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
Nosler Accubond Long Range problem
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="Fiftydriver" data-source="post: 846641" data-attributes="member: 10"><p>I have done some testing with mono solids and penetration testing and they do perform differently then an expanding bullet on penetration. The reason is that they do not expand much at all and retain nearly 100% of their original length, this causes some issues as they pass through tissue and often causes them to tumble.</p><p> </p><p>This is reduced with the higher their impact RPM level is. Simply put, the faster they are spinning, generally, the longer they penetrate with their nose pointed forward. The lower their RPM level, the faster they begin to tumble. That said, I have not seen one of these bullets not tumble to some degree in penetration tests. the longer and more aggressive the ogive, it seems the sooner this happens.</p><p> </p><p>The STOPPING bullets with their round or blunt nose profile seem to penetrate the straightest at any RPM level. To that point, the shorter the solid, the straight and more consistant it will penetrate, the longer the bullet, the sooner it will tumble. Just what I have seen in my own testing.</p><p> </p><p>Now, to a cup jacketed bullet. Once a bullet expands, it stops having anything in common with the mono solids because the length of the bullet is greatly reduced and the frontal area of this bullet design is greatly increased. This generally can cause some very inconsistent penetration paths so its pretty hard to say if RPM levels have any real effect on terminal penetration on an expanding bullet.</p><p> </p><p>The controlled expansion bullets such as the Barnes or expanding solids seem to be somewhere in between the two in my testing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fiftydriver, post: 846641, member: 10"] I have done some testing with mono solids and penetration testing and they do perform differently then an expanding bullet on penetration. The reason is that they do not expand much at all and retain nearly 100% of their original length, this causes some issues as they pass through tissue and often causes them to tumble. This is reduced with the higher their impact RPM level is. Simply put, the faster they are spinning, generally, the longer they penetrate with their nose pointed forward. The lower their RPM level, the faster they begin to tumble. That said, I have not seen one of these bullets not tumble to some degree in penetration tests. the longer and more aggressive the ogive, it seems the sooner this happens. The STOPPING bullets with their round or blunt nose profile seem to penetrate the straightest at any RPM level. To that point, the shorter the solid, the straight and more consistant it will penetrate, the longer the bullet, the sooner it will tumble. Just what I have seen in my own testing. Now, to a cup jacketed bullet. Once a bullet expands, it stops having anything in common with the mono solids because the length of the bullet is greatly reduced and the frontal area of this bullet design is greatly increased. This generally can cause some very inconsistent penetration paths so its pretty hard to say if RPM levels have any real effect on terminal penetration on an expanding bullet. The controlled expansion bullets such as the Barnes or expanding solids seem to be somewhere in between the two in my testing. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Nosler Accubond Long Range problem
Top