In the 270 Win. Both are available, can’t get Interbond or AB. Most shots are beyond 100, and I’m proficient out to 500. Game is deer, bear, and elk.

I've not used 150gr BT in the 270. I have used the 150 SST on a couple deer and elk. The deer killed had huge holes through them, and none took a step. The elk, I center-punched the humerus on a quartering-toward shot. What was left of the bullet exited the rear ribs and stayed in the hide. Elk made it 12-15 feet after the shot. I didn't do an autopsy. I like the SST quite a bit, and have stockpiled quite a few. They shoot every accurately for me, as well.

A sample of 2 deer convinced me no more SSTs. I've never had an issue with NBTs and still use them.

MHWASH,

In my experience the present versions of both the SST and Ballistic Tip work very similarly, penetrating well even though they can mess up some meat, and retaining around 50% of their weight, give or take about 10%.

Marc,

Have you the heavy for caliber SSTs?

I've never shot the 270 version but shoot both in 7mm....both very accurate for me with slight edge going to the BT, I've had a couple of each explode on impact at STW velocity up close. I shoot the BT more often just because I have used them forever but load the SST when it's what I can get. I'd not be afraid to use either one.

I've got a new pig control round in 308 with SR4759 shooting the 150SST and limited testing is positive...guessing velocity is 2000ish and the three pigs and two does so far were picture perfect performance best I can tell. Nice neat entrance wounds, 2" or so exits with pulverized lungs, easy blood trail for the whole 40 yards the longest one made it, no excessive bloodshot meat. That load at 100 ought to be about on pace with a factory load at 400 I think.

Initially the SSTs were like varmint bullets. They toughened up the core or jacket since the early ones. They are closer to each other than previously but I would rate the BT as tougher due ti the much heavier jacket. And some BTs like the 120 7mm are much tougher. Neither would be my choice for elk but they would certainly work if that is all you had.

I’ve had bad experiences with the old NBT on deer size game in the 150gr 308win and the 165 in a 300 weatherby. About 15-20 years ago.

On deer size game the modern SST has been great...talking the 225gr .338 in a win mag loses full house...shots under 100 yards. Only one I’ve used and I was impressed but it was a small sample size...4 deer perhaps but all in the last 6 years

So this thread is about the .277 / 150 version of the SST and NBT, not the .308 or other versions.

I’ve never used an SST, but the Last time I used the 150 NBT from a 270 I shot a good sized cow elk at around 200 yards. Bullet went through the chest and exited. Elk ran 20 yards and was dead. Hard to get better than that.

Aside, my partner shot a cow simultaneously and at the same range with his 300 WM and a 180 Accubond. His cow reacted the same, running 20 yards til it fell over dead. However, the Accubond didn’t exit.

The ballistic tips (130 and 150 gr.) have been consistent for me on deer. I would like to use the 150 gr. SST but haven’t been able to get them to group well enough to hunt them. I don’t think you will be able to see any difference in how they perform on game and would choose the one that shoots the best for you.

Has Hornady made changes to the SST in the last few years?

They've evidently made changes from the early ones, since the early ones performed like varmint bullets. I was unfortunate in getting some of the early bullets. But I also had early ballistic tips way back when and they've evidently changed too, because those early BT's were as volatile as the early SST's..

I will say the SST's shot very well on paper, so did the BT's as I recall! My 6mm Rem shot 95 gr SST's and my 25-06 shot SST's very accurately. I sold all my SST bullets very cheaply - a dime on the dollar, because I did not know if each box was good game bullets or volatile bullets and how they would act on game.

165s out of the 06. I've killed a bunch of deer with Ballistic Tips out of the 270 close as 20 yards out to 200 and never found them lacking.

I'm glad to read this. I bought a box of 130gr .277 SST's back when I first started handloading and found them to be violently frangible, and never even considered Hornady bullets after that experience. Horrible blowups and chasing critters around...not my idea of fun, or anyone's. I might give them a try again knowing this. Thanks.

