This is a 168gr Ballistic Silvertip fired from a .308 and recovered from an Idaho bear this past May. Shot was 104 yards broadside through the lungs and the bullet was recovered in the hide on the off side. The bear ran about 30 yards before piling up. There was massive internal damage, but also massive separation of the jacket and core. What you see is all that was found.

Bullet failure, yes or no?...

I wouldn't particularly like that, but you can't argue with results....

If it killed the bear how could it have failed?

I've only seen 2 or 3 bears in my life, but since he was dead I'll say it was not a failure. The bullet actually looks pretty good to me, but I don't know how they're supposed to act on bears. I should have asked firstly, did he run off a long ways, long tracking job, etc? DRT?

Dead bear OR not......

That's NOT how I want my recovered bullets to look.

It does NOT satisfy me........F A I L U R E !

Failure, imo. Sure, the bear died, but a guy last year also killed a bear with a blow to the head with a log, too, iirc.

I like exits. If the bullet doesn't exit, then at least offer a nice and wide mushroom. Also, if you hit the bear in the lungs and made no bone contact, then that is actually pathetic bullet peformance, imo.

Let me give at least 1 reason that performance is UNacceptable.

IF you needed to shoot a raking shot from behind, NOT butt shot, but at last rib angled toward opp shoulder...

that performance might/prolly would kill an animal but PROBABLY not give an exit wound. May or may not give any blood trail.

IF the animal is able to run any distance, you may or may not find it.

I expect hunting bullets to hold together. That's success.

Dead in 30 yards is acceptable on a lung shot bear. Anything lung shot goes some distance - but I'm guessing 30 yards is not excessive. Do I like a bullet to retain integrity on game animals? Why yes, I do, and that bullet did not, but even though the core separated, the core made it to the far side hide.
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . and the bear died . . . . . . humanely, from the sounds of it.

I like the X bullets' performance on game animals from deer to moose, so that would include bear. Never seen an X bullet separate core from jacket.

Did you hit any heavy bone in the shoulder or was it ribs and lungs only?

That's what you get with cup and core a lot of times...People should be used to these results by now......Use a partition next time....

It worked as advertised and designed... how can that be a failure?

Now, if it failed to open when designed to do so, then it would be a failure.

If it were designed to maintain its core and failed to do so then it would be a failure.

None of the above happened.

It worked as advertised.

The bear died.

All that means success.

Tongue in cheek?

Serious bro...I agree with you though....

I agree with Brad.....it appears to have performed as about expected not knowing the velocity.....they are not advertised as "bonded core".....I'd switch bullets.

Much as I love Partition's (and I do), I've used the NBT enough with nothing but success to be a believer. I really like NBT'S. And black bears really aren't all the tough!

Hard to know what to make of some posts. The bear died in 30 yards or so. Can't see any kind of failure in the process. Could the bullet have behaved differently? Who cares. Hit properly, stuff dies. Hit improperly people complain and moan about what could have been with a "better" bullet. I'd love to find a black bear I'd have trouble killing with a 168 grain bullet in a .308 Winchester--I don't think they come that big.................

Amen to that, I've got some to load and shoot in my 308 in the next couple of days. If they perk (which I spect they will) I'll have no problemo using them for all that moves this year.

Dober

Dober,

Are you sure you can use nothing but a Kimber this season? Your M70's might start to question your judgement...

Perfect bullet performance and no Barnes Rodeo!
Btw your average cup and core that shed its core would not have near the retained weight that the BT shown has. BT's have the thickest jacket of any cup and core I have seen.

I would not call it a failure but its not what I want in a bullet. .308 does not stress a bullet with speed. I am always thinking what if you would have shot that from a 300 winny or 300 RUM. There is no way that bullet is going to stand up to those kinds of speeds/stress. Or what if you had shoot him on the flat of th shoulder at 50 yards. It might work fine but then again it might not.

I think Bt's and Accubonds act like a standard cup/core bullet should. If you want to use a standard bullet they are great but if you want a premium bullet performance you need to use something else.

Dink

Brad and others, sincerely I am not being hateful.

I'm asking a real ?

Has anyone ever seen a bullet/ammo maker advertise their bullets to perform and LOOK like this?

I can't remember ever seeing that kind of 'advertisement' from any maker UNLESS a premium used such a pic of what you don't want your bullet to look like.

Seriously -- bullets that I've recovered from tests or game that looked like that are no longer used nor in my loading cabinet.

YMMV

Does not look like a failure to me and apparently the core held with it for most of it's path as the jacket held up quite well. Did the core exit? I've seen the core puke on many cnc bullets, but the jackets looked far worse. Even seen them puke on so called locking pills such as the ILs.

It cracks me up when folks bash NBTs and it really gives me a chuckle when they claim a diff cnc pill is better.

No better lung shot bullet than a ballistic tip..... there are better bullets for shooting bones though. If I have to choose between a 30 yard tracking job with little blood...... or a 400 yard tracking job with a good blood trail...... I'll take the former, especially on ursus.....

As for the bullet in question, it did not fail in any way..... this is what pert'near any CnC bullet would look after a trip through critter clockwork.... if you don't like it.... don't shoot them..... but don't call doing what they're supposed to 'failure'....

Once the jacket has delivered the big wad of lead to the target, it's job is done. It isn't the jacket that kills, it's the big wad of lead traveling thru the vitals messin' things up.

As the old timer said, "At what point in the animal's death did the bullet fail?"

Second, perhaps the impact velocity was too fast for the bullet. Afterall, isn't that a bullet for long range work? Just wondering aloud.

Pictures of recovered bullets are about the worst way to judge a bullets terminal performance.

Rate the wound channel, Was it big enough.. did it penetrate well enough?

I wonder if the current the trend to show recovered bullets pictures has made it to desireable to design bullets that look good and have very high retained weight figures, rather than concentrating on what the bullet does to the animal.

years back, I shot a 230 lb whitetail at a slight quartering on angle at about the same distance with a 130 g nosler BT going 3000 out of a 2-sebenty. the recovered bullet which was on the far hide looked like that. I think the deer made it 10 yds after being hit. bullet failure or not, he's hanging on the wall right now. I think I could have made that same shot 100 times and the results would have been the same.

