'Toughness' of BT's vs. SB's???

CDH · Nov 19, 2004

I have heard this argument elsewhere, and since I couldn't find any threads here, I thought I'd go to the source.

Hunting versions only for the purposes of this discussion...no varmit bullets!

I would EXPECT the Solid Base line to be slightly slower to expand due to soft point vs. hollow point design, but...wall thickness, lead alloy, jacket alloy, etc. could easily overcome this.

Sooooo, from the makers themselves, can the Solid Base bullets be considered slightly 'tougher' than Ballistic Tips of the same velocity, weight, and caliber?

2ndtimer · Nov 19, 2004

Good question! I too, would expect the Solid Base to be a little bit tougher and penetrate a little deeper, since it doesn't have the plastic tip to initiate expansion like the ballistic tip. But since Nosler has made several changes over the years to fine tune the Ballistic Tips for big game, they might have been able to equal or at least match the penetration of the Solid Base design. So, which is it, Nosler? I still think the solid base might lie between the Ballistic Tip and Partition in terms of penetration ability, probably closer to the ballistic tip, but who knows? Maybe Federal just wanted to be able to sell ammo to people who refuse to use any plastic tip bullet. (I assume they also have to have wood stocks on their rifles, too...)

NOSLER · Nov 19, 2004

The solid base is between the BT and PT, more on the BT side. If a BT had a lead tip, the solid base would be it.

Because it doesn't have the tip, the wound channel characteristics are very good and as a entry level premium bullet, this one takes the cake.

Penetration is good, accuracy is good. I really don't have a negative complaint with this bullet.

longwinters · Nov 19, 2004

Hey now! I shoot Accubonds and wood stocked rifles. :lol:

Long

Scorpion210 · Dec 30, 2004

Plastic tip Accubonds and a wood stock...whats wrong with that??????

FOTIS · Jan 3, 2005

Scorpion210":m8gammhv said:
Plastic tip Accubonds and a wood stock...whats wrong with that??????

Nothing! :lol:

GB300wm · Jan 16, 2005

NOSLER":pyho7xwr said:
The solid base is between the BT and PT, more on the BT side. If a BT had a lead tip, the solid base would be it.

Because it doesn't have the tip, the wound channel characteristics are very good and as a entry level premium bullet, this one takes the cake.

Penetration is good, accuracy is good. I really don't have a negative complaint with this bullet.

Would this mean that with more forward weight on the solid base that it could be a more accurate bullet than the BT?? I shot the solid base for years on metallic silhoullette and was upset when they were discontinued. I switched to BT but was never as satisfied as I was with the solid base. I ordered solid base bullets for my hunting rifle as soon as I heard that they were being released. It seems to me that the BT's caused much more damage on game with much less penetration. I would agree that the solid base is different that the BT,but I think it closer to a Partition than a BT IMO. :grin: