Reloading Monolithics for Hunting

[Haftard]

I love what the 130 gmx bullets do out of my 270 and I can't wait to get a load worked up for my 7mm. I'm thinking however to go with a brass option. See I shoot the 300g bloodlines out of my muzzleloader and what them things do to an elk at 10 yards is impressive. And what they do to an elk at 150 yards is also very impressive. Only issues is finding all the damn peddals when butchering. Not fun getting one of them in the burger.

Has anyone noticed that it seems like you get less bloodshot with monolithic bullets?

 

[Local Loader]

I wouldn't get too attached to the GMXs, it seems they plan on replacing them next year with the CX bullets.

 

[joken]

I posted this picture a couple years ago but it fits this discussion. This little buck was shot with my 270 and a handload using a 130gr TTSX. I was shooting uphill and hit him low. The shot was around 70 yards. I have the load data if anyone is curious.

 

[Koda]

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.

"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)."

"Hammers perform down to 1800 fps"

question to all, where do we get this min (max)velocity data? I cant find either on Barnes website.

 

[Xaevian]

"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)."

"Hammers perform down to 1800 fps"

question to all, where do we get this min (max)velocity data? I cant find either on Barnes website.

You can ask the manufacturer's customer service. They get that question so often, I wonder why they don't just put it on their boxes.

 

[BigGame]

I agree, contact them directly. You should also specify the particular bullet, as they may have different figures by bullet. Last, it's also useful to research what users are experiencing in the field, if you can find it.

 

[BigGame]

Hammer lists their recommendation on their homepage.

"All of the Hammer Bullets that are designed for hunting are impact tested down to 1800 fps impact velocity for proper deformation."

Patented Custom Bullets | Hammer Bullets

Hammer Bullets are custom designed bullets offering superior accuracy and ensuring minimal game waste. Our bullets have higher velocity and are lead free.

hammerbullets.com

 

[Koda]

They get that question so often, I wonder why they don't just put it on their boxes.

sure would be a lot easier if they published it, but my guess is eventually someone says they achieved it (when they most likely didnt) and blasts them online when it doesnt meet their expectation.

 

[Haftard]

Yeah I was really curious about the hammer. I think I'm gonna get a box and try them in my 7mm

 

[Koda]

Hammer lists their recommendation on their homepage.

"All of the Hammer Bullets that are designed for hunting are impact tested down to 1800 fps impact velocity for proper deformation."

Patented Custom Bullets | Hammer Bullets

Hammer Bullets are custom designed bullets offering superior accuracy and ensuring minimal game waste. Our bullets have higher velocity and are lead free.

hammerbullets.com

yup, they do. and Im soooo tempted to switch to Hammer bullets for their transparency and reputation.

If I read their homepage right it seems their Shock Hammer bullet performs like a blend between a Partition and a TSX (penetration and weight retention) while their Hunter performs similar to a frangable...

 

[BigGame]

The Hammer homepage does a pretty good job of explaining the different designs. You can get more from the Hammer forum ("Hammer Time").

Both the Shock Hammer and Hammer Hunter shed their nose petals. The Shock Hammers shed less, retaining a larger shank. They also have a larger meplat (3mm) which encourages more rapid and reliable deformation. The Hammer Hunters are more streamlined with better BC and smaller meplat (1mm) with larger shedding nose petals. In general I think the Shock Hammers are recommended when impacts are expected to be inside of 250 yards or so and Hammer Hunters when you're reaching out further. For me, accuracy looms large. I have found very good accuracy in three of my rifles with the Hammer Hunters and in one other I like the Shock Hammer.

 

[Koda]

The Hammer homepage does a pretty good job of explaining the different designs. You can get more from the Hammer forum ("Hammer Time").