That the jacket looks so good tells me it had structural support for most of its journey through the bear...few jackets would look that good traveling without some lead in them for any distance. Looks like the core came out very late. Many who would argue failure are ignoring the benefits of an extra projectile in the vitals that would result from separation. Looks like good performance, especially considering the result.

�Failure� is a judgment based on expectations and/or desires. Regardless of whether or not the manufacturer intended the bullet to lose its core (doubtful), there is the matter of the personal expectations of the shooter.

Is it enough to say the bullet performed as expected or desired simply because the animal died?

Consider the following situations. First, you rent car �A� and drive to your destination. There are no problems with the car and you arrive at your destination refreshed from the air-conditioning and relaxed because the seats were comfortable and you were listening to your favorite music and the car performed in all other aspects as expected. A week later you save a few bucks renting car �B� and make the same trip. Shortly after you start the air conditioning fails in 105 degree heat, the seat springs break and the radio quits working. Moreover the windshield wipers fail, a headlight doesn�t work, the brakes quit working properly, the transmission gets stuck in second gear and the engine starts missing on half the cylinders and dies completely immediately after you arrive at your destination.

In both cases you arrived at your destination. Does that make the experiences equivalent? Your first two trips were through desert flats but your third will be on steep mountain roads. For the third trip will you rent car �A� or save a few bucks and rent car �B� because it �usually� works?

What I want out of a bullet is reliable and rapid but controlled and limited expansion and for it to hold together with good weight retention for good penetration over a wide range of impact velocities. With the bullets available today it really isn�t difficult to find bullets that will meet those expectations.

While the bear died and the performance of the Ballistic Silvertip in question may have been satisfactory to the manufacturer, shooter and others, it failed to meet my expectations and desires for bullet performance. What would have happened if a follow-up shot was necessary and all that was available was one at the south end as the bear fled north? There are quite a few bullets I would trust for such a shot over the Ballistic Silvertip and it is probable/certain they would have performed equally well on the first shot. Make mine a Grand Slam, Partition, AccuBond, Scirocco-II, A-Frame, Trophy Bonded, North Fork, TTSX, MRX, etc.

Here is a picture of four recovered bullets. From left to right:
350g North Fork FP, .45-70, 6x6 elk
160g Grand Slam, 7mm Rem Mag, 5x5 elk
162g Hornady InterLock BTSP, 7mm Rem Mag, spike elk
180g North Fork SS, .300 Win Mag, 200-yard steel



The 350g North Fork passed through the left front leg, obliterating a section of leg bone, obliterated a section of near rib, shattered the far rib and came to rest under the hide on the off side.
The Grand Slam destroyed both shoulder joints of a 5x5 bull before coming to rest under the off-side hide. Weight retention was over 70%.
The Hornady InterLock BTSP passed through a near rib, missed the far ribs (possibly nicked one slightly) before coming to rest under the hide on the off-side. Weight retention was under 48%.
The North Fork was the ONLY bullet I tested against the 200 yard steel where there was anything left to recover. (Barnes bullets left a beautiful copper plated impression, though. )

Both the Grand Slam and the Hornady BTSP were fired from the same gun at about the same distance (~110 yards), about the same muzzle velocity and both were broadside shots. The challenge to the integrity of the Grand Slam, however, was far greater than that for the Hornady InterLock, yet the Grand Slam did a much better job of holding together and penetrating. The Grand Slams always worked fine for me at longer ranges/lower velocities as well, in one case dropping a 6x5 bull straight down at 350 yards with a pass-through. They were Hell on prairie dogs and coyotes, too.

Granted, steel isn�t flesh and bone. Here are two North Fork bullets recovered from game animals. From left to right:
.30-06, 165g North Fork @ 2800fps, 500yds from dirt, 145.0g retained (88%)
.30-06, 165g North Fork @ 2800fps, ~25yds from cow elk, 133.2g retained (81%)
7mm 140g North Fork @ 3200fps, ~150yds from buck mule deer, 131.2g retained (94%)



The second .30-06 North Fork smashed a leg and a rib and was found on the off-side. The 7mm North Fork hit the right ham and was found against the sternum.

I�m convinced that most of the game I�ve taken over the last 30 years would have fallen to my .22-250 with varmint bullets. Even if it were legal in Colorado, however, the .22-250 is not a cartridge I would chose nor would varmint bullets be my choice if it were. Most bullets will work most of the time but the working envelopes are much wider on some than others. At 104 yards that Ballistic Silvertip was probably traveling around 2500fps and maybe slower. At that velocity I would expect a cup-and-core bullet to expand but retain its core. That clearly didn�t happen in this case.

But, yeah, the bear died.

Serious question for those who believe this bullet (OP) failed: Given the many posts and pics about some of the Barnes X bullets, tsx, or whatever else Barnes that, when "caught", has shed it's petals or at least some of them, but kills what it's shot at....is that a failure?

Most BG animals are built with thin ribs and skin,hide,etc. over the chest cavity.From a broadside angle,or even raking slightly from the back, it doesn't take much penetration to get through those ribs and into the vitals from that angle,which are soft, gooey,and easily destroyed...and once you put a substantial hole in them,an animal dies pretty quickly.

Bullets like the one shown create a lot of trauma under those circumstances.

But it is also true that a bullet that has some weight retaining mechanism to it (whether a partition, bonding, mono,or even a heavy tapered jacket) will be a bit more reliable on a wider range of shots,and for good reasons.

First,the ability to hang onto some weight will make them a bit better at breaking heavy bones and the structural integrity will alow them to destroy vitals on their continued passage through the animal. Their retained weight and mass are more likely to cause them to penetrate in a straight line(nothing is infallible);important if your objective is an off side shoulder,and I do believe that simultaneously breaking heavy bones to disable AND continue on in the passage through the animal and destroy vital organs leads to very quick kills.

Next is impact velocity, which can vary,along with distance,where the animal is hit,at what angle, etc.To kill a bullet has to penetrat,and expand.If it gets in far enough and expands in vitals it will kill;but if it expands and wastes itself too soon,can't reach the vitals because it has torn itself up too soon in the passage through an animal, it will not kill well and reliably under a wide range of circumstances.A bullet with some weight retaining mechanism will withstand higher impact velocity better than a bullet that is very lightly constructed.There is a reason that Nosler has beefed up some of its' BT's and that Swift beefed up the Scirrocco....seems some Ultra mag shooters were driving them fast and shooting elk with them....they got unimpressive in a hurry.

