Are Hollow Point Bullets Generally More Accurate?

[Turkeytider]

First off, let me say that I am aware that there are no match grade .17HMR loads currently in production. Having said that, I am finding that my particular Savage 93R17 is shooting a CCI 17 grain jacketed hollow point round with greater accuracy and precision than the Vmax loads. I`ve noted that true match grade bullets, at least many if not all, are hollow points of sorts ( not true expanding rounds like hunting hollow points ). It`s led me to wonder if this is just a coincidence or if indeed by nature hollow point bullets are inherently more consistently accurate and precise. I`ve also found that the most accurate rounds out of my .223 are either 55grain hollow point match (Frontier) or a Nosler 62grain hollow point Varmageddon round.

 

[PRD1]

It is true that many match-grade bullets are hollow-pointed, and the reason generally given is that it is easier to make a perfect base for a bullet which has the core inserted from the nose, than to make a perfect base for one which has the core inserted from the rear. It has been demonstrated that a perfect base is more important to the potential accuracy of the bullet than is a perfect nose (other factors being equal, such as finished weight, concentricity of the jacket, consistent form, etc.), and you may have noticed that even the best of HP match bullets often show small irregularities in the closing and final shaping at the nose.

PRD1 - mhb - mIke

 

[ACES&8S]

I find the same to be true for me.
Factory 223 hp always shoot better that the fmj.
I reload the 55-grain sierra hp and it does better than any fmj or sst I have ever shot but I
am sure there are plenty of other opinions other than mine. But then what is .5 of an inch, at
100 yards unless you go fanatic.
Even in my CZ 22 hornet the little 45 grain HP/Bee is a real fox dropper, out to 125 yards
but it or the SST 35 grain can mess up the fur.
However, the 300 win mag shoots SST better albeit the precision of the Sierra 165 grain HPBT
is so close and more efficient in the lethal department, it is my, go to big game bullet to load.

 

[allisd17]

My 7.62x39 bolt gun can get 1 MOA groups from Wolf hollow points; group size more or less doubles with FMJ bullets.

 

[wbm]

Are Hollow Point Bullets Generally More Accurate?

No.

 

[jmr40]

Most match bullets are NOT hollow point. They do have an open tip, which is not truly a hollow point. HP bullets are designed to help bullets expand at slower speeds. Open tipped bullets have a tiny opening, but it does nothing to aid expansion. It is just part of the manufacturing process.

Some manufacturers leave the open tip. Others fill the opening with a plastic tip which does 2 things. It will provide a bit more aerodynamics, and with hunting bullets the plastic tip being pushed back into the open tip may help with expansion.

Most FMJ bullets are not manufactured with accuracy as a priority. I think it would be fair to say that most accurate bullets do have an open tip, but they are not accurate just because of the open tip. They are designed from the beginning to be more accurate, and tolerances are held to higher standards.

 

[Slamfire]

One of my F Class bud's was talking about chamfering the nose of his match bullets. On all of my 168's and 175 SMK's in 308, there is a little hollow circle at the tip, so I call them hollow points. After all, there is a lot of air space in that tip. Match bullets are not meant to be hunting bullets, there is no consideration for controlled expansion at any speed.

I did read an article, decades ago, about the most accurate 9mm pistol bullet. It was some research contract for the military. The hollow point was the most accurate, had to do with having the longest length between a pressure wave out in front, and the center of gravity. I assume it works similarly for rifle ammunition.

But, and this is a huge but, concentricity of the jacket, and having the center of gravity exactly in the axis of rotation are very critical for accuracy. If the center of gravity is out side the axis of rotation, that bullet will wobble in flight. And then, there is something absolutely no in print gun writer talks about: stability at distance. Heck, these guys shoot their rifles at 25 or 100 yards and then make predictions about hitting targets at 1200 yards, and more!. But they don't shoot their bullets at distance. And until I had access to CMP Talladega, I did not know that funnies are real

This was a bullet and a load I shot at 600 and 1000 yards, and I thought I was the world's worst 1000 yard shot. Shoots well at 300 yards




tumbles at 600 yards





Federal Fusions in a 270 Win

shoots well at 300 yards



tumbling at 600 yards



Speer 150 grain flat base bullets for the 270 Win

shoots acceptably well at 300 yards



tumbling at 600 yards



For decades I have been reading these jackasses in print tout the ballistic coefficient, or the trajectory of this or that bullet, and not one of them mentioned bullet instability at distance. And, this includes pistol bullets, I have loaded 44 and 45 bullets slow enough, they tumbled at 50 yards.