Both the Shock Hammer and Hammer Hunter shed their nose petals. The Shock Hammers shed less, retaining a larger shank. They also have a larger meplat (3mm) which encourages more rapid and reliable deformation. The Hammer Hunters are more streamlined with better BC and smaller meplat (1mm) with larger shedding nose petals. In general I think the Shock Hammers are recommended when impacts are expected to be inside of 250 yards or so and Hammer Hunters when you're reaching out further. For me, accuracy looms large. I have found very good accuracy in three of my rifles with the Hammer Hunters and in one other I like the Shock Hammer.

Somewhere theres an MC Hammer joke in here I just know it...

For my handload project I truly cant decide between the Hammer or the Barnes TTSX. Id rather support a smaller company like Hammer but I already have plenty of TTSX on hand getting good results and they have stellar reviews everywhere its hard to give up on using them. From what Ive read the TTSX does a bit better at deeper penetration than the Hammers which lends itself to my needs even if its only a slight advantage...

 

[3MTA3]

New to the monolithic game, and also interested in lead free hunting. Summarizing what I've read above, Barnes does a good job of expansion (assuming the 2K terminal velocity recommended for monolithics) and Hammer behaves like a partition by shedding petals after initial penetration allowing the remainder of the body to continue for deeper penetration. Nosler E-Tips seem more of an unknown quantity.

Has anybody had a chance to use the new Hornady CX line? Sounds like their version of the TTSX. They are available and running about a buck a bullet with shipping.

Probably the toughest aspect is determining what weight of bullet to use based on barrel twist. I'm looking for a good deer/elk bullet for my 280 AI. Barrel twist is 1 in 8*, speeds run about 50 fps slower than a 7mm Rem Mag. In a more traditional bullet I'd be looking at 160 grains, so I would be looking at 140 to 150 grains in a monolithic?

Looking at factory loads for 7mm RM Barnes loads 139 - 160 gr Hornady has 150 CX, so that would possibly be a an OK weight for the 280 AI. I'm thinking 140-150 would be safe?

What are you doing for load development? Start at the low end of the same load for a conventional bullet of the same weight, even though the less dense monolithic will take up more case volume at the same OAL?

*EDIT: initially posted 1 in 10, the correct twist is 1 in 8

 

[Koda]

Probably the toughest aspect is determining what weight of bullet to use based on barrel twist. I'm looking for a good deer/elk bullet for my 280 AI. Barrel twist is 1 in 10, speeds run about 50 fps slower than a 7mm Rem Mag. In a more traditional bullet I'd be looking at 160 grains, so I would be looking at 140 to 150 grains in a monolithic?

I dont think theres a way to determine an equivelent weight, in short just pick the heaviest you can find that is rated for your twist rate.

What are you doing for load development? Start at the low end of the same load for a conventional bullet of the same weight, even though the less dense monolithic will take up more case volume at the same OAL?

Im fairly new to reloading so maybe someone can confirm or clarify (or scold... ) but if theres no published load data Id first call the bullet manufacturer and ask if they have any (Hammer has some load data...). Otherwise Id start at the low end of the same load for a conventional bullet of the same weight.

as far as I know a monolithic of the same weight as a lead bullet will be longer and protrude into the case farther at the same OAL. I measure my seating depth from the lands, but keep in mind many suggest to seat monos with a larger jump to the lands.

 

[3MTA3]

I dont think theres a way to determine an equivelent weight, in short just pick the heaviest you can find that is rated for your twist rate.

Im fairly new to reloading so maybe someone can confirm or clarify (or scold... ) but if theres no published load data Id first call the bullet manufacturer and ask if they have any (Hammer has some load data...). Otherwise Id start at the low end of the same load for a conventional bullet of the same weight.

as far as I know a monolithic of the same weight as a lead bullet will be longer and protrude into the case farther at the same OAL. I measure my seating depth from the lands, but keep in mind many suggest to seat monos with a larger jump to the lands.

I incorrectly stated my barrel's twist above - it's 1 in 8. Hammer lists the minimum twist rates so pretty much anything 7mm they make is good. I think I can "assume" that goes for Barnes and Hornady, who don't provide that info.

My understanding is that you should pick a lighter monolithic than a lead core. You want the terminal velocity to be 2,000 fps at impact, so the lighter bullet along with the higher ballistic coefficient per given weight should help to retain that velocity.