Don't disregard all Hornady bullets after the SST experience. The good old Interlock is a great deer bullet. It is my preferred lead tip cup and core bullet that I always go to first.

You know what they say about first impressions...mine was terrible.

I really like both bullets. Both shoot lights out and Ive not had any issues with excessive meat loss. However, I do not shoot shoulders either. Ive stashed back several thousand of each for my rifles.

I am glad to hear they are improved. I can remember 8-10 years ago they were very frangible and alot of people loved them for their accuracy but they were not performing well on game. BT had a similar problem even before that, but changed their construction to be a true hunting bullet. Sounds like SST did the same thing. The SST has been a popular hunting bullet on Facebook elk groups. Its good to know that they are performing well now.

My experience with both in 7mm and 30cal has been they work great on deer, but make a mess under 100yds at anything over 2800 -2900fps muzzle velocity. Not exactly ground breaking and not much different than any other c&c I've used.

They made the changes PDQ as they got lots of complaints. I think it was the first or second year of production for the SST's.

The Nosler's were changed when they started making a distinction between the Hunting BT and the Varmint BT. I tried to verify when this was done but couldn't pin the date down exactly but around 1978 so it has been awhile. This was also when Nosler went from the 100 bullet to the 50 bullet packaging and changed the color of the box. They also color coded the tips at about the same time.

1978?? Is that a typo?

Nosler didnt make BT's in 1978. I believe the came out around 1985. They came in a red and green box of 100. Some time in the early 90's they where toughened. The first ones where not bad deer bullets at all.

Looking at sectioned views of both bullets I would have thought the Ballistic Tips on average would have been the tougher bullet with their heavier jackets. Maybe Hornady use a harder lead alloy.

That or an anheuser moment.

Ballistic tips have only been around for about 25 years. The thicker jackets came out around sometime near 2009 as best I can tell. By 2010 almost all of the heavier ones were the Hunting version.

Yeah, I have shot animals with both SST and NBT, and the result is about the same, but I keep buying NBT.

Ballistic Tips appeared in the mid-1980s.

The first thick-jacket model was the 200-grain .338, which appeared in the early 1990s.

Ballistic Tips came out 37 years ago (1984). https://www.nosler.com/nosler-history

I started using the .308 150's in 1989 and found them wicked killers on deer with never anything except a pass through. And those were the early, more "fragile" version.

As to jacket thickness, I doubt there's a hard date as to when jackets were beefed up. Some caliber/weight's have gone through three or four (or more) iterations. However, I'd agree that certainly everything since 2010 has probably been brought up to speed.

Suffice to say, there's not one "hunting" ballistic Tip I'd hesitate to use on elk.

And an Interlock ring FWIW.

Im another one that hasn't used the bullets in a .270 ( duh...) but I shoot the 150 NBT in my .275 Rigby...have killed critters up to 325 pounds and have complete penetration on all of them. Excellent performance in my book.

Some misinformation on here. Been using NBTs since 1984.

Brad is correct, the BTs came out in 1984, maybe even 1983 for a few calibers despite what their website says. I loaded the first 7mm 150s in 1984 and killed a buck with em in the 7RM. The gun store clerk even told me to load em hot since his experience on deer was they were tough in the 30 cal. This was in the summer of 84 so he might have used em the season before? Anyhow my friend wanted to shoot them too so he bought the dies and 180BTs for his 300 Weatherby and he shot a buck that year too.

I still have one older box of the 7mm 150s and maybe an older box of the 30 cal 180s I'll post up later.

The 7mms and 30 cal BTs were never a varmint bullet as claimed by some. I killed alot of antelope, deer and bears with the 7mm 120, 140, 150 and 30 165s BTs and they never do as much meat damage as Sierras GKs of the same weights

Never used BTs given their initial reputation so although i do load them now, I've never used them on game. I have used the SST180s out of my 303 on deer at ranges from 40-150 yards. complete pass through and good sized exit holes reflecting controlled expansion.

So have you never used em on game or you have used them on deer?

Not trying to be a smartazz just asking for clarification.

Thank you for pointing out the mistake. I've edited to reflect.

MtnHtr,

The 140 7mm was also good to go from the beginning, according to the late Chub Eastman, who for years was the contact for writers at Nosler. I started using them in the late 1980s, and never recovered one.

But he also told me that Nosler did tweak some of the early "hunting" Ballistic Tips after they were introduced, mostly by using a harder core alloy.

The "heavy jacket" Ballistic Tips I mentioned earlier did start with the 200-grain .338, which I believe was introduced in 1992 or 1993. Do know for sure they were around in 1993 because that's when first I field-tested some sent to me by Nosler for that purpose. The jacket was MUCH thicker through the base area than previous Ballistic Tips.

In general the really heavy-jacket BTs have a jacket weighing around 2/3 to 3/4 of the entire weight of the bullet, while in the typical hunting BTs it's around half the bullet's weight. Some of the other hunting BTs have been converted to the heavier jacket over the years, and others introduced. If I recall correctly, all the hunting Ballistic Tips from the 165-grain .30 caliber up now have the heavy jacket. One of my local friends shot a cow elk 2-3 years ago with the 165 from his .300 Weatherby. The cow stood facing him at 100-150 yards, and the bullet was recovered from the hide over the rump.

MD,

Good to know and appreciate your comments. Yes, the 7mm 140 NBT is a great bullet. Accurate as can be and kills very well. Ime it wrecks a little better than the 120gr NBT which is also a great bullet. I did section both bullets many yrs ago and it appeared the 120 was slightly thicker in the frontal section. I later spoke with Chub Eastman and he assured me both bullets are the same except the 120 was just shorter. Might have been the camera angle and my filing skills?



I did collect a 7mm 120gr, it lodged in the off side scapula of a running buck I killed (a great running boar type shot), both cup and core separated but were recovered close to each other.

I met a B&C measurer by the name of James Tonkin Jr about 23yrs ago who had an impressive collection of NA trophies. He was like a modern day Grancel Fritz, his house was adourned with B&C trophies galore. I had not tried the 7mm 140NBT at that time but what was interesting is that this gentleman used the 7mm 140NBT in his custom XP 100 handguns for many of his trophies. He took at least one nice tule elk bull with the combo and many impressive trophies. James was a rifle looney of first order and his reloading room had more bullets on the shelf than most gun stores. One thing stood out, I noticed James had a more than ample supply of 7mm 140gr BTs and only a few Nosler PTs in 140 on his shelf. It was very obvious he was very fond of the 140BT for the 7-08. IIRC he had just purchased a 7-08 for his wife but it "was going back" due to issues. Anyhow here are a few of his 7mm 140gr trophies:

One interesting note on the above elk. F&G regs only state a minimum rifle caliber for big game iirc. At the required pre hunt meeting for the lucky elk tag holders it seemed the head F&G biologist took issue with Jame's intentions to use a 7-08 handgun to take a tule elk. He had to arrange a range session with several of the skeptical F&G mgrs to prove his proficiency. Long story short he put his bull down with one shot using the 7mm 140gr NBT from his handgun.




Another fan of the 7mm 140gr NBT was Darrell Holland, a rifle smith from OR. He used it with great success on many types of African plains game, almost all were one shot kills iirc. He sent me these and other pics around 2003. All taken with the 7mm 140BT in 7-08AI




And don't forget Steve Timm as well, he was fond of the 7mm 120gr BT. Iirc he took a bull elk with that bullet though I would have used the 140BT myself.

Years ago like 20 I tried a 165gr BT 30-06 was the rifle on a blacktail buck. Quartering towards me 100 yds. Long story shot it blew up on the surface left a football sized patch of meat exposed. My buddy next to me killed it. Never again one and done. Shot lots of great bullets over the years, that particular Federal Premium 165gr Nosler BT was a pile of crap.

