Bullet Performance Database

[Mr. Zorg]

308win
Norma Vulkan
180grn
Advertised Muzzle Velocity 2612
Wild boar 60-70kg's (143lbs)
Pig was in a creek bed, shot taken from top of the creek bank shooting down at only about 30 yards, entry just below the spine, bullet found under the skin on the opposite shoulder. Rapid expansion and a massive amount of internal damage. Really impressed with the Norma Vulkan for a fast expanding bullet. Would absolutely recommend this offering from Norma especially for wild boar hunting.

Entry
View attachment 330246

Opposite Shoulder
View attachment 330247

Recovered bullet
View attachment 330248

Thanks for the post & photos. I picked up a box of 7X64mm Norma factory ammo loaded with 170 grain Vulkan bullets recently.

They look similar to the Winchester Power Max Bonded and Geco Plus bullets externally to me except the Norma Vulkan has never been a bonded bullet, and probably predates those.

 

[Aussie_Hunter]

Thanks for the post & photos. I picked up a box of 7X64mm Norma factory ammo loaded with 170 grain Vulkan bullets recently.

They look similar to the Winchester Power Max Bonded and Geco Plus bullets externally to me except the Norma Vulkan has never been a bonded bullet, and probably predates those.

Correct, the Vulkan has been around since the 80's I believe, even though they are not bonded I am impressed with the performance of the Vulkan..

 

[Ray B]

even though they are not bonded I am impressed with the performance of the Vulkan..

Bill Steigers told me that bonding will not correct an inadequate jacket. That the jacket whether bonded or not must be up to the task. Since that time, about 1983, there have been many bullets made with the main claim to fame being that they are bonded. I have tested several that had inadequate jackets and the bonding resulted in the recovered pieces of jacket had little globs of lead stuck to them. It is more important to have a sturdy jacket, or the more recent practice of having a solid gilding metal/copper shank than to have the core bonded to the jacket; although the best is to have a sturdy jacket with a bonded lead core.

 

[Aussie_Hunter]

Bill Steigers told me that bonding will not correct an inadequate jacket. That the jacket whether bonded or not must be up to the task. Since that time, about 1983, there have been many bullets made with the main claim to fame being that they are bonded. I have tested several that had inadequate jackets and the bonding resulted in the recovered pieces of jacket had little globs of lead stuck to them. It is more important to have a sturdy jacket, or the more recent practice of having a solid gilding metal/copper shank than to have the core bonded to the jacket; although the best is to have a sturdy jacket with a bonded lead core.

Is there really bullets on the market in this day and age with an inadequate jacket? I have never come across one...........

 

[Ray B]

Is there really bullets on the market in this day and age with an inadequate jacket? I have never come across one...........

The term inadequate is not actually accurate. Every bullet has a window of desired performance. The "window" is the combination of velocity and impact desired. To achieve the desired performance bullet designers have to make a bullet that will expand- that is change its ballistic shape to the desired amount, at a rate that is optimum for the specific animal. So any bullet will be adequate or even superior if it is fired within its velocity window and it expands as desired on the game animal. So we have bullets with very thin jackets that go all to pieces in the first few inches of contact, which exactly what is wanted for shooting ground hogs and we have solids which do not change their shape at all but have superior penetration which is exactly what is wanted for braining elephants. Everything in between is a matter of determining the desired window of velocity and impact performance that is desired for a specific situation, then getting bullets that meet those specs. The problem is that people will use a bullet that is designed for slower velocities or softer resistance and then are dismayed when the bullet didn't perform up to expectations.

 

[Aussie_Hunter]

The term inadequate is not actually accurate. Every bullet has a window of desired performance. The "window" is the combination of velocity and impact desired. To achieve the desired performance bullet designers have to make a bullet that will expand- that is change its ballistic shape to the desired amount, at a rate that is optimum for the specific animal. So any bullet will be adequate or even superior if it is fired within its velocity window and it expands as desired on the game animal. So we have bullets with very thin jackets that go all to pieces in the first few inches of contact, which exactly what is wanted for shooting ground hogs and we have solids which do not change their shape at all but have superior penetration which is exactly what is wanted for braining elephants. Everything in between is a matter of determining the desired window of velocity and impact performance that is desired for a specific situation, then getting bullets that meet those specs. The problem is that people will use a bullet that is designed for slower velocities or softer resistance and then are dismayed when the bullet didn't perform up to expectations.

