Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Phonebook season

So, first a few disclaimers. I only used 20" of wet phonebooks, which clearly wasn't enough for some bullets. And I don't think all the phone books were evenly saturated. That being said. We're gonna have a few rematches early next week when we get those dang 220 gr A-Frames in. I only shot 1 bullet each, better would have been 3 like BCSteve. I shot these at about 10 yards with the chronograph reading right at my usual velocities. A quick review of the bullets used:
.264 100 gr Ballistic Tip, 120 TTSX, 130 Accubond, 140 SST, Speer and Partition.
8mm 150 Speer and 220 Sierra
.358 150 Speer and Partition
But here's what we've got so far:
Bringing up the rear is the 100 grain .264 Ballistic Tip, velocity 3733 fps, penetration 8 inches, expansion 0.547, retained weight 32.3 grains (32.3%), complete loss of lead core. No big surprises here. Actually I was surprised the little jacket even made it that far.

In 9th place was the 220 8mm Sierra. Penetration 12.5" Velocity 2849, expansion 0.779", retained weight 113.7 grains (51.7%). That actually surprised me, the bullet is designed for the 8mm Remington Magnum, I thought it would do better.

In 8th place, 140 grain .264 Hornady SST. Penetration depth 12.75", impact velocity 3215 fps 0.636" expansion, retained weight 48.4 grains (34.5%), complete loss of core.

In 7th place, .264 140 grain Speer 14.5" penetration depth, impact velocity 3270 fps (a bit above normal), .484" expansion, 68.2 gr retained (48.7%).

In 6th place 130 gr .264 Accubond, 15" penetration depth, impact velocity 3309 fps, expansion 0.491", 66.1 gr retained (50.8%)

In 5th place, the surprising 150 gr 8mm Speer, depth 15.5" impact velocity 3339 fps, expansion .509, retained weight 82.6 grains (55.1%)

4th place, 140 gr .264 Partition 19.5" penetration depth, impact velocity 3188, expansion 0.517, retained weight 99.2 grains (70.8%). Shed front core, retained rectal pod.

3 way tie for 1st: 250 grain Speer and Parition (Impact 2885 and 2887 respectively) and 120 TTSX (impact 3515! not sure why so much higher than normal). I'm really surprised that the 250 Speer escaped the box, I don't know if the phone books were any wetter or drier, but it sure put a huge hole in the second phone book.

The bullet line up:

Left to right is: 8mm 220 Sierra, 8mm 150 Speer, .264 140 Partition, .264 130 Accubond, .264 140 Speer, .264 140 SST, and .264 100 Ballistic Tip.
Other pictures are taking forever to load into photobucket, they're coming soon.

Very interesting stuff. Thanks for sharing.

Next up are pictures of the exit "wound" from the second phone book in line. Each retained bullet is also placed next to the wound, then we have a picture of what is left of the bullet. Below is the 220 gr Sierra wound and the bullet


Next is the 8mm 150 gr Speer


This is the wound channel from the 120 TTSX

Below is the 140 SST

[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040202.jpg[/img]
Below is the 140 Speer(left channel, turning the box around to reuse phone books might have been why the 250 gr Speer escaped).
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040194.jpg[/img]
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040203.jpg[/img]
250 Partition
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040195.jpg[/img]
250 Speer
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040196.jpg[/img]
130 Accubond
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040197.jpg[/img]
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040204.jpg[/img]
100 gr Ballistic Tip
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040198.jpg[/img]
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040201.jpg[/img]
140 Partition (phonebook looks a little dry)
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040199.jpg[/img]
[img:center]http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp5/richman_mark/P1040205.jpg[/img]

Great stuff. Thanks for sharing and putting in the "work".

For some crazy reason, UPS Basic apparently means UPS delivers to the post office, which then delivers my package. Anyway, I got the 220 A-Frames in. Gonna back my load down a hair and blast some dry phone books. Just gonna shoot the 120 TTSX, 140 Partition, 250 Partition, 250 Speer and 220 A-Frame.

