6.5 creed vs 30-06

[bmart2622]

Im fairly certain that it was said that the cartridge is irrelevant and what mattered was bullet selection

 

[Formidilosus]

Im fairly certain that it was said that the cartridge is irrelevant and what mattered was bullet selection

In this context, the cartridge is irrelevant. It doesn’t matter if the bullet came out of a 308win or a 30-377 Weatherby, at the same impact velocities the bullet does the same work.

 

[bmart2622]

To get to said impact velocity requires a certain cartridge though right?

 

[Formidilosus]

To get to said impact velocity requires a certain cartridge though right?

You are being purposely obtuse.

 

[bmart2622]

Im not actually, trying to understand your hypothetical "ifs"

 

[thauglor]

3006, you can use all that garand ammo out there lol

 

[bmart2622]

Lets say we are shooting a 200 gr Accubond that requires 1800 fps to reliably open, lets also say that said bullet hits an elk at say 750 yds where said bullet is below 1800fps where a 300 ultra firing the same bullet would be above the 1800 fps threshold...seems like the cartridge would dictate the effectiveness of the exact same bullet being shot

 

[Laramie]

In this context, the cartridge is irrelevant. It doesn’t matter if the bullet came out of a 308win or a 30-377 Weatherby, at the same impact velocities the bullet does the same work.

Have been doing quite a bit of reading but have a question I have not been able to find answers on. I'll use the 77 grain TMK as an example - What I am seeing is a recommended impact velocity of 1900+. From your experience how much difference in damage is there between 2700 to 2300 and 1900. My overall question is if a bullet is designed for an impact range of 1900-2800, do you see many differences in damage throughout the recommended range with the more frangible bullets you recommend?

My experiences with bonded bullets have been that damage goes down slightly at the top ranges as velocity goes down and then significantly once the bottom ends are reached. For instance, my 165 grain Interbonds are intended to expand well down to 2000 FPS. In my particular setup, that is reached at 500 yards- my self imposed limit for quite a few reasons outside of bullet performance. I do see a difference in damage at say 200 yards vs 450 yards as the bullets has lost about 400 FPS.

No hidden agenda with the question- just trying to understand why I have experienced what I have as compared to what you have.

 

[Formidilosus]

Lets say we are shooting a 200 gr Accubond that requires 1800 fps to reliably open, lets also say that said bullet hits an elk at say 750 yds where said bullet is below 1800fps where a 300 ultra firing the same bullet would be above the 1800 fps threshold...seems like the cartridge would dictate the effectiveness of the exact same bullet being shot

You are correct in that and if people understood that as it is, then yes. However, that’s not how the majority view it. A lot of people would say a 308 is marginal on elk, but a 300 win mag is fantastic.

Bullet>impact velocity>rifle>scope>mounts. That’s generally the order that decisions should go. So saying “the cartridge isn’t the important part to killing”, is akin to saying “The rifle that fires a certain cartridge isn’t the important part of terminal ballistics”. A

gain in the context I was responding/writing to.

 

[9.1]

Fudds will never be convinced even in the face of data that they don't need their uber magnums

Size matters, bro.

 

[bmart2622]

Not as important and irrelevant are quite different in my eyes. Im no expert and will never claim to be. But in the 28 years Ive been buying elk tags Ive filled 26 of them, all with cup and core style bullets, never lost an elk and everyone that was shot more than once never required the 2nd shot due to the bullets performance, and none were shot with anything less than a 30 cal. Along with the elk Ive personally taken there have been at least that many taken by family members with the same results. Again Im not an expert and lots of guys have killed more elk than me but Ive had pretty good success....long story short...I pick the 3006

 

[atmat]

Not as important and irrelevant are quite different in my eyes. Im no expert and will never claim to be. But in the 28 years Ive been buying elk tags Ive filled 26 of them, all with cup and core style bullets, never lost an elk and everyone that was shot more than once never required the 2nd shot due to the bullets performance, and none were shot with anything less than a 30 cal. Along with the elk Ive personally taken there have been at least that many taken by family members with the same results. Again Im not an expert and lots of guys have killed more elk than me but Ive had pretty good success....long story short...I pick the 3006

I think you’re arguing semantics for the sake of arguing semantics. Again, this goes back to functional or relative relevance.

