Are premium bullets worth it?

[Opposite Pole]

What state is the red from? Interesting tops, nice stag.

NSW, roughly half way between Sydney and Canberra.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I suggest reading a book John Noslers, going ballistic.
The summary of non-premium bullets performance, from this book, is in the attachment.

John Noslers partition bullet is world wide known as first premium bullet, although very similar bullet construction was made in Germany, years earlier, known as H-mantel.

The problem with modern cartridges and magnum velocities, in the second part of XX century, brought the problem of uncontrolled exapansion, fragmentation, loss of bullet weight, and suseqeunetly loss of penetration. It then created the need for a bullet that will hold together, on high impact speeds.

I am not sure if there is definition of premium bullets, per se. But they may be cosnsidered as some of follwoing types:
- Partition bullets, where the lead core is separated in two parts, with longitudinal cross section in the shape of letters "A", or "H". Thus the european /german name H-mantel, with the idea of front part expanding & fragmenting and transferring impact energy to the game on impact, and with second part coninuing penetration to vitals. Minor drawback of this type of bullet could be, smaller exit wound, wiht less of blood spoor. (nosler partitoons, rws h-mantel and similar, for example)

Next technology, is bonding of lead core to the jacket, usually of soft point constrction. So, this soft point, bonded to the jacket. Thickness of jacket will control expansion, and bonding will keep the lead from fragmentation, thus keeping the bullet weight, and penetratration to vitals achieved. More then 90% of mass retention is expected. Norma oryx, good example,

Third technology is monolithic bullet, designed for expansion. Usually will open in 4 parts, without fragmentation. Such as TSX bullet.

Not to go in DG non expanding solids on this subject, for all 3 types of bullet designes, it requires special technology and manufacturing process, thus they are more expensive then others. These three can be considered as "premium" bullets.

More economic bullets:
The cheapeast and oldest technology is just a bullet with lead core, likely to fragment on high impact speeds, simple soft point. Good enough for medium velocities, but questionable on magnum velocity.

So the main problem is to keep the bullet together...
Medium priced technolgy, is so called "core locking". It is based on internal radial rings of the jacket, with lead core. Radial rings are designed to control expansion and, fragmentation at minimum, thus keeping the mass and penetratrion to vitals.
Exmaple is hornady PTS, or various core lokt bullets.

In bullet selection, especially in magnum calibers, you get exactly what you pay for.

Personally (being conservative, and not inklined to magnum speeds) I found good compromise in choosing 9.3x62, with cca 700 mtrs/sec velocities, using old fashion, plain simple soft points (teil-mantels), which with so small impact velocities do not fragment, do expand, and keep penetration. So for 9.3 soft point, will do just fine!

With impact velocities, in my view only, of over 800-850 m/sec (or more) premium bullets should be considered, and stronlgy suggested especially on bigger game.

Below is extract from John Noslers book, "Going Ballistic".



View attachment 282572

@markhunter
Couldn't have said it better.
A bullet used within it prescribed velocity parameters works.
Push the envelope and they will blow up . A 180 grain old cup and core will work better in the 08 and 06 than a 300 win mag.
Horses for courses. If in doubt use a better bullet.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

As with many things shooting, I think it's mostly a confidence thing.

I've shot 11 deer over the past 3 years, 9 red hinds, 1 fallow and a sika stag, all with Remington Core-lokt or Federal Power shok 130gr bullets. Pretty mild .270win factory loads at around 2850-2950 chronoed. Very much 'budget' loads, with the core-lokt being the cheapest ammo available at my local shop.

The shots have all been between 80 and 250yds. HL, shoulders, 1 quartering shot. All the bullets worked perfectly, straight through, straight channels, decent expansion, with all animals running 50yds or less, many simply falling on the spot. Based on this it is my strong opinion that any simple cup and core type bullet, in the right place will work perfectly at any range I care to pull the trigger at for any UK deer (80KG or so max.)

That said, I'm now working up hunting loads for next year with 145gr ELD-X and some 140gr Accubonds. Does it make any difference to the deer? Doubt it. Does it actually help that much with trajectory or wind resisitance. Honestly? Doubt that as well, even with the ELD-X it's maybe 4-5" less drop and a couple inches less windage at 300 and what do people really group at that range in hunting situations? However, it's also only a 5-10 quid difference in price / 100 as well, so why not? It's a nice feeling to know that you're using 'the best', gives you confidence, and as long as that doesn't lead to you taking more marginal shots, that's a good thing imo. Plus it maybe helps my scores a bit for Sporting Rifle comps wrt windage, and that's a nice benefit as well.

