150gr GS GV in 3006

[bullet]

Would be interested to see how Varget/AR2208 goes, seeing as the H4895/AR2206 went so well and for most applications I would think Varget would fall in between the burn rate of 4895 and R17.

I must say I am one of those blokes that will argue the cost of these bullets is not worth it, but I will qualify that by saying not worth it to me.

Great to read your reports. The narratives really do tell the story of the handloader's journey. Good stuff.

Thanks bobnob, and if I had not seen the difference in how the GS dispatches game as apposed to the TSX I would not be spending any money on these either.

Let me back up for a moment and cover a unique aspect of the GS HV. Now it has been proven that a flat meplat on the front of a bullet creates a much larger wound channel not allowing it to shrink back and close up like a meplat that has a round shape like a mushroomed bullet. It has been proven that a high velocity flat fronted cylinder shape will leave a larger primary wound channel than a slower, double caliber mushroom. HV bullets are therefore designed to start mushrooming reliably from much lower speeds than most other premium bullets, typically from around 1000fps. Two to four centimeters of penetration is all that is required to fully expand an HV bullet.

At higher speeds, HV bullets will lose the petals entirely (after they initial open up all the way coming off at 2600fps or above), shedding 12% to 15% of weight and presenting a flat cylinder shape to the direction of movement. The HV concept thus offers, at worst, a good double caliber mushroom, with extremely high retention and, at best, a high speed cylinder shape for dramatic primary wound trauma. Now you consider that the driving bands given my 30-06 with the 150gr HV much higher velocities than the standard 150gr can be driven out of a 22" barrel (at 100yds still doing over 2800fps) meaning that after a little penetration the petals come off for me all the way out to 185yds giving me a dangerous game bullet that creates a larger wound channel than a double expanded muchroomed bullet. Also, past 185yds I retain over 2,000 pounds of energy out to 245yds and on top of that if the animal is say 190yds and beyond my HV will begin to open up at 1000fps and I am still doing 1158fps at 1,000 yds.

Now all that I have mentioned is the reason the GS HV will kill better and perform better than the TSX or TTSX at any given range in the same cartridge. That is why I will spend the money since I can now easily get them. I actually have the best of both worlds with the GS HV.

 

[FOTIS]

Those are some great results Mike. That bullet will do good from coyotes to moose!

Accuracy tends to be outstanding in my findings.

 

[bobnob]

Mike your last post reminds me of something I have heard over and over, by word of mouth and also of course on the net. It goes something like this:

"When I butchered the deer/pig/goat, while there was only a small exit hole, the internal damage was massive" and similar.

Goes to show that you don't need a bullet to be as wide as a beer can to create a wide an awful big wound channel. What you wrote above and what is in the GS web site you linked elsewhere starts to explain some of the terminal effects that may well be at work.


I find the study of terminal ballistics much more interesting than internal and external. Its really where the rubber meets the road and is probably why I love doing the wet newspaper tests so much.

Anyway I don't doubt those bullets are just the ducks guts! I think the real edge in my mind that they will expand well, right down to low impact speeds. Great versatility. Shame I just don't have the skills to shoot stuff far enough away to take advantage of that!

Looking forward to the next installment!

 

[OU812]

Mike those #'s look very impressive. I would say that H4895 load will be tough to improve. Looks great!

Yeah, staying right here with the H4895.


Muzzle 3055fps engery 3108.4

100yds 2804.8fps engery 2620.1

250yds zero 2454.5 engery 2006.5

400yds 2130.4fps engery 1511.6

500yds 1928.7 engery 1238.9

Bullet that is one cool looking bullet. This post on the CS HV bullet got me curious to learn more as I have heard of them but knew nothing about them. I see from the CS site the listed BC of the 150 CS HV is .387 and min impact speed is listed as 1600 fps.

Where did you get an impact speed of 1000 fps?

Looking at velocity and energy the 150 CS HV and 150 TTSX are a wash. I'm curious on how you determined that the CS HV will kill or perform better than the TTSX?

 

[bullet]

Mike those #'s look very impressive. I would say that H4895 load will be tough to improve. Looks great!

Yeah, staying right here with the H4895.


Muzzle 3055fps engery 3108.4

100yds 2804.8fps engery 2620.1

250yds zero 2454.5 engery 2006.5

400yds 2130.4fps engery 1511.6

500yds 1928.7 engery 1238.9

Bullet that is one cool looking bullet. This post on the CS HV bullet got me curious to learn more as I have heard of them but knew nothing about them. I see from the CS site the listed BC of the 150 CS HV is .387 and min impact speed is listed as 1600 fps.

Where did you get an impact speed of 1000 fps?

