I have come to the conclusion that I want my game bullets (excluding small game/varmints) to have a muzzle velocity no greater than about 3000 fps. I would rather have a rifle with enough power and size to get the job done with conventional cup and core bullets, then to rely on bullets such as the Barnes', which I must concede, seem to perform wonderfully. The prominent thought here is that when you push the cup and core style bullets to a very high velocity, you risk fragmenting the bullet, ruining meat, and reducing desired penetration. So, to solve this, I simply increase my bullet weight in a given cartridge to meet my own personal standards.

Where I get hazy on the subject is MINIMUM impact velocities that allow proper epansion of a given bullet. I would think that this magic number would change, depending on bullet hardness, design, and construction. So, at what velocities would those of you with an intimate knwoledge of terminal ballistics, consider the minimum impact velocites for cup and core bullets? Partition style bullets? Mono-metals?

A couple years ago I saw a extensive "table" that had photos of a variety of bullets shot into test media at various impact velocities (100 fps intervals for each bullet brand/model - e.g., Speer Hot Cor). I think I saw that table here at the Campfire, and I hope someone will post it again. At any rate, the typical cup-and-core bullets appeared to have a minimum impact velocity (for consistent expansion) of around 1900 to 2000 fps for the test media that was used for the project (some looked like they had decent expansion at 1900 but not at 1800 and some looked like they had decent expansion at 2000 but not at 1900 - depended on brand and product line within the brand). For example, I'm remembering at least one of the Speer bullets looked like 2000 fps was the minimum and at least one of the Hornady bullets looked like 1900 fps was the minimum. However, within the Speer line, the Hot Cor and Mag Tip (which Speer would probably call a premium) might have different minimum velocities, and within the Hornady line the SST might have a different minimum velocity from a comparable BTSP (I don't recall all of the details from the table).

I am not an expert but I agree that over 3000fps weird things seem to happen to normal lead core bullets.

I have found your run-of-the-mill bullets like the Interlock or Core Lokt LOVE impact velocities around 2500 to 2800. This experience is based mostly around the 270 and 308 and to some extent the 222 and 30-06.

For some reason the Hotcor seem to me to be able to take a little more heat and perform well, eg about 3000fps in the 270. Maybe just my perception but it seems a little tougher than the others I mentioned above inlcuding the SST.

What is the experience upon which your conclusion is based?

Impact velocities of 2500-2800 fps is under 100 yards for the majority of hunting rounds!!!

I'm no gunwriter, but based on my reading it seems that most standard lead bullets give pretty decent expansion as long as they impact at around 1500- 1800 fps. Depends on the exact bullet. The solid copper bullets need a bit more speed, 1800-2000 fps.

Some of the bullet makers list suggested maximum and minimum impact speeds on their websites, others do not.

I agree more with JMR is saying. 1800 has been the impact velocity that I have desired, and when I use ballisitc software, I often consider the distance for that velocity about max for that cartridge. I appreciate what you all have had to say.

Here are graphical summaries of some of the data in the great penetration experiment.





The first chart is penetration vs. impact speed for a few common types of bullet. The second is the average of Speer, Sierra, and Hornady. Averaging reduces the random noise, and does a better job of showing the underlying trend.

The lessons of the graphs are:

1. Below a critical speed, the bullet fails to open. That gets you a very long skinny wound channel.

2. Above another critical speed, the bullet opens too much, too fast and either gives you a short fat wound channel, or, more likely, breaks up and gives significantly reduced penetration.

3. Between these two critical speeds, penetration is pretty constant. It doesn't matter much what the impact speed of the bullet is, as long as it is in that range.

4. For standard cup and core bullets, the critical range is about 2100-2800 FPS.

5. Not fully shown in the individual graph, the Barnes X and the Nosler Partition open reliably at around 1800 FPS and penetrate properly up to warp 9.8. They also produce deeper penetration that cup and core bullets. IIRC, Hornady Spire points open around 1800 as well, but I could be mistaken.

Manufacturers will tell you the optimum impact speeds for their bullets.

