Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Any good 338 Federal - .225 Nosler etips loads

I settled on the 210 grain Partition as the all purpose load in my 24" 1-10" ROT 338-06.

I'm still playing around with the Ruger Hawkeye in 338 FED that I bought in 2017, but like the 180 grain AB so far.

I agree with your comment that the 338 FED runs into COAL issues with many of the currently available component bullets in short actions. I have occasionally thought about having JES rebore a spare Savage 99F in 308 to 338 FED, but haven't yet done so because of COAL restrictions in that action.





'

CRS,

Haven't heard of any formal studies involving bullet expansion in different twist rates, but would imagine ballistic gelatin or something like the Test Tube would provide some info.

One of the interesting things about Test Tubes (which were made of relatively soft candle wax) is that unlike ballistic gel they left a permanent wound channel. When sectioned, you could actually see the marks left by the bullet as it twisted through the wax. With lead-cored bullets this normally matched the rifling twist, with one turn in X inches, but with petal-type bullets the rate of turning increased as the bullet penetrated.

Some people (including me) guessed that the increased rate-of-turn was due to the slight propeller angle of the expanded petals, which "grabbed" the wax. Others suggested it was simply due to the bullet slowing down, while it continued to turn at the same rate. I would then ask, "Why doesn't the same thing happen with lead-cored bullets that don't expand in the typical petal shape?"

But I suspect the best test would be to shoot a lot of animals, and record as much data as possible. It wouldn't surprise me that some of the effectiveness of 6.5 rounds (whether the old-timers like the 6.5x55 or newer cases) is due to the typical twist of 1-8 or so.

Very interesting information, the twist difference in bullet construction gives pause for thought.

There is no way that this idea has not been tested by a bullet manufacturer, military, FBI, etc in the past.

I like the idea of shooting lots of animals, but then you have a meta analysis study, without all the proper controls in place.
My science background does not always like those types of studies.

I agree on the effectiveness of fast twist rounds. I thought of that last night while pondering before sleep.

We have shot a lot of deer/antelope with a 1:14 22-250 and Barnes 53gr TSX. I had it rebarreled to 1:8 after shooting the first barrel out. Might have to revisit it again. But our deer populations are not as high as they once were and with both boys being gone, the hunters and demand for venison is certainly decreasing. For quite a few years it was nothing to put 10 plus critters in the freezer between archery, rifle and muzzleloader.

One would think a larger caliber, heavier constructed bullet would be less ROT sensitive than a faster, lighter built bullet. Now, wonder what the actual truth may be.

DF

CRS,

At least one major European ammo manufacturer does tend to test new bullets on animals--partly because in much of Europe wild animals belong to the landowner, and the meat can be sold commercially. Thus a lot of hunters want bullets that will put animals down quickly, before they can cross the property boundary where they belong to another landowner. Many hunters also like using lung shots, to ruin less of the profitable meat. Many property owners also cull considerable amounts of game, both for the meat and to reduce damage to young trees, another commercial consideration.

I had an interesting talk to one of the ammo company's representatives in the U.S. about a dozen years ago. He said they'd shot around 500 animals during the development of their latest bullet, designed to put down game from roe to red deer quickly with lung shots. It turned out that in their trials, bullets that fragmented considerably, as I recall losing at least half their weight, proved to do the job best--and that was how the bullet they eventually introduced was designed (and tested) to act.

This can also be done on a lesser scale in some parts of the U.S., especially Texas, and more American bullet makers are doing more pre-testing on actual animals rather than relying purely on laboratory pre-testing as many used to do. But generally such testing isn't done on the scale of that test in Europe, and often "our" bullets are designed to perform somewhat differently, with more emphasis on deeper penetration and weight retention.