Hornady Podcast 226 Match Bullets for Hunting

[wgcracker13]

I figured this would come up. Listening to the Hornady Podcast Episode #226, Match Bullets for hunting. I am about 8:50 into the listen, so still fresh. They mentioned they don't do terminal performance testing (ballistics gel). There may be some splitting of hairs with FBI testing and terminal testing. I can't wait to see the discussion of this podcast.

 

[wind gypsy]

They sure post a lot of terminal results of “match” bullets for the TAP line of ammo.

 

[RancherJohn]

They sure post a lot of terminal results of “match” bullets for the TAP line of ammo.

Of course they haven't tested it, they just have all the info and pictures regarding it's terminal performance, even going so far as to claim large wound cavities. But definitely not tested.

 

[wgcracker13]

I'm picking up more as I listen. It sounds like there isn't lot to lot consistency with the lead cores on the eldm. I believe Ryan has mentioned that he had a different behavior with the eldm out of a 7 prc this year to where it didn't have a pop sound that it traditionally had.

 

[Ready2Rut]

I'm somewhat confused as to why folks would shoot the ELD-M instead of the ELD-X in calibers where both are available. From what I understand, Hornady has designed for and does continuous QC on the expansion and fragmentation of the ELD-X but not ELD-M. Are the in-flight or terminal ballistics of the ELD-M really that much better? Does it just come down to the greater variety of bullet weights for handloading in the ELD-M?

 

[wgcracker13]

I'm somewhat confused as to why folks would shoot the ELD-M instead of the ELD-X in calibers where both are available. From what I understand, Hornady has designed for and does continuous QC on the expansion and fragmentation of the ELD-X but not ELD-M. Are the in-flight or terminal ballistics of the ELD-M really that much better? Does it just come down to the greater variety of bullet weights for handloading in the ELD-M?

I have had personal experience with the factory ELDX and ELDM with my 300 prc. I have had a 20-shot group at 100 yard be 6" with factory ELD-X, then on the same day/hour, had limited factory ELD-M shoot sub-moa out of the same rifle. Which one would you take hunting in that situation?

 

[Ready2Rut]

I have had personal experience with the factory ELDX and ELDM with my 300 prc. I have had a 20-shot group at 100 yard be 6" with factory ELD-X, then on the same day/hour, had limited factory ELD-M shoot sub-moa out of the same rifle. Which one would you take hunting in that situation?

That makes sense for your situation, I also shoot factory and luckily my rifle likes the ELD-X.

I guess I was more wondering why people who get super nerdy about handloading and load dev--who could probably tune the ELD-X to shoot really well in any rifle--would build a load from the ground up with ELD-M.

 

[streamerfish]

That makes sense for your situation, I also shoot factory and luckily my rifle likes the ELD-X.

I guess I was more wondering why people who get super nerdy about handloading and load dev--who could probably tune the ELD-X to shoot really well in any rifle--would build a load from the ground up with ELD-M.

I dont personally use them, but the pics above of the fbi gel testing tell the story. Very large wound cavities with plenty of penetration. Along with more/better heavy for caliber, higher b.c. choices. And they tend to be very accurate.

 

[IdahoHntr]

That makes sense for your situation, I also shoot factory and luckily my rifle likes the ELD-X.

I guess I was more wondering why people who get super nerdy about handloading and load dev--who could probably tune the ELD-X to shoot really well in any rifle--would build a load from the ground up with ELD-M.

Having shot both bullets, I’ve seen more consistency in the ELD-M in both accuracy and terminal performance. The ELD-X just isn’t as destructive IME. I think it’s still a good bullet, but with way more options available for the ELD-M, especially in factory loadings, I don’t have a reason to shoot the ELD-X again.

ELD-M factory ammo also tends to be cheaper which is a nice plus.

 

[wind gypsy]

That makes sense for your situation, I also shoot factory and luckily my rifle likes the ELD-X.

I guess I was more wondering why people who get super nerdy about handloading and load dev--who could probably tune the ELD-X to shoot really well in any rifle--would build a load from the ground up with ELD-M.