JMHO, but I don't fall into the school who believe in rapid disintegration and mutliple wound channels for BG animals.One good wound channel is plenty. If I want to break a big plate glass window, I don't pick up a handful of pebbles....I pick up a big rock.

I think Brad and some others are right; the bullet performed exactly as it was designed and engineered to perform.It just isn't my style of engineering.YMMV.

Sounds like excellent performance as the bullet did a complete pass through. Who cares about a thin guilding metal sleeve anyway?

Depends on your expectations and desires.

My group has yet to recover one form an animal but the one I recovered from water jugs (.308" 180g MRX @ ~3050fps) lost one petal but still retained a high percentage of its original weight. I expected the bullet to lose them all, so it surpassed my expectations.

Judging a bullets performance by what it looks like after the deed, is akin to judging toilet paper by what it looks like after wiping.....

Not bullet failure in my book. I agree with the other guys saying that it performed as one would typically expect.

I shot that same bullet a lot last year from a .308win and only caught one in an animal. It was a hard quartering shot and the recovered bullet looked just like the one pictured in the first post. Everything else penetrated on whitetails and hogs. Blood trails were very good and the last 6 critters shot with said bullet just folded up on the spot. If my animals were bigger or my muzzle velocities were a lot higher, I'd probably look for a tougher bullet. The plan for this season is to try the 200gr .338 version at 2,900 or so. I expect good things......

Something that hasn't been mentioned on this thread is the jacket weighs more than the core in many Ballistic Tips, and the Ballistic Silvertips are constructed exactly the same as BT's of the same weight.

The 168 .30 is one of the models with a very heavy jacket that's 60% or a little more of the bullet's weight. These bullets often lose their cores, but the jacket typically ends up under the hide on the far side, retaining around 55-60% of the original weight.

In fact I've found the jacket of a 200-grain .338 (the first of the heavy-jacket BT's) under the hide on the rump of a 400-pound gemsbok--after shooting the bull in the shoulder and spine at the other end. When Nosler made the 260-grain .375 BT I found the same sort of jacket under the hide on the offside of another gemsbok that died very suddenly--after the bullet broke shoulders.

The reason core separation can be a problem with standard cup-and-cores is the core is the vast majority of the bullet's weight. If the jacket comes off, the lead core often disintegrates because the protection of the harder jacket is gone, and penetration quickly stops.

But the hunting Ballistic Tips are different than standard C&C's, or even the varmint BT's. The jacket is the part of the bullet that does the penetrating.

This bullet didn't fail. It did what big game Ballistic Tips normally do, kill the animal quickly, with the heavy jacket ending up on the far side.

That was the point I was making when asking the question. Nice work Formid.

Mixed answer.

Since you got the bear, I will not say the bullet failed. The classic question has always been 'at what point in the death of the animal did the bullet fail?'.

Having said that, although the bullet succeeded in killing the bear, I do believe that I would ditch that load and find another bullet to use. It succeeded, but not optimally, so I'd go find a partition or something that stuck together better. I'd prolly be lookin' at a partition.

Funny, a lot of people think a ballistic tip shedding its jacket and killing an animal is a failure...but the latest trend of shooting critters with target bullets, which literally explode when hit are not a failure.


Puzzling...

Not a failure, but not what I would use on deer or bear in particular. Bear have a tendency to not produce good blood trails in the fall and two holes are better than one IMO.

A bullet moving through at speed will produce decent cavitation and wreck the internals. A bullet that may produce a somewhat wider albeit shorter wound channel will wreck internals more or less comparably. A shot off the mark is just a problem that you don't blame on the bullet.

I believe that the more likely a complete pass through is the more likely the bullet will follow it's intended path. Conversely, the lees likely to pass through the more likely deflection becomes. Hence I choose penetration with controlled expansion. This bullet might kill well most of the time, but the insurance of a better bullet is cheap enough I just wouldn't bother with this one.

How do you know it wouldnt stand up to RUM velocities? Just speculating?
I happen to have a 180gr I dug out of the off side shoulder of a elk that looks just like the one posted and it had a IMPACT velocity of over 3300 and broke bone going in..

i like john's comment on the differentials in weight in bt bullets, and how much weight the jacket really is--something i did not know, and i also appreciate form's comment on the concept "that it worked", that it was successful, despite what it looked like after the fact...

though a poor analogy, one could look at it this way too;
when our men went to the moon, they were successful--but to be successful, the object that got them there was either a burned out, or burned up hull--a shadow of what it once was...

If a bullet won't penetrate soft tissue at 2800 fps adding 500 feet per second is not going to help it any. It will only cause it to mushroom/come apart faster reducing penetration.

How fast are you running those 180's to get impact speed above 3300?

Dink

Thanks M D -

That info alone causes me to change my opinion ON THIS BULLET.

Otoh - IMO, most c/c bullets are not DESIGNED with sufficient jacket weight to accomplish the task.

Thanks Again
Jerry

Well I don't think you have anything to complain about. While as a general rule I don't like Boat Tail bullets for big game shooting, unless its a barnes X, I understand a lot of hunters do. You collected your bear, no harm done, unless you are the bear in question, then its a big problem. If anything this is a good illustration on said bullet performance at they Velocities you are shooting them at. I could see that the same bullet might be problematic out of say a 300 Weatherby or Dakota for example. And its more to do with Not messing up a more good eatable meat than anything else with me. The only Black Bear I ever took was shot over bait in Maine, 180 gr Hornaday RN was the bullet I used,I didn't collect the bullet so I don't know what shape it was in, I do know that it expanded well took out both lungs and left a good exit hole. It to traveled maybe 30 yards at most. There was only some rib meat that was blood shot.

The bullet was expected to kill the bear. The bear is dead. WTF was the question again ?

I see the pic of the bullet, but where is the dead bear?
Personally, I'd like to see 15-20 dead critter pics rather than bullets....

A 300 RUM with a muzzle velocity of 3375iirc. And again I put a 180 BT through the shoulder bone of a elk at around 100 yards with said combo and the bullet still went through the vitals, the opposite shoulder and was found under the hide. Which kinda shoots your theory all the hell.

Let me get this straight.. You purposely use a bullet that gives up wounding ability in order to provide for complete penetration in a effortto aid in tracking, which is necessitated by lack of wounding? Round and round we go!