 

[PRD1]

The transition from super-to-subsonic flight is particularly likely to cause instability in a bullet which is only marginally stable at long range. I remember shooting a thousand yard match years ago and working in the pits when a friend was shooting his 40X .308 with 168 gr. Match Kings. He had done very well at the earlier shorter ranges with the same load, but couldn't stay on target at the thousand. I told him that his bullets were subsonic (no 'crack' as they passed overhead and little 'pop' when he did strike the target), and most of the bullets which did hit passed through more-or-less sideways. I recommended he change to the 180 gr. MK, which maintained its velocity better and remained supersonic at 1000, while giving excellent accuracy. At the time, I was competing with an Army team and the M14NM rifle. Whenever possible, I made 'Mexican Match' by pulling the M118 bullet and seating either the 168 gr. MK or the 180 gr. MK, without changing the charge in either case. Both loads shot noticeably better than the issued M118 Match ammunition, though that bullet stayed stable to the thousand yard mark.

PRD1 - mhb - MIke

 

[ms6852]

The articles I have read point out that the BTHP's meplat or the point of the bullet is designed that way for long range accuracy by the engineers, and is not designed to expand. The openings in the bullets allows the manufacturers to pour the projectile's core into place while the lead is still molten or liquid. As the lead hardens it becomes form fitted to the jacket which promotes a flatter trajectory and in-flight stability. The hollow point increases the BC like a true pointed bullet.

Also many shooters worry that the jacket edge of the hollow point will make for an inaccurate bullet but that is far from the truth. As bullet rotates, that jacket edge captures air and creates a cone of forced air, making for a more stable and smooth trajectory.

 

[Slamfire]

The transition from super-to-subsonic flight is particularly likely to cause instability in a bullet which is only marginally stable at long range. I remember shooting a thousand yard match years ago and working in the pits when a friend was shooting his 40X .308 with 168 gr. Match Kings. He had done very well at the earlier shorter ranges with the same load, but couldn't stay on target at the thousand. I told him that his bullets were subsonic (no 'crack' as they passed overhead and little 'pop' when he did strike the target), and most of the bullets which did hit passed through more-or-less sideways. I recommended he change to the 180 gr. MK, which maintained its velocity better and remained supersonic at 1000, while giving excellent accuracy. At the time, I was competing with an Army team and the M14NM rifle. Whenever possible, I made 'Mexican Match' by pulling the M118 bullet and seating either the 168 gr. MK or the 180 gr. MK, without changing the charge in either case. Both loads shot noticeably better than the issued M118 Match ammunition, though that bullet stayed stable to the thousand yard mark.

PRD1 - mhb - MIke

I remember a American Rifleman Dope Bag question from the 70's or 80's about the stability of the 168 Match 308 bullets. The article stated for 1000 yards, the military 174 FMJBT was a better bullet because the 168 tumbled around 800 yards. The 175 SMK was not introduced until the late 1990's I think. And I did try shooting a 308 Win NM Garand at 1000 with 168's, and the bullets tumbled.

But, what was out there in the press, was that this was a 168 Match bullet problem. There was absolutely nothing about tumbling being an issue with any other bullet. Well I have had tumbling at 600 yards with 308 caliber 190 Hornady Match, 190 SMK, 200 grain round nose flat base (FB) Federal Fusion in 35 caliber, .277 Federal Fusions in 130 gr FB, 130gr BT, 150 gr BT and FB. And then the Speer 277 150 grain flat base. Bullet instability is not a 168 thing, it is in fact, very common. The shooter does not know, until he tests his load at distance, whether the bullet will tumble at the transition from super sonic to sub sonic. And in my experience, the difference between tumbling and not tumbling at 600 yards was a half a grain of powder for my .277 Federal Fusion 150 grain BT bullets! I am sure, if I had 700 or 800 yard targets, those Federal Fusion bullets stable at 600 yards would have tumbled before it reached the further targets.

And just where is this information? Where is the information that states this bullet tumbles when it goes sub sonic?

 

[Turkeytider]

The articles I have read point out that the BTHP's meplat or the point of the bullet is designed that way for long range accuracy by the engineers, and is not designed to expand. The openings in the bullets allows the manufacturers to pour the projectile's core into place while the lead is still molten or liquid. As the lead hardens it becomes form fitted to the jacket which promotes a flatter trajectory and in-flight stability. The hollow point increases the BC like a true pointed bullet.