 

[bmart2622]

I think I wanted clarity and asked for it and then stated my opinion backed up by objective evidence, thinking anything other than that would be a poor assumption on your behalf

 

[Formidilosus]

Have been doing quite a bit of reading but have a question I have not been able to find answers on. I'll use the 77 grain TMK as an example - What I am seeing is a recommended impact velocity of 1900+. From your experience how much difference in damage is there between 2700 to 2300 and 1900. My overall question is if a bullet is designed for an impact range of 1900-2800, do you see many differences in damage throughout the recommended range with the more frangible bullets you recommend?

Bare with me, I’m doing this on my phone.

Yes sir you do with all bullets, however depending on which bullet type you get more consistent wound paths with some frangible bullets across the velocity range; or, acceptable terminal ballistics at higher velocity impact and greatly improved terminal effects at lower velocity.


In general with ELD-M and TMK’s at high impact velocity (above 2,400’ish FPS) you get massive wounds with most or all of the temporary stretch cavity becoming apart of the permanent cavity. No mono will cause this at any common velocity, and only soft bonded bullets at very high impact velocities (3,200’ish) will be comparable.
Between 2,400’ish and 2,100’ish FPS part of the temporary stretch cavity is still causing permanent damage due to fragments of bullets cutting tissue, but the total volume of the wound is less severe. No mono common mono will cause, and soft bonded bullets above 2,600’ish may. Below 2,100’ish FPS to around 1,800fps, most of the temporary stretch cavity is not permanent, however you do have fragments that cause permanent damage up to 4 inches or so from the main wound channel. This is the wound size that monos cause above 2,400’ish fps at best. Tougher onded bullets will be similar above 2,200-2,300fps.


For a pretty close visual reference using a a 6.5 CM and IIRC a 140gr ELD-M (though 130-147gr ELD-M and X, and TMK will be similar.

Above 2,400fps’ish impact




2,400-2,100’ish FPS impact (this is what a softer bonded will do at very high impact speeds-



2,100-1,800’ish FPS impact (this is what softer bonded at normal impact speed at best, and monos at very high impact speeds can look like) -

My experiences with bonded bullets have been that damage goes down slightly at the top ranges as velocity goes down and then significantly once the bottom ends are reached. For instance, my 165 grain Interbonds are intended to expand well down to 2000 FPS. In my particular setup, that is reached at 500 yards- my self imposed limit for quite a few reasons outside of bullet performance. I do see a difference in damage at say 200 yards vs 450 yards as the bullets has lost about 400 FPS.

No hidden agenda with the question- just trying to understand why I have experienced what I have as compared to what you have.

They’re good questions and your thoughts are correct. A kind of easier way to think about it is- the “tougher” a bullet is, the smaller the operating window for good performance will be. The same can be said for “frangible” bullets, which is why lightweight varmint bullets don’t penetrate very far. To over come that, you have to use heavy for caliber bullets when doing the ELD-M and X, Berger, TMK, etc. Then you get both sufficient penetration and exceptional wound channel sizes.

 

[Laramie]

They’re good questions and your thoughts are correct. A kind of easier way to think about it is- the “tougher” a bullet is, the smaller the operating window for good performance will be. The same can be said for “frangible” bullets, which is why lightweight varmint bullets don’t penetrate very far. To over come that, you have to use heavy for caliber bullets when doing the ELD-M and X, Berger, TMK, etc. Then you get both sufficient penetration and exceptional wound channel sizes.

If a bullet like the ELD-M impacts a shoulder, is the stretch cavity beyond the muscle and bone reduced with that style of bullet? I would assume it would be reduced due to losing a % of mass and speed going through everything before reaching the lungs.