Extensive wound channels and (relatively)deep penetration are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

And bullets that don't fragment frequently make very severe wounds.It's expansion characteristics that do this,along with impact velocity.

There is very little harm in a bullet that exits....and very little harm in a bullet that stays in game.Because the bullet that stays in game at 75 yards,may blow on through at 300-400 yards where velocity has dropped of and expansion is not so dramatic.I guess we have all seen this on one animal or another from time to time.

Sounds like the bullet did what it intended. I can't find a way to call that a failure. On the other hand, it would not be my desired performance going in. I'd prefer a bit more insurance for hitting hard things. A partition might do the same but it has the extra weight in the back to keep chugging along.

Ever have to use toilet paper that wasn't up to the intended task? I have, and much prefer a somewhat stouter paper.

Same thing with bread. My wife and I grabbed an unfamiliar brand of bread once when we were on the road, the intent being to make sandwiches later. When we did we discovered there was so little gluten in the bread that it literally fell apart while we were spreading the mayo. We managed to get something resembling sandwiches and filled our bellies, but there is no way I but that brand any more.

The great thing is that we all get to choose what bullets we use. I choose something stouter than many people and am comfortable with both my selections and my reasons for doing so. In this house Ballistic Tips are practice fodder.

My 1st choice... Partitions. Shot Placement & Penetration is much more critical than bullets that create huge wound channels then come apart & don't exit..... A entrance & a Exit Wound means the animal bleeds out faster & more importantly leaves a blood trail if the animal runs off. Ballistic Tips are fine for light skinned game, but would you use that same bullet on Grizzlies or Cape Buffalos ?
I wouldn't be afraid to use my .308 on anything with a 180 Noser Partition or Barnes X bullet. Except maybe a Elephant or Cape Buffalo... But my 1st choice for any bear load would be my 300 Ultra Mag with a 200 grain Partition... Just my humble opinion, though. I don't have any use for Ballistic Tips except for Pronghorn Antelopes & prairie dogs....

Well if you started a 180 BT at 3375 (which is damned fast for a RUM) at 100 yards your velocity would have been around 3160ish (maybe). So much for that 3300 fps impact.

You might have gotten away with busting a elk shoulder with a BT but keep it up and it will let you down.

Dink

I like 'em to drop in their tracks. I've done it with partitions, SST's, IB's, Hornady SP's and a few others.

Dink, not being argumentative and no offense intended.....how many deer/elk sized stuff have you shot through the shoulders with a BT?

I have zero experience with them since 1990 or so, but there's a few guys here who have shot literal truckloads of deer/elk sized stuff with the BT's. I've asked them many questions and they really sing their praises. I believe what they say.

Not a failure.

I've seen a bunch of those cups over the years. But then, I've killed a mess of animals with NBT's.

What Mule Deer said...

I have shot 10-12 deer/antelope with BT's. Like you I started with them sometime in the 90's when they were really soft. I starting using them again in the last few years after reading what good luck everyone was having with them so killed a few more things with them. I have had the new version not exit deer and antelope on broadside shots when the shoulder was hit. Off the top of my head I think I have killed stuff with them in 270 win, 270 WSM, and 25-06. I shot some coyotes and jackrabbits with them out of my 300 RUM but can't remember shooting anything else with them.

I can't hardly get one designed for big game to exit but shot a antelope doe with a 40 grain BT at 267 yards and it exited. Go figure...

I am a shoulder shooter and think thats why they don't impress me much. I have no doubt some guys have had great luck with them but I wonder if they shooting stuff in the ribs instead of the shoulder.

Dink

Thinking BBC arent you? LOL. of course your right the two arent mutually exclusive. I will have to defer to your expiereance, but will a BBC or simular dig as deep as say a partion or TSX?

Dink [/quote]
A 300 RUM with a muzzle velocity of 3375iirc. And again I put a 180 BT through the shoulder bone of a elk at around 100 yards with said combo and the bullet still went through the vitals, the opposite shoulder and was found under the hide. Which kinda shoots your theory all the hell.

[/quote]

Well if you started a 180 BT at 3375 (which is damned fast for a RUM) at 100 yards your velocity would have been around 3160ish (maybe). So much for that 3300 fps impact.

You might have gotten away with busting a elk shoulder with a BT but keep it up and it will let you down.

Dink [/quote]
You might be right on the impact velocity(or not). The 3300fps was going from memory of the figures in the nosler manual.
I have owned multiple 300 rums. The factory 26" tubes have always done just over 3300fps with remington factory 180gr SS ammo. My current rig is on its second 24" Mike rock 5R barrel and has always gotten alittle more velocity. Brass life has been excellant and I havent seen any signs of high pressure, even on warm days.
What you are doing is making suggestions based assumptions and speculating vs. expiereance. I have actually used the 30 cal 180gr BT's at these velocity levels and have always been happy with the performace and results.
I am not losing any sleep waiting for a bullet failure either.

I had several cup/core separations and 2 that went to fuggin' pieces when the NBT's were relatively new to the market.

I've heard how they are much better now, but the stuff I'm currently using has never let me down, so I see no reason to fool with them again.

JM

If it killed the critter then the bullet did it's job. I've had the same results myself, but the animal has always been dead right quick like.

+1

If by "BBC" you mean Trophy Bonded Bear Claw, the design is very similar to that used by North Fork - solid rear section and bonded lead core up front.

The 7mm 140g NF SS on the right penetrated a mulie buck from right ham to sternum. 3200fps MV, ~150 yards.


By contrast I've had .308" 180g MRX traverse a mulie doe from front to back and exit. 3033fps MV, ~300 yards.

Not exactly the same - heavier, slower bullet and smaller animal - and the North Fork may well have exited had the range been 300 yards. Nevertheless I was very pleased in both cases and both animals went straight down.

BBC= Bitteroot bonded core.

I wouldnt mind using North Forks if they had a little sleeker design. No sense using something with the BC of a brick when you dont have to.

When Mike got out of the business I ended up with a several hundred 7mm 140g North Forks with a sleek profile. When the business was sold the new owners kept the old profile.

Have to say that at the distances I shoot elk (350 max so far) the profile makes no difference. Even at 600 they are easy to put on target. The North Forks have been very accurate in all my rifles and in the .45-70 often are the most consistently consistent loads I build, yielding 5 shot E.S. under 5fps several times. Not that the elk care...

