Basically, the claims are interesting enough but what we gotta do is buy a box or two, work up a load, take them to 800 and see what happens. Hornady say's it's a big deal so a big deal is what I'm expecting. Till lots of bullets are going downrange by people who are spending their own time and money to test them, then there really isn't that much to talk about. Thanks for the innovation Hornady. Now I'm looking forward to seeing them in my grocers freezer. Hopefully they won't be to finicky to find a good load .
Hornady ELD-X bullets
- Thread starter drpbroun5
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 283
Maximum distance measured and frequency of measurement would be two valid reasons for using Doppler Radar for measurement and bullet analysis. If you combine that tool with PRODAS and you've got a suite of testing equipment that is hard to beat!
With sophisticated equipment, it opens a window of visibility that is quite revealing. I'm unaware of any civilian testing that rivals what I've seen from Hornady. Its good to be skeptical, we should all question the validity of any data presented to us as fact.
As a mechanical engineer, I studied material science and fluid dynamics. However, a lot of the understanding these concepts requires needs some pretty serious allocation of mental resources!
Here's a simple scenario that can help the skeptics, or guys like me that want to conserve mental resources
Hornady manufactured a run of 140 Amax bullets and built a portion of them using the new tip material. Then, shot them side by side in the same conditions with the same gun, velocity, etc. The flight behavior Hornady is describing was completely evident by the data collected by the radar. Hornady's testing equipment gives them to ability to really see what the bullet is doing if they are able to avoid any of the potential measurement problems. The comparative analysis of identical bullets that only vary with tip material is a great way to filter out potential errors, and demonstrate the tip melting phenomena.
It wasn't that long ago that people "knew" the world was flat...
With sophisticated equipment, it opens a window of visibility that is quite revealing. I'm unaware of any civilian testing that rivals what I've seen from Hornady. Its good to be skeptical, we should all question the validity of any data presented to us as fact.
As a mechanical engineer, I studied material science and fluid dynamics. However, a lot of the understanding these concepts requires needs some pretty serious allocation of mental resources!
Here's a simple scenario that can help the skeptics, or guys like me that want to conserve mental resources
Hornady manufactured a run of 140 Amax bullets and built a portion of them using the new tip material. Then, shot them side by side in the same conditions with the same gun, velocity, etc. The flight behavior Hornady is describing was completely evident by the data collected by the radar. Hornady's testing equipment gives them to ability to really see what the bullet is doing if they are able to avoid any of the potential measurement problems. The comparative analysis of identical bullets that only vary with tip material is a great way to filter out potential errors, and demonstrate the tip melting phenomena.
It wasn't that long ago that people "knew" the world was flat...
It is interesting to me that evidently NOBODY has seen these bullets except Hornady and Gunwerks. Hornady should get them out to the most knowledgeable shooters that shoot alot over long range in hunting situations so all of us can get a real world field evaluation of these bullets. I'm not questioning Mr. Davidson. What I am saying is that there needs to be an evaluation by many hunters using many weapons systems in a lot of varied field situations to really know the facts on these or any bullet, caliber, powder, etc combination. I would think that Hornady would welcome an unbiased evaluatiopn. Having said that, I have placed an order myself for bullets in 6.5, 7mm, and .308. Midway is taking orders with a projected delivery in a couple of weeks from now.
Paul
Paul
Good to know I will put my orders in also.
I watched hornadys video on the new eld x bullets. Their research determined that the polymer tips were breaking down on 400 yds and up from heat and bullets drastically losing bc. They claim that this is similar across all polymer tip bullets until they designed new heat resistant tips. Is this one of their marketing strategies or is this the real deal? Did a max bullets hold bc @ long range or was the bc false claims?
gohring3006
Well-Known Member
I have to say, that I used the 178 and 208 Amax's with great success out to 1000 yards. I know a few more people who put the 208 Amax out farther than that.
So I'm not sold on the idea that the Amax is a worthless bullet past 400 yards.
All of this hype has ticked me off!!! It has made me switch to Bergers. I am waiting on more test. For a bullet company to tell me that the Amax is the most advanced bullet made just a month ago, to its totally worthless past 400 yards today.
I don't know what to think!!!
So I'm not sold on the idea that the Amax is a worthless bullet past 400 yards.
All of this hype has ticked me off!!! It has made me switch to Bergers. I am waiting on more test. For a bullet company to tell me that the Amax is the most advanced bullet made just a month ago, to its totally worthless past 400 yards today.
I don't know what to think!!!
I haven't heard anyone call the Amax worthless. All they are saying is that inside 400 yards BC is almost irrelevant and we have all known this is true for a long time. There isn't that much difference in drop and drift from a nosler PT to an Amax inside that distance. And this is their point here too. Inside 400 yards the difference between their ELD and Amax is basically unnoticeable. Outside that distance is where BC starts to matter and where they feel it makes a difference. I buy into that concept completely.
Also, they specifically mentioned that cartridges shooting bullets faster are going to experience more of an issue than slower ones. So it isn't surprising to me that this concept makes more sense to some than others. Also, Just because the tip is deforming doesn't mean it isn't good at distance, it just means that the BC is degrading so your drops are worse than they could be with a proper tip that maintains shape.
I too am a big Amax fan but I can say that everyone I know personally that shoots them LR or ELR uses stepped bc's or tweaks their short range numbers so their LR numbers match up. This is very likely why or at least part of it.
