Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 30 cal bullet test, cow femurs and newspaper part 1

Kman, Just found this thread from monster muleys web site discussion on bullet performance. Wonderful presentation of your test results. Thank you for all your extensive work and sharing here with us fellow gun lovers and hunters. : )

The biggest lesson here still hasn't been mentioned in 11 pages?

I have found it extremely difficult to sell the fact that Sectional Density is a totally BS argument in grading expanding hunting bullets.

The 130gn TTSX at 3500fps and the stubby handgun cast bullet have the lowest SD in the pack and are up with the best of them in penetration. Not one single surprise in that, but SD will continue to plague theoretical argument long into the future.

Excellent work kman.

I actually plotted the penetration vs. Published SD and it turns out there was no correlation. There was nearly perfect correlation between the SD of the recovered bullet and penetration.

The SD argument falls flat when you compare same caliber and same weight bullet which naturally have same SD.

The 200gn TSX, Partition, Speer and Accubond will achieve penetration based on their construction. The SD theory is out the window.

Bullet construction and inadequacy of same for particular velocity levels, has destroyed the sales potential of some great cartridges and created whole writing careers for some that didn't make the connection.

Yup.

Did I miss the 165 hornady BTSP and 168 AMAX?

Oman,

Thanks for your test. I love reading stuff like this. Some very impressive bullets. I'm really impressed with those Etips and Sciroccos.

Oman,

Have you ever done extensive testing with 6mm bullets? I'd love to see tests like you performed with the 30cal if you ever decide to do any more.

Thanks again,

Dan

Kman,

My previous posts called you Oman- sorry about that - that's auto correct for you.

I'm not at all impressed with most of the Barnes results. You mentioned small wound channels in the Barnes tests due to blow petals, is it safe to assume the petals were blown on impact or shortly thereafter? As far as I am concerned, that is bullet failure, especially considering the performance of the GMX and the E-Tip

How is that bullet failure when tens of millions of animals have been killed with cup and core bullets that did the same thing? Just another thought.

EXCELLENT Point! Most cup and core lose far more mass than what a Barnes or similar loses when it drops a petal or two.

You are free to choose what you want but why would you choose a Barnes that clearly shed its petals before making it through bone rather than any of the others that at least retained some mass, and therefore, ability to cause a signicant wound channel . The Barnes were clearly the worst performers in the group.

There is not a cup and core in the group that lost more mass than several of the Barnes in those photos- and, what they did lose they lost as a result of making a wound channel- not so with Barnes as was noted by Kman.

Simple solution to the problem - shoot thru the ribs, neck or head ........and don't worry about the bullet's ability to break shoulder bone........


Nevertheless good work Kman.........and it also amazes me why we still stick to 165 - 180 grain bullets in the 30 cal when the 130 gr TTSX / GMX or similar will do the job....heck I am even contemplating loading up some 110 grain TTSX's to shoot deer thru my 300 Win Mag.... have tried 110 grain V-Max's and they shoot a treat on varmints. Go figure???
Gus

DaSakoMan,

If I had to guess the 110 grain 30 cal bullet will work exceptionally well. This is based on knowledge of watching a friend many years ago use 110 Sierra HP on deer in Maine out of a 06. Witnessed a lot of DRT's with him using that Sierra bullet and it was accurate off the bench as well. A 110 TTSX out of a 300WM would probably be just awesome with very quick kills on deer.

This was a great read. Thank you very much for all your hard work and taking the time to share it with all of us. I greatly appreciated it.

while I love the test, I looked at the results, and was rather shocked,as too the results my favorite bullet in 30 caliber produced in the test.
I found listed as, well, it was damn near the worst listed! performance..sucked in that test,..then I thought thru decades of results Ive seen on deer and elk and having had zero failures it occurred to me that Ive never shot an elk in the shoulder, and neither has anyone else I hunt with,tried punching holes in shoulder joint,s. Id point out that when you shoot a deer or elk deliberately in the shoulder joint, your sure to loose a good deal of that shoulder,meat.

a 200 speer 30 cal launched from several of the camps 30/06 rifles, has a very good track record,dealing with ,punching thru the lungs and heart area of game, it has for decades produced very dead elk and deer!
the test is certainly interesting, but after using a bullet with complete success for decades in a 30/06 I just can,t jump on the premium bullet band wagon, and abandon a well known productive tool that we have used successfully for many years.the common 30/06 is a very frequent choice among the hunters I know and in skilled hands its fully adequate in most conditions when used to kill deer and elk, easily filling the requirements and with darn few perceived or actual limitations doing so..

http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/item.asp?sku=000212211

Great post! Thanks for sharing!

As to people's desire to shoot really light monometal bullets from 30 cals at very high velocity, good luck to people if that's what they like but... Why is that in any way better than a 180g cup and core bullet solution at more moderate speed?

Seems to me they'll probably both work about the same as far as killing quickly and humanely. Accuracy is likely also to be similar.

And while one will kick a bit less than the other, it will also cost about two-and-a-half times more.

Great work and once again, clear, compelling evidence that the T/TTSXs, by every valid measure of effectiveness are the best bullets out there, or certainly the best of all the ones tested.

I think we are under the assumption that penetration is the sole determining factor in humane harvest. Certainly this test was to see what bullet could penetrate after hitting what appears to be a bovine stifle (it is similar anatomically to the human knee) at five meters. Hitting an animal in other areas of its body may have benefits in bullet frangibility. In other words the ability of a bullet to shed or transfer its energy into the animal instead of passing through and expending it into the dirt or some place out side of the animal. Also dispersal of bullet material into highly vascular tissue may enhance hemorrhage.
However hydro static shock is perhaps best expressed with complete penetration (Much as a sabot round going through the tank turret, will suck out the crewman through the exit hole). Another consideration is the toxic principle of the lead fragments left behind in tissue by the more frangible bullet.
I am a huge fan of Barnes XLC's on Elk but I have had concerns about shots on whitetails in thick woods where the bullet passed through at such an angle where not much energy was left in the animal and not much blood was left on the ground to track it. Excellent post! Many thanks for sharing!