Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters JB: ballistic tip bullets

It seems I recall mule deer saying Noslers 180 gr 308 ballistic tip got a new formula sometime back and is now a pretty stout bullet. Would that be true of 270 in 150 gr? Or any heavy for caliber bullets? Or something they just did for the 308?

They also beefed up the jacket on the 165 and 168 .30's considerably.

The 200-grain .338 Ballistic Tip, introduced in the early 1990's, was the first really heavy-jacket model (it's now only made as the Ballistic Silvertip). The jacket is about 2/3 of the bullet's entire weight, so it tends to penetrate more like a Partition, even if it loses the core. Since then a number of other Ballistic Tips have been given similar jackets, including the 165, 168 and 180 .30's, and the 180 8mm.

Some other since-discontinued BT's were also heavy-jacket models, such as the 180 .338, 225 .35, 250 9.3 and 260 .375. But they were all converted to AccuBonds, sometimes very soon after introduction. A couple other Ballistic Tips that have relatively heavy jackets are the 120 and 150 7mm's. The 95-grain 6mm also has a great reputation for penetration.

Dunno about the 150 .270, but do have a friend who's used it on elk with no problems. And in general "hunting" (big game) Ballistic Tips are stouter than the original version introduced in the 1980's. Like many bullet companies, Nosler sometimes tweaks the design of existing bullets to improve performance. This can be done not just by modifying the jacket but changing the hardness of the core.

I use the 140’s in my 264’s. They seem to hold together well on deer and pigs. I like the different color tips, because I have 7 mags. I’m always worried about getting a 7 mag in a 264.

Don't think you can get a 7 mag in a .264 chamber, but whatever.

I tried one, the bolt won’t close. That’s good to know. It makes sense that it won’t or someone would have done it. I enjoy your articles very much! Are there any cartridge combinations that could be dangerous?

Not really, at least in SAAMI cartridges.

The calibers of similar cartridges have to be VERY close for it to happen, so if that's a possibility SAAMI changes other dimensions.
Which is why the shoulder on the .280 Remington was moved ahead of the .270's, just enough to prevent chambering a .280 in a .270 with a slightly oversize chamber neck. Same deal with the .270 WSM and 7mm WSM.

Almost all the Hunting BT have the heavier jackets now. Some like the 120 gr 7mm which was designed for silhouette shooting had the heavy jacket from the start. The 260 .375 BT was an oddity in that it had a heavy jacket but would shed it's core even on light game. I wrote to Nosler that someone might get into trouble with these if they tried them on Buffalo. Not sure if I had any influence on them or not but they shortly thereafter turned the 260s into Accubonds and dropped the BT.

Also any of the larger than 30 caliber bullets all started with the heavier hunting jacket configuration. All of them work well on medium game but I am still likely to choose an Accubond or Partition for larger game. This is just personal choice as the heavy jacketed BT would work fine too.

Nosler introduced the AccuBond the year after a bunch of the .30+ Ballistic Tips, like the 225 .35, 250 9.3 and 260 .375. I know this because I went to South Africa to field-test 260-grain .375 Ballistic Tips in 2002, and the next year they replaced it with the AccuBond.

All of the heavy-jacket Ballistic Tips can lose their cores, but the jacket still normally retains at least 60% of the bullet's original weight--which of course tends to overlap the lower end of weight retention in smaller-caliber Partitions. In a way, they perform in the opposite way from conventional cup-and-core bullets, where the core is by far the heaviest part of the bullet. So it's usually no big deal when a heavy-jacket Ballistic Tip loses the core. In fact I can't ever remembering it causing a problem on a big game animal, and I've used them on game up to elk-sized.

Nosler's original criteria for changing Ballistic Tips into AccuBonds was to test both versions in "media," and if there was significant difference in penetration with the AccuBond version, then drop the Ballistic Tip version. Eventually they introduced AccuBonds in some caliber/weight combinations that duplicated Ballistic Tips, but that was due to shooter demand, not any significant difference in penetration.

I know you can chamber and fire a .222 round in a .223! A friend fired a whole magazine of 5 rounds and never knew it until we picked up the brass. It was perfectly fireformed to .223, with a slightly shorter neck.

Head spacing on the extractor most likely.

John B, have you ever tested for accuracy a NAB and a NBT in the same chambering and at least close in weight?

Yeah, and when there's a difference it's usually in favor of the Ballistic Tip.

Mule Deer, have the accuracy differences ever been significant enough to be "practically important"? That's kind of a loaded question, but it isn't meant to be.

No, not for most hunting.

Though my most recent load work-up was with the 129-grain AccuBond Long Range in the 6.5 PRC. After tweaking the seating depth, it's shooting 5-shot groups (not just 3-shot) in half an inch. So far the same rifle hasn't shot Ballistic Tips as well!

I used 130 Grain Ballistic Tip in my 270 win with 58 grains H 4831 one season about 15 years ago. They were accurate. I shot 2 mule deer and 2 white tail deer that season with them. All 4 were standing broad side at ranges of 75 to 150 yards. All 4 were shot in the front shoulder. All 4 completely blew up on impact and only left a surface wound which required tracking 2 of them. All 4 required a second shot to kill them. Maybe I got a bad box? I know I would never use them again. I never had problems with 130 grain Speer, Sierra,Hornady or Nosler Partition Bullets.

I think they are tougher now, I’ve shot a good many pigs with the 130 in my 270. It goes through both shoulders to parts unknown.

JB,

Are the .338 200 grain BST's still as tough as you described?

I shoot 200 AB's in a 338/06. It is a slow, slow barrel. 2670 is all it can muster with the 200 AB's. If the BST's are as tough as you described, I may as well shoot those for elk instead of the AB's.

Thoughts?

That's what I shoot in my real .338.

They are a great elk bullet. Open quick and penetrate deep, and leave BIG holes, and wide, short blood trails.

To back up what Mule Deer said about jacket/core separation I have a load for my .284 Winchester with 120g BT. The velocity is 3200 fps. I shot 2 deer with it. One a whitetail buck at 35 yards. Jacket and core separated, but the jacket was found on the offside under the skin. The other was a mule deer doe (about the same size as the buck). It was shot at 280 yards and it penetrated over 2 ft of the deer before exiting.

saskfox,

I suspect your sense of time is a little off, or your 130 Ballistic Tips were an old box. Haven't encountered remotely resembling that with new-production Ballistic Tips for around 30 years.