Elk Bullets - LRX vs HHT

[HydroMT]

Thanks for the feedback! I take it with that performance, never tried the Hammers or any other Monos?

I haven't tried the Hammers so I can't comment on them. A lot of my friends use them and I haven't heard anything negative about them. For other mono metal bullets, I have tried the Hornady CX, Hornady GMX, and Nosler E-tip. I suspect all three provide good terminal performance but my rifles shoot the LRX significantly better.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Gun to the head, LRX. Barnes gets actual BC from a 300 yd indoor range. There's an article somewhere showing advertised versus actual BC and Barnes is consistent as anyone. Keep in mind an individual rifle is not going to be exact to any manufacturer claim, but some manufacturers are better than others. Barnes being one that I feel is living up to what they claim.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Manufacturers that use drops at their specific location, don't do favors to anyone, IMO. Like putting a hot rod car on the dynamometer and bragging it makes XXX horsepower and XXX torque. How does it work at my 7200 ft of elevation versus the sea level that it was tested at that have favorable conditions? Numbers will be so different as to be irrelevant. However, if ballistic coefficient is calculated from flight time which Barnes does, then atmospheric conditions can be accounted for and not guessed at.

 

[armiller1991]

@35WhelenAI,
Those are great points. On paper, the 160 LRX are a bit better in BC than the 162 HHT. If the HHT I underperform estimates, that widens that gap. I know you need to true/confirm BC yourself, but there something to be said about a mfg providing actual, measured numbers.
I like high BC due to wind deflection (my biggest hunting enemy) and and retained velocity downrange (especially critical with Monos).
Thank you!