The "tuning" with handloads is functionally a myth much of the time. Some bullets just dont shoot well reliably out of certain rifles.

Compare BC on 175 ELDx vs 180 ELDm.

If people can get them to shoot better, they have a higher BC, and terminal performance meets their desires, why wouldn't they shoot the ELDm?

This variability in cores is new info to me. If more folks have poor terminal performance with ELDm i could see them becoming less popular for hunting.

 

[LongWayAround]

I'm somewhat confused as to why folks would shoot the ELD-M instead of the ELD-X in calibers where both are available. From what I understand, Hornady has designed for and does continuous QC on the expansion and fragmentation of the ELD-X but not ELD-M. Are the in-flight or terminal ballistics of the ELD-M really that much better? Does it just come down to the greater variety of bullet weights for handloading in the ELD-M?

I shoot factory ELD-M. They're cheaper, have a higher bc, and kill very well.

I have heard, anecdotally, more people complain about the ELD-X bullets in one way or another.

The handful of M's that I have recovered have had good weight retention, big gnarly petals of copper, and have typically been found on the offside against the hide. For me, there's nothing to not like.

I also don't buy that the miniscule "interlock ring" makes much of a difference between the two. The jacket is thicker on the X, but I haven't seen a problem in the M's.

 

[streamerfish]

I generally enjoy the Hornady podcasts. Although some of the super in the weeds 4dof type of topics make me glaze over a bit.

Not really anything groundbreaking, or anything they haven't talked about before. Except....they have clearly "softened" their stance as much as they can without running into issues, and one other point at the bottom....The key points.

Eldx is our all purpose the greatest ever hunting bullet and here is why (yes we know)

ELDM is a match bullet. We recognize the fact that a bunch of people use it with large success and have a nickname for it (ode to S2H podcast a few yrs ago with the hornady guys and probably rokslide in general).

We HAVE done terminal performance testing on the eldm, however, we don't do consistent qc terminal testing for the eldm because we don't need to, as its a match bullet and we don't really care. But we know.

We will somewhat admit that its probably a really great deer/antelope bullet, especially at longer ranges. That's what we believe most hunters that are using it, are using it for. But we cant be absolutely definitive on it because we don't do consistent qr testing on it, and we didn't specifically design it for it.

Its characteristics in the testing that we have done point towards large wound channels with around 16"-18" penetration.

We are doubtful about it having enough penetration for elk.

Although it may work and work great, wouldn't it be easier to just use the ELDX.

A tips in our testing perform worse then ELDM terminally.

Maybe the most interesting......we venomously oppose people hunting with any kind of HPBT style of bullet. Our testing absolutely shows your asking for trouble. (I took this as an absolute shot across the bow at Berger).

 

[RME]

I guess I was more wondering why people who get super nerdy about handloading and load dev--who could probably tune the ELD-X to shoot really well in any rifle--would build a load from the ground up with ELD-M.

I don’t have an opinion on match bullets for hunting because I haven’t used them but it’s been around for awhile. 20 years ago Matchkings were popular for hunting on some forums. Bergers were popular before their hunting bullets were introduced. A-maxes were popular. So it’s not just Eld-m’s.

 

[wgcracker13]

Maybe the most interesting......we venomously oppose people hunting with any kind of HPBT style of bullet. Our testing absolutely shows your asking for trouble. (I took this as an absolute shot across the bow at Berger).

I took my elk this year with the 170 EOL out of my 6.8 Western. I went around talking to different people about it at the Western hunt expo and I got told time after time not to shoot any game in the shoulder. Just so happens that their jaws would hit the floor when I would show them a shattered scapula and a broken leg bone on the offside with an accompanied exit hole. Also having massive amounts of damage, with a blood trail downhill 3 feet away from the elk.

I did get finish listening to the podcast and they did mention their testing of the ELD-M. I had to laugh when they talked about 16" not being enough penetration for elk. When processing the elk, his body width didn't even come up to my knee. In my opinion, I don't think elk are that big, to qualify that, I am around 15-18 hand tall horses every day. I would put an elk around the size of a pony for the vital cavity and all.

