Update E-tips willn't group

[baltz526]

There are a few 270 shooters that think the 150 is just right for elk :roll: Just to expand on the 180gr Partition to the 150 etip. average weight of 180gr Partition after killing elk guess 65% = 117gr. average weight of etip 150gr after killing elk guess 95% = 142.5gr. At some point in the bullets travel through an elk it might matter but i can not see it.

 

[SJB358]

Good point on that. I kind of have a little hangup with using that light of a bullet too, but it is all in my head. The all copper bullets have worked well for me. Once I get a .257 rifle, I already have some 100gr E-Tips on the bench to try out. I think I would rather still stick with PT's though, again, just in my head, I know I will probably get what I expect out of them, for speed, accuracy and dead animals! Scotty

 

[DrMike]

I understand the physics and the physiological changes that occur with bullet impact. Nevertheless, because there are critters out there with big teeth and big claws that object strenuously to begin shot, I tend to err on the side of caution and use as much mass as possible just in case I should meet one of those nasty brutes. I am only grudgingly making the transition to 165/168 monolithic bullets in my 30-06. However, I'm playing with 200 grain bullets in my 300 WSM. I have reduced my bullet weights in my 358 and 350 RM to 200 grain TSX (Nosler, if there was a 200 grain AB or ET, it would get my nod). I'm being pulled into this brave, new world of lighter, faster projectiles kicking and screaming that it ain't right. Too many years shooting heavy for calibre, I suppose.

 

[Jim1 AB]

I have probably always been over gunned/bullet for most of my deer hunting. Meat deer but have learned a lot from it. Even large mule deer bucks are not that tough. Big white tail boys a bit tougher. Of course this all depends on the situations of course. An adrenalin pumped animal is a lot tougher than one standing around and not knowing what hit him. I think it is not till you start getting into the bigger guys that bullet weight verse caliber becomes an issue that should be addressed. Sectional density. Bullet expansion aside here. Even with weight retention in the 90% plus I still think it plays a major role here. It seams a lot of guys are taking it a little far with dropping bullets weights because the bullets are "better". Example elk with a 300 Win Mag. 180gr plus maybe 200gr with "regular" bullets that retain 75-85% weight. Drop down to a 165gr. well maybe, I wouldn't but now you hear some guys figuring dropping down to 150gr. is adequate. Not likely in my opinion. I can only base this on gut instinct but I'm sure thinking the 180 is going to make a lot bigger impression on that animal than the 150.

Now come on guys I'm not looking for a battle here I would just like to hear some intelligent thought out responses. If you can change my mind, great I'll end up loading a few flatter shooting rounds.

Jim

 

[JD338]

A friend of mine used the 30 cal 168 gr E-Tip in his 30-06 AI last your in WY to hunt elk and antelope. Both he and his son used his rifle to take a cow elk each. Both were one shot kills with complete penetration. One of the ellk was a quartering away shot and the 168 gr ET entered the back of the rib cage and exited through the off shoulder. It is a tough bullet and more than enoough for elk.

JD338

 

[Jim1 AB]

Thanks JD
There is no doubt these e-tips penetrate. JD do you remember what kind of distances the guys took their elk at. I've use the 180s for two years now and there is no way they would be more than adequate for some of the largest game. At least this side on the pond.

 

[baltz526]

A bit of trivia: two 200gr .308 partitions recovered from elk 125.5gr, 100.5gr shot out of 24" 300 win mag at 2900fps muzzle velocity at under 100yrds. 180gr Etip recovered from pumice target back stop at 200yds after 3' plus of penetration 179.5gr shot out of 20" barreled 300 win mag. muzzle velocity of 2890fps. I shot a big blacktail buck with the 180gr etips, First impression, Way to much bullet for deer

 

[Jim1 AB]

baltz526

Did you get expansion. First year I killed a mule doe with the 180s. Not impressed. I thought the name bullets very exploding. Not the case of course. Shot at one doe and zero impression. the bunch ran around and I shot an other. Had a couple of doe tags and I was sure the first one was hit and just didn't know it. Heard the thawack on both. The second one dropped pretty well right away. The herd buggered off with not sign of the first one hit at all. The off side relieved two small exit holes. It wasn't until a couple of days later after hanging her I took the hide off and sure as hell two in and two out. Not 3/4" apart. Yardage @ 120 yards 3100 ft/sec muzzle vel. I wasn't two dam impressed. Had a lot better luck last year all bullets seamed to expand enough. I had a friend using that rifle and load. He made a bad neck shot from the rear on one doe a little to low. Anyway I took the bullet out of the shoulder. Quite a bit of penetration going through the hip right from the start.

For smallish type deer I think the velocity had better be a lot higher to get reliable expansion. You don't always near or want premium bullets. Of course Partitions kind of give you the best of both worlds.

 

[SJB358]

That is my feelings exactly. The PT or the AccuBond give you the best of both worlds. I would like to do a penetration test with the Accubonds, PT's and E-Tip shot at the same speed and see which one comes out on top. Might have to try it, just to see for myself. Scotty

 

[Jim1 AB]

Scotty I think part of the problem is very few of us see what happen time and time again with any given bullets and we just base our opinions on a couple of dead animals. I have the wife's 300 Win Mag loaded up with 165gr Sciroccos and after a antelope hunt here in a couple of weeks my 6.5 Ruger will be loaded up with 130 ABs for deer. It should give me a bit of an idea of how these bullets compare. The ABs will be traveling a bit faster at the muzzle but the wife usually shoots a little closer.

