OP
OP
troy fairweather
Member
Maybe I can send them a copy of my blue light ID, no biggie if I can't get it.
Bonded vs monolithic bullets.
- Thread starter troy fairweather
- Start date
- Status
Unicorn_Prince
Member
I was using "premium" lead bullets for years until I had one blow up on a cow elk this year. I was pretty close, maybe 80 yards, but it should have held together considering it didn't hit any major bones. When butchering her I found fragments everywhere. I'm done with that. I want a bullet that I can put through two elk shoulders and still have it exit. As far as ballistic coefficients go they may be slightly lower but that should not make a difference at even farther than reasonable hunting distances. High BCs really shine over 500 yds. Monos do require slightly higher impact velocities, even newer ones, from what I can find on manufacturers websites. But again they dont drop to minimum velocities until you reach distances at which most have no business shooting.
Humane?
.38 Special
Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2006
- Messages
- 7,388
I'm actually not sure if it's okay for me to be laughing right now.
High bcs shine closer than 500 yds when the wind is present.
I'm curious what bullet you were using on that cow at 80 yds and how fast it was flying?
These thing just interest me.
WisBorn
Contributing Member
I should have said good clean kills.
With more unethical hunters, and less land open to the public. Tracking a deer more than 100 yards can turn into an argument.
Yes humane
Last edited:
OP
OP
troy fairweather
Member
I always thought it can only be a failure if the bullet comes apart in a way where the proper bullet at the proper speed and is a good normally killing shot. If it killed the animal is it really a failure.
OP
OP
troy fairweather
Member
I lost my biggest buck I ever shot because it went 10 yards and rolled down the hill, on to the neighbor's land, she would not let me get the deer.
It was on a 1200 acre peace of land nw Alabama.
I prefer to drop them.
Last edited:
WisBorn
Contributing Member
I remember on more than one occasion having a wounded animal come to my stand and I put the animal down or walked onto a down animal then go looking for the hunter that shot the animal.
In to many cases people don't do the right thing in help one another.
OP
OP
troy fairweather
Member
Ya I've put a few deer out of there misery, one property I hunt hand a hunting lease that is just up the hill. I don't think the land owner finds less the 4-5 deer carcass in the spring from the city hunters.
Then they had the gal one year to say we shoot up all the deer, unsaid if they didn't start hunting at 9:30 and sound like a hurd of buffalo, and they would recover there deer they would have no problem.
Now every year they call the dec just to waste are time, one reason I haven't hunted there in a few years.
illinoisburt
Member
Monos are not bad. Many are great!
Elk, b.c. discussions, and a blow up failure under 100 yards? My guess would be a 300 mag (win or ultra) with either the SST, ELD, or a Berger based on all the common frustrations I see on other forums. Companies focused on the ELR hunting and shooting market are usually pretty open about their bullets having thin fragile jackets and soft cores so they can still expand at 800+ yards when velocity is falling well under 2k, maybe even mid-teens.
For most hunting situations, plain old standard speed heavy corelocks or powerpoints have been cleanly killing them for decades. Simply a case of matching the bullet to the game.
(Fyi I'm a lifelong Speer hotcor shooter with no complaints.)
Unicorn_Prince
Member
You're half right! 300 WM. Muzzle velocity is around 2960 fps (never chronographed it but that's what the reloading manual says). I won't throw this manufacture under the bus as it may have been a one off incident and they've done pretty well for me for a long time but it wasn't a soft long range bullet. They claim to be "the benchmark by which all modern bullets are measured" however I don't think monos were as prevalent when they came up with that slogan. Im sure someone will figure out who im talking about but I won't confirm or deny lol.
Unicorn_Prince
Member
I would argue that if there is wind is present enough to make that a consideration then it is no longer an ethical shot. Unless of course one is regularly practicing 500+ yd shots and doing so in windy conditions that need practiced being read as well. That's my two cents. Of course if one is doing that then my two cents probably aren't worth as much.
Last edited:
Lol I hear what you're saying, around here, it's easier to count the days without wind than the days with wind so even at 200-300 yards, the dope changes with bullet choice, not dogging the monos, they just don't check EVERY box....... yet.
illinoisburt
Member
The bullet actually worked as designed. Per their FAQ "bullets are designed to expand into consistent mushrooms while retaining 65-70% of their original weight with proven performance over a wide range of velocities and game" so 1/3 turned into fragments is normal.
OP
OP
troy fairweather
Member
I think for now I'll just get some speer hot -cors. I haven't used them in years but we're always good. Still not decided on 145s or 160s. I see midway has them on sale.
I have some 140 hotcors for the 6.5 prc to try out.
I have some 140 hotcors for the 6.5 prc to try out.
Unicorn_Prince
Member
I would disagree as there wasn't one piece that was probably even ¼ of the original weight. But, to play devil's advocate let's say it did retain 60% weight. Monos claim around 95% retention and that's what I would prefer.