Here's a mess I made with my .45-70 in 2003. The 350g North Fork FP (nothing sleek about that...) went through on a quartering away shot, just around 200 yards. The buck ran 3-4 yards, ran a small circle and collapsed. I've never seen any animal bleed so profusely.

Zactly my thoughts...



FWIW, I've seen every bullet I've ever used look different than in the ads. This is especially true of certain of the tougher bullets. If a bullet is supposed expand, I want it to do so, even way out there. If it is supposed to be be a super penetrator, I don't want to see it unless I really smacked something long in thickness, or at least very tough. If a rapid expander (like the pictured specimen) makes it through the vitals and to the far wall of a critter in more than just traces and bits, well, I'd say it did alright - certainly not a failure. That doesn't mean it would be my first choice for that application however.

I figure if I found the bullet it was because I had a knife in my hand and that was because the animal was DEAD !! I hate skinning live critters. I shoot the 100 gr BT out of my 250 Savage and the deer do not like it when I do that. I have never found a BT in a deer. Last winter I was in my stand and this dink of a doe came thru @ 10 yards and I drilled her. I am 20 feet up in this tree and I had to shoot her almost in the spine.... but not hitting bone. I was looking for her to fold right there but she flinched at the shot and kind of wobbled off about 40 yards snd stood there for 30 seconds or so and walked another 30 yards and laid down and died. When I walked up to her, there was a splash wound in the hide the size of a half dollar..... and an exit wound out her chest. She tasted fine.Pretty recovered bullets make good selling ads and good stories but fresh back straps in the cast iron skillet are better. Dead is dead. The bullet worked.

I remember you told me your Dad used them...also recall your impression from using them yourself.

Yes I meant those (although today there are others I'm sure do the same things but I have not run out of BBC's yet,so I'll keep using them); and the answer to the question is "yes","no",and "sometimes"

Ben, they are very much creatures of the velocity at which they impact;and as much as any bullet I have bumped into,really thrive at high speeds.Counterintuitively,sometimes the faster you drive them into something, the deeper they penetrate;because they will initially expand to a broad frontal area,but the very heavy copper jackets (in 30 cal,say,about .060)and expanded wings do not shear off and are supported by the bonding to the lead core,and instead of breaking off, peel back tighter to the shank, creating a smaller frontal area.Not only Steigers(inventor)noted this, but Mike Brady inventor of the Northfork,noted the same things and it was BBC he sought to emulate,and wrote of this.He told me the same things in conversations.

And also at distance,as velocity falls off,upset is not as dramatic due to very heavy construction,and it can be hard to keep them in animals,especially with broadside shots.

I have seen them blow some very nasty holes in animals,but as often you will find them curled under off side hide after a trip through both shoulders.I have opened elk chest cavities after high velocity impact and it looked like they were run through a blender...more than one guide has commented,asking what we used that caused so much damage,and one was incredulous that it was a 300 WM...he had not seen that kind of damage from the cartridge.

Retained weight has always been 92-95%+.My last one recovered was a 160 from a 7RM that took a bull in the neck straight away,from behind over the shoulders....it went full length of the neck,through vertabrae and muscle, recovered under the chin....in skinning it, the guide commented that the rut weary bull was "sick",because of blood and bruising oozing from pores.....I got a kick out of this because I have heard it before.It was simply trauma and nothing else.

Knowing you shoot the 300 RUM I wish I still had my stash of 30-180's to send you some because at 3375 that bullet would be a real bomb from your rifle...the 165 from a 300 WM at 3200+ makes a real mess.

I know looking at recovered bullets from dead animals may seem an academic exercise to some, but I do not agree that it has no value and I want to know not only that the animal is "dead",but "why";see enough of them,and examine what they did,how they penetrated and damage done this time,and patterns develop,and it provides a good indication of what they will do the next time,making them "predictable",which IMHO is a good thing...one reason I grudgingly stick to Partitions is because of their predictable behaviour in a wide variety of calibers and cartridges,and a wide cross section of conditions.You know pretty much what will happen when the hammer falls.That's reassuring.

We did not end up today with so many good bullets by people NOT looking at recovered bullets and what they did (the two are linked together)and can learn something from every shot and bullet,if we open our eyes and minds.Ignoring this stuff is like examining an accident scene without the examination.

Your 180BT and your elk experience (I remember your photo of the bullet) seems to confirm what Mule Deer has said about the 180 BT....it seems pretty tough.It would have to be to take that kind of impact velocity on an animal that size.

Thought I'd repeat the following from earlier in the thread, because so many people apparently never read entire threads--and don't understand the differences between many of today's bullets. Just because a bullet is classified a "cup and core" or "bonded" or "monolithic" doesn't mean they all act exactly the same:

The jacket weighs more than the core in many Ballistic Tips, and the Ballistic Silvertips are constructed exactly the same as BT's of the same weight.

The 168 .30 is one of the models with a very heavy jacket that's 60% or a little more of the bullet's weight. These bullets often lose their cores, but the jacket typically ends up under the hide on the far side, retaining around 55-60% of the original weight.

In fact I've found the jacket of a 200-grain .338 (the first of the heavy-jacket BT's) under the hide on the rump of a 400-pound gemsbok--after shooting the bull in the shoulder and spine at the other end. When Nosler made the 260-grain .375 BT I found the same sort of jacket under the hide on the offside of another gemsbok that died very suddenly--after the bullet broke shoulders.

The reason core separation can be a problem with standard cup-and-cores is the core is the vast majority of the bullet's weight. If the jacket comes off, the lead core often disintegrates because the protection of the harder jacket is gone, and penetration quickly stops.

But the hunting Ballistic Tips are different than standard C&C's, or even the varmint BT's. The jacket is the part of the bullet that does the penetrating.

This bullet didn't fail. It did what big game Ballistic Tips normally do, kill the animal quickly, with the heavy jacket ending up on the far side.

I bet it left one heck of a wound channel.

Bwalker I have also owned several RUM's. It's my favorite cartridge. I am not guessing at anything. If you like to find bullets in game keep using BT's or any cup/core bullets but sooner or later they will let you down. They were not meant to be driven that fast and shot into animals less than 100 yards.

I will take exit holes every time.

Dink

By your own admission you haven't shot any big game animals with a BT out of your RUM, so you really are guessing on a BT's performance at RUM velocity levels.
Sooner or latter any bullet will let you down as they all do weird stuff on occasion. In the mean team Im not dealing with the Barnes Rodeo and the risk of minimal or no expansion.

