Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Hammer Bullets
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="jpndave" data-source="post: 1816447" data-attributes="member: 5437"><p>I may regret posting this but here goes...</p><p></p><p>I have never been a fan of mono bullets for a number of reasons. Most of this is from Barnes bullet experiences over the years but others too.</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">engraving pressure</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">low BC</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">possible pencil/terminal performance</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">cost</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">light bullet weights</li> </ul><p>I find myself considering things that I previously wouldn't or didn't see as a good option. As an example, I swore I wouldn't get on the 6.5 Creedmoor bandwagon. I've brought in quite a few rifles for friends and others and they are all nice rifles. All of them are very accurate and pleasant to shoot. The turning point was a recent Mouflon hunt where I borrowed one of those 6.5 Creedmoor rifles (a Christensen Mesa) and it just plain worked. So after returning from the trip I find myself the proud owner of a Kimber Classic in 6.5 Creedmoor - but that's a different story. I bring that up because the CM supporters has been used as a comparison to the Hammer bullets. The CM is not the end all be all that many try to put out there but it does work.</p><p></p><p>Now In looking for bullets for said CM Kimber, I find myself considering solids as that is what I was using in that Christensen. Eating crow on two fronts it seems.</p><p></p><p>Of the above listed disadvantages I would say that Hammer has killed all but two of those - low BC and cost. A third, the lighter bullet weight I probably just need to rethink a little bit with the added velocity and different performance of the solids. Their design seems to eliminate the engraving pressure. The terminal performance, which is what the OP is asking seems to be outstanding with this design. I'm going to lump the Cutting Edge in here with the Hammers and hopefully that doesn't offend anyone, LOL, ya right. The design that sheds petals seems to be a really good one. I don't recall seeing a failure of either posted though surely anything can fail. The blunt tip left after separation gives a nice deep crushing path with the petals adding damage along the way. No way does a mono "blow up" and even if it dumps the petals early and shallow you still have the main core driving through. The only limit on performance it seems is minimum velocity, which Cutting Edge lists for the linked bullet below at 1200fps, or if they don't open up and pencil through.</p><p></p><p>To the low BC and inflated numbers quoted. I'm afraid that is just the drawback of a less dense material rather than lead. The numbers Hammer lists are quoted as being calculated from drops which is going to vary rifle to rifle, twist, speed, etc. Honestly, kudos to them for getting as close as they have for a smaller company without the deep pockets to radar verify things like the bigger manufacturers have. I know quite a few, Hornady, Nosler, (not sure on Berger and others) have recently updated BC ratings as new data comes in. Hornady gives multiple BCs with velocity on the ELDs at least, and of course they list the best one in the main listings. </p><p></p><p>Cost? We can always hope for better but these are lathe turned bullets so that might be asking a lot.</p><p></p><p>I have never heard anything but positive both from and about the Hammer company and owners. That's a big plus in my book.</p><p></p><p>I'm debating trying these two for this new rifle.</p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://hammerbullets.com/product/264-cal-125g-hammer-hunter/[/URL]</p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://cuttingedgebullets.com/264-6-5mm-125gr-lazer-tipped-hollow-point-50ct[/URL]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jpndave, post: 1816447, member: 5437"] I may regret posting this but here goes... I have never been a fan of mono bullets for a number of reasons. Most of this is from Barnes bullet experiences over the years but others too. [LIST] [*]engraving pressure [*]low BC [*]possible pencil/terminal performance [*]cost [*]light bullet weights [/LIST] I find myself considering things that I previously wouldn't or didn't see as a good option. As an example, I swore I wouldn't get on the 6.5 Creedmoor bandwagon. I've brought in quite a few rifles for friends and others and they are all nice rifles. All of them are very accurate and pleasant to shoot. The turning point was a recent Mouflon hunt where I borrowed one of those 6.5 Creedmoor rifles (a Christensen Mesa) and it just plain worked. So after returning from the trip I find myself the proud owner of a Kimber Classic in 6.5 Creedmoor - but that's a different story. I bring that up because the CM supporters has been used as a comparison to the Hammer bullets. The CM is not the end all be all that many try to put out there but it does work. Now In looking for bullets for said CM Kimber, I find myself considering solids as that is what I was using in that Christensen. Eating crow on two fronts it seems. Of the above listed disadvantages I would say that Hammer has killed all but two of those - low BC and cost. A third, the lighter bullet weight I probably just need to rethink a little bit with the added velocity and different performance of the solids. Their design seems to eliminate the engraving pressure. The terminal performance, which is what the OP is asking seems to be outstanding with this design. I'm going to lump the Cutting Edge in here with the Hammers and hopefully that doesn't offend anyone, LOL, ya right. The design that sheds petals seems to be a really good one. I don't recall seeing a failure of either posted though surely anything can fail. The blunt tip left after separation gives a nice deep crushing path with the petals adding damage along the way. No way does a mono "blow up" and even if it dumps the petals early and shallow you still have the main core driving through. The only limit on performance it seems is minimum velocity, which Cutting Edge lists for the linked bullet below at 1200fps, or if they don't open up and pencil through. To the low BC and inflated numbers quoted. I'm afraid that is just the drawback of a less dense material rather than lead. The numbers Hammer lists are quoted as being calculated from drops which is going to vary rifle to rifle, twist, speed, etc. Honestly, kudos to them for getting as close as they have for a smaller company without the deep pockets to radar verify things like the bigger manufacturers have. I know quite a few, Hornady, Nosler, (not sure on Berger and others) have recently updated BC ratings as new data comes in. Hornady gives multiple BCs with velocity on the ELDs at least, and of course they list the best one in the main listings. Cost? We can always hope for better but these are lathe turned bullets so that might be asking a lot. I have never heard anything but positive both from and about the Hammer company and owners. That's a big plus in my book. I'm debating trying these two for this new rifle. [URL unfurl="true"]https://hammerbullets.com/product/264-cal-125g-hammer-hunter/[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://cuttingedgebullets.com/264-6-5mm-125gr-lazer-tipped-hollow-point-50ct[/URL] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Hammer Bullets
Top