@Ray B this conversation went from inadequate bullet jackets and bonded bullets to people using a bullet that's not fit for purpose...........I'm not really sure where you are going with all this? But it stems from my comment about the Vulkan bullet and how well it performed even though it's not bonded? But yeah anyway I agree if you are going to use a bullet on wild boar that was designed for use on rabbits it's probably not gong to work out to well for you.

 

[Ray B]

What I was saying was that the integrity of the jacket has more to do with bullet terminal performance than whether or not it is bonded- which is what the non-bonded Vulcan shows. Excellent performance due to a substantial jacket without bonding.

 

[Aussie_Hunter]

What I was saying was that the integrity of the jacket has more to do with bullet terminal performance than whether or not it is bonded- which is what the non-bonded Vulcan shows. Excellent performance due to a substantial jacket without bonding.

Yeah ok fair enough. But do we agree that a bonded bullet is going to provide better performance (weight retention, penetration) compared to a non-bonded bullet of the exact same weight, calibre jacket construction etc and purpose?

 

[Ray B]

Agreed

 

[Tanks]

CEB .500 caliber 500 grain solids recovered from elephants. The one on the bottom 15 meters brain shot found in the spine. The one on the right (50 meters) went through the right shoulder and found on the left hip. Fired at 2,370 fps

 

[bruce moulds]

actually the main advantage of bonding is to stop the core slipping out of the jacket.
once out, the core has no integrity at all.
bruce.

 

[bruce moulds]

if there is a bullet that encompasses some of this discussion, it is the 300 gn sierra 375 boattail.
I have found it to form a massive mushroom, and never failed on me.
the mushroom is big enough to limit penetration.
this is facilitated by a tough jacket and a hard core..
that said, I would not use the bullet on buffalo or cattle just in case, but elk, big donkeys, sambar, and maybe big bears it would work well.
bruce.

 

[quacker attacker]

Hornady 6.5 Creedmoor 120 grain GMX Full Boar Recovered from: Frontal shot on a red lechwe, and broad side shots on a sable and a golden wildebeast. Also added one more since this picture from a white tail shot quartering on through the front shoulder. Can't get much better performance than this!

 

[Frederik]

All 3 Woodleigh HD 300gr in 375 velocity 2470fps
Left to right Buffalo cow shoulder to shoulder found under opposite skin range 70 meters, buffalo fell 25 meters after the shot.
Blue wildebeest frontal shot found in rumen range 120 meters, dropped right there
Blue wildebeest Shoulder to shoulder found under skin range 150 meters, shot was a bit low clipped bottom of heart beest managed 60 meters before falling over.
They might not have the perfect mushroom but the trauma they cause inside is amazing and they do not break open past the cannelure. I'm very happy with them but please note this is the HD bullet made for the faster 375 velocity not the normal standard woodleigh soft.
All these animals were one shot kills.

 

[Velo Dog]

if there is a bullet that encompasses some of this discussion, it is the 300 gn sierra 375 boattail.
I have found it to form a massive mushroom, and never failed on me.
the mushroom is big enough to limit penetration.
this is facilitated by a tough jacket and a hard core..
that said, I would not use the bullet on buffalo or cattle just in case, but elk, big donkeys, sambar, and maybe big bears it would work well.
bruce.

Hi bruce moulds,

I agree with you.
And, I know I’m likely preaching to the choir here but, perhaps some folks new to Hunting and/or new to hand loading may find comfort in this rant.
Anyway, I like Sierra bullets in general, including the .375 / 300 grain.
When used within its intended velocity range (essentially within H&H speeds), it is apparently a real killer.