Looking at velocity and energy the 150 CS HV and 150 TTSX are a wash. I'm curious on how you determined that the CS HV will kill or perform better than the TTSX?

Read this whole page on this link. Also, I saw over four years in using both the TSX and GS that the HV out performs terminally, real life viewing of wound channels and how more often on a consistent bases game is downed quickly with the GS over the TSX. They are not the same and do not act the same. http://www.gsgroup.co.za/faqexpansion.html

 

[OU812]

Mike those #'s look very impressive. I would say that H4895 load will be tough to improve. Looks great!

Yeah, staying right here with the H4895.


Muzzle 3055fps engery 3108.4

100yds 2804.8fps engery 2620.1

250yds zero 2454.5 engery 2006.5

400yds 2130.4fps engery 1511.6

500yds 1928.7 engery 1238.9[/quote]


Bullet that is one cool looking bullet. This post on the CS HV bullet got me curious to learn more as I have heard of them but knew nothing about them. I see from the CS site the listed BC of the 150 CS HV is .387 and min impact speed is listed as 1600 fps.

Where did you get an impact speed of 1000 fps?

Looking at velocity and energy the 150 CS HV and 150 TTSX are a wash. I'm curious on how you determined that the CS HV will kill or perform better than the TTSX?[/quote]

Read this whole page on this link. Also, I saw over four years in using both the TSX and GS that the HV out performs terminally, real life viewing of wound channels and how more often on a consistent bases game is downed quickly with the GS over the TSX. They are not the same and do not act the same.[/quote]


I read the link. I think that is the page where you copied and pasted from. I was merely going off of the info listed for the 150 grain bullet. One place they list 1600 fps and the other they show around 1000 fps.

I realize the CS and barnes bullets are not the same but in all fairness the TSX is NOT the same as the TTSX.

http://www.gsgroup.co.za/308150HV079.html

 

[bullet]

Nor is it much of an improvement, it hardly preformed much better and at times not at all better than the TSX.

 

[OU812]

Nor is it much of an improvement, it hardly preformed much better and at times not at all better than the TSX.

Really now? What was "performed" based on exactly? That being said the TSX or TTSX would not be my first choice for deer sized game unless i lived in an area where all copper is the only choice.

 

[bullet]

Nor is it much of an improvement, it hardly preformed much better and at times not at all better than the TSX.

Really now? What was "performed" based on exactly? That being said the TSX or TTSX would not be my first choice for deer sized game unless i lived in an area where all copper is the only choice.

Yes, the TSX nor the TTSX would not be mine and I found out why in using it over a period of years. But to the contrary the GS HV I would choose and will once again prove its value as more than a good deer bullet this fall, but with potential to serve in many roles out of my 06.

 

[OU812]

Nor is it much of an improvement, it hardly preformed much better and at times not at all better than the TSX.

Really now? What was "performed" based on exactly? That being said the TSX or TTSX would not be my first choice for deer sized game unless i lived in an area where all copper is the only choice.

Yes, the TSX nor the TTSX would not be mine and I found out why in using it over a period of years. But to the contrary the GS HV I would choose and will once again prove its value as more than a good deer bullet this fall, but with potential to serve in many roles out of my 06.

I'm quite certain the GS HV is a dandy bullet with many uses. I'm just trying to understand why it will kill better and perform better than the TTSX for larger game which I use the TTSX for.

 

[bullet]

I'm quite certain the GS HV is a dandy bullet with many uses. I'm just trying to understand why it will kill better and perform better than the TTSX for larger game which I use the TTSX for.

If you studied the links in detail it becomes obvious why. To summarize: 1. The driving bands allow more velocity (grooves can not compete here). 2. The velocity allows for speeds many times over 2600fps which if so the petals come off. This is a good thing (Banes wants their petals to stay on not always good) in that it allows for the bullet to have a flat meplat which in turns creates a cavitation that makes a larger wound channel (the TSX does not compete here) and allows the bullet to be suspended in a bubble and this low pressure bubble makes it possible for the bullet to travel in a straight line and not tumble or change directions as it is protected by this bubble. Therefore, it becomes a very good big and dangerous game bullet providing deep penetration and superior wound channel. 3. It begins to open up before other monolithic bullets even those with tips and it fully opens at 1600fps making it idea for deer size game. You get the best of both worlds so it works on deer size game and moose size game and dangerous game all in one bullet.

 

[OU812]

I'm quite certain the GS HV is a dandy bullet with many uses. I'm just trying to understand why it will kill better and perform better than the TTSX for larger game which I use the TTSX for.