To me it seems we have the best of all scenarios coming our way. Price point for the ELD is nearly the same as the Amax and should shoot flatter and drift less. Plus if there ELD-X is what they say, at least for me it will be a nearly perfect all range bullet out to 1/2 mile which is about as far as I shoot at game.
There are a number of guys on the Hide that got to be in on the testing. Stuff gets hammered on over there if it isn't the real deal or what it is supposed to be. I have read nothing but good on this new tech. And the good news is that we are all only a few weeks away from our own testing! Let the fun begin!
gohring3006
Well-Known Member
Looking forward to the tests.
Capt RB
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2014
- Messages
- 1,994
Instead of calculating they used doppler radar to examine the profile. Kinda trumps whatever bc number you plug in. This is what this bullet did at this velocity at this range no??
The Dtac 111 was discontinued rather quickly because of less than predicted results. It had a poly tip.
Kudos to Hornady! If it flies straight and acts accordingly we all benefit from it.
The Dtac 111 was discontinued rather quickly because of less than predicted results. It had a poly tip.
Kudos to Hornady! If it flies straight and acts accordingly we all benefit from it.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 283
We've been working on the transition away from HPBT type bullets for three years now with Hornady. We used VLD hollow points way back in the early stages of the long range hunting movement specifically because the high BCs retained more velocity down range, and more importantly, had less wind deflection. Wind is the primary cause of long range performance failures in hunting situations.
With the development of the Hornady ELD-X, the primary focus was terminal performance. More consistent initiation of expansion. Specifically focusing on high velocity and low velocity impacts. Tipped bullets expand in a more predictable fashion, plus the interlock feature yields high weight retention and higher average penetration depths that standard cup and core bullet builds.
The whole advantage to the new bullet is all about terminal. In our company we shoot A LOT of animals every year. Some for film, some for fun. We are talking over a 100 animals in primarily long range situations. Over 10 years, we have seen every way a bullet can leave you wishing for more.
With the ELD-X the BCs aren't game changing. But they are as good as the industry standard with lower SD because meplat trimming is not required for uniformity. AND they perform better terminally. The fliers are gone (over penetration without expansion, tumbling, etc), and we can expect good terminal performance about 300-400 fps slower than HPBT type bullets.
I can't wait for them to be released to the public! They are working like crazy to get the production units built. I've ordered about 400,000 pcs of the new ELD-X bullets. If any of you run into trouble getting them, let me know.
With the development of the Hornady ELD-X, the primary focus was terminal performance. More consistent initiation of expansion. Specifically focusing on high velocity and low velocity impacts. Tipped bullets expand in a more predictable fashion, plus the interlock feature yields high weight retention and higher average penetration depths that standard cup and core bullet builds.
The whole advantage to the new bullet is all about terminal. In our company we shoot A LOT of animals every year. Some for film, some for fun. We are talking over a 100 animals in primarily long range situations. Over 10 years, we have seen every way a bullet can leave you wishing for more.
With the ELD-X the BCs aren't game changing. But they are as good as the industry standard with lower SD because meplat trimming is not required for uniformity. AND they perform better terminally. The fliers are gone (over penetration without expansion, tumbling, etc), and we can expect good terminal performance about 300-400 fps slower than HPBT type bullets.
I can't wait for them to be released to the public! They are working like crazy to get the production units built. I've ordered about 400,000 pcs of the new ELD-X bullets. If any of you run into trouble getting them, let me know.
I think Aaron summed it up well. I too have been left wanting more. That is, a high BC offering with predictable expansion. Since I primarily use a 308 win, reliable expansion at lower than average velocities is very important to me and increases the effective range of the 308 dramatically. The ABLR was supposed to fill this niche but they seem to be very difficult to tune in many rifles. I have one that shoots them well but struggle to find others to shoot them well.
I've been a fan of Hornaday since I started long range shooting in the early 90s. They're a very accurate and consistent bullet with great terminal performance. The downside has been lower BCs for most of their bullets. The 6.4 140, 7mm 162 and 208 AMAXs were the best which isn't much of a selection.
On that note, I have found that the BCs of the 168 and 178 AMAXs have fallen off the table by the time they reach 1000 yards. Hopefully the new designs improve that.
Aaron, is the 178 ELDX formed any differently than the 178 AMAX?
I've been a fan of Hornaday since I started long range shooting in the early 90s. They're a very accurate and consistent bullet with great terminal performance. The downside has been lower BCs for most of their bullets. The 6.4 140, 7mm 162 and 208 AMAXs were the best which isn't much of a selection.
On that note, I have found that the BCs of the 168 and 178 AMAXs have fallen off the table by the time they reach 1000 yards. Hopefully the new designs improve that.
Aaron, is the 178 ELDX formed any differently than the 178 AMAX?
Aaron,
can you speak to the barrel twist rates that were used to determine the BC's for these new bullets? If you take a look at Brian's analysis of the LR Accubonds, he was able to get near the published BC with some projectiles using what I would consider 'faster-than-typical' barrel ROT (1:7 ROT for the 7mm class of projectiles for example).
I'm hoping this isn't the case with these new Hornady's as well.
Link to his analysis:
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/nosler-lr-accubonds-bc-testing-results-137554/
Also, it would be nice to see Hornady list a minimum twist rate and optimal twist rate similar to what Berger has moved to with their product line.
