Reloading Monolithics for Hunting

[BigGame]

@Koda started a thread that eventually lingered over to this topic, so I'm starting a clean thread to discuss further. This isn't a proselytizing thread about why you should use monolithics. I use them by choice and Koda was interesting in discussing for his own reloading interests. @orygun and @pharmseller were in the mix of that conversation as well.

Read More

 

[BigGame]

I'll start off with this: Some hunting/reloading basics that end up needing to be reevaluated when you start using monolithics.

• There is an accepted range of weights for caliber; e.g., 140-165gr for 7mm (deer to elk) or 150-180gr for .308.
• Heavy for caliber bullets are preferred for the biggest animals to achieve the necessary penetration.
• Twist rates should be kept within commonly accepted ranges. Over-twisting can have ill effects or maybe even cause bullet disintegration.
• All monolithic bullets are the same.

As you wade in, you need to question all of those sacred cows. Probably more.

 

[BigGame]

I should have added another sacred cow: You must use a <fill in the blank> for elk-sized game and <some smaller caliber> is a deer cartridge.

Those lines change with monolithics as well.

 

[No_Regerts]

I find them to be accurate and more tolerant of a little jump to the lands vs cup and cores. I tend to use light to mid-range weights in any given caliber because SPEED is your friend when it comes to getting good expansion over a longer distance. That, and they don't shed weight like jacketed bullets. A 150gr TTSX will weigh more than a 180gr Partition, if you can even catch it in the animal to weigh it. Most will exit unless impact velocity is real low.

So, I tend to load lighter weight for more velocity and use what the bullet manufacturers load data. They have more bearing surface since they have to be longer than a corresponding C&C bullet to achieve the same weight.

Edit: I'd have no issue using 130gr TTSX on elk out of a 30-06. These, at 3200fps, are devastating.

 

[BigGame]

SPEED is your friend

I completely agree. And this is one of the first things people tend to hear about monolithics - go lighter and push them faster. This is a formula that works for various styles of monolithic design. But it's also a bit difficult for people to completely believe until they test it out for themselves. Your example of a 130gr TTSX from a 30-06 on elk is a good example. I'm certain it is completely devastating, but it's totally understandable if people make the drift downward in weight slowly.

What is important from a reloading perspective, I think, is to always examine what you're gaining in velocity and flatter trajectory out to your intended distances as you decrease weight. You may not yet have the confidence to know that that lighter weight projectile will in fact penetrate like a 180gr bonded/lead-core, but once your realize it will all of the extra benefits of that velocity become gravy.

 

[Koda]

I'll start off with this: Some hunting/reloading basics that end up needing to be reevaluated when you start using monolithics.

• There is an accepted range of weights for caliber; e.g., 140-165gr for 7mm (deer to elk) or 150-180gr for .308.
• Heavy for caliber bullets are preferred for the biggest animals to achieve the necessary penetration.
• Twist rates should be kept within commonly accepted ranges. Over-twisting can have ill effects or maybe even cause bullet disintegration.
• All monolithic bullets are the same.

As you wade in, you need to question all of those sacred cows. Probably more.

This is good to consider, I have a lot to consider as I choose a projectile to reload in my .257 caliber which is widely considered on the very low end for elk which does concern me. If not all monolithics are the same, whats the metric for learning which one to choose?

 

[No_Regerts]

This is good to consider, I have a lot to consider as I choose a projectile to reload in my .257 caliber which is widely considered on the very low end for elk which does concern me. If not all monolithics are the same, whats the metric for learning which one to choose?

There are a few that offer slight benefits over others. The LRX looks like a TTSX, but it's made for shooting longer ranges and still expanding. There's also the E-Tip and GMX, but Barnes had such a big head start that I had no reason to change.

I've been happy with the 168gr TTSX in the 300 Win Mag when hunting for deer and elk out to 450ish yards. The impact velocity threshold is lower than the 165gr. I think because of the longer ogive profile. I mostly shoot 700s when it comes to magnums because of magazine space. That bullet/cartridge combo in a 30-06 length might be a bit tight. The shorter profile of the 165gr might be more appropriate in that situation.

 

[BigGame]

If not all monolithics are the same, whats the metric for learning which one to choose?

I'm not able to give you metrics on which to choose. But I'll share what I've learned about the differences and others will certainly chime in so you can make a decision.

I'll compare Barnes bullets to Hammer bullets, because I've loaded and used both on game. Barnes, in my view, is the segment pioneer for monolithic bullets. They were one of the first, and they still maintain one of the broadest product lines (Hammer is actually broader now, but largely only available to reloaders). Barnes also sells loaded ammunition for those who don't reload. Because Barnes pioneered the segment, their failures weigh heavily on what many people believe to be the broad failures of all monolithics. That's not true for a couple reasons - 1) Barnes overcame their failures, and 2) there are a lot of innovative companies out there making completely different monolithic designs.

The early Barnes designs (read as the X-class designs) did not have the running bands that are now common to all monolithic bullets. Those are the cuts in the shank that give the material somewhere to flow when displaced by the lands while traveling the down the barrel. Those early designs penetrated like crazy, but also copper-fouled barrels badly and had accuracy issues in some barrels. Then Barnes innovated the running bands in the shank, and then monolithics were off to the races with all sorts of new things like ballistic tips, etc.

The Barnes design, in my view, can best be described as an attempt to remain as true as possible to the sacred cows hunters held dear while using a new material. By that I mean they wanted to design a bullet that would mushroom upon impact and create a hallmark benefit of outstanding penetration, but generally to be accepted as what hunters expect, with a couple different features. Barnes uses a harder copper alloy. So their bullets require a certain velocity to mushroom and perform as expected. This was aided when they perfected their ballistic tips that seemed to improve expansion, though generally people using Barnes probably like to see 2,200+ fps impacts and 2,000 fps impacts are the lower threshold to ensure performance (and not penciling though).

Hammer went a different direction. Hammer uses a softer allow and specifically designed their bullets to shed their petals completely, leaving only a solid, flat-faced shank to continue penetrating. The notion, in the terms we most commonly use when talking about terminal ballistics, is Hammer wanted the quickly-shedding petals to emulate the immediate explosive cavitation characteristic of traditional unbonded soft-point bullets while also providing the deep and devastating penetration associated with wadcutters or dangerous-game solids. The best of both worlds. Kind of an effective deer bullet that doubles as an effective elk bullet; i.e., explosive initial damage plus deep penetration. Also, due to the softer alloy, Hammers perform down to 1,800 fps. The lower threshold gets you more effective range.

Those are just two examples, but I hope they give a sense of the divergence in design paths. There are a number of innovative monolithic bullet manufacturers out there. Badlands, Cutting Edge, and Lehigh Defense are a few (Lehigh is handgun). Quite a thing when folks in a small shop can put a CNC machine to good use...

 

[No_Regerts]

Sounds like Hammer bullets are, in effect, similar in concept to the Nosler Partition. The front end has rapid expansion while the shank drives through. That's not a bad thing. I've always had great terminal performance out of Partitions.

I've drifted to monolithics for a few reasons:

1: High velocity/flat trajectory. As a non-extended range hunter, I'm only concerned with how flat we are to 400-450 yards. I can hold on hair out to 350 and compensate very little out to 450.

2: Achieved with less recoil. Lighter bullets mean less recoil.

3: No compromise in terminal velocity.

4: Accuracy

5: No lead in my meat.

 

[BigGame]

Sounds like Hammer bullets are, in effect, similar in concept to the Nosler Partition. The front end has rapid expansion while the shank drives through. That's not a bad thing.

Well said. I agree.

I've drifted to monolithics for a few reasons:

1: High velocity/flat trajectory. As a non-extended range hunter, I'm only concerned with how flat we are to 400-450 yards. I can hold on hair out to 350 and compensate very little out to 450.

2: Achieved with less recoil. Lighter bullets mean less recoil.

3: No compromise in terminal velocity.

4: Accuracy

5: No lead in my meat.

Really well said. The only thing I'd add on point #5, and this gets into the issue of lead, is that I don't want to feed it to my kids.

 

[osprey]

I played with early barnes offerings and never really had consistent results with them so I moved in a different direction. I now use the tactx bullets in the 300blk and maker rex bullets for sub hunting in 458 socom. If required I am sure I could get friendly with copper monolithics for other applications. For sub hunting they are money!

 

[No_Regerts]

Well said. I agree.


Really well said. The only thing I'd add on point #5, and this gets into the issue of lead, is that I don't want to feed it to my kids.

Yes! I use non-toxic on everything we eat. Coyotes and other varmints still get Ballistic Tips and V-Maxes.

 

[TTSX]

Here's what I like: much, much higher weight retention. Longer bullets per grain, so I can have long, stable bullets but I can keep the recoil down and velocity up.

What I do not like: price per bullet

 

[No_Regerts]

I forgot to mention, my ARs are loaded with 55gr TTSXs. I've shot body armor with the stuff and it's pretty impressive.

 

[Koda]

The replies are coming in faster than I can type. I was going to reverberate what No_Regerts said comparing Hammer to Partitions.
It sounds like Barnes TTSX might offer an advantage with deeper penetration. Specific to my case, using a 25-06 on elk I am leaning to any advantage for penetration. What it might come down to in my case is if the lighter weights of monolithics made a difference than the lead cup and core performance. Or if the additional velocity gained with monolithics makes everything equal out. My options are 120gr Partition vs 100gr monolithic. It seems like from what Im reading either is equal, except Id rather not feed lead to my kids either.

 

[No_Regerts]

I want to say I've heard some people complain that the .257 and smaller TTSXs don't have as much material up front and tend to shed petals. I don't have direct experience with .257 TTSXs, but the .224s lose petals from time to time. The standard TSXs don't seem to be as effected, but also don't seem to open as reliably once velocity bleeds off.

 

[BigGame]

Lead thing.

I'll make Three points.

1) California did it extremely poorly by mandating non-toxic ammo. They effectively stigmatized the use of non-toxic ammo as something necessary and not desirable. Much of the headwinds regarding monolithic bullets can be laid at their doorstep, in spite of their intent. In the minds of many, monolithic bullets only exist by hostile government mandate. So much for effective public policy. There are better policy examples than California out there (happy to expand if interest).
2) I chose to shoot non-toxic initially because I feed what I take to my kids. I realize that folks who have been eating lead shot for decades have not fallen over dead yet, but that's not how lead poisoning works. The folks in Flint, Michigan didn't fall over dead when their water supply had lead in it either. Lead doesn't kill on contact, it messes with your brain. Particularly if you're a young person whose brain is still developing. So maybe you're around and just can't fill in the crossword puzzles like you used to. I'm not feeding my kids lead.
3) I initially thought I was giving something up by limiting myself to non-toxic projectiles. Thank goodness American ingenuity stepped in. It opened an avenue that not only satisfied my home needs, but actually exceeded my ballistic expectations.

I'm pretty sure I started this thread by saying I wasn't going to proselytize the use of monolithic bullets. And I'm not. The kind of effective penetration on game I've described has parallels across a broad swath of bullets. This is simply the sandbox I play in and there are many hunting-effective answers to the question.

 

[Koda]

I want to say I've heard some people complain that the .257 and smaller TTSXs don't have as much material up front and tend to shed petals. I don't have direct experience with .257 TTSXs, but the .224s lose petals from time to time. The standard TSXs don't seem to be as effected, but also don't seem to open as reliably once velocity bleeds off.

a hard pill for me to swallow is to admit the calibers limitations and force myself to stay within those when elk hunting with the .25, basically I wont be doing any long range hunting. I haven't decided yet the exact metric but currently keeping things under 300yds max for elk I feel the impact velocities will perform to the projectiles terminal velocity.... I think. I'm open to insights on this but from what I'm reading here a lighter monolithic sent slightly faster velocity will perform similar to a slightly heavier lead core slightly slower so all things being equal I can look into using a monolithic over a partition. I think.

 

[No_Regerts]

a hard pill for me to swallow is to admit the calibers limitations and force myself to stay within those when elk hunting with the .25, basically I wont be doing any long range hunting. I haven't decided yet the exact metric but currently keeping things under 300yds max for elk I feel the impact velocities will perform to the projectiles terminal velocity.... I think. I'm open to insights on this but from what I'm reading here a lighter monolithic sent slightly faster velocity will perform similar to a slightly heavier lead core slightly slower so all things being equal I can look into using a monolithic over a partition. I think.

When it comes to the 25-06, IMO, using anything more than 115gr bullets becomes grounds for a 270. A 270 will push 130s as fast or faster than a 25-06 with 115gr bullets. It may be possible with a longer barrel and a powder like RL26 to get the heavier bullets going a bit faster, but I don't think it makes sense. The 100gr copper or 110gr bonded bullets are just fine for anything up to elk.

 

[No_Regerts]

I ALMOST FORGOT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING!

Monolithics allow for a high shoulder shot placement without damaging too much meat. Where I hunt mule deer, it's very steep and I often use magnum cartridges for the purpose of blowing out both shoulders to anchor the animal. This way, it doesn't end up going on a gravity induced tenderization trip to the bottom of a canyon.