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
Really now, what bullet?
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="elkaholic" data-source="post: 635445" data-attributes="member: 13833"><p>I've spent a considerable amount of time testing various bullets and have been making my own for 6 or 7 years now and have not yet found a perfect bullet for everything, because there isn't one, but there are some rules of thumb. Thinner jacketed bullets such as the Berger or A-max will normally kill quicker and more spectacularly but are also more prone to being more inconsistent as far as performing the same shot to shot when compared to heavier constructed bullets. Similar jackets with varying meplat sizes will perform differently and this is especially true if the bullet has a ballistic tip. Good examples are the Berger vs A-max. The Berger will penetrate farther before expansion takes place which is a benefit at higher velocities while the A-max will expand more easily and uniformly at lower velocities which is an advantage for extreme range. Obviously, the converse of each can be a disadvantage. B.C. always comes into play when you are talking long range for more reasons than drop and wind drift. Every bullet has a threshhold velocity for expansion to occur so a higher b.c. bullet will carry that velocity farther out and allow expansion past the range of a similarly constructed bullet of lesser b.c. Bonded bullets will begin expansion nearly as easy as non bonded (all else being equal) but will penetrate farther with less fragmentation. You can easily see making a case for all of these attributes (or flaws) as the case may be, depending on the intended game, distance etc. This is why there are soooo many arguments about which bullet is the best and also why there are so many bullets<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big Grin :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" />. As many have stated in the past, shot placement is more critical than anything else, but that doesn't excuse using a bullet that won't perform. I've often told people if a Nosler partition had the b.c. of a Berger, I would use them for everything. In fact, I'm trying to work on something similar to that. The best thing I have found is to TEST at the range you plan on shooting. I've been testing reduced loads which duplicate intended range velocities a lot the last few years and this can be a real eye opener! One thing that I've found is (advertised expansion velocities are almost always inflated on the low side) for any reasonable media! Another factor of note is that the smaller the diameter of the projectile, the more important the bullet construction becomes. Conversely, the more frontal area and sectional density, the more forgiving as far as killing. (common sense)..........Rich</p><p>p.s. I'm going to add a qualifier to a statement that I made concerning "heavier constructed bullets being more consistent shot to shot". This is not to suggest that they are better or worse but merely are more predictable in expansion characteristics. It is also possible to be consistently bad for the intended use. Thought I might save some unneccessary discussion there!!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="elkaholic, post: 635445, member: 13833"] I've spent a considerable amount of time testing various bullets and have been making my own for 6 or 7 years now and have not yet found a perfect bullet for everything, because there isn't one, but there are some rules of thumb. Thinner jacketed bullets such as the Berger or A-max will normally kill quicker and more spectacularly but are also more prone to being more inconsistent as far as performing the same shot to shot when compared to heavier constructed bullets. Similar jackets with varying meplat sizes will perform differently and this is especially true if the bullet has a ballistic tip. Good examples are the Berger vs A-max. The Berger will penetrate farther before expansion takes place which is a benefit at higher velocities while the A-max will expand more easily and uniformly at lower velocities which is an advantage for extreme range. Obviously, the converse of each can be a disadvantage. B.C. always comes into play when you are talking long range for more reasons than drop and wind drift. Every bullet has a threshhold velocity for expansion to occur so a higher b.c. bullet will carry that velocity farther out and allow expansion past the range of a similarly constructed bullet of lesser b.c. Bonded bullets will begin expansion nearly as easy as non bonded (all else being equal) but will penetrate farther with less fragmentation. You can easily see making a case for all of these attributes (or flaws) as the case may be, depending on the intended game, distance etc. This is why there are soooo many arguments about which bullet is the best and also why there are so many bullets:D. As many have stated in the past, shot placement is more critical than anything else, but that doesn't excuse using a bullet that won't perform. I've often told people if a Nosler partition had the b.c. of a Berger, I would use them for everything. In fact, I'm trying to work on something similar to that. The best thing I have found is to TEST at the range you plan on shooting. I've been testing reduced loads which duplicate intended range velocities a lot the last few years and this can be a real eye opener! One thing that I've found is (advertised expansion velocities are almost always inflated on the low side) for any reasonable media! Another factor of note is that the smaller the diameter of the projectile, the more important the bullet construction becomes. Conversely, the more frontal area and sectional density, the more forgiving as far as killing. (common sense)..........Rich p.s. I'm going to add a qualifier to a statement that I made concerning "heavier constructed bullets being more consistent shot to shot". This is not to suggest that they are better or worse but merely are more predictable in expansion characteristics. It is also possible to be consistently bad for the intended use. Thought I might save some unneccessary discussion there!! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Really now, what bullet?
Top