Also many shooters worry that the jacket edge of the hollow point will make for an inaccurate bullet but that is far from the truth. As bullet rotates, that jacket edge captures air and creates a cone of forced air, making for a more stable and smooth trajectory.

Obviously a hunting HP has a larger opening than a true match grade HP bullet. Even so, is it safe to assume that the hunting HP and match HP are constructed in the same fashion? IF that`s so, are some of the characteristics that make match HP bullets so accurate also found in a hunting HP round?

 

[High Plains]

In 2013 I toured the Sierra Bullet factory Sedalia, Missouri. I saw the entire manufacturing process and load testing of 168 grain Match Kings going to Federal for their match ammo. The last part of the bullet making was/ is close inspection of every SMK by five women checking meplant size, boat tail angle, weight, color and one more aspect I can’t remember. Any bullet that survives those quality checks is deemed ready for use. Finally, bullets are picked out of the entire lot made that day and accuracy tested in the underground range. The shot group from a heavy-barreled rifle secured to a concrete base was tiny, proving the lot was ready for shipment to Federal.
All this means the checks that go into match bullets make them better than FMJ bullets for hitting paper. FMJs should not be expected to meet accuracy specs like a match bullet——— plastic tipped or not. An very small weight tolerance is important in achieving the desired accuracy. FMJ bullets usually vary slightly in weight (but are still useable) and are not made for repeated precision.

 

[doubleh]

I only load for 2 rifle calibers now so am not qualified to say definitely yea or nay. I do know that over the years my best groups in both .223 and 22-250 have been when I used Sierra HP bullets. Hornady v-max comes close but not quite as good.

 

[ms6852]

Obviously a hunting HP has a larger opening than a true match grade HP bullet. Even so, is it safe to assume that the hunting HP and match HP are constructed in the same fashion? IF that`s so, are some of the characteristics that make match HP bullets so accurate also found in a hunting HP round?

Like I said earlier, my reply is based on articles I had read. So I do not know about HP for hunting and match HP for target. Here is one of the articles I read. Maybe you can find out about the hunting HP's and enlighten us. I've used Remington Core-lokt all my life for hunting.
https://www.ssusa.org/content/why-are-hollow-point-rifle-bullets-more-accurate/

 

[Varminterror]

On the topic of differentiating “hunting HP’s” versus “match BTHP’s,” or match “OTM’s,” the answers are pretty simple.

By labeling a bullet “match,” the manufacturer steps away from the burden of designing jacket construction for controlled expansion, and can optimize either thicker or thinner, tapered or not tapered, however they feel best produces the optimum jacket for their production process. In some brands, that may mean their match bullets have a thicker jacket than their hunting bullets, in other brands, it means the jacket is thicker. For example, Berger uses THICKER jackets in their target bullet line than their hunting bullet line, to promote more rapid expansion in the hunting bullets. Contrarily, Hornady’s ELD/A-Max jackets are thinner than their SST hunting bullet jackets - supposedly to improve bullet performance in game (retention) in their hunting bullets, LIMITING expansion in the hunting bullets compared to their target line.

Manufacturers are also absolved of tip opening obligations, again, to promote expansion, when producing a BTHP/OTM “match” bullet, rather than a hunting bullet. For example, the Long Range Hybrid line from Berger uses a meplat pointing step which improves BC consistency - but might close the nose for less reliable expansion than some other bullets (doesn’t seem to be the case for the 109 LR Hybrids, however).

But I will also comment, most of the Fuddism that “match bullets aren’t designed for hunting,” and “match bullets won’t open in game” is just ignorant crap, passed around as gunshop/internet lore. I’ve used Match bullets for hunting for most of my life, and recall when Hornady even had their A-max (now retipped to become the ELD-m’s) listed in their hunting bullet category. Berger hybrids, Sierra Matchkings, Hornady A-Max & ELD’s… they all penetrate then explode violently in game, bringing quick anchoring and near immediate death, with minimized meat damage compared to conventional soft point hunting bullets.

 

[Riomouse911]

I remember a American Rifleman Dope Bag question from the 70's or 80's about the stability of the 168 Match 308 bullets. The article stated for 1000 yards, the military 174 FMJBT was a better bullet because the 168 tumbled around 800 yards. The 175 SMK was not introduced until the late 1990's I think. And I did try shooting a 308 Win NM Garand at 1000 with 168's, and the bullets tumbled.

