Expanding bullets to try on targets

[MrCetrizine]

As of 2nd of May, expanding bullets return to section 1. So I was wondering if there are any that would be worth trying on targets.

I currently use SMK/TMK and Berger in .223 .30 .303 and soon 6.5

I don't get poor accuracy but like everyone, I'm always looking to improve.

[Andrew]

I get some amazingly small groups from 165 grain SST in the 308s. My RPR loves them, as does my Tikka and my Winchester. Lacking any other loaded ammo, I once took my RPR out to 800 with these bullets and rung a 10" x 14" steel 9 of 10 prone. They shoot that well. They are the only bullet I use for off hand practice with my Tikka out to 200 yards. ~Andrew

 

(As a point of fact, I don't shoot them at game. Only target.)

[snakeman]

MrC

 

55g Blitzking for your .223.... when tailored it'll consistently print .5 MOA @ 100

[Chanonry]

To what end ?

 

Generally (!) bc's on expanding ammunition are lower than on target. So hard to see any obvious advantage for long range. In fact the pull of Amax to hunting was the reverse trend - use an accurate but frangible target bullet for hunting. Kind of suggests my point has some truth

 

Inherent precision ? Well I had some 50/55??gr Vmax that worked very well in a 223 but any better than anything else ??

[bradders]

To what end ?

 

Generally (!) bc's on expanding ammunition are lower than on target. So hard to see any obvious advantage for long range. In fact the pull of Amax to hunting was the reverse trend - use an accurate but frangible target bullet for hunting. Kind of suggests my point has some truth

 

Inherent precision ? Well I had some 50/55??gr Vmax that worked very well in a 223 but any better than anything else ??

 

 

BCs are relevant to wind drift, not accuracy,

[MrCetrizine]

To what end ?

All rifles like different bullets and loadings for various reasons. Now I'll have a larger selection of bullets, why wouldn't I want to see if the ones now available to me, work better in my rifle.

In my limited experience, I've found that BC and other numbers count for nothing, some bullets work well when their design and marketing info says they shouldn't and vice versa.

 

I'm happy to try anything I can.

[bradders]

All rifles like different bullets and loadings for various reasons. Now I'll have a larger selection of bullets, why wouldn't I want to see if the ones now available to me, work better in my rifle.

In my limited experience, I've found that BC and other numbers count for nothing, some bullets work well when their design and marketing info says they shouldn't and vice versa.

 

I'm happy to try anything I can.

 

Testing all these new bullets should take up enough time to keep you away from the real (fun) matches

[MrCetrizine]

I'd love to do CSR (at Diggle) but knee injuries in my teens have left me too fat and pain ridden to run without falling over and screaming like a mildly alarmed liberal.

 

Besides 300m battleships with Birchwood Casey Battleships targets is fun.

[Panda]

As of 2nd of May, expanding bullets return to section 1. So I was wondering if there are any that would be worth trying on targets.

I currently use SMK/TMK and Berger in .223 .30 .303 and soon 6.5

I don't get poor accuracy but like everyone, I'm always looking to improve.

Not to put you off, but you may want to check local range orders or discuss the matter with the RO before using expanding ammunition if you are thinking of using them on a formal range. My understanding (and I admit it may be wrong) was that it was the bullet that couldn't be used on some ranges rather than the fact the shooter couldn't hold/use them.

[MrCetrizine]

Both my clubs prefer expanding as they don't drill too deep into the backstop which means greater time between maintenance.

[VarmLR]

In .223, I have found that it depends on range. To 200 yards, any BC advantage for wind is marginal between say the 69 TMK and 60gr V-max. I have found that because you can generate higher velocities with the V-max, they are equally as suited to those distances for precision work and print very tight groups in my .223, the draw being that they are cheaper than the TMKs too.

 

For longer distance work, the standard SMK 77gr seems the best of the lot for me, along with the 69TMK.

 

In .308, I haven't found any hunting bullet that out performs the humble match king close in or further out, so I keep my hunting bullets for their intended use and stick with the SMK and TMK for all target work.

 

In the smaller calibre, I have also found that the TMK is every bit as reliable as a vermin control round as the V-Max, has reliable, explosive expansion, and makes for a particularly lethal longer range vermin control bullet, a la the A-Max.

 

For a one-bullet-does-it-all round in .223, I haven't yet used anything else to beat it. Effective range for precision work appears to be around 600 yards, no further in my rifle.

[tackb]

Both my clubs prefer expanding as they don't drill too deep into the backstop which means greater time between maintenance.

 

how does that work ? more projectiles nearer the surface extend the service life of the butts ?