Yea, my dad used them quit a bit and he still has a large stash of BBC's. I have seen my dad shoot a few animals with them and they were devastating. While hunting with him, when I was pretty young I used his 270 to shoot a whitetail doe with one. It got dead pretty quick. At the time I wasnt really worried about bullet performance so I cant recall what the wounds looked like.

No doubt your right, I just hate the idea of shedding velocity faster than required for no good reason.
Care to post a pic up of the sleker 7mm NF you have. Id be interested in seeing them.

Understood.....hard to keep up with all of them these days,with there being so many of all types with each behaving very slightly differently.

Which is the great thing about BT's. The core explodes and the heavy jacket soldiers on. Same concept as a partition really except that the bt sheds more lead and thus does more damage.

No problem.



From left to right:
Hornady box full of NF 140's, Mike Brady's newer design
NF 160g in 7mm RM
NF 140g in 7mm RM
NF 140g 7mm
Swift .257" 120g A-Frame
Loaded 7mm RM 140g NF
Loaded 7mm RM 160g NF

(The X's on the base of the 160's indicates they were pulled and reloaded. Powder change, from H4831SC to H1000.)

If you look in the background you'll see my stash of 200 .458" 350g and a new box of .308" 180g. I'm set with North Fork bullets for a while...

Hoping I can slip another one into a bear next year for a follow up review.

Here's a little better picture of the 140g North Fork SS with the sleeker profile. You can see the smaller nose on the bullets in the box. They actually have a sort of HP nose instead of a protected soft point design.

I know a lot of the younger crowd is preoccupied with bullet shape and plastic tips today,and sometimes with good reason,but the truth is that out to (say) about 500 yards it really doesn't matter.

The NF is not much different from a BBC;neither are what anyone today would call an ideal LR bullet(the NF may be a bit blunter).But buried in my laptop somewhere is a pic of a group fired from my 7 Rem Mag with 140 Accubonds at 400 yards...and in that group is a single 140 Bitterroot(my rifle puts them both the same place). And I know I could stick a 140 Partition the same place with the same load.

Shooting a 162 Amax from my Mashburn lately alongside the 160 Partition and yes the 162 Amax shades it....by about a half MOA at 600 yards.This with the Amax impacting 2.5" high,and the partition impacting 1/2" higher at 100 yards,so it evens out and at 600 yards they land in the same group.How many more clicks on the turret is that?

Another example is the 150 BT vs the 150 Nosler Partition,same load from the 7 Rem Mag,and there is a difference, but not until you hit 600 yards and then it is about the width of your hand....at 600 yards.Inside that distance it's the same/same,and you can't tell one from the other.

In other words the advantages of the tipped bullets are pretty fractional at the distances most people shoot most BG animals,and no where near as much as some folks believe.The advantages show up but you have to get well past 500 before it starts to show up at all.

Careful there Bob - don't want to have any ammo maker attorneys read this. You slanderer you! Shhh!

When shooting my .280 Rem � although the loads were significantly different in terms of bullet weight, B.C. and MV, at 600 yards � there was surprisingly little difference in Point Of Impact regardless of the load I used. When I ran the math here�s what it looks like with a 250 yard zero.


120g TTSX, B.C. .373, 3163fps
140g TTSX, B.C. .412, 2968fps
140g AccuBond, B.C. .485, 3038fps
162g A-MAX, B.C. .625, 2841fps

400 yards
-14.31�, 2229fps, 1323fpe = 120g TTSX
-15.96�, 2148fps, 1435fpe = 140g TTSX
-14.14�, 2322fps, 1675fpe = 140g AccuBond
-15.25�, 2299fps, 1900fpe = 162g A-MAX

500 yards
-32.37�, 2024fps, 1092fpe = 120g TTSX
-35.67�, 1967fps, 1202fpe = 140g TTSX
-31.61�, 2160fps, 1450fpe = 140g AccuBond
-33.67�, 2173fps, 1699fpe = 162g A-MAX

600 yards
-58.81�, 1831fps, 893fpe = 120g TTSX
-64.38�, 1794fps, 1001fpe = 140g TTSX
-56.31�, 2004fps, 1248fpe = 140g AccuBond
-59.32�, 2051fps, 1514fpe = 162g A-MAX

Funny you mentioned this Bob.... as I was out yesterday comparing a couple 7mm bullets myself. My experience did not reflect yours.... with bullets of similar ballistic ilk as the ones you mentioned. In a side by side comparison the 162 Amax was much easier to make hits with from 400 on out than the 160 Accubond, 160 Speer BT, and the 150 NBT. That may not make sense on paper, but it was obvious in the field. Twisting a turret is pretty simple.... doping wind is where that extra .100-.150 in BC is a boon.

I find it pretty intereting watching all the BT bashing..... as most of it comes from folks with little/no experience crashing them into fur. Put one in the slats.... and there are few bullets better.

I'm sure you would call me a "BT basher" but I don't really question their ability when putting "one in the slats", especially with the fatter, heavier types. My concern is what happens when more difficult shots are taken either by choice, by accident, or to prevent a possibly wounded animal from escaping. For those shots I prefer stouter bullets.

A premium bullet in a bad spot is only marginally better than a CnC bullet in a bad spot, and sometimes it can be worse. A guy who picks a bullet based on the 5% chance that something will go wrong.... is the kind of guy that wears a helmet and fire-proof suit when he gets in his car.... just incase he gets in a wreck on the way to work.....

dogshooter: If you read my post carefully,you may note I was talking drop;not wind.

I simply offered a comparison between the two bullets I was shooting, noting actual results on paper and how they compared for drop.

If you read other stuff I've posted you will also find that I think the Amax is a fabulously accurate bullet;ditto the 150 gr BT which I simply compared,again for drop,to a 150 Partition.Even at 600 yards, I have had the 162 get through conditions in a way that impressed me.....OTOH while out hunting, I have not had a 160 Nosler Partition blown off course so that I failed to kill with it.I have not had any problems hitting and killing with that bullet.

I'm well aware of what wind does to a bullet,as are many shooters;but I won't take the risk of holding off very much to allow for it on an animal.But yes tha Amax seems to be a very good bullet for shooting distance from a 7 mag. How it is terminally, I have no idea.