But, what was out there in the press, was that this was a 168 Match bullet problem. There was absolutely nothing about tumbling being an issue with any other bullet. Well I have had tumbling at 600 yards with 308 caliber 190 Hornady Match, 190 SMK, 200 grain round nose flat base (FB) Federal Fusion in 35 caliber, .277 Federal Fusions in 130 gr FB, 130gr BT, 150 gr BT and FB. And then the Speer 277 150 grain flat base. Bullet instability is not a 168 thing, it is in fact, very common. The shooter does not know, until he tests his load at distance, whether the bullet will tumble at the transition from super sonic to sub sonic. And in my experience, the difference between tumbling and not tumbling at 600 yards was a half a grain of powder for my .277 Federal Fusion 150 grain BT bullets! I am sure, if I had 700 or 800 yard targets, those Federal Fusion bullets stable at 600 yards would have tumbled before it reached the further targets.

And just where is this information? Where is the information that states this bullet tumbles when it goes sub sonic?

You are saying tumbling. Are your bullets actually tumbling like a kicked football and striking the paper at odd angles at those distances or is the accuracy falling off from inconsistent bullet construction/insufficient bullet speed, etc. and your bullets are straight but groups are rapidly opening up?

Ive fired some shot-out Mini-14 rifles that have had multiple thousands of practice rounds fired through them so the rifling was almost gone. Those had 55 gr fmj bullets strike sideways through paper at 50 to 100 yards. Further than that just keeping shots on 24x36 silhouettes was tough, there was no way to even guess where shots would land.

Just wonderin’.

Stay safe.

 

[robin banks]

One of my F Class bud's was talking about chamfering the nose of his match bullets. On all of my 168's and 175 SMK's in 308, there is a little hollow circle at the tip, so I call them hollow points. After all, there is a lot of air space in that tip. Match bullets are not meant to be hunting bullets, there is no consideration for controlled expansion at any speed.

I did read an article, decades ago, about the most accurate 9mm pistol bullet. It was some research contract for the military. The hollow point was the most accurate, had to do with having the longest length between a pressure wave out in front, and the center of gravity. I assume it works similarly for rifle ammunition.

But, and this is a huge but, concentricity of the jacket, and having the center of gravity exactly in the axis of rotation are very critical for accuracy. If the center of gravity is out side the axis of rotation, that bullet will wobble in flight. And then, there is something absolutely no in print gun writer talks about: stability at distance. Heck, these guys shoot their rifles at 25 or 100 yards and then make predictions about hitting targets at 1200 yards, and more!. But they don't shoot their bullets at distance. And until I had access to CMP Talladega, I did not know that funnies are real

This was a bullet and a load I shot at 600 and 1000 yards, and I thought I was the world's worst 1000 yard shot. Shoots well at 300 yards


View attachment 1082610

tumbles at 600 yards

View attachment 1082611

View attachment 1082612

Federal Fusions in a 270 Win

shoots well at 300 yards

View attachment 1082613

tumbling at 600 yards

View attachment 1082614

Speer 150 grain flat base bullets for the 270 Win

shoots acceptably well at 300 yards

View attachment 1082615

tumbling at 600 yards

View attachment 1082616

For decades I have been reading these jackasses in print tout the ballistic coefficient, or the trajectory of this or that bullet, and not one of them mentioned bullet instability at distance. And, this includes pistol bullets, I have loaded 44 and 45 bullets slow enough, they tumbled at 50 yards.

so you think the bullets are slightly out of round causing the tumbling? I wonder if it would happen that bad with a faster twist or make it worse. your experience is unmatched and I love when guys that shoot at 100 yds think they know everything. you actually prove your points in the field at long range analyzing the results. invaluable info

 

[High Plains]

…… most of the Fuddism that “match bullets aren’t designed for hunting,” and “match bullets won’t open in game” is just ignorant crap, passed around as gunshop/internet lore. I’ve used Match bullets for hunting for most of my life, and recall when Hornady even had their A-max (now retipped to become the ELD-m’s) listed in their hunting bullet category. Berger hybrids, Sierra Matchkings, Hornady A-Max & ELD’s… they all penetrate then explode violently in game, bringing quick anchoring and near immediate death, with minimized meat damage compared to conventional soft point hunting bullets.

YES! The Sierra Match Kings were used by some Army hi-power rifle teammates on deer. Bang-flop was the result. Those deer never stood a chance with guys who knew all the ins and outs of long range marksmanship and bullet drops at certain distances. I’ve seen deer fall to a 168 grain match bullet from a 7mm Rem Mag just as fast as any “hunting” bullet does it.