I second this. I don't like SST's either. Too fragile. But not all Hornady bullets are the same. The regular old lead tipped interlocks have been one of my favorite bullets for deer. I have used the 117 grain interlock for a long time out of my 25-06 and have never recovered a bullet. Close shots, angled shots, you name it. They just zipped on through. They have also been a consistantly accurate bullet for me as well.

Shag,

As you know my experiences with the early Nosler 165gr BT was stellar. Dropped several muleys with no issues at all. Killed a few bears with em too.

It's interesting to read of folks having good performance in the early days of BTs with the 140 7mm. I loaded those for an antlerless mule deer tag in 1992 in my 7RM. I shot a doe through the lungs broadside at under 100 yards and the bullet really blew up. I found the leadless shredded jacket under the offside hide and a few little bits of lead. It was a dramatic bang-flop but didn't even hit a rib on the way in. I still have all those parts in my collection. I swore off BTs after that, as did many of the respondents here.
But after reading of their greatly improved performance these days, I used the 140 BT in the .270 WSM to take an antelope and mule deer in MT in 2019, and the 200 CTBS (Just the 200 BT with a black coating) to take a MT whitetail buck and doe in 2020 with the .338-06. All these worked fine.
I only have some early, fragile, SSTs - 150 gr .308s, and while I have loaded some in the .308 Win, I've not hunted them and probably won't based on reports of the early bullets' fragility. But I hear the same about the current version as the BT - much stronger now. Do they put the little Interlock ring in the SSTs now?

Thanks,
Rex

I don’t know if a new 140 BT will do any better than what you described. If that bullet made it all the way through and rebounded off the hide from a 7 Mag that’s about I’d hope for with any cup and core.

I’ve seen BTs do the same thing a number of times from the 95 to the 180 BT.

And I’m not saying you’re wrong or anything I just mean I doubt a newer BT probably wouldn’t act much different.

Interesting. I still have some of those old early 90s 7mm 140BT in the same box I loaded the one from that "blew up." and I have a box of new ones I bought as blems off SPS. I could try to section both and see if there is any visible difference in the jackets. I can say the .270 140 BTs I used penetrated well (but those were longer range shots too than my 1992 "blow up", which makes a big difference). Nothing recovered except one full length shot hip to far shoulder on the big Mulie buck.
Obviously the .338 200BTs held up fine, in and out. Both those deer ran a short distance on lung shots and fell dead.

Cheers,
Rex

If Nosler toughened up the Ballistic Tips since the early days' I'd assume the 7mm 140gn would have been toughened up some.

Elvis,

As I mentioned earlier, some got toughened up, others didn't need to be--and one their guys I knew and trusted (the late Chub Eastman) specifically mentioned the 140-grain 7mm. I can even remember when that conversation took place, because we were on a deer hunt together in South Dakota in 2001.

I will also provide more details of my history with the bullet. I started using it in the late 1990s, handloaded in the 7x57 to about 2800 fps, and the first animal taken with it was a pronghorn at around 200 yards. Now pronghorns aren't very big--it takes a large one to field-dress 100 pounds--but they have some of the hardest bones among game animals, mostly to withstand running so fast (up to 60 mph), over over uneven ground. This one stood angling away to the left up a slope from me, and I put the bullet in the middle of the ribs toward the far shoulder.

It landed a little higher than the crosshairs, due to the way the rifle was sighted-in, and the antelope collapsed. Turned out the bullet had not only smashed the far shoulder, but several inches of the lower half of the spine--and exited. I have seen a 130-grain .270 cup-and-core bullet with a good reputation for holding together totally disintegrate on a pronghorn's spine.

Dunno how many animals I've used that bullet on over the years, but they also held up very well in the .280 Ackley Improved when started 300 fps faster. I have never recovered one.

Now, this doesn't mean somewhere, sometime a 140 Ballistic Tip didn't hold together--but I also know the gunsmith Darrel Holland pretty well, and as shown in a photo or two posted by MtnHtr earlier in this thread, he used the 7mm 140 Ballistic Tip considerably in Africa to take much much larger and tougher game that pronghorns and deer, including gemsbok, which not only have very thick hides but heavy shoulder bones.

My experiences with the 7mm 140BTs and others mirrors Mule Deer's. I've killed 2 antelopes with 7mm BTs. The first one was about 450yds in windy conditions and I was using early 150BTs in the 7RM. Held for wind correction but still hit the antelope buck a little far back in the liver, he stood there for maybe 20 seconds and fell over. The 150BT passed thru. Second antelope was at 147yds lazered and quartering towards me while using my 3rd custom Lilja 7-08. The 140BT from my 7-08 broke the off shoulder and passed thru, the lope dropped fairly quick. No second shot needed. Pictured here laying on the broken off shoulder, note the thick leg bones.


I've killed several muley bucks with the 7-08/140BT combo and have never recovered one like Mule Deer. I shot this CA Sierra buck with the same load at about 350yds from the rear as it ran uphill above timberline, the 140BT went thru its hip and exited behind the off shoulder where the blood is seeping.

Another one killed closed to 500yds lasered, both hits exited.


On black bears it's different, I have recovered both 7mm 140BT (7-08) and 165BTs (06) from several bears due to their thick hides. Usually the cup and core is found under the off side hide of the bear.

It’d be interesting to see. The BT has been a wicked good deer killer for my family, friends and I.

I'll bet ya have one explode on the surface of a buck you'd feel different. Lol Had it not i'd prolly feel different. For me? It was to lil time and way to many good bullets out there to dick around...

If the bullet did indeed blow up you wouldnt have found the jacket under the hide.

Well that's a good point. The bullet came completely apart into the shards of the jacket and few pieces of lead remaining. The responses to my post inspired me to stop trusting my memory and go back to my bullet collection and reference the actual notes. I was wrong about no ribs - see the notes in the pic. The frag of the core did make a few pinhole exits through the offside hide. I just weighed all these chunks together and they weighed 56 grains total.

But I was still unhappy with the fragmentation. This was 1992 remember. Most of the good reports I have read here were from the late 90s and beyond. I don't know when or ever the bullet may have been toughened up.
It'll be about 10 days until I get the chance to section the old and new .284 140BTs but I will try to remember to do so when I am able.

Cheers,
Rex

Doesn’t look bad for a 75 yard impact and yeah, the lead did come unglued but as was mentioned that jacket held together about as good as anyone could hope for a 3000+ FPS impact into flesh.

Thank you for posting that. Pretty neat stuff.

At which point in the "bang-flop" did you determine that the bullet failed?

Quite a bit more steam than a 270 will put on a 150.

A bud had same issues w 140s in a 7 Mag in the last 10 years. That is a lot of velocity under 100 yards.

I'd like to see a better closeup of the jacket. From the photo you've posted it certainly doesn't look "blown up" to me. The jacket looks like it held together well enough, and the bullet did its job as designed, being retrieved from a dead animal.

If a guy wants picture perfect retrieved bullets from dead animals 100% of the time, a bonded or Partition bullet is the answer.

Yep, that's a good one that has been well and accurately used over the years.
I had shot partitions exclusively up until this try with the BT, so I was spoiled on broken bones and nice exits. Even though I had previously caught a .257 115 Partition that went stern to stem on a bedded pronghorn. But I had only shot the 175 Partition previously in my 7RM, and those don't get caught too much! I figured that Nevada doe tag was a good one to try out the BT on. It was for sure the most dramatic kill I ever made. The doe literally did a back flip and landed dead, and that with no CNS impact. But again, the bullet ended up like that having hit nothing but a rib on entry, and in my other notes from that hunt, I just saw the words "thank goodness I didn't hit the shoulder."
I'm no hater on the BT - I have at least 2000 of them in my stocks right now in .243, .264, .284, .308, and .338.
I just had that early one come apart. I fully believe the newer ones are much stronger, as so many folks have had great results with them.