If you studied the links in detail it becomes obvious why. To summarize: 1. The driving bands allow more velocity (grooves can not compete here). 2. The velocity allows for speeds many times over 2600fps which if so the petals come off. This is a good thing (Banes wants their petals to stay on not always good) in that it allows for the bullet to have a flat meplat which in turns creates a cavitation that makes a larger wound channel (the TSX does not compete here) and allows the bullet to be suspended in a bubble and this low pressure bubble makes it possible for the bullet to travel in a straight line and not tumble or change directions as it is protected by this bubble. Therefore, it becomes a very good big and dangerous game bullet providing deep penetration and superior wound channel. 3. It begins to open up before other monolithic bullets even those with tips and it fully opens at 1600fps making it idea for deer size game. You get the best of both worlds so it works on deer size game and moose size game and dangerous game all in one bullet.

I did read the link and fully understand that they are trying to sell bullets like any other bullet manufacture. I agree with the higher velocity these bullets achieve but lets not forget the bullets are coated with a moly like substance, actually an oxide layer then coated which also lends it's self to increased speed as well.

Why on earth would one want the petals to come off? Is that the only way it can penetrate? So if the petals came off a Barnes TTSX or TSX or Nosler E-tip or Hornady GMX it would have the same flat surface, or very close to the GS HV but I don't think any of the other all copper bullet manufactures comes with a magic bubble around the bullet though. Oddly enough that is considered a failure with the other all copper bullets when the pedals come off.

Barnes, Hornady, Nosler and GS, 2 different schools of thought of how an all copper bullet should perform I guess. I do find it odd that not Nosler, Hornady or Barnes feels the petals of an all copper bullet should peel off. Keep up the good work Mike and I can't wait to see those bullets in action.

 

[bullet]

Well, I am truly tried of trying to explain especially since I have compared their wound canals with the TSX and if you don't buy it fine you certainly have the right. But at this moment I will not try and convince you and further and please don't take offense. Mike :mrgreen:

 

[FOTIS]

I am sure no offense will be taken We all have our ideas of "kill and overkill etc."

 

[OU812]

Mike no offence taken what so ever, and back at ya.

 

[bobnob]

On a peripheral theme, can a Nosler Partition - driven at very high relative speed - that blows the front core off be expected to perform the same as the shank/rear core drives through the carcass?

I am happy to be shortened up if I have thing wrong, or if I have drawn an incorrect corollary, but is this the same concept that Woodleigh is talking about with their new-ish Hydrostatically Stabilised bullets.... http://www.woodleighbullets.com.au/prod ... stabilised

They talk about a "pressure ring" that precedes the bullet through the carcass. Am I on the right track? Woodleigh seems to think they are onto something.


I would love to test them. I suppose if open season is ever declared on Kenworths I will have a reason!

 

[FOTIS]

Actually that has been done by Ross Seyfried. He developed the 6mm Mach 3 or 4. 7mm rem mag necked down to 6mm.
At max velocities all partitions used were totally consumed. Completely.

 

[bullet]

On a peripheral theme, can a Nosler Partition - driven at very high relative speed - that blows the front core off be expected to perform the same as the shank/rear core drives through the carcass?

If the front of the Partition comes off If you will note in the example below from a test I did with the Partition at high velocities there is a flat area up front but also very rounded edges and the folded back petals flare out in some places with a gap on one side of the meplat that defeats the pressure ring and the cavitation does not leave the same kind of wound channel as the HV with its petals gone or like the Woodleigh design.

Enterance wound of Partition and the exit wound - note the exit is not that big like with monolithic bullets but the wound channel was not as dramatic as the HV

 

[kraky1]

I ordered a bunch of gs bullets years ago and played with them some. I didn't find accuracy any quicker to find than other bullets. I do believe the on game performance or these bullets is great although I can only report on one kill a carribou my buddy shot with some 7mm in his stw and it made a garden hose size hole from side to side.
I'm not sure I buy their ballistic coefficients but they may have modified them since when I shopped them.
Regarding pressure here is some actual info on the 150 gs custom.
A year or two back when MR2000 came out and was the "bees knees" for 308 a guy had hooked up pressure equpment and was posting lots of results. I emailed him and he agreed to test some of my "in stock" supply since his gun was hooked up.
For a comp in that 308...and he had a long throat...
53.5 MR200 under a 150 AccuBond registered 2952 at 58000 psi
The gs custom with the exact same load and set up registered 2999 at 60,200.
From that info it would appear they are almost a "draw" on pressure and velocity.
Just saying how it turned out.
No doubt a good well designed bullet....not sure the ballistics offer anything. And from that test not sure the bands really offer anything either.

 

[bullet]

I will be as kind as I can on this response, I don't beieve much of anything you said.