[Laurie]

Historic service rifle often benefits from expanding bullets. Before the ban I used 0.311 Sierra Pro-Hunters in 303 and other cartridges and found them, better than the 174gn SMK in some rifles, cheaper too. The old (now discontinued) Hornady 175gn 0.284 RNSP is a dead ringer for the 7X57's original 173gn RNFMJ and loaded to original 7X57 velocities not only shot very well in M1895 service rifles, but matched sight gradations perfectly. ... and so on, and so forth.

 

Moving on, many American 'Effers' who still use VLDs prefer the 'Hunting' version to the thicker jacket Match variants. The story here is that all Berger had thin J4 jackets until maybe 10 or so years ago. Some people had found that they worked on live game too and Berger was exploring that market aiming to sell them as multi-purpose designs. However, 6.5-284 shooters and those with the coming generation of hot 7mm numbers started to report the very occasional bullet blow-up and after a lot of feedback, testing and agonising Berger went to thicker jackets for most of its match bullets. They didn't work on game, so the original thin-jacketed designs were continued under the 'Hunting' brand name and put in orange boxes, making what had been legal here for years, S5 depending simply on when you bought them not on any design change - I still have lots of early thin jacket Bergers, but they're quite 'legal' for match use such is the idiocy of the law we've lived with for years.

 

Then there are the multi-purpose bullets, designed to expand but made to match standards and often liked for short-range match use. That applies to nearly all 20s - the lifting of the restrictions will make 20-calibre cartridges viable multi-purpose numbers like the small 22s providing they don't infringe MoD / Bisley ranges' maximum MV ceilings. There are also one or two bullets designed to be dual match and deer, thne best example being the 87gn Berger Hunting VLD which is sold everywhere other than here for match use alongside its more common application. It was specifically designed as the heaviest / longest bullet that would be stabilised by the standard 243 Win 9 and 10-inch twist rifling pitches. Ironically, since Bryan Litz designed it he has updated his Coefficient of Stability requirements from 1.4 which the bullet just achieved in a 10-inch twist to an unattainable 1.5, so Berger no longer mention this bullet much for the 243. It will still allow a common or garden heavy barrel factory 243 to be viable in club matches though - I'll give this bullet a go in a Howa Varminter once the restrictions are lifted.

[gbal]

BCs are relevant to wind drift, not accuracy,

 

Precision is the reduction of dispersion between shots and is a function of rifle and ammunition (production tolerances and quality).

Accuracy is the coincidence of POA and POI,and is a function of the shooter's 'shooting solution decisions ' and other rifle handling skills.

 

BC does indeed affect wind drift-higher BC resulting is less drift (and drop)

 

One of the shooter's major shooting solution decisions is how much to allow for wind drift,increasingly critical as distance to target increases,and target size deceases laterally.

 

Very ,few shooters can guage wind from muzzle to target with no estimation error. Most therefore make wind reading errors-the best may reduce these,of course. But any error in wind estimation applied in the firing solution (how many clicks L/R or 'hold off") means a 'less accurate' shot.

The higher the BC,the less drift and therefore the less the wind reading error derived from misreading that wind ....eg a 2 mph wind reading error in a 10 mph 'average' over distance wind means 2/10 ie 1/5 error in drift allowance....which for a 223 with .3 BC bullet is around 2.1 inches at 300y,and with a .4 BCbullet is 1.6 inches.....no big deal,unless shooting crows,but let's stretch to 1000y..with a 308w and BC .490 bullet the error is 1/5 of 100.2 inches,and ie very nearly 20 inches ,and with BC .43 its1/5 of 117.4 which is 23.5 inches. That 3.5 disadvantage might well mean a lower scoring ring for the shot (and should be doubled as error can go +/-).

BC isn't much of a deal under 250 yards-not much is for a rifle/ammo in their 'comfort zone'.

Note 'drop' is not a shooter decision issue as gravity is not a function of any decision he shooter makes-it's a constant,as is target distance/time of flight on target shooting ranges. Click in (fine tune for atmospherics etc if needed).

 

BC can be overemphasised-just as can MV,SD of MV,MOA grouping,etc etc.....but it does affect 'accuracy' for those who are ballistically literate/litzerate.and who shoot either long ranges/small targets...or both!

 

gbal

[MrCetrizine]

how does that work ? more projectiles nearer the surface extend the service life of the butts ?

Seems to be, they can just rake off the top few feet and replace rather than the lanes where target bullets are used which get tunnels all the way to the steel backer and have to be totally dug out and rebuilt.

[tackb]

Seems to be, they can just rake off the top few feet and replace rather than the lanes where target bullets are used which get tunnels all the way to the steel backer and have to be totally dug out and rebuilt.

 

ah , so it doesn't extend the intervals it just makes it less onerous ?

 

I understand now

[Chanonry]

 

 

BCs are relevant to wind drift, not accuracy,

 

Not bother to read the second point ??

[Chanonry]

All rifles like different bullets and loadings for various reasons. Now I'll have a larger selection of bullets, why wouldn't I want to see if the ones now available to me, work better in my rifle.

In my limited experience, I've found that BC and other numbers count for nothing, some bullets work well when their design and marketing info says they shouldn't and vice versa.

 

I'm happy to try anything I can.

"work better in my rifle"

 

Which was the point of my question. Lets put it another way - what does that mean?

 

if we have no idea what you are specifically looking for we therefore can't relate it to our experience?

[Chanonry]

 

 

BCs are relevant to wind drift, not accuracy,

Eh, Big Fail.

 

Is hitting the target relevant to accuracy then? Eh wind drift kind of important then, eh bc.... No?

 

Precision. Accuracy.

[gbal]

BC IS RELEVANT TO ACCURACY.*

My earlier post *14 shows why....maybe it needed capitals at the end.

Better BC means less wind drift ,therefore less wind reading error ,and so less disparity between POA and POI.

 

I think that's a large part of the reason shooters care about BC values (and the validity of BC value claims).It does not mean every bullet with the same BC shoots the same in every rifle;individual rifles can have preferences,independent of BC-BC aids the shooter's firing solution (how well his judgement of POA relates to POI,given the atmospheric conditions).

 

* (Accuracy-in the Litz use of the term,very widely adopted ( eg Zant of PRS blog) -operationalising a firing solution to hit your target-judgement,technique and skill if you prefer)

 

gbal

[MrCetrizine]

 

if we have no idea what you are specifically looking for we therefore can't relate it to our experience?

That's sort of my problem, I have no idea what I'm looking for. Because I've not been able to buy expanding bullets, I've no idea what exists, what technologies and materials are used what's current vs what an RFD is trying to push on me because he has stock he can't get rid of.

[Laurie]

There are some general guidelines to use on this.

 

If it's a 'varmint' bullet, it'll be as well made as the equivalent match design. With varminters using custom rifles and shooting at small targets at fair distances, a manufacturer who makes inconsistent bullets finds he can hardly give them away. With the improvements in rifles and even more so affordable high-grade optics, varminters are constantly extending their effective ranges too, so there has been great pressure on improving BCs to reduce wind effects.

 

Same thing for recently introduced medium game bullets. Hornady EL-Xs appear to be as well made as the ELD-M match version and have similar BCs. Berger has transformed this market with its 'Hunting VLD' designs and US consumers expect all makers to have what are in effect expanding versions of out and out match designs. The quality / design gap between Berger and the others hit Hornady and Sierra sales badly in the USA, Nosler less so - but everybody is playing catch-up now with new models. They are all premium products though and priced as such, so there isn't going to be any benefit in switching to them unless it's an availability in the shops issue.

 

The mid level BC boat-tail sporting designs have always tended to make good general-purpose match bullets and can sometimes facilitate using factory rifles on the ranges where there are few suitable out and out match models. For instance, the Sierra 6mm 85gn HPBT 'GameKing' and its 87gn HPBT Hornady equivalent were almost as good as contemporary match bullets in pre-ban times and work in standard 243 Win barrels. They're probably a bit better made today with more consistent jackets - assuming they're still in production which may not be the case - and will still be suitable for general range use, but are unlikely to stand up to current 6mm specialist match designs in either BC or precision. (But as the latter are all 90-110gn weights and need 8-inch twist barrels, the 87gn Berger Hunting VLD aside, they're no good to many 6mm cartridge sporting users who want to take part in a competition or two.) Back in the 90s, Nosler Ballistic Tips were as good as any match bullet generally then available in the UK and often favoured in 30 calibre by 308 Win 'Target Rifle' shooters - for a while they were cheaper than Sierra MatchKings and Hornady, Lapua, Norma etc equivalents too until the importer discovered who these mystery new buyers were who were increasing sales at a vast rate. I doubt if any national level BR or F-Class shooters are going to switch from ELD-Ms and Hybrids to these and similar bullets and equivalents today, but they'll still be extremely capable in general match use. Again though, there is unlikely to be any cost benefit in using them, more likely a cost penalty!

 

The basic made in their millions RNSP and PSP cup & core flat-base models should be left high and dry in both precision and aerodynamics, and US manufacturers are trying to move the market away from them to higher price and margin 'high-performance' and 'boutique bullet' designs. They'll certainly be relatively poor BC wise, but used to sometimes group very well on paper in pre-ban times. How they'd do by today's standards ...... ?

 

If it's a 'boutique' premium sporting design promising certain high-level expansion and / or weight retention performances - twin core / 'partition', bonded core to jacket, all copper etc types - precision isn't usually up to that of match or top quality long-range sporting bullets, although again actual precision may pleasantly surprise users. But these are expensive models often sold in 50s and therefore unappealing to high round count paper punchers anyway.