Also there was a "main" wound channel but there was fragments in too many places away from that channel that didn't make sense to me for my comfort.
Interestingly I still have the bullet from my first elk well over a decade ago, same lead core projectile. This one worked as I would expect. When I can get it to a sensitive enough scale I'm curious to see what its retained weight was. I'll post ASAP.
Last edited:
Unicorn_Prince
Member
Which action is your 6.5 PRC built on? I think I've made a decision but still gathering info.
Unicorn_Prince
Member
I will agree! Too bad depleted uranium is toxic or tungsten is cost prohibitive and may be toxic as well. I would like to see some higher sectional densities lol. Maybe platinum will keep dropping in price and we can get some platinum core bullets haha
OP
OP
troy fairweather
Member
I have the mauser m18, it's a long action they use a mag that's about 3.30" could make the mag longer but not needed. The 147 hdy eldm touch the lands at about 2.985, I'm loading at 2.950 for a 0.035 ish jump. So I should have plenty of room if I need to chase the lands.
I read some guys can't run long and some can't run long enough. Most is the 2 different throat specs causing the problems.
The only way to get higher sectional density is to raise weight within the caliber, not sure how depleted uranium, tungsten or platinum would help do that unless you're planning on a very fast twist rate on your barrels?
In your example of the 80 yd cow incident, the bullet did what it was supposed to, it was applied improperly though. Cup and cores (and Barnes too, I've been on the phone with them as well) have a minimum and maximum impact velocity. Generally speaking for a c'n'c: 1800-2800 (several exceptions, Berger and sst will get the floor closer to 1600). In my 300 wm I ran 180s to help alleviate some of that dilemma, at close range they'd not over expand, and at longer range, I could put them through a bone knowing they'd still keep trucking. Thus far I've only seen 1 cup and core run hot to cold and exit EVERY time, including impact velocities >2900 from multiple angles. At excessive speeds the monos will still shed petals, even Barnes makes no promises if you push past the ceiling. They do make for a wonderful hide bullet for the tiny exit they make, but depending on the terrain, quarry, and time of year, a mono is not always the right answer around here. Some days I need the high bc splodorific and some days I need TUFF, many days I'm in between, and my loads reflect that as I have a lil of everything ready to go, in general my preference is a detonation inside the chest cavity and it serves me well as I'm quite aware of what I'm asking my bullet to do. Using heavier metals would certainly not serve a good purpose for the hunter who KNOWS his bullet.
mcb
Member
Higher density metals would help section density and not require a faster twist. Remember the required twist rate goes up as the bullet gets longer but if you can maintain a fixed length and increase the mass (blunter nose or denser materials) the required twist rate will go down. At ~19 g/cc a tungsten or uranium core bullet can be shorter and heavier than a lead core (11.3 g/cc) bullet.
The problem with these super dense materials is they are typically expensive and in many cases very hard. Tungsten and spent uranium are both used in AP rounds due to their harness and high density (and pyrophoric properties in the case of uranium). They work great on hard armor not so much on critters since there is no way a tungsten or uranium core is going to expand on a flesh target.
Last edited:
I think we're discussing density vs sectional density, a 180 gr .30 cal bullet will have a sectional density of .271 regardless of design, be it long hollow point, long copper, or short tungsten. If we have a .30 bullet that is 1.2" long, weighing 180 gr, sd is still .271. again the only way to gain SECTIONAL density is to increase weight. So if we can hit 180 gr at .75" with tungsten, regardless of design, it is still .271, when Hornady used aluminum to replace polymer, it did not increase sd without increasing weight.
Let's pretend we could draw/swage out a long hollow cavity on a tungsten core bullet wrapped lightly in a copper jacket (to grab rifling better), it could be 180 gr, with a skived tip for better expansion, with a length of 2" (fast twist) but sd will still only be .271, is it a harder bullet? Absolutely! My m855 has the same sd as my 62sgk.
Unicorn_Prince
Member
As far as exotic metals go in hunting rounds I know they are not practical, I was being slightly facetious lol. Just pointing out, as @horsey300 said, that monos don't check every box for him, they don't for me either. It would be nice if their sectional densities matched that of projectiles with lead in them. Since I'm picking my poison between all copper based and lead based projectiles my experience and limited research is pushing me towards monos.
mcb
Member
I guess my point was that if you have a barrel that would not stabilize a lead core bullet due to not having a fast enough twist. You could create a bullet of the same mass (sectional density) with a denser alloy that might be short enough to stabilize in the same barrel.
No mater how you shape tungsten (and shaping it ain't easy) it is never going to make a good expanding bullet. Tungsten is simply to hard and brittle. It does not plasticly deform the way lead and copper can. If you exceed the yield strength of tungsten if fractures it does not bend or deform, just shatters.
I don't think much of Section Density as it relates to hunting bullets since as a rule a good hunting bullet on impact goes from a high section density to a very low sectional density if it performs well.
- Status