Perhaps if any others who respond here could try to "date-stamp" their experiences and lets see if break-ups seem more prevalent prior to 1995 or so?

Cheers,
Rex

Yes, the jacket held together and you can feel the weight of the base of it when holding it in your hand.

EDIT to add...But I don't want picture perfect retrieved bullets. I want exit holes, with carnage in their wake.

Cheers,
Rex

Then a Partition or Accubond is your huckleberry. It's that simple.

And even then there's no guarantee, as my little anecdote at the top of this thread illustrated! With essentially identical hits on similar sized cow elk, the 150 NBT from my 270 exited, and the 180 NAB from my friends 300 WM did not.

If a guy insists on using a 7mm RM, I'd certainly step up to at least the 150 NBT, and better yet, a 160 of stout construction. Seems to me it's asking a lot of a 140 NBT at 7mm RM speeds.

Indeed. Six of my ten ten kills in 2018-2020 were with ABs, Partitions, or Barnes TSX (2 elk, 2 pronghorn, 2 deer) but the other 4 were with BTs (3 deer, one pronghorn) and those BTs worked fine and penetrated fully, which was what I was trying to add to the OPs question and thread content. But it's only fair to also share the one that came apart on me back in 92, especially since it supports the idea that the BTs have been toughened up over the years.


Regards,
Rex

"But it's only fair to also share the one that came apart on me back in 92, especially since it supports the idea that the BTs have been toughened up over the years."

No, it doesn't support that "idea."

For one thing, it didn't blow up, as you claimed in your first post here. The jacket held together and penetrated sufficiently, and the deer died instantly.

From a 7mm RM at close range that's very consistent to the way 140 Ballistic Tips have worked since they appeared. They're cup-and-cores, so expansion will vary with impact velocity.

Thanks John. I must have misinterpreted your mention of the .284 140BT earlier in this thread. If I understand right, you’re saying that particular bullet is largely unchanged since its intro, is that right? I interpreted it the opposite when I first read your words. I’ll still try to section and old one and a new one week after next when I’m back in my shop, since s couple respondents were interested in that.
And sorry for the choice of words earlier. I reckon “blow up” should be reserved for situations where there is little or no penetration and pretty much bullet disintegration. That one instance was just the only time I had a bullet “come apart and the core break up into probably about a dozen pieces” and it made an impression on me. But as you said it did the job. This is largely due to bullet choice over the years, as I’d never used anything but but partitions and “X” prior to 2018. Well, one exception was one 225 SGK on a pronghorn with the 35 Whelen in 1994, but that of course worked perfectly.

Cheers,
Rex

I think it would be important for you to come to some rational conclusions as to exactly what your hunting bullets are for. That way you can develop some realistic expectations.

You are disappointed in an instant incapacitation because either the bullet didn't exit or it had shed too much weight in the process. You thanked your lucky stars that you didn't hit a shoulder, but since you didn't, you have no idea what the outcome would have been. If the goal isn't instant incapacitation leading to a quick death, what exactly is the goal?

You claim you want exits. You can get them nearly every time with non-expanding flat nose bullets. You will give up instant incapacitation, unless you hit the CNS, but your shots will most effectively break bones, and you will get more exits than using an expanding bullet.

TRex and Shag,

You're making me work now, lols!

I've been using NBTs since they first came out in 1984 up until a few yrs ago when my state went lead free. Never seen a blow up on thin skinned deer or others with both early and late versions in 7mm and 30cal. As stated before Ioaded 180 NBTs for a friends 300 Weatherby and 7mm 150s for my Ruger 7RM in 1984. Both of us killed deer that year at close range. I've also used the 7mm 140 and 160 Partitions on deer, bear and elk so I can play big boy hunter too. Along with some mono experience.

This buck was taken at less than 50yds with early version 180BTs from the 300 Weatherby as it climbed the rock slide in the background. The guy on the left and the one who took this picture got cold and built a fire. A couple bucks trotted by (being pushed by others down below). My friend killed that buck as it was quartering away, he said it reared up and fell backwards dead - bang flop. No blow up.