As for the GameKings, great bullets with superb accuracy. I currently use these as my 'plinking', running boar comp and short range practice rounds, primarily because one of the guys at the range very kindly gave me a couple hundred foc. I load them to book min charges of N160 and they basically replicate the factory ammo at 2850, grouping comfortably under MOA. Could I hunt with them? Absolutely, no concerns. Would I? Only if I ran out of my usual load.

So that's it really. For most hunting, don't feel the need to use Premium. Any modern bullet of the correct weight and construction will be absolutely fine. But if Premium bullets gives confidence, then that's going to benefit your shooting way more than any 'real world' terminal advantage, and is an entirely valid reason to use them.

Perhaps African game if different and I have no intention of shooting beyond 300, but that's my real world findings thus far and statisitically significant sample size or no, it works for me.

@Alistair
After seeing the performance of the ELDX in Namibia I wouldn't use them if you gave them to me. Yes the killed but even a 200 yards hunters were experiencing core separations.
I used the accubonds and no such problems close or 200 yards and pushed to max velocity.
Just my thoughts
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

having used both types of bullets, premium for hunting is a done deal. premium is it for bigger game.
Woodleigh comes under the heading of premium, but at the bottom of the heap.
only because in the case of say a 338 bullet out of a 338/378 at 50 yds, the friendship might be stretched.
if they do the job, that is all they have to do.
I will stick my neck out and state that they are a better bullet than the nosler partition for all but making a big gun into a smaller gun.
experience has shown that cup and core non bonded bullets are quite ok when used properly.
the problem is that they have a very narrow striking velocity for optimum terminal performance.
too fast and they destruct, and too slow the opposite.
this gives them about a 100 yd window, as velocity decreases as the bullet flies.
they also require specific target presentation.
in the old days, the problem was addressed by simply using a long bullet like the old 7x57 175 gn bullet.
it could just keep expanding and there was still plenty of bullet left.
one trouble with long small calibre bullets is that they can bend on impact like the 156ish gn 6.5mm bullets became known for.
having used billets like swift and barnes, it is obvious that bullets at this level are superior in terminal performance.
they expand fast, retain weight, and do not have to be overlong for calibre (high fineness ratio).
they also do this through a high range of striking velocities.
they also do it at higher velocities.
in fact, the higher the striking velocity, the more effective they are, smashing bone and penetrating better at angles.
which raises the point that they can also be used at less than optimum target presentation.
a point comes to mind that some demand full penetration of a bullet.
this can be a big ask on a big animal when busting a shoulder bone from an angle while trying to get the heart.
as long as it goes past the heart it has done its job.
but it has to get there.
bruce.

@ Bruce moulds
Using a woodleigh or accubonds in a 338/378 is really stretching the friendship unless you are out past 400 yards and in the velocity parameters. A closer range you may as well use standard cup and core.
Bob

 

[Alistair]

@Alistair
After seeing the performance of the ELDX in Namibia I wouldn't use them if you gave them to me. Yes the killed but even a 200 yards hunters were experiencing core separations.
I used the accubonds and no such problems close or 200 yards and pushed to max velocity.
Just my thoughts
Bob

Hey Bob,

Jutst goes to show. I've used these myself now on red hinds. They're certainly aggressive in expansion, but everything died and they all exited without fail, so the fact that they don't hold together doesn't matter to me in the slightest. I use them for mid / long range (150-350yds) cull animals launched at 2950fps and they're decisive! Great 'on the spot' knock downs too, which is good, because as anyone who has hunted hills or mountains knows, shot deer always without fail run down the steepest, deepest, rockiest ravine they can find before expiring.

I wouldn't use them for anything heavier built than red deer though.

Al.

 

[Mr. Zorg]

@markhunter
Couldn't have said it better.
A bullet used within it prescribed velocity parameters works.
Push the envelope and they will blow up . A 180 grain old cup and core will work better in the 08 and 06 than a 300 win mag.
Horses for courses. If in doubt use a better bullet.
Bob

Well I see a few differences.

The RWS H-Mantel has a partial internal ring much like the second generation Speer Grand Slam bullets had along the level where the interface of the two different composition lead cores resided.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQIAhAC&usg=AOvVaw11gcUv-mas0X9FoU9jfrO7

The RWS Dopplekern design more closely approximates the Nosler Partition design and can be seen in cross section.

Also, the expectation on weight retention for the bonded technology Nosler Accubond is about 60%, far below 90%. John Barsness has postd elsewhere this is the deliberately targeted value because Nosler wanted to produce a bonded technology bullet with about the same weight retention as their Partition bullet; he's further posted Nosler accomplishes this by only bonding the rear 50% of the bullet which contains more mass than the front of the bullet with it's pointy part, and having a contoured jacket. I can't comment on the bonding strategy from any personal experience.

