Flat Base vs Boat Tail Bullets

[DMW1116]

I’ve heard a few people talk about how flat based bullets can be more accurate than boat tail bullets at shorter distances. I bought a few to try out but thought I’d do some research first.

Is that actually true? The reasoning about the gasses disturbing the base less seems sound, but that doesn’t mean it works in practice.

If that is true, what is meant by shorter ranges? I don’t have access to a range longer than 300 yards regularly so I’m not looking to stretch that far. I also plan to try these in an iron sighted rifle so that realistically is probably a more restrictive limit than bullet shape.

These are Hornady 55 grain soft points with a flat base and no cannelure. I thought I might try them as an upgrade in bullet accuracy over the 55 grain FMJ bullets I’ve been using.

 

[Charlie98]

These are Hornady 55 grain soft points with a flat base and no cannelure. I thought I might try them as an upgrade in bullet accuracy over the 55 grain FMJ bullets I’ve been using.

I've found that bullet (or similar...) to be extremely accurate, vs a generic FMJ of the same weight. Part of it also might be bullet construction, not necessarily it's shape, et al. SP bullets are simply built better than mass-produced FMJ's, as are BT bullets intended for accuracy (think Sierra MatchKing.)

 

[lightman]

In my limited testing I have found flat base bullets are usually more accurate at 100 and 200 yards. This is comparing like quality bullets. This was also admittedly a small sample in my test.

 

[Laphroaig]

I think that manufacturing procedures in the early days of making boattails was not fully perfected and the bullets were not as accurate. I'm not sure if it was precisely forming the boattail in the jacket, or seating the core into the tapered jacket. Once lore gets entered into the conversation its hard to dispel and gets passed down through the generations.

I'm pretty sure that the manufacturing has improved greatly in the years since. That being said, the advantage of the higher BC boattails comes into play at longer ranges both with trajectory and bucking the wind. I've shot some nice 100 yd. groups with both but still think short range accuracy is slightly skewed toward flat base bullets.

 

[Walkalong]

These are Hornady 55 grain soft points with a flat base and no cannelure. I thought I might try them as an upgrade in bullet accuracy over the 55 grain FMJ bullets I’ve been using.

Almost any SP or HP bullet will shoot better than a FMJ with an open base, the base is critical for accuracy.

You’re going to have to have a world class accurate rifle and skill shooting it to prove the accuracy difference in equal quality boat tail and flat base bullets.

 

[Jim Watson]

You’re going to have to have a world class accurate rifle and skill shooting it to prove the accuracy difference in equal quality boat tail and flat base bullets.

Doesn't everybody on the internet?

 

[GooseGestapo]

Consider that Benchrest competitors shoot at 100 and 200yds.
Almost all shooters shoot exclusively flat base bullets. Only shooters I know that shot boat-tail bullets are .22 cal shooters at 200yds, on windy days.

The boat tail becomes an asset beyond 300yds where reduced drag becomes a benefit.

For the majority of rifles, the difference is undetectable. A rifle may prefer the boat tail for reasons other than the base of the bullet.
My M1 Garand that I use in Garand matches (200yds) will shoot approximately 1.5moa with the best ammo. It just happens to prefer the Hornady 155gr A-max. I bought a large bulk quantity on sale.
Whatever works!

However, just yesterday, I was checking the zero on my Colt Lt.Rifle in .30/06 in prep for cow elk hunt in Utah in Oct. I was using PPU 165gr BTSpt’s 16cent bullets in 2019... shot a 5-shot @.95” group over 56.0 gr of RL17 for over 2,900fps. I may just hunt with these “burners”! It does little better with Sierra GameKings...

My REM 700 HB Tactical (20”bbl) GAGS on the PPU... go figure...

 

[Thomasss]

I don't want to burst your bubble...now where's that pin. lol
I shoot mostly 30.06 and .270 and find that boat tails shoot as good or better than flat bottom bullets even at short distances(100 yards or less).
Read "Handloader" August, 2021, Myths and Misconceptions of Boat Tail Bullets. Elmer Keith was the first to complain about boat tail bullets in 1961. Nosler was the first company to produce them. Basically, bullet construction, back then, caused gas to escape around the bullet sides as they went down the barrel(obturation). Heavier and different copper alloys have corrected that problem.
These days, I've read run out, concentricity and hot burning powders can cause more issues when comparing the two bullet styles and not the bullets themselves. Also, boat tail bullets cost more to manufacture, so bullet companies are now looking at other options to increase ballistic co-efficient and performance.

 

[Jim Watson]

Nosler was the first company to produce them.

This would be news to the US Army, Sierra, Western Tool and Copper Works, and no doubt several others.

 

[Dale Alan]

You’re going to have to have a world class accurate rifle and skill shooting it to prove the accuracy difference in equal quality boat tail and flat base bullets.

Walkalong nailed it .

 

[kmw1954]

When I first started shooting and reloading about a year ago for 223 I was shooting a Savage Axis with a 22" barrel with a 1:9 twist. At the time the only bullets I could find were Hornady 55gr Varmint sp #2265 and #2266 https://www.hornady.com/bullets/rifle/#!/ the BT version actually shot slightly better in my gun. I then went to a 62gr Hornady FMJBT that actually shot better than both the 55gr... Why, I cannot tell you.

 

[Dale Alan]

This would be news to the US Army, Sierra, Western Tool and Copper Works, and no doubt several others.

And lieutenant-colonel Desaleux....1901...

 

[DMW1116]

So it sounds like the issue with the FMJ-BT might be the FMJ instead of the BT.

In any case these are the #2265. I’ll see how the do driven by some CFE 223.

 

[Thomasss]

Nosler was the first successful company to produce boat tail bullets for the civilian use. There were many wildcat loaders experimenting with boat tail bullets including the U.S. armed forces However, the results were poor. The Marine Corp. was shooting them in national matches as early as 1903, but they would also ruin a barrel within a few days. Other manufacturers had boat tail bullets but they would fragment on impact instead of mushroom. And still others that used metals other than copper and consequently stripped the rifling out of their barrels.

 

[barnfrog]

Walkalong nailed it .

As usual.

 

[Archie]

Everything I have read indicates the boat tail configuration gives the bullet a better ballistic coefficient for longer ranges. Most shots in real life (hunting or combat) are 300 yards or less. It seems that boat tail bullets are all that important.
No doubt there are rifles which group better with one type or the other. Only determined by testing.
I use that which is easier to find and easier on my exchequer.

 

[Walkalong]

So it sounds like the issue with the FMJ-BT might be the FMJ instead of the BT.

Yes, the poor to very poor base is the issue, not that they are a BT.

 

[Jim Watson]

Nosler was the first successful company to produce boat tail bullets for the civilian use.

In 1972 Sierra was making boattail soft points, what they now call Game Kings, as well as the target bullets now under the Match King label,
Hornady had boattail target bullets but not hunting bullets.
Nosler cataloged no boattails at all that year.

 

[Howland937]

https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/boattail-vs-flat-base-projectiles/375628

Like has been alluded to previously, lay people like me would probably never see the difference. But there's some pretty interesting info in that article.

 

[Thomasss]

The article stated by Howland937 is full of ifs, possibilities and maybe's.
The article in Handloader magazine addresses those issues through bullet development from early 1900s through the 1950s. Even after boat tail bullet issues were corrected, Elmer Keith continued to complain about them in articles published in his column "Gun Notes," Guns & Ammo magazine1961-62.
Another expert that does independent product testing told me short range bullet accuracy has a lot more to do with run out and concentricity than just about anything else.

 

[AK Hunter]

Yes for short range accuracy use the flat base bullets, they seal better & don't destabilize from the muzzle blast. But if you are shooting past 250 yds the boat tail can help because they will stabilize even after the gas from the muzzle blast hits them. I hear hollow points work better than FMJ at long distance too.

 

[Thomasss]

What amazes me is many people talk about a boat tail bullets "destabilize" by blow-by gases and yet it self corrects itself over longer distances. It's been proven many times with so called brush busting bullets that once a bullet destabilizes by brush, etc. the yaw or deflection only becomes worse over time and distance. How then does the ballistic co-efficient increase only in long distance shooting with a bullet that is off course from the muzzle?.

 

[DMW1116]

For that rifle the max will be 300 but mostly 100 to 200 yards. I’ll load up a test batch and see how they do. If they shoot about 3 MOA then that’s likely my limit not the gun/bullet combo.

 

[Jim Watson]

I have it on good authority Nosler was in full production of boat tail bullets in the mid 1950s

Although Nosler was incorporated in 1948 to make Partitions, Jack O'Connor and Phil Sharpe did not even mention them in their 1953 books.

Nosler catalog section in 1972 Stoegers shows only Partitions and the then-new Solid Base, both flatbase designs.

Awaiting cite to "good authority," because I no longer have other books from 1950s and 1960s.

 

[Dale Alan]

What amazes me is many people talk about a boat tail bullets "destabilize" by blow-by gases and yet it self corrects itself over longer distances. It's been proven many times with so called brush busting bullets that once a bullet destabilizes by brush, etc. the yaw or deflection only becomes worse over time and distance. How then does the ballistic co-efficient increase only in long distance shooting with a bullet that is off course from the muzzle?.

Watch some videos ,do some research .You will soon find out you don't know enough about the subject. Not talking brush busters, talking real life ballistics.