Obviously, the podcast is through a marketing lens and informational lens. Still interesting to listen to and look at the comments as they come in.

 

[whoop]

Maybe the most interesting......we venomously oppose people hunting with any kind of HPBT style of bullet. Our testing absolutely shows your asking for trouble. (I took this as an absolute shot across the bow at Berger).

Dang! i have 80 or so 215's ready to go. guess i will just hunt long range rocks!

 

[Ready2Rut]

Maybe the most interesting......we venomously oppose people hunting with any kind of HPBT style of bullet. Our testing absolutely shows your asking for trouble. (I took this as an absolute shot across the bow at Berger).

This was the most interesting/useful part of this podcast episode for me. Their results in gel seem to align with what I've read on Rokslide about a few different HPBT bullets that I was considering hunting with.

I took my elk this year with the 170 EOL out of my 6.8 Western. I went around talking to different people about it at the Western hunt expo and I got told time after time not to shoot any game in the shoulder. Just so happens that their jaws would hit the floor when I would show them a shattered scapula and a broken leg bone on the offside with an accompanied exit hole. Also having massive amounts of damage, with a blood trail downhill 3 feet away from the elk.

n=1.

The point that they are making in the podcast isn't that you will never have excellent terminal performance with a HPBT, its that Hornady's offerings in this realm are inconsistent. Glad you had a good result but it seems like one shouldn't count on it. Especially with so many great polymer tip match-style bullets out there.

 

[streamerfish]

This was the most interesting/useful part of this podcast episode for me. Their results in gel seem to align with what I've read on Rokslide about a few different HPBT bullets that I was considering hunting with.


n=1.

The point that they are making in the podcast isn't that you will never have excellent terminal performance with a HPBT, its that Hornady's offerings in this realm are inconsistent. Glad you had a good result but it seems like one shouldn't count on it. Especially with so many great polymer tip match-style bullets out there.

Yeah....I'm not so sure that I actually agree with them on that entirely. Maybe if they were meaning just their BTHP bullets.

Berger at this point has pretty massive data set of being a very good hunting bullet. Pretty much any bullet outside of a Nosler Partition has some kind of "failure rate".

All tipped bullets have some level of failure rate also...so to speak.

 

[199p]

I'm somewhat confused as to why folks would shoot the ELD-M instead of the ELD-X in calibers where both are available. From what I understand, Hornady has designed for and does continuous QC on the expansion and fragmentation of the ELD-X but not ELD-M. Are the in-flight or terminal ballistics of the ELD-M really that much better? Does it just come down to the greater variety of bullet weights for handloading in the ELD-M?

The general rule i follow with them is if im running heavy for cal then go for the M as it kills better at slower speeds. the only exception to this is 143 in my 6.5cm factory ammo for 147 just wasnt available. but .223 73m, 6cm 108m etc

 

[wgcracker13]

Yeah....I'm not so sure that I actually agree with them on that entirely. Maybe if they were meaning just their BTHP bullets.

Berger at this point has pretty massive data set of being a very good hunting bullet. Pretty much any bullet outside of a Nosler Partition has some kind of "failure rate".

All tipped bullets have some level of failure rate also...so to speak.

I agree with the failure rate being different for different bullets. The other thing that needs to be taken into consideration is the behavior of the animal. It will still take time to incapacitation and even a complete death between the vitals and brain. I do think that people (especially me) suck at describing what happened with the damage that a bullet does and even the animal's reaction. Both of those expectations can be conflated together in overly positive or negative. One video that I love is Extreme Outer Limit's videos of 60+ kills or different compilation videos. It at least shows the variety of reactions that can happen with the Berger bullets.

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

Ultimate Reloader has done side by side gel tests between ELDX and ELDM. The difference was miniscule IIRC.

Any bullet can fail and some animals react much differently to being hit. Unless you're shooting a single shot, make sure you can quickly reload and continue to send rounds.