I ask because I have seen a damage increases with monos, and longer range (300 to 500 yards) bonded impacts when impacting the shoulder- I'm guessing because the denser muscle and bone aid in expansion and bone fragments also increase the amount of damage to the lungs but again, I haven't kept notes- may just be perception.

Thanks for taking the time to discuss.

 

[Formidilosus]

If a bullet like the ELD-M impacts a shoulder, is the stretch cavity beyond the muscle and bone reduced with that style of bullet? I would assume it would be reduced due to losing a % of mass and speed going through everything before reaching the lungs.

No sir. The damage is increased to the bone causing a bit more fragmentation, but mainly due to bone fragments acting with the projectile increasing the amount of separate wound channels.

I ask because I have seen a damage increases with monos, and longer range (300 to 500 yards) bonded impacts when impacting the shoulder- I'm guessing because the denser muscle and bone aid in expansion and bone fragments also increase the amount of damage to the lungs but again, I haven't kept notes- may just be perception.

Interestingly muscle doesn’t really change a bullets behavior. It sounds counterintuitive, but most tissue is primarily water- including the lungs and muscle.
Bone does change things, but not in the way that has been stated by gun writers for decades. No modern big game bullet, including heavy for caliber “match” and fragmenting bullets will be stopped by a “shoulder”- it’s just not thick enough. On average a “shoulder” hit causes about 1 inch or so less penetration for most bullets. The joint where the scapula and humerus bone connect (the “knuckle”) is large enough to reduce penetration by a couple of inches.
What bone can do is aid in bullet upset. One of the big misconceptions with plastic tipped bullets is that the tip is driven back into the bullet initiating expansion. That’s not what happens. When impacting tissue, the tip bends or flexes out of the bullet, exposing the larger opening in the bullet that remains. That’s why tipped bullets expand more- the nose opening is larger.

So let’s say a bullet is hitting at just under the required FPS for the tip to pop out, or the bullet to upset. For this example, hypothetically, 1 fps less then it needs. Hitting bone, can, and tends to be just enough resistance to pop the tip out or deform the bullet enough to cause some upset, and usually with some bone fragments which helps wounding. Also, it may cause the bullet to become unstable earlier (I.E. yaw) and tumble which can and does create very good wounds. People would be shocked at how many bullets at lower impact velocities, regardless of type, tumble.

Now all bullets can and will do strange things due to variability in copper, lead, metal, and production that are unforeseen. I have seen standard monos fragment (though their most consistent issue is lack of upset), Accubonds both show extremely minimal upset and near total fragmentation, ELD-M’s not open up when velocity should have been sufficient, etc. Pretty much the most consistent bullets that I’ve personally seen have been TMK’s and Speer Gold Dots/Federal Fusions, and Nosler Partitions.

The only bullet I have not seen “fail” in testing and animals are Nosler Partitions- though they can as well.

Thanks for taking the time to discuss.

Yes sir, to you as well.

 

[Formidilosus]

long story short...I pick the 3006

What bullet in your 30-06?

I think I wanted clarity and asked for it and then stated my opinion backed up by objective evidence, thinking anything other than that would be a poor assumption on your behalf

In that case, I misread your intent as well. I apologize for that.

 

[bmart2622]

Honesty the majority of elk I killed with my 3006, which is probably around a dozen, was with cheap CoreLokts when I was younger and then a couple with 165gr Ballistic tip and a couple with 165gr Accubond. If I still shot a 3006 it would be a 165gr Accubond or 180 Accubond OR Id try the 175gr Terminal Ascent if they werent non existent

 

[bmart2622]

Hey Form, since I have very little experience with rapid expanding more frangible bullets and you seem to have quite a bit, I have an honest question for you. How would a 175eldx or 175 Elite Hunter out of a 7mm PRC do on the knuckle of a bull elk at say 50 yds? You think it would still be ok? I want to build a 7mm PRC but am not sold on the Bergers of Eldx

 

[30338]

I'd wonder how a 160 accubond in that scenario would do as well. Actually at 50 yards I'd just not shoot one there but be curious to hear from Form.