Wow. According to that graph, the mean penetration really takes a turn at around 2100 fps, which is considerably higher then my original guestimate of about 1800 fps for most bullets. If this is true, and standard cup and core bullets are not expanding at those velocities, then that would limit the ability of particular cartridges and a specific bullet loaded in those cartridges to kill quickly at longer ranges. So, if this is the case, is expansion on game, such as deer, less of an issue as just ensuring that you strike vital organs?
According to my Sierra Infinity software, my 165 Sierra GK leaving my 30/06 at about 2900 fps is dropping below the 2100 fps mark at about 350 yards. This seems short of what that round should be able to reliably kill a deer at. So, does this mean that hitting the heart, lungs, or some other vital piece of anatomy is more important than having a destructive wound channel? If this is the case, why not just hunt with Matchkings???

Man, I need to shoot something.

It's not like the bullet completely quits functioning below 2100 FPS. It just doesn't function as well. I'd sure as heck hate running into a 165 grain cup and core bullet moving 1900 FPS.

If you want optimum performance at 500 yards with that load, then a premium bullet such as the Partition is probably worth the extra cost.

Personally, I won't walk 500 yards to pick up a dead animal. My limit is around 200, unless it's a once in a lifetime trophy. That simplifies things considerably.

That is a very good way of looking at it. Most everything I have killed has been under 100 yards. But, if I look at things this simply, I won't have anything to bs about during the off season.

I think there is a big difference in optimum expansion and adequate expansion. Optimum expansion may be achieved at 2000+fps, but most bullets for modern rifles will still give adequate expansion at slower speeds, 1800 fps or less, in my opinion. Some, such as RN bullets designed for 30-30 speeds will give good expansion at much slower speeds.

Nosler shows some photos of their bullets at various impact speeds. http://www.nosler.com/Bullets/Accubond.aspx. Only the Accubond shows a suggested minimum speed of 1900 fps.

While no speeds are suggsted for the Ballistic tip the photo they show at 1900 fps shows more expansion than the Accubond at 2000. I don't claim to be an expert and if wrong don't mind someone setting me right, but my take is that most standard bullets will most likely do the job as slow as 1800 fps. Maybe not as dramaically as if they impact faster, but still get the job done. The solid copper bullets probably work fine at more moderate ranges, but probably won't perform well if impact velocities are below 2000 fps.

Here is an extensive bullet test done by Gary Sciuchetti and posted in Handloader magazine in June of 1998. Number 193.

If anybody wants the complete article, let me know and I will post it here as soon as I can get it scanned.

Link to the chart above at stevespages.com:

http://stevespages.com/jpg/bestbullet.jpg

That's good. Never knew there was such a site.

Up in the San Juans,my old pal hit a spike bull at the base of the neck(as it quartered away) at about 500 yards with a 30/06-165 gr Nosler Partition started about 2950.

The bullet traveled the length of the neck and blew out the side of the bulls face.(If you have never shot one, an elk has a pretty tough neck,full of muscle and bone and not much else)

Next season, he hit another spike with the same rifle and load,through the hips as it ran through the quakies at about 40 yards(bum shot;do not try this at home ....it broke the hips,exited,and on the way cut the femoral artery.The elk skidded like a tractor and was DOA.

I don't know what this says about the theories of bullet expansion, but what it tells me is a guy might be better off not thinking so hard, just shoot a Partition, and not worry too much.

I have brung down at least two dozen elk and most of them were with the old '06 using 150 gr Remington corelocts. Never did have one let me down.

Thank you for posting that.

Ya'lls welcome.

Then you should keep using them.....I will stick with a Partition....Thanks.

Partitions are expensive

But they easily pay for themselves...sorta like a good coon hound.

Their forte is they expand at distance,yet still penetrate well at higher velocity; the point of my post.And they work exceptionally well without concerns about starting them at predetrmined velocities....they work as well from magnum cartridges as from standard cases.

