Light vs heavy for caliber bullets on game

[Jaegerr]

I didn’t find anything online in a quick search, but I had a question on bullet weight.

I’ve been down the reloading rabbit hole before buying anything and personally wanting to load copper mono’s into a 300WSM and the consensus on monos is light and fast, but in bullets like partitions, bonded bullets, ELD-X, Bergers, etc is heavy for the higher BC which is a pretty straight forward desire.

How much does bullet weight affect terminal performance on game? It’s apples and oranges comparing monos to lead core bullets but for something like a 168TTSX running faster compared to like a 190LRX as an example. Thanks!

 

[sniper20]

If you need terminal performance at range, then you are going to want to go heavy. If you punch bullet info into a ballistic calculator, you will see that heavier bullets are going to retain velocity at range, but more importantly energy. If you are looking for a long range bullet, I'm not a believer in Barnes. Not because they are a bad bullet, but because they require more velocity to open up than a traditional bullet does. However, shooting a 300WSM, you should have enough speed with the 168 class bullet to get reliable opening at good range.

I'm a huge fan of the Accubond bullets, they have always worked exactly as advertised for me. I have used ELD-X and been happy. However, I have seen where they don't expand all that great at slower velocity (watched gel stuff at 700 yards, they penciled through).

I currently use Berger bullets, and for the first time using them, at 150 yards, they do more damage than I have ever seen (big doe whitetail). From watching online, they seem to do excellent long range performance, thus why I tried them.

 

[Legend]

I didn’t find anything online in a quick search, but I had a question on bullet weight.

I’ve been down the reloading rabbit hole before buying anything and personally wanting to load copper mono’s into a 300WSM and the consensus on monos is light and fast, but in bullets like partitions, bonded bullets, ELD-X, Bergers, etc is heavy for the higher BC which is a pretty straight forward desire.

How much does bullet weight affect terminal performance on game? It’s apples and oranges comparing monos to lead core bullets but for something like a 168TTSX running faster compared to like a 190LRX as an example. Thanks!

I wanted to reduce the recoil on my 300wsm so my kids could shoot it. I picked up some Hammer 124 grain copper bullets and reloaded with the minimum charge weight powder. I can tell you that there has been more than a few elk that never noticed the light bullet. And the recoil is super fun now.

Now I will add that this set up is out of velocity at around 500yds. I know this because I killed a cow at 550 and the bullet didn't expand. She died but the bullet penciled through.

So pick a bullet and keep them fast. Weight will not matter in my opinion.

 

[Jaegerr]

I wanted to reduce the recoil on my 300wsm so my kids could shoot it. I picked up some Hammer 124 grain copper bullets and reloaded with the minimum charge weight powder. I can tell you that there has been more than a few elk that never noticed the light bullet. And the recoil is super fun now.

Now I will add that this set up is out of velocity at around 500yds. I know this because I killed a cow at 550 and the bullet didn't expand. She died but the bullet penciled through.

So pick a bullet and keep them fast. Weight will not matter in my opinion.

I was looking at the 168TTSX, trying to research load data out of 20" tubes seeing if I can get them above 3,000 fps

 

[Legend]

I was looking at the 168TTSX, trying to research load data out of 20" tubes seeing if I can get them above 3,000 fps

I'll let you research that one.

But I will just reiterate that you shouldn't be afraid of dropping to low weight copper. As long as you know your range limit/velocity limit.

I guarantee you can get over 3000fps if you go lighter weight bullet. Try it for fun if nothing else.

 

[TaperPin]

Any bullet than holds together more or less in one piece is going to benefit from well anbove minimum impact velocity to open up well. Short-ish to medium-ish distances often benefit from light to medium weight for more dramatic internal damage, but eventually the heavier bullet catches up.

Sometimes it almost doesn’t make a difference - my 300 mag can shoot a 180 gr Accubond faster than a 200 gr, but at 600 yards the velocities are essentially the same. Between the muzzle and 600 yards, there isn’t enough of a difference to matter in velocity, and there’s plenty of energy with either. I should like the 200 gr better, but the 180 has a long reputation that’s hard to argue with and any difference in penetration is minimal. In my mind it’s a toss up at my max distances.

Copper bullets penetrate so well, there’s no advantage to heavy weight unless there’s a velocity advantage at distances way out there.

 

[Rich M]

Wow. What a question. Goid ?

I always felt it had to do w velocity and bullet design. Get a V in the magic expansion range of BD and everything works well. Too slow and less ecpansion (no such thing as penciling thru) and too much V and catstrophic expansion.

Far as i know coppers get loaded for length and not necessarily weight (lighter than lead). I found my guns and I, like okd stule cup & cores better.

 

[Andouille]

I was looking at the 168TTSX, trying to research load data out of 20" tubes seeing if I can get them above 3,000 fps

You should be at or slightly above 3,000 fps. I get 2,960-2,990fps with 175 LRX and Staball 6.5 out of my 20" WSM. My research leads me to believe that the 175 LRX has a lower minimum velocity and much higher BC (.508) than the 168ttsx (.470), thereby negating the small benefit of additional velocity of the marginally lighter Ttsx. LRX should stay over 2,000fps to just under 600yds.