However, I would prefer it to have a flat base.
Boat tail bullets seem to encourage their lead cores to squirt forward, away from their jackets, now and then.
It is IMO sort of silly to make a boat tail design of any hunting bullet.

Boat tailed bullets I believe were developed either by military ballistics engineers or, by long range serious target competitors or, perhaps both, to enhance extra-long range performance.
This design only begins to show its worth, extremely far down range.
Out there, the velocity and rotational spin is greatly diminishing, thereby allowing the bullet to start wobbling and drifting willy nilly off course.

Again IMO, boat tailed bullets are best kept in military applications and 1,000 yard target competitions.
As a hunting bullet, boat tail designs evidently do more for marketing than they do for actual performance on flesh and bone.

Ok rant over.

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

 

[Ray B]

Boat tailed bullets I believe were developed either by military ballistics engineers

Yes, from what I have read, boattail bullets first application came in the Great War when the machine gun was used to extend the killing range beyond that of standard rifle fire. A soldier with iron sighted rifle had an effective range of 500 yards, that dead zone was extended to 1100 yards by a machine gun firing boattail bullets.

 

[bruce moulds]

yes at ranges we shoot there is no point in boat tails.
I was just using as an example of a surprise.
I have never had one seem to slip a core, but the concern precludes me from using them on big boned dangerous game.
on things like donkeys they are devastating, and would also be so on elk I am sure.
where they are good, they are very very good.
bruce.

 

[Velo Dog]

yes at ranges we shoot there is no point in boat tails.
I was just using as an example of a surprise.
I have never had one seem to slip a core, but the concern precludes me from using them on big boned dangerous game.
on things like donkeys they are devastating, and would also be so on elk I am sure.
where they are good, they are very very good.
bruce.

Hello again bruce moulds and fellow hunters,

As usual I am in agreement with you.
In one of his several books on hunting in Africa, Craig Boddinton included a photo of a large eland bull he had taken with the .375 H&H / 300 grain Sierra bullet/s.
Clearly seen and mentioned in his writings describing same, is a bulge just under the skin of this large animal.
This bullet had “mushroomed” properly, while passing through the vitals and stopped just short of exiting the far side of the large bull.

Often today, Hunters overlook some of the most reliable bullets, (even though they’ve been working well for many decades) seemingly for no better reason than buying whatever is new.
Case in point: The descriptor “cup and core”, I have noticed, is sometimes used in context such that, it suggests inferior design.
That said and in all fairness, if one is to use smallish calibers for largish animals, then indeed newer, tougher bullets are definitely the way to go.

At more sedate velocities, old fashioned “cup and core” bullets work predictably very well, in my experiences especially the out of style these days; “round nose softs”.
Of course, I personally see no particular reason for using small calibers on large game animals.
Put another way, I always prefer to “use enough gun” (quote is from Robert Ruark).

Conversely, today’s newer / tougher bullets have been known to occasionally, not deform as desired, when passing through flesh and bone, at lower velocities.
Old time round nose jacketed softs are half mushroomed even before they leave the ammunition factory, lol.

Unfortunately, the WWWDB (“World Wide Wet Diaper Brigade” is making a lot of progress in banning lead billets and lead fishing sinkers as well.
Using cement fishing sinkers won’t change sport fishing as we know it, very much anyway.
But using non lead bullets for hunting is already causing some ripples.

IE: Non lead bullets are so far, noticeably harder than lead, making them sort of “tougher than necessary” so to speak and therefore, potentially more prone to ricochet off the ground, hardwood tree trunks, etc.
Likewise, they are longer than same caliber/weight dreaded “cup and core” bullets, making them sometimes problematic for needed powder space in certain cartridges.
Plus, they are proving inaccurate in some rifles (including one of my rifles hahahaha.....ha).

Cheers,
Velo Dog.

 

[Mike Van Horn]

Tested the 28 cal, 168 LRX in 7mm Weatherby
Muzzle velocity 3175, est impact 3100

 

[Mike Van Horn]

Tested 25 cal, 120 grain Northfork, 257 Weatherby, used starting load at 30 yards, est impact 3000 fps