You may also note that I did not "bash" any BT's;simply implied they are not my first choice as a general purpose BG bullet,and offered general comments on "why".After all that seems to be what the thread is about.....whether one of them "failed" and "why".

I don't care if others use and like them;I know they work.I have seen plenty used on animals by other people....I just like and prefer something generally stouter.

I know all that Bob.... and I'd never acuse you of bashing anything, that was a seperate thought, dirrected at others.

Wind cannot be separated from drop... at least not to me. If one is reaching to spin a turn, then one need be very cognizant of wind.... and as your point demonstrates..... the latter is far more difficult to both judge and compensate for than the former.

As for BTs.... I've seen far fewer of them caught by critters.... than the Accubond. I grew up shooting NBTs at stuff, most of them doing 3200+.... and have only found one. Also, I tend to include the large for caliber Amax and Bergers when discussing bullets of NBT performance DNA.... because these bullets have shown similar performance in the field.

I have a jar full of bullets that look like that along with some cores. Funny thing, I dug them all out of a dead animals.
Out all the deer/elk amd pronghorn I have shot in 40+ years or so, I have lost only two, 1 elk, 1 deer, and that was my fault,not the bullet's.Just a guess but I would say that is in the 2% realm. I'd bet those who take questionable shots because they think they are shooting a better bullet have a lot higher rate of loss,althouh most won't admit it.

If anyone takes less than optimal shots, sooner or later,they are going to lose and animal and most likely it won't be the bullet failure that is the cause.

I believe what you say.

Yes the wind is a factor; I pay a great deal of attention to it,but don't make it an overriding concern in my choice of bullets.Reason is simple:I have seen it at work,been "burned" by it,and generally I won't risk a shot if it looks bad enough to me....I have walked away from situations on BG animals when I knew it would be a factor.

We all choose bullets for different reasons; I lean more toward my own version of what passes for terminal performance,mostly because so much of my hunting does not involve real long range shooting,(even out west,where about 500 yards is as far as I have had to reach); so that's where I place my own emphasis when it comes to bullets and what they do.

I think I'm having a "Ground Hog Day"

I distincly remember quoting this from MD yesterday and making the following comment.

Thanks MD for posting this. I did NOT know that. This info causes me to change my OPINION about THIS BULLET.
I'd now say this bullet was a success.

Added today - however I still look for and prefer ANY bullet to stick together & exit. I also know that every NP, etc. does NOT always exit.

You see, I still am a student and learn.

Thanks Again

No doubt that the difference between a tipped boat tail and a north fork or the like is small, but why give up anything when a bullet can be made with a modern shape?
I also think Nosler would sell a boat load more Partitions if they tipped and boat tailed em.

Agreed. I think the tipped Trophy Bonded is one of the best bullets available. (It has both. Sure wish it was available as a component.)

A premium bullet in a bad spot can be considerably better than a C&C that comes apart too quickly.

As to the helmet and fire-proof suit, no, more like a guy that puts his seat belt on. I've been in metal benders both ways and much prefer the seat belt route - even though incidents are far less than 5% of total.

So far I've yet to experience an instance where a North Fork (or Trophy Bonded, MRX, TTSX, AccuBond or Grand Slam) has failed to perform as well as a C&C. Conversely, there have been several instances where I feel they performed better in terms of bone smashed or animal penetrated. If you don't like them, don't use them.

This is just one man, and this may cause a couple of Fire members to scratch their head but if I had to choose between hitting an elk behind the diaphram with a NBT or Berger or Amax vs one of the NF's or TSX/TTSX's or something of similar harness I'd choose the soft slug in a heart beat!

Dober

This is just my way but when doing the old drop chart thing I believe in starting them right on @ 100 yds. To me that's a fair test, I don't believe in sighting them on @ 250 or something like that as that isn't a fair apples to apples.

Try the sighting again with a 100 yd zero and see how they stack up.

Just a thunk

Dober

dogshooter have you shot (or seen shot) a lot of animals with so-called premiums(nothing more than tougher bullets really),or mostly used the BT's and AB's?

For me it would depend on what I bought the bullet to do. What was it's job?

Kill the bear, or look pretty after getting dug out?

Kill the bear? Success

Look pretty? Failure.

That's a failure, and I'll tell you why. I've recovered a couple just like that from the shoulders of animals that were not killed by them.

Though I've not been fortunate to shoot an ark full... I've always been game to go hunting, so I've been around quite a few downed beasts. I've seen all manner of projectiles fired at game.... and I've never seen a rodeo from a bullet that went through both lungs, regardless of whether it exited or not. I've seen Partitions and the like kill.... I've killed with a couple Barnes.... and I've also killed deer with 'varmint' bullets on several occasions.

I made reference to the Accubond vs. NBT because the AB is supposed to be so much better than its non-bonded brother.... and I have not found that to be the case.... I think they're about equal. Fact is, nothing with bullets is certain.... crash one into enough stuff and you will be surprised by results... I've never had a Ballistic Tip 'fail' in my presence.

For the record, here's the only NBT I've ever recovered, pulled from a chubby mule deer doe. This is a 100 grain .25 cal. NBT. Fired from a .25-06 at a shade under 3400 fps. Shot distance was 25 yards.... give or take... so this bullet took the full Monty. It pulverized the front shoulder, heart/lungs, shattered the last rib on the off side and was found under the hide. It weighs 58 grains (of which 46 grains is jacket)....

OK, with 100 yard zero, although I never use such as it fails to maximize the capabilities of the cartridges at the ranges at which I am typically prepared to shoot.

With 100 yard zero:
-3� = 207 yards = 120g TTSX
-3� = 197 yards = 140g TTSX
-3� = 215 yards = 140g AccuBond
-3� = 195 yards= 162g A-MAX


400 yards
-23.46�, 2229fps, 1323fpe = 120g TTSX
-26.55�, 2148fps, 1435fpe = 140g TTSX
-20.64�, 2322fps, 1675fpe = 140g AccuBond
-25.26�, 2299fps, 1900fpe = 162g A-MAX

500 yards
-43.81�, 2024fps, 1092fpe = 120g TTSX
-48.91�, 1967fps, 1202fpe = 140g TTSX
-37.94�, 2160fps, 1450fpe = 140g AccuBond
-47.43�, 2173fps, 1699fpe = 162g A-MAX

600 yards
-72.53�, 1831fps, 893fpe = 120g TTSX
-80.26�, 1794fps, 1001fpe = 140g TTSX
-61.97�, 2004fps, 1248fpe = 140g AccuBond
-75.83�, 2051fps, 1514fpe = 162g A-MAX

So while the difference in drop at 600 yards varies by just over 8� with a 250 yard zero, with a 100 yard zero the drop varies by over 18�.