 

[Jaegerr]

You should be at or slightly above 3,000 fps. I get 2,960-2,990fps with 175 LRX and Staball 6.5 out of my 20" WSM. My research leads me to believe that the 175 LRX has a lower minimum velocity and much higher BC (.508) than the 168ttsx (.470), thereby negating the small benefit of additional velocity of the marginally lighter Ttsx. LRX should stay over 2,000fps to just under 600yds.

Do you mind sharing the load data and what elevation you’re shooting at? And is staball 6.5 a stable powder for hunting? I’m very new to reloading lol

 

[Andouille]

Don't have my load data handy, but I started with Hodgdon data for Staball and similar weight class bullets. Staball 6.5 is very température stable, easy to meter, and gives slightly higher velocities than H4350 for midweight bullets in WSM. It has been easy to find at Cabelas lately. PM me and I'll send more info and let you know what beginner mistakes to avoid... I've made plenty in the last year.

 

[sniper20]

Don't have my load data handy, but I started with Hodgdon data for Staball and similar weight class bullets. Staball 6.5 is very température stable, easy to meter, and gives slightly higher velocities than H4350 for midweight bullets in WSM. It has been easy to find at Cabelas lately. PM me and I'll send more info and let you know what beginner mistakes to avoid... I've made plenty in the last year.

Are you talking Staball HD? Staball 6.5 isn't going to be optimized for this kind of case...

 

[Andouille]

Are you talking Staball HD? Staball 6.5 isn't going to be optimized for this kind of case...

How can a powder be optimized for a "kind" of case? "6.5“ and "HD" denominations mean nothing without evaluating the appropriateness of the burn rate. I can substantiate this statement with facts:

Burn rate and load data for Staball 6.5 say it's suited for WSM mid weight projectiles. Just a tad faster than the venerable H4350, well known for WSM use.

Staball HD is far to slow for midweight bullets out of WSM, even slower than H1000, which is rarely used for WSM as it would require use of extremely heavy bullets.

Check burn rates here and I'm open to learning how I could be wrong.

https://hodgdonpowderco.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/updatedburnrateschart-1.pdf

 

[sniper20]

How can a powder be optimized for a "kind" of case? "6.5“ and "HD" denominations mean nothing without evaluating the appropriateness of the burn rate. I can substantiate this statement with facts:

Burn rate and load data for Staball 6.5 say it's suited for WSM mid weight projectiles. Just a tad faster than the venerable H4350, well known for WSM use.

Staball HD is far to slow for midweight bullets out of WSM, even slower than H1000, which is rarely used for WSM as it would require use of extremely heavy bullets.

Check burn rates here and I'm open to learning how I could be wrong.

https://hodgdonpowderco.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/updatedburnrateschart-1.pdf

Not saying HD was the best option, just wanted to clarify. And way to many variables to say a powder works or not, especially on burn rate... A lot of my loads use powders not listed in manuals (Hornady, Nosler, Speer, Sierra) and are the best find that I have. There are variables such as barrel length, bullet brand, barrel brand, etc.

 

[Blurry1]

A more apples to apples question brought me to this post. I was running some ballistic calculations on .30 cal bullets to decide if there was value in loading 165gr (my usual) vs 200gr bullets for moose. My forced personal max range is 350yds. So if I do some theoretical numbers I come up with the rough following for 350 yds.

165gr
2400fps
2200 ftlb

200gr
2100fps
2100ftlb

So the question on terminal performance. Does a roughly 17% increase in weight provide any real advantage at a slower speed on a moose outside of maybe punching through a shoulder blade better? We could hymn and haw between 50fps either way. However, I’m curious about real world experience.

Before any one asks this is based on a nosler accubond.

 

[Compressedload]

Why do hunters choose 300gr and heavier projectiles in say a 375 H&H when hunting Cape buffalo and not 235gr or 250gr? Obviously various examples in big bores... Pick any example.

Expanding bullets do have a dynamic SD so SD isn't the whole story. Frontal area seems to be larger on heavier expanding bullets than lighter bullets in the same cartridge but not a hard and fast rule. I believe the answer lies in momentum which seems to be promote deeper and straighter penetration. You can test this with (almost) non-expanding solids.

This all assumes similar designs. The variation between different designs and construction of the same weight in the same calibre often leads to dissimilar results.

In the moose example above I absolutely choose the 200gr over the 165gr of similar design and construction.

 

[BigNate]

It won't matter much at 350 yds IMHO.

In every situation, how the bullet performs at the distance it's used at is what matters.
The difference I'd really want to know is how my bullet that I choose for my max distance works when used at 30 yards.
Often times the bullet that's perfect for a longer range shot is to fragile for reliable performance up close.

 

[Blurry1]

It won't matter much at 350 yds IMHO.

In every situation, how the bullet performs at the distance it's used at is what matters.
The difference I'd really want to know is how my bullet that I choose for my max distance works when used at 30 yards.
Often times the bullet that's perfect for a longer range shot is to fragile for reliable performance up close.

That was where my head was at. I get that inertia and SD can lead to deeper penetration but I have to guess an extra 300fps offsets the small difference to some extent. My still for up a 200grainer just for fun. Never know when a bison tag is gonna happen.

 

[Yung6ix]

I've been mostly shooting 40 gr Nosler Varmageddons and 40 gr Nosler ballistic tips the last couple years from a couple different 223s.
I still shoot 55g BT out of a 22-250 and occasionally use a 6mm. Many bullets are going to be effective. The most important thing is to shoot them in a good spot. Speed does kill, I've had several less than ideal shots result in dead coyotes.