Ok, shot dry phone books only, here's the results:
The loser is:
250 grain Speer, 10" of dry phone book penetration, impact at 2890 fps, expanded into so weird dirstorted thing, but held together somewhat. Diameter 0.628, retained weight 128.2 grains (51.3%).
4th place with 10.5 inches of penetration is the 120 TTSX, impact at 3464, retained weight 120 grains (100%), diameter .564.

3rd place with 11.25 inches of penetration is the 140 grain Partition. Since it outpenetrated the 120 TTSX in this test, I'm assuming the phone books were too dry when I last shot it, and the books were wetter for the TTSX. Anway impact was 3253, expanded diameter .499, retained weight 96.7 gr (69.1%). Shed the front core.

2nd place with 12 inches was the 220 A-Frame, impact 2798 fps. Diameter 0.576, 193 grains retained (87.7%). Bulged rectal pod, partially shed front core.

1st place with 12.5 inches of penetration was the 250 grain Partition, impact velocity 2875. Expanded to 0.570", 178.2 grains (71.3%)

Here's the line up:

Left to right is the 250 Partition, 250 Speer, 220 A-Frame, 120 TTSX and 140 Partition

Not surprised the 250grNPT won the race. In the 350RM, (or 35 Whelen) the 250gr Speer penetrates almost as deep as the 250gr NPT. The 250gr Speer is no slouch in the slower 35s, it will penetrate 7 water filled milk jugs:

MtnHtr

That's a pretty festive little video. I don't know or care how well my results translate to performance on game, but with a mix of calibers, I just wasn't sure what to expect in terms of relative performance. I'm frankly a little disappointed that the Accubond didn't stay together very well. I've used the 140 Nosler Partition a couple of times and knew that two elk shoulders won't hold it. Given how well that 250 gr Partition did (4,500 ft. lbs!) I can't imagine anything I'm likely to have a tag for being able to retain it. The TTSX, I had no idea where it would place relative to the others and am encouraged to see it ranks right next to the 140 Partition.
Other disappointments:
140 SST didn't retain the core, but it did penetrate resonably well. I still wouldn't hesitate to shoot a deer with it. But I likely wouldn't shoot elk with that load.
220 Sierra, I thought for sure it would do well, given how Sierra talks it up as such a tough bullet. It doesn't hold a candle to the A-Frame.
Bonding doesn't seem to do squat. Or maybe I put a little too much stress on the bullets, but the A-Frame sheared most of it's front core, and the Accubond had almost nothing left.
But if I'm looking for a penetrator, I'm going with the mechanical advantage of a partition or solid rear core. Just can't beat that through welds or chemical bonds, not that you need that level penetration for most critters.
Pleasant surprises:
All the Speer Bullets did a good job of retaining a little bit of the lead core and penetrating quite well. Just a great cheap bullet in my opinion. Even the 150 gr 8mm Speer antelope load did a great job.

Disappointment are alway a relative thing, yet your results are nasty wicked. Sure as heck wouldn't want to be a phone book in your neck of the woods, nor anything higher up on the food chain.

Not suprised to see the 140 6.5 Partition running with the big dogs... Nor am I suprised to see it do that well in both dry and wet newsprint.

Here's the only Partition I've ever recovered from a big game animal in my life. it took ~2 1/2' of Mule Deer at ~180 yards to stop it (it left the muzzle somewhere around 2725 FPS, I didn't set up my chronograph before I shot him)

So, how did we score on our handicapping?
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...163489/Re_Handicap_this_race#Post3163489

Well I'd give incompletes to MtnHnter and Sam Olson, you have pick 6 horses for a pick-6, not just two. That said, Sam loses anyway assuming he meant 120 TTSX on top with the 140 Partition in second. MtnHunter did a little better picking the overall winner. Steelhead was kinda all over the place picking the 140 Partition to win, and 250 Partition in the middle, but the 220 A-Frame did come in second and of course the 100 gr Ballistic Tip took last.
AJ, you put the 250 Partition a little low, but other than did pretty good.
5sdad did similarly well, picking the bottom end pretty closely and the top end was off by a few slots.
For myself, I got the exacta, but missed the trifecta and overrated the heck out of the 220 Sierra. So I give myslef a gold star.
Trophies and ice cream to all participants, but attaboys only to those who attempted the complete rankings. And basically we all suck at picking winners, although me and MtnHunter did pick the top bullet.
If you can come up with a scoring system, I'm all ears.