My preference is to zero for Maximum Point Blank Range for a 6� diameter target for a given load. This results in minor trajectory differences at 100 yards out to 300 yards and a maximum rise of 3� above line of sight. Moreover it optimizes the trajectory for each specific load in terms of drop for the target diameter. (Meaning the 3� rise above line of sight which is the limit I�m willing to accept.)

For the same loads MPBR for a 6� diameter target works out as follows:

Zero = 261 yards, MPBR (-3�) = 306 yards, +2.52� @ 100 yards = 120g TTSX
Zero = 249 yards, MPBR (-3�) = 292 yards, +2.62� @ 100 yards = 140g TTSX
Zero = 271 yards, MPBR (-3�) = 319 yards, +2.43� @ 100 yards = 140g AccuBond
Zero = 246 yards, MPBR (-3�) = 291 yards, +2.66� @ 100 yards= 162g A-MAX

400 yards
-13.4�, 2229fps, 1323fpe = 120g TTSX,
-16.05�, 2148fps, 1435fpe = 140g TTSX
-10.91�, 2322fps, 1675fpe = 140g AccuBond
-15.61�, 2299fps, 1900fpe = 162g A-MAX

500 yards
-31.23�, 2024fps, 1092fpe = 120g TTS
-35.78�, 1967fps, 1202fpe = 140g TTSX
-25.78�, 2160fps, 1450fpe = 140g AccuBond
-34.12�, 2173fps, 1699fpe = 162g A-MAX

600 yards
-57.44�, 1831fps, 893fpe = 120g TTSX
-64.52�, 1794fps, 1001fpe = 140g TTSX
-47.37�, 2004fps, 1248fpe = 140g AccuBond
-59.86�, 2051fps, 1514fpe = 162g A-MAX

Probably the only rifle I�ve ever zeroed for 100 yards is my .44 Mag carbine with iron sights. To each their own, though, and if 100 works for you I�ve no argument with your using it. For someone like me, who is willing to accept a maximum 3� rise from line of sight, MPBR zeros for a 6� target make a lot of sense.

Be interesting to see which bullet would come out on top if you figured +/- 5" of wind into the 'point blank range'. Meaning you either run out of drop, or run out of drift.....

Ive seen BT's that were stuck In bones that led to a trailing job and follow up shots...more than once.

One was a 140 class whitetail we found a day later using my dog. Had to shoot that one again as well.

Saying the BT performs similarly to the Accubond runs counter to my experience, if that were the case, I wouldn't use them.

Accubonds behave more like Partitions...and I've never run across anyone that believed an NBT and Partition were similar in performance when it comes to bone and quartering shots...

I've seen ABs caught by critters at a much higher rate than NBTs.... that's all I'm sayin'. If you're judging a bullet on whether or not it exits.... my experience is the NBT is more apt to exit.... but I admit that is a statistically small sample (40-50ish total critters.... most of which I didn't shoot). If one were to shoot 1000 deer.... you might could tell the difference.

If Nosler made a 7mm 160 NBT with a BC of .550ish..... I'd live the rest of my life slinging it.

I'd buy them by the case..........

I shot three deer with four 130 grain accubonds last year. Three of them did not exit. Everything I shot with them died but they don't me give me that warm fuzzy feeling when shooting them anymore.

Dink

It did not fail.

It provided sufficient penetration and did extensive damage.

What else?

I was wondering about that myself.

I've never viewed cup/core separation as a good thing.

a bullet that opens nicely, sheds some of its weight, but maintains its base offers BOTH penetration and expansion.

It's been my experience that this type of design is more consistent over a broader range of velocities than Mono's or the more frangible types I've used.

YMMV

So if a bullet turned to dust after penetrating 3", but the bear died anyway, that would be acceptable bullet performance?

It certainly wouldn't be for me and I doubt it would be for most hunters.

Can a deer-size animal actually die from only three inches of penetration? Is their anatomy that narrow? Or, is that just random thought?

3" is enough to take out its jugular or googler as my ex father in law likes to say...

And that applies to critters bigger than deer.

Still dont want a bullet like that.

Hey, John that's right........

IF you can HIT the 'googler'.

They drop instantly from a hit in the googler...

Three inches of pentration in the googler. Sounds like date night in Montana!..

.
.
.
.
.
.
Sounds like personal experience

Never heard of a sheep being referred to as a 'googler'.....

Oh, thats funny as hell!!

Depending on the heft of the googler, 3 inches might be all the penetration you can manage.

Easier on the hips and thighs too.....

Of course they can. But not every shot is placed as intended and 3" may not be enough. Moreover, some hunt larger game.

For the same loads MPBR for a 6� diameter target works out as follows:

OK. 10mph crosswind, 5� drift.

257 yards ; Zero = 261 yards, MPBR (-3�) = 306 yards, +2.52� @ 100 yards = 120g TTSX
261 yards ; Zero = 249 yards, MPBR (-3�) = 292 yards, +2.62� @ 100 yards = 140g TTSX
297 yards ; Zero = 271 yards, MPBR (-3�) = 319 yards, +2.43� @ 100 yards = 140g AccuBond
315 yards ; Zero = 246 yards, MPBR (-3�) = 291 yards, +2.66� @ 100 yards= 162g A-MAX

At MPBR the calculated drift for the 120g TTSX is 6.89�. Everything else is less and for the 160g A-MAX it is only 4.25�.

[quote=GreatWaputi]This is a 168gr Ballistic Silvertip fired from a .308 and recovered from an Idaho bear this past May. Shot was 104 yards broadside through the lungs and the bullet was recovered in the hide on the off side. The bear ran about 30 yards before piling up. There was massive internal damage, but also massive separation of the jacket and core. What you see is all that was found.

Bullet failure, yes or no?...


No - Not a failure! - "168gr Ballistic Silvertip fired from a .308 and recovered from an Idaho bear"

It may not be pretty but it worked, what more could you ask of it?

drover