'm disinclined towards the fragmenting type.

Some of us prefer an Sg of 2 for terminal performance.

The 1.5 aids in keeping bullet point on at impact, which in turn aids in expansion as advertised, and a longer wound channel due to maintaining a straighter line.

In my experience absent measuring twist rates are often mis stated. I'd start with the 118 HHT.

I prefer the nose coming off, over a classic mushroom. You will see more penetration, and keeping the velocity higher through the animal typically better wound channels.

Best wishes

 

[HARPERC]

i"ve been told that if you drive the bullet faster it is not imperative to have a faster twist barrel. Is this true up to a point???

Up to a point, generally its tough to make up the difference. Play with the various ballistic calculators on line to get an idea of what to expect from specifics.

 

[snox801]

What hammer were you using? Do you know what the approximate impact velocity was on the 600yd shots. That's pretty sweet!

I'm using the 123gr absolute hammer. Guy i loaded same bullet for last year shot his big bull at 683 yards it stood like it wasn't hit for a second then tipped over dead. He had a longer barrel than me and was starting with a faster speed.
I was at 2145fps according to my app load app at 608.

 

[western living]

My buddy is very pleased with them on his 6.5 CM and has harvested MT/ID bull/cow elk, black bear, deer, and antelope. But his has rifle has 1:8."

View attachment 531979
I ran the numbers using Berger's SG calculator at 5000,', and you must propel the 127 LRX at 3600 FPS for an SG of 1.5 with your barrel twist.

View attachment 531983

Good luck!

I've used the Berger calculator, but it is not using the Miller formula. From what I can tell, Berger is primarily interested in calculating the loss of BC from their calculated Sg.

If I put a reasonable muzzle velocity of 3200 fps into the Berger calc at 5000 feet with a temp of 0 deg. F, I get an Sg of 1.28 which indicates I would be losing 7% of the BC. Instead of a BC of .468, I'd be getting .437 -- still better than Barne's 120 grain TTSX at .412

I won't know without testing, but I don't believe I'd get bullets keyholing under the above conditions. What I don't know and can't easily test is what I'd see with terminal performance.

Using the Miller formula under the same exact parameters - same bullet, same specs, 5000 feet and 0 deg. F, 3200 fps -- I get an Sg of 1.752. If I make conditions worse, 4000 feet, -5 deg. F, I still get a Miller-formula Sg of 1.666

Stability
Input Data
Caliber:	0.264 in	Bullet Weight:	127.0 gr
Bullet Length:	1.402 in	Plastic Tip Length:	0.199 in
Muzzle Velocity:	3200.0 ft/s	Barrel Twist:	9.0 in
Temperature:	-5.0 °F	Pressure:	25.37 in Hg
Output Data
Stability:	1.666

I'm not just wanting to argue calculator results. I can see the Sg results for myself. The question is: how will Sg affect terminal performance?

According to Hammer, they're essentially saying that I need an Sg of 1.9 to get good terminal performance with their bullets -- they say a Miller-formula Sg of 1.5 at sea-level, which would result in a Miller-formula Sg of 1.9 where I live (and even higher where I hunt).

If that's the case with Hammer bullets, what kind of Sg would I need to expect good performance from expanding bullets like TTSX, LRX, CX?

 

[FEENIX]

I've used the Berger calculator, but it is not using the Miller formula. From what I can tell, Berger is primarily interested in calculating the loss of BC from their calculated Sg.

If I put a reasonable muzzle velocity of 3200 fps into the Berger calc at 5000 feet with a temp of 0 deg. F, I get an Sg of 1.28 which indicates I would be losing 7% of the BC. Instead of a BC of .468, I'd be getting .437 -- still better than Barne's 120 grain TTSX at .412

I won't know without testing, but I don't believe I'd get bullets keyholing under the above conditions. What I don't know and can't easily test is what I'd see with terminal performance.

Using the Miller formula under the same exact parameters - same bullet, same specs, 5000 feet and 0 deg. F, 3200 fps -- I get an Sg of 1.752. If I make conditions worse, 4000 feet, -5 deg. F, I still get a Miller-formula Sg of 1.666

Stability
Input Data
Caliber:	0.264 in	Bullet Weight:	127.0 gr
Bullet Length:	1.402 in	Plastic Tip Length:	0.199 in
Muzzle Velocity:	3200.0 ft/s	Barrel Twist:	9.0 in
Temperature:	-5.0 °F	Pressure:	25.37 in Hg
Output Data
Stability:	1.666

I'm not just wanting to argue calculator results. I can see the Sg results for myself. The question is: how will Sg affect terminal performance?

According to Hammer, they're essentially saying that I need an Sg of 1.9 to get good terminal performance with their bullets -- they say a Miller-formula Sg of 1.5 at sea-level, which would result in a Miller-formula Sg of 1.9 where I live (and even higher where I hunt).

If that's the case with Hammer bullets, what kind of Sg would I need to expect good performance from expanding bullets like TTSX, LRX, CX?

I say go for it then.

 

[Koda_]

According to Hammer, they're essentially saying that I need an Sg of 1.9 to get good terminal performance with their bullets -- they say a Miller-formula Sg of 1.5 at sea-level, which would result in a Miller-formula Sg of 1.9 where I live (and even higher where I hunt).

If that's the case with Hammer bullets, what kind of Sg would I need to expect good performance from expanding bullets like TTSX, LRX, CX?

I think your putting too much thought into this.
Pick a bullet and make a load for it and go hunt. The bullets your looking at all are good.

 

[ButterBean]

I think your putting too much thought into this.
Pick a bullet and make a load for it and go hunt. The bullets your looking at all are good.

X-2

 

[COmtnman1]

Certainly everyone is entitled to have their own opinions and can choose to hang up on theoretical facts and figures, if they want to. What should be paid the most attention are the real facts and figures and real world testing of said products.
I'm sure all manufacturers test their products, but I can tell you from talking a lot to the Hammer guys, they are serious about terminal performance and heavily resisted market trends that had any potential to reduce terminal performance. If Steve recommends a certain bullet at a certain velocity, you can take it to the bank as far as the terminal performance goes. I doubt you could ever even get the other guys to take your call..... I know I'm off topic a little bit, but had to weigh in given my experiences. And I'm no keyboard ninja. I spend 50 plus days a year at the range, and have harvested all kinds of North American species.

Opinions??????? Theoretical facts & figures, wow, Really? How long has Barnes been around, how much game has been killed with Barnes bullets? Much longer than your Hammer & etc!!! I just don't understand all of the Barnes bashers on this site, at least it seems to me like it. I'll take a Barnes any day over your other copper mono bullets! They're as successful, & more than most, as any bullet out there in the last 40 years or more. They do have a PROVEN track record, they wouldn't have been around as long as they have if not, search it for yourself. Enuf said. Sorry, didn't mean to offend anyone, but just had to give my 2 cents worth & that's probably all it's worth.