I think, incomplete, attaboy, pretty good, pretty closely, and gold star are close enough scores

I'll take a NULA in 284Win, SS barrel with custom paint.

MtnHtr

the speer bullets look to be tougher than I would have thought before I read this. The 120TTSX into the dry phone books is interesting to say the least. I shot dry catalogs at 100 yards with several rifles the only conclusion I could form was that a Nosler 130 flat base in .270 caliber would disentegrate further into a total of 5 inches of paper than a .308 cal 150 grain speer. A 77 grain .223 unknown manufacturer penetrated about as far as a 117 grain Sierra in 257 caliber. Every one of them was nothing more than lead dust and a bit of copper jacket.

I'm wondering what the results would have been at more modest impact velocities....say at 80 - 1-- yards from 6.5x55 and 8x57? I wonder if some of the "lesser" bullets would come into their own?

I wouldn't expect much of anything to hold together when subjected to a heavy, dry medium at .264 Win Mag muzzle velocities. That's a lot to ask of any smaller bullet. It doesn't surprise me the Barnes did well, but anything with a core....

Since I no longer own moderate velocity rifles (sold all but the .358 and .264 when I got my FFL), I couldn't tell you what lower velocities would do, although I could load them down, that doesn't represent what they would do in my guns. I assume the bullets would hold together well, but would they penetrate deeper with more weight at a lower speed? Dunno.
I actually think the Speers did quite well with the high impact speeds. Compare to the Accubond or Hornady SST. You can even see the "interlocking ring" in the Hornady jacket. I had heard good things about the 250 gr Speer from the Canadian guys who use that bullet in their .358s on moose.
This is obviously a tougher test than a deer or elk will provide, but I wanted to compare relative performance at the velocities I would be shooting them at.

I'd shot a lot of Does and Antelope on the east side with 150 grain Hornadys out of an -06. Several times I'd find a coreless jacket in them.

But discussing "bullet failures" that were recovered from DEAD animals is a lot like wiping before you poop...

IIRC, the Partition I recovered from that Muley was 90 something grains, about 67% or so. It amazes me how closely it resembles your 6.5 Partitions

I wasn't calling anything a failure, but I liked how the 140 Speer held up in comparison to the 140 SST.
When shooting deer, I like a fast opener. One of the more interesting bullet recoveries I ever had was from a factory 140 grain Ballistic Silvertip from my .280. I found the bullet at the edge of a fenceline inside between two research enclosures (200 acres each). And since I was the only one culling in those particluar enclosures at the time and I almost always used the same bullet, I was shocked to find the cupped jacket with the black Lubalox coating right at the fenceline, over 100 yards from where I had shot two deer about a year prior to that point.
Point is, I know a jacket without a core will go a long way, and I'm okay with that kind of disruption on deer or antelope (am going to shoot antelope does with that 100 grain load this year). However, I'd feel more comfortable with the Partition or TTSX performance on elk compared to the Speer, SST or Accubond at the velocities I shoot them at. I've taken elk with that 140 Partition, so I am comfortable with that level of performance on bigger stuff.
This year, I don't have any elk/deer combos planned where the .264 might be allowed out to play. And in the future, I likely won't be using SSTs or Speers on those hunts. Just stick to Partitions or TTSXs. I'm still considering all of those bullets for my deer only hunt here in Colorado, but accuracy is going to play a bigger factor in that choice.

Great test. Thanks for sharing it with us. I actually got a box of those 120-grain TTSX's on the way to try in my 7mm wsm. If they shoot, that's all I'm hunting with in that rifle this year.