30 cal 165 BT vs 168 BT

lefty315

Handloader
Sep 29, 2004
838
129
I've never loaded either and don't have any to compare. Besides the 3 grains difference in weight I see the 168 is .017 longer, is the profile very different? I'm guessing it must be because there is a little bit of a jump in the BC.

Just curious.....I'm bored
 

kraky1

Handloader
Mar 7, 2012
494
0
I think the objective of the two bullets was to allow a person with a shorter magazine to be able to get closer to the rifling?
 

TackDriver284

Handloader
Feb 13, 2016
1,864
594
Both 165 and 168 Ballistic Tips shot very well in my .308
I used both at .020 off the lands and both shoots the same. Both will work very well on deer sized game, I don't see much difference between the two. See the exit with the 168 Ballistic tip at 180 yards with the .308 at 2770 fps out the muzzle.

WXen9uk.jpg
 

kraky1

Handloader
Mar 7, 2012
494
0
I think I got my story confused with the blunt tip Partition vrs regular Partition!
That said I do have some 165 Bts and 168 Bts on hand and I just put them in my Sinclair 308 comparator.
Visually the 168 definitely looks more streamlined.
What I found through actual measurement is the shank below the ogive to the base on the 165 is .042 shorter.
So going by the Numbers the bullets are fairly close.
I'm just going to have to throw a guess out there that some people like the idea of a 168 grain bullet versus 165 and that there might be some differences in the way the ogives contact rifling as far as accuracy preference goes?
 

TackDriver284

Handloader
Feb 13, 2016
1,864
594
I ran out of the old 165's I had 15 years ago when I did a load development before winter, when I went to find some, they only had the 168's and grabbed 3 boxes at Bass Pro. So I was not able to test them at long ranges and I used the same data for the 168's as I did with the 165's, and the 168's shot the same POI at 100. I just needed more 165's to test them with at longer ranges. The BC between the two won't be noticeable anyway under 400 yards.
 

lefty315

Handloader
Sep 29, 2004
838
129
It was more of a curiousity as to why make two bullets that were three grains apart in weight. Thought perhaps they were maybe using a match style bullet profile but made as haunting bullet so folks could switch back and forth in a target rifle should they chose to do so and use it hunting.
 

TackDriver284

Handloader
Feb 13, 2016
1,864
594
lefty315":3ggz5c8k said:
It was more of a curiousity as to why make two bullets that were three grains apart in weight. Thought perhaps they were maybe using a match style bullet profile but made as haunting bullet so folks could switch back and forth in a target rifle should they chose to do so and use it hunting.
I use 168's mainly because the 168 grain bullet has been the standard for match bullets in 30 caliber. That is why most mfg's offer the 168's replicating the match bullet design that has been so successful over the years. The ogive design is very forgiving accuracy wise not requiring a lot of tinkering. I could be wrong. But whichever shoots best in your rifle, use it. It is probably splitting hairs comparing the two but your rifle could prefer one over the other. Hopefully some Nosler guy on here may answer that question.
 

TXbaldhunter

Handloader
May 12, 2007
289
48
If I remember right,when Nosler first came out with the 168gr BT,it was supposed to have a little thicker jacket than the 165gr BT. I don't know if that stands true today,because Nosler redesigned the BT over the years. I've used both bullets on whitetails and I really couldn't tell any difference between the two,all DRT,lots of blood on the ground.
 
Top