A buck I shot a few weeks later with early version 7mm 150 BT from a Ruger 7RM as it stood broadside at about 100yds. Again no sign of blowup:


A few recoveries from my 7-08s, the core is epoxied back in on the 140BT on the far left, all later versions:

A 139gr Hornady from one of my 7-08s recovered from a mule deer buck killed at about 450yds after it punched thru both shoulders


Still have some of the older versions of NBTs



Unlike monos, sometimes a fragment from a cup n core hits a nerve or artery and thats all it takes. And at long ranges it's helpful too.

And just for sake of conversation here's another photo of one of Darrell Holland's kills he sent me. He used a 70gr NBT out of his 6mm-06AI, the velocity is written on back of the pic. Now I don't recommend this bullet for deer sized game but it's obvious he placed it in the boiler room

Rex,

Here's how I started my post on page 3 here:

"The 140 7mm was also good to go from the beginning, according to the late Chub Eastman, who for years was the contact for writers at Nosler. I started using them in the late 1980s, and never recovered one."

I might also mention that when Nosler introduced Ballistic Tips they were designed for deer-sized game, as they already made a great bullet for game larger than deer.

They emphasized this the first few years, but so many hunters insisted on using Ballistic Tips on elk (because they were named Nosler, or because they were so accurate, or both) that they started getting complaints, especially about shoulder shots. In fact one of my fellow writers at the time was so impressed with the accuracy of 165 BTs in his .30-06 that he used them on elk.

He was not, however, very ballistically sophisticated, being more of a hunting writer. I warned him at the time that if kept using them on elk (he'd killed one raghorn bull with a rib shot) that he'd end up chasing a three-legged elk around someday. That happened the next fall, when he put one into the shoulder of a big cow, and it failed to penetrate. He eventually ran down the cow, but he could have saved a lot of trouble by using a 165 Partition. The finer accuracy of the Ballistic Tip didn't make any difference in killing elk, because he never shot beyond 400 yards anyway.

He did switch to Partitions after that, but there a LOT of hunters like him back then. Eventually Nosler grew weary of people using their deer bullets on elk, so developed the heavy-jacket Ballistic Tips. As I mentioned early in this thread, the first was the 200-grain .338, and after it proved to work fine they expanded the heavy-jacket Ballistic Tip to calibers and weights that also might be used on elk, primarily from 7mm up.

Swift ran into basically the same damn thing when they introduced the original Scirocco. They already made the A-Frame, a great bullet for game larger than deer, but many hunters (many if not most deer hunters) wanted something like the Ballistic Tip, with a plastic tip and boattail for a higher ballistic coefficient. (BC was getting to be a big deal about then, due to the appearance of laser rangefinders.)

Swift designed the original Scirocco to expand very widely, to make a bigger hole in deer and kill quicker. But many hunters saw Swift and "bonded" on the boxes, so expected Sciroccos to penetrate deeply, and used them on bigger game. The result? Eventually Swift had to redesign the Scirocco to expand less and penetrate deeper. Hence the Scirocco II.

^^^^^^

Well said!

As you increase the odds of an exit the carnage goes down. Carnage is what kills. At some point you get to where the animals almost always run and the entrance and exits are so small you dont have much blood if any tongues for tracking, whichbisnsuppose to be the purpose of an exit hole.

Wow I really appreciate all the responses, and good insight. I don’t want to hijack the OP’s thread. Although I have only been doing the western big game hunting thing for thirty years(I got a late start), I’ve tried to be a good student and learn all I can. Almost 61 now, I recognize I probably have maybe a decade and a half or so left. So though I have probably been happier with Partitions than anything over the years, I’ve been expanding my horizons a bit since 2018. My biggest point, for the OP, remains while I can’t compare to the SST as he hoped, I can report excellent performance by the BT I have used lately.

All the best from the ATL airport awaiting a connection,
Rex