HammerBullets
Well-Known Member
Compared 69gr Sierra bullet to a 71gr Hammer Hunter with same load data. Done this with different calibers. Same results. Hammers are always faster. This time I recorded it.
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
Why Hammer Bullets Are Always Faster
- Thread starter HammerBullets
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Seabeeken
Well-Known Member
Do the same test with absolute hammers.
Absolutely 100 percent meaningless without pressure testing results. Not saying hammers do not get more velocity but this proves nothing. different bullets often get higher or lower velocity with same charge weights. Does not mean pressure is the same nor does "no pressure signs" means ok.
Lou
Lou
Rich Coyle
Well-Known Member
Your post is meaningless to many of us. Why does "no pressure signs" NOT mean it's okay? What makes a load okay or not okay?
Huntnful
Well-Known Member
Not that meaningless actually. I loaded the same exact charge of powder with a 140 ELDM and a 147 ELDM and the 147 went faster because it created more pressure. Learned something new that day lol. I ended up of course getting more speed out of the 140 eventually with more powder. But at the same exact charge weight, the heavier bullet, with longer bearing surface created enough pressure to make it faster.
But I do normally see faster speeds from hammers from a given weight range for what it's worth lol. Normally 80+ fps
It is well documented that traditional pressure signs do not correlate to anything and may only show up well after exceeding pressure limits. Do web searches if interested. Hornady has some recent podcast out on this I think.
If want something useful , I load hammers to published barnes tsx since It is also a banded mono. Data and velocities and charges have roughly matched barnes data in 3 cartridges so far (6.5 creed, 270 win, 300 win). Leads me to believe they are similar but dont know until hammer or some powder company publishes pressure tested data with hammers
Lou
Yeah - I apologize for being a bit blunt. I have seen one too many miracle bullets/cartridges/case designs/etc… that come along in my time that give higher velocity for some reason. Not one of the claims have held up to pressure testing. There may be slight improvements but in general significantly more velocity = more pressure.
For ex, factory loaded 170 HH in 300 wby ammo is listed at 3300 fps. This is about where you would expect a 170 out of a 300 bee. No extra hundreds of fps
Lou
Yep....pressure equals speed and speed equals pressure.
No magic to it, just the way it is
Just watched the video, primers were shown with the 69's post firing and they looked like they'd had plenty. Primers post shooting not shown with the 70's.
No magic to it, just the way it is
Just watched the video, primers were shown with the 69's post firing and they looked like they'd had plenty. Primers post shooting not shown with the 70's.
Last edited:
Rich Coyle
Well-Known Member
Your post is still meaningless. Most of us don't have pressure testing equipment.
Grey Goast
Well-Known Member
I have one Question have you ever seen hammer bullets in long range compitition shooting where accurcy is the game the answer is no- but where hunting game is bringing down with 1 shot so you dont have to track it for a mile you will see hammer bullets. Simple when a man picks out any bullet as his favorite there is no changing his mind not even with data that would prove other wise. same as his favorite fishing rod or rifle - thats just life no need to argue over it,
That is the exact point he is making. You aren't getting free velocity without more pressure and you have no idea how much more pressure. If you use max book data for some other equal weight bullet you are likely pushing pressure past the "safe" point and traditional pressure signs may not show. It's up to you to decide what you are comfortable doing.
Seabeeken
Well-Known Member
I test a lot. First thing I do is load beyond published data to find pressure and then back off. In every case, I get more speed with HH and even more with AH. Less bore friction/resistance = higher speeds with less pressure and the need to use faster burning powders.
As for match shooting them, I get amazing accuracy with them but at +/- $1 ea. it just isnt affordable. Also, the mindset is with Berger being best and most jumped on that bandwagon. Ive also had great results with hammers when hunting but do miss the Barnes where the petals stay on the bullet. The hammer petals can keep the dentist busy. JMO/E
As for match shooting them, I get amazing accuracy with them but at +/- $1 ea. it just isnt affordable. Also, the mindset is with Berger being best and most jumped on that bandwagon. Ive also had great results with hammers when hunting but do miss the Barnes where the petals stay on the bullet. The hammer petals can keep the dentist busy. JMO/E
I have an interest in "anything" that relates to Hammer bullets so anything written in this post is not meaningless!!! WTH did some of you guys put razor blades in your Wheaties for breakfast!!!! Someone took the time to write their opinion, at least respect it!! My limited experience with Hammers is to start low and work up. For whatever reason I've had pressure issues with four rifles, two in 35 Whelen, one in 30-06 and another AR custom match barrel. It's not to say that I didn't get what I was looking for in a load, it's just that when I started too high, like 1 1/2 grains below maximum, I had some pressure issues.
Buckys
Well-Known Member
OP, Thank you for the data, I have been very happy with my limited experience with the Hammers so far.
Please allow me to re-iterate some of the feedback discussed above ... I prefer to not push velocity without published load that includes measured chamber pressures. It is just not safe enough for my taste. Are there any plans to start collecting such data, maybe in collaboration with folks like Weatherby?
Please allow me to re-iterate some of the feedback discussed above ... I prefer to not push velocity without published load that includes measured chamber pressures. It is just not safe enough for my taste. Are there any plans to start collecting such data, maybe in collaboration with folks like Weatherby?