Two years ago I decided that 120 PT were not the bullets for my son-in-laws, formerly my 257 Weatherby because of the mess he was getting. Of course he decided to hit everything on the shoulder. I loaded him up with 120 A Frames last year but he only killed a couple of deer and the load wasn't all that accurate. I loaded up some 100gr. TTSXs and they are very accurate. With that tip I'm sure hoping they expand as reveled by all. I've used 225 PTs in my 358 STA, and they are loaded awfully hot and you couldn't ask for better luck. I've used 240 and 225 TBs, as general hunting loads with great results, that much better than the PT pretty hard to say.

Jim

 

[Murphdog]

What about Sectional Density (SD), the Physic Books will tell us the higher the Sectional Density the greater the penatration. A 180 grain 30 cal bullet has a SD of .271, .248 for the 165s and .226 for the 150s. The SD of a 150 grain bullet is 83% of the SD of a 180.

I have enough experience to know that a higher SD will make a difference but will that difference be off set higher weight retention?

For the record a 150 grain .277 bullet has a SD of .279 and I have watched hunting partners drop elk in their tracks with both 270 wins and 270 Williams (Wildcat based on a 7mm Rem mag case). You will never hear me say that a hunter who can shoot a .270 and is using quality ammunition is under gunned for hunting elk.

One of the things I really like about partitions is that in the 243 Win, 270 win, 270 Willaims, 7mm-08 rem, 280 rem, 30-06, and 308 Norma is that the bullet is rather easy on the meat. I am a butcher by trade and have been around and cut up lots of critters. I have made and seen lots of really big messes from bullets that were not meat friendly.

 

[Elkman]

As most of you know I am a long time Partition fan. I have shot other bullets, and do use the TSX in my 7mm STW only because that gun is not Partition friendly. (which I am going to test again next year) As other's of you have said I have seen many testamonials here and on other fourms on what a "slam bang bullet" did on a particular head of game. I also posted quite a long post here a couple of months ago summarizing testing results from a wide vbariety of bullets. This test if I remember involved over 3,000 rounds of ammo down range to compare penetration and weight retention. The Swift, Partition and the Remington round nose core-lock all did well, the AccuBond and TSX were not tested. Many of the standard constructed bullets did well at lower velocities 2700 but failed miserably at high velocities. My personal experience with Partitions covers just slightly more than 50 years (started using them early on) with both my dad and I. Our sample involves over 200 big game animals with just slightly less that 1/2 being elk. Of course ranges vary from point blank to 400+ yards, our most spectactular failures were at very close ranges with other bullets and at longer ranges with the same. Terrific expansion with massive meat loss and bone damage at close range, and little or no expansion with long distance tracking at long range. I have poked em through elk at 17 yards and at much longer ranges, with the rusult always being dead elk and deer. I have had no failures to recover on elk, and have had a few on deer primarily becuause of poor shot selection and rushing the shot. Neither as a result of the bullet. Through out those 50 plus years we were using a minimum of an 06 and or numerous 30 caliber and 7mm Caliber magnums. There are other good bullets I just think and have proved that the Partition is one of the best. I do not work for NOSLER

 

[JD338]

Thanks JD
There is no doubt these e-tips penetrate. JD do you remember what kind of distances the guys took their elk at. I've use the 180s for two years now and there is no way they would be more than adequate for some of the largest game. At least this side on the pond.

As I recall, one was under 200 yds and the other cow was over 200 yds.

JD338

 

[Jim1 AB]

Elkman

I've used TB for quite a few years and as a whole I like what I've seen them do. They have change since I ordered my first ones from Jack Carter. Not a lot but they have changed. Since you've been using Partitions for quite a few years now have you seen a difference in them. I do like Partitions, they perform exactly as they are designed to.

Murphdog

"I have enough experience to know that a higher SD will make a difference but will that difference be off set higher weight retention?"
I started a thread asking for opinions on exactly this question. I'm thinking maybe not a lot for one size down but if your dropping two or even three weight sizes. Not a chance can weight retention make up for it. But if you go to extremes a bullet doing everything short of completely blowing up, is not going to have much effect on an animal... unless it penetrates enough to get inside. If it blows up inside a deer or even a elephant it will kill the animal quite fast. Internal bomb. Unless anyone of us has so much experience with "terminal ballistics"....

I think the best we can do is adequate expansion, adequate weight retention and last but surly not least shot placement.

Jim

 

[Murphdog]

JIm

Excellant point on shot placement, if all our shots were placed perfectly we would not have to worry near so much about bullet construction.

Until a bullet is designed that will travel to the center of the body cavity and explode (you guys at Nosler are working on this right?) trade offs will have to be made. Because few if any hunters have seen enough animals taken to know even half the answers, a forum like this is invalueable. Besides a would rather learn from someone elses mistakes then my own. Much less painful

At this point in my hunting career I still think that the good ole' Partition is going to hard to beat for getting the job done day in and day out.

 

[SJB358]

Same here. I would find it hard to beleive without seeing or hearing of something really extreme of a PT failing. What I mean by failing is this, either failing to expand or breaking apart upon impact. The first one covered with a non bonded frontal core of softer lead, while the rear is held together with solid copper wall. It just can't really fail, unless it is used outside of its design parameters and even then, I bet it would still do okay. I like the AB's and ETip's, but when dollars are on the line and I am using up leave time, I think I will stick with PT's. Accubonds and others will get used time to time, but for elk and anything else I travel for, PT will be in the mag I think. Scotty