I can say Norma has published the tip area of their Oryx bullet is not bonded which in combination with the tip skiving is their approach to provide reliable quick initiation of expansion down to their published minimum expansion impact velocity of 1500 fps. So IMO John Barsness's postings on the Nosler Accubond aren't unreasonable.

I'm going to work on uploading some vintage bullet cutaway photos from a European web site that shows many of these designs sectioned alongside others.

 

[Mr. Zorg]

Here are the pics. Included are some designs that haven't gained much traction in the marketplace like the Hirtenburger ABC bullet and PPU Grom. What I particularly like is the (calculated?) impact velocity is listed for the recovered bullet posed alongside a sectioned unfired example.

Vintage Bullets 5

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 4

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 3

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 2

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 1

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

NSW, roughly half way between Sydney and Canberra.

@Opposite Pole
I've seen plenty of fallow down that way but no reds. Must be looking in the wrong area. PM please.
Bob

 

[Mr. Zorg]

Some more I was able to upload.

Vintage Bullets 13

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 12

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 11

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 10

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 9

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 8

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 7

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

Vintage Bullets 6

• Mr. Zorg
• Jun 2, 2020

 

[Major Khan]

Absolutely . We are sports men . Not butchers . It is our crucial responsibility to use the most superior munitions available ... Against the quarry , which we are pursuing ... In order to dispatch it , cleanly and quickly . While not always a possibility in the real world ... The goal when hunting game animals , should always be ... To dispatch them with the 1st shot .

Now , a greater question becomes : What exactly constitutes a " Premium Quality Bullet " ? During the time of my career , for instance ( 1961 to 1970 ) ... A Winchester Silver Tip soft point bullet was considered to be " Premium " .
A Remington Core Lokt soft point bullet was considered to be " Premium " .
A Hornady steel " Jacketed " solid metal covered bullet was considered to be " Premium " .

Today , most modern sports men would not even LOOK at ANY of these bullets ... When selecting a suitable bullet , for taking to an African safari .

" Premium " is purely subjective .

 

[Gemsbok45]

Swift A-Frames and Barnes monolithic solids.Why wouldn’t you use a premium bullet.

 

[RayAtkinson]

Premium bullets are not needed for deer and light bodied animals, but on a $10,000 Safari I would recommend them and particularly for DG...Its just that simple and all the BS written reports are some guy justifying his existence with gobbly goop..the vary fact that he would write such trivia turns me off reading it..

 

[Fastrig]

Premium bullets are not needed for deer and light bodied animals, but on a $10,000 Safari I would recommend them and particularly for DG...Its just that simple and all the BS written reports are some guy justifying his existence with gobbly goop..the vary fact that he would write such trivia turns me off reading it..

Tend to agree with you. First twenty years of my hunting existence was with shotguns and lever action rifles (all bead or open sights). Birds and deer, light body animals, shot placement the most important factor, decent ammo off the shelf works fine for either of those. Graduated to bolt actions and optics in my 30’s and started going after heavier game, that is where a better bullet comes into play. Still use off the shelf ammo, but I select better grades as I want good penetration, the round to hold together, good mushrooming, and clean kills. If you’re spending ten grand or more to go to Africa on a hunt, I can’t see why anyone would take less than the best shelf ammo available. What, to save a hundred to two hundred dollar? That’s nuts, too many dangerous critters running around Africa for that. Same for Alaska hunts...you don’t want one of those big browns pissed and coming after you because your round came apart and didn’t penetrate. End of the day, use the appropriate round for the place and critter you’re hunting, not rocket science.

 

[Ray B]

I don't mind taking expensive and in some cases irreplaceable bullets on hunting trips, but I do object to shooting them at the range once load development and trajectory/placement has been determined. So it is nice when less expensive readily obtainable bullets can be substituted for the firearm familiarity portion of training. Years ago I had a 300 Weatherby and the velocity required what was then known as Super Premium bullets. So I used 180 grain Bitterroots. But Bill only made a batch of them about once every 3 or 4 years and when he ran out, they were unobtainable until it was their turn again. Fortunately, I found that Speer 180 gr spitzers were very similar in pressure indicators, trajectory and flight path. so I was in the happy position of being able to buy and use the Speers by the hundreds and save the 20 packs of BBCs for fine tuning and the trips to the hunting fields. Considering the cost of everything else, even the $2 each (1980) for the bullets was a miniscule expense for the trip.