For deer you don't need them.....maybe not for elk either, although they will generally penetrate deeper for you than a standard C&C of the same weight and velocity.So much with the C&C depends on impact speed, jacket thickness and design,hardness of core,etc.Only reason I tout a Partition is because mostly it eliminates all those considerations at "normal" game ranges....about 500-600 yards and as far as I have seen them used.

You can set up a rifle so the NPT impacts with your cheaper bullet,so you use fewer of them (just to check zero and hunt).Obviously they aren't the only thing that will put game on the ground, but they are one of a handful of bullets you can rely on to penetrate deeply.

Personally I worry a whole lot more about bullet performance up close than way out there.

In that regard, they cost sonewhat more,but they aren't really expensive...worth it to some, but not to everybody

Where on the web can we find this document? Steve's page failed to load for me.

Did Gary Sciuchetti, or somebody else, publish an update of this excellent 1998 study?

From those pictures that bigbucl posted, the Rem Core-Lokts seemed to perform well over a very wide range of velocities.

That about says it all.Good thread!

Thanks

Actually, they cost less because you only need one.

My thought is that you throw a big and heavey enough chunk of lead you will only need one as well. I am a huge fan of my 165 Sierra GK in my 30/06. If I was going to hunt elk that rifle, I would step it up to the 180 Sierra GK and call it good.

Okay, I just ran the 180 SGK at 2750 fps in my ballistics program and if those numbers are realistic, I may have to just dump the 165 and go with the 180. That looks like some pretty badazz performance.

I had never heard of Gary prior to seeing this article so I sure don't know. Nor have I ever seen any kind of update to the original. Maybe Mule Deer could shed some light on him or more on the subject.

The graphs I posted are taken from Gary's study.

IIRC, you can buy a poster of Gary's findings for $15.

I tend to be fascinated by the technical aspects of our hobby. But I'll also be the first to say that sometimes we overthink things. There is a lot to be said for a simple hunting trip.

off season, I test a bullets penetration ability thru the local Oregon trees, at certain distances and velocities...

Got started on that by using trees as a back stop when chronographing out in the woods when the range is tied up with some club shoot etc..

taught me a lot and is still teaching me a lot..

some of the highlights I found for my own uses...

1. Ballistic Tips, are an excellent bullet for slower impact velocities

2. Varmint bullets, when an impact velocity is going to be pretty low, their fragility make them still open up, yet their core in the rear is still tough enough to give some pretty deep penetration...holds true for varmint bullets from 20 caliber right up thru 30 caliber...

3. Round noses are better at slower speeds, than are Spire Points...

4. if not using a fragile bullet like a varmint bullet, then sectional density performs better than low sectional density..
example: a 175 grain Hornady RN, with an MV of 1800 fps, managed to penetrate thru 18 inches of Pine, and keep on going at an impact of 100 yds from the Muzzle..

a lot of you know I do a lot of handloading for kids, who are just starting out...teach them to work up...their shooting abilities...

so I have spent time testing this along those lines, for such needed information...

but I also use it myself, to tailor loads to the areas I hunt and the game I am pursing...

since most game ( like 90%) is taken within 100 yds... and like 99% is taken within 200 yds, just how much velocity does one really need?

Not talking antelope in open country for instance, but where I hunt locally, 150 yds is going to be an awfully long shot...

if you take a look at most ballistic charts also, regardless of caliber, almost any Spitzer bullet, if shot at 30/30 velocities of 2250 fps at the Muzzle... when zeroed 3.5 inches high at 100 yds, will be dead on at 200 yds, and will be 3.5 inches low at about 240 yds..

then you take into account, the average white tail deer is 15 to 16 inches, from breastbone to backbone, regardless of weight...

cut that 'window of opportunity' in half, to say 7.5 to 8 inches..

now go back to the formula above about being zeroed 3.5 inches high at 100 yds, being dead on at 200 and 3.5 inches low at 240 yds...

with an MV of 2250 fps, in pretty much any caliber with a spitzer bullet, you have a formula that you can aim on hide at anywhere out to close to 250 yds, and if you hold steady, the bullet will be where it needs to be for a clean kill...

match that up to a bullet that you know will open at that distance reliably, and you should not have much to worry about..