Lead is 1.26 times denser than copper, so a 140gr monolithic would have about the same volume and likely ballistic coefficient as a 160 grain copper clad lead bullet, or perhaps a bit heavier compared to a heavy bonded bullet like an Accubond.

Load data for the 280 AI likely a bit tricky, buy in my Nosler manual it uses the same for the 150 grain E-Tip along with the 150 grain Ballistic Tip.

 

[Koda]

My understanding is that you should pick a lighter monolithic than a lead core. You want the terminal velocity to be 2,000 fps at impact, so the lighter bullet along with the higher ballistic coefficient per given weight should help to retain that velocity.

is the BC always higher on lighter projectiles? As Im also looking for the right bullet to load for this is something Ive been struggling to figure out, Im not certain its always best to pick a lighter monolithic. Agree the terminal velocity should stay above 2000 (1800 for Hammers...) but is the highest BC the only metric to determine the best bullet weight?

 

[3MTA3]

is the BC always higher on lighter projectiles? As Im also looking for the right bullet to load for this is something Ive been struggling to figure out, Im not certain its always best to pick a lighter monolithic. Agree the terminal velocity should stay above 2000 (1800 for Hammers...) but is the highest BC the only metric to determine the best bullet weight?

It depends on the density... The BC is based on size and shape. The BC describes the wind resistance an object. The higher the BC the less resistant. There are also different types of BC like g7 vs g3 that you commonly see.

If you take an entirely lead bullet and make the exact same size and shape bullet from a different material it will have the same BC regardless of weight.

Since monolithic bullets are made from less dense materials than a conventional bullet, one with the same weight will be longer and more streamlined and thus have a higher BC. Also, a monolithic that had the same BC and caliber will weigh less.

Ballistic coefficient - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Koda]

It depends on the density... The BC is based on size and shape. The BC describes the wind resistance an object. The higher the BC the less resistant. There are also different types of BC like g7 vs g3 that you commonly see.

If you take an entirely lead bullet and make the exact same size and shape bullet from a different material it will have the same BC regardless of weight.

Since monolithic bullets are made from less dense materials than a conventional bullet, one with the same weight will be longer and more streamlined and thus have a higher BC. Also, a monolithic that had the same BC and caliber will weigh less.

Ballistic coefficient - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

yup, and all that is where I start to get lost choosing a bullet. I don't know how to put the data together to select the optimal bullet..... but at the same time I'm not certain it matters when Ive narrowed my selection down to some of the most reputable performance bullets

What I've heard is a heavier bullet tends to be more accurate downrange (windage)?. I know heavier will mean more terminal energy, and more drop. Lighter bullets can equal or exceed energy if you load them to higher velocities but there is a safety limit there too. So it depends on how fast you can drive them safely but we don't know until we buy some to try out.

 

[3MTA3]

yup, and all that is where I start to get lost choosing a bullet. I don't know how to put the data together to select the optimal bullet..... but at the same time I'm not certain it matters when Ive narrowed my selection down to some of the most reputable performance bullets

What I've heard is a heavier bullet tends to be more accurate downrange (windage)?. I know heavier will mean more terminal energy, and more drop. Lighter bullets can equal or exceed energy if you load them to higher velocities but there is a safety limit there too. So it depends on how fast you can drive them safely but we don't know until we buy some to try out.

Heavier does not necessarily mean more energy! E=MV^2, so while mass is linear, velocity is exponential. Take two objects, one twice as large with the small one traveling twice as fast. The smaller, faster object has far more energy.

Heavier also does not necessarily less resistant to cross wind. It's about the area the wind is pressing against, how drag resistant that profile, and the energy of the object at that point.

Like you say, though, the proof is in the pudding!

 

[No_Regerts]

Almost no monolithic will have BCs commonly found in target bullets. They are too light for their length. Being longer lead-core bullets of the same weight, they can also get into stability problems that don't seem to jive with their weight.