the local kids here have proven that to work pretty darn well.. even beyond 200 yds...

when they ask me my bullet choice, I recommend Ballistic tips, for both accuracy and reliability for expansion at impact velocities as low as the 1200 to 1400 fps range..

as for myself, I've taken several deer with my 7 x 57 Featherweight, with 115 grain Speer HPs,.. the charge was 28 grains of SR 4759, a cast bullet load....but here is how it performed on the second largest black tail I have taken.. this one weighed 210 lbs on the hoof..according to OR F&W...

heart shot... didn't need a second one...quite evident..



and then the donor of the heart picture:



shows the size of the ol boy... his antlers were covered in dried blood also..which don't show up well in the pictures...


and finally a pic of Seafire jr and his other Scout Buddy ( who both recently made Eagle Scout Rank) with the donor of the heart...



so the slower speeds help kids make great shot placements..

the other boy with my son, took a deer next season, with a 270 loaded with a 90 grain Speer HP, behind a charge of 30 grains of IMR 4198...

this in an area that 150 yds is a mega long shot..

Hmmm.. I don't see a tag on that deer.

Probably poached.

Congratulations to the young men on the fine buck and on the Eagle Scout rank as well.

Also to you for getting them there and the loads.

Bullets be some devestating little suckers, eh?

Looks to me like he was roped before he was shot.

Personally I shoot a 180 grain partition at an MV of 3200 (.308 diameter). With this I have 14 one-shot kills in a row, on animals from 100 to 800 pounds (not counting a 5500 pound hippo when I ran out of heavy rifle ammo) and ranges from 50 feet to 275 yards.

The nice part about it is I can simply ignore all other bullets and ignore trajectory as far as I care to shoot. I don't care about impact velocity. All these bullets but one have exited the animal. None have disintegrated.

Cost? It seems foolish to worry about the cost of a bullet when you consider all the other costs of a hunt.

I get UPSET thinking about it.grin

There ya go...simplicity at its' finest.

This stuff will drive the readers and number crunchers crazy.But not if you hunt.It generally does not get a lot better than that.Notions of a a Partition "losing steam" are entertaining.

I printed a color copy of the Best Bullet article on the large plotter at work. It is 36 inches wide and hangs on the wall in my room. I refer to it often.

Open it up at the link in this thread to stevespages. Notice the performance of the Remington SPCL (round nose). Now tell me at what velocity it didn't expand and hold together.

BR: Are you asking me?

If so, I don't recall ever saying they did not expand and hold together.I never even mentioned them; I discussed Partitions,not CoreLokts.Someone else mentioned corelokts after I posted on the Partitions

But as long as we're on the topic,my understanding is that Remington, quite a few years back, turned the spitzer-type CoreLokt into nothing more than a standard C&C bullet to cut costs.Johnnie B and others have mentioned this on here many times...IIRC there were expceptions and the round nose was one of them,and they are built the same as they always were. Apparently not all CoreLokts are the same.....

No Bob, just a general comment for the thread.

The Best Hunting Bullet is my favorite gun article of all time. It took a lot of time and work to do that extensive test, and it applies almost universally (everybody uses 30/180 bullets at some point).

I like the Nosler Partition too and the extra cost is negligible compared to any other expense associated to hunting. In the total it does not even figure.

Which caliber do you use ?
Do you hand-load or use factory rounds ?
Is 3200 a measured muzzle velocity ?

Thanks

Poached? The damn thing was someones pet, it's still wearing a leash!

Seafire, good on ya for what you've done.

I don't have much money, and certainly not enough to leave home and work to go on an out of state hunt, pay a guide, tags....

I do all my hunting either on public land or on land owned by friends. My hunting costs are minimal. Gas, license,... If I can save 20 dollars on a box of bullets and get twice as many bullets, I will. I am still young. Maybe one day I will fret the costs of a guided hunting trip and then the cost of a bullet will become of less importance. But, for now, I just wanted to know what impact velocities work for what bullets, and we seem to have had a good discussion on that.