Meateater bullet performance video.

[S-3 ranch]

I keep seeing 1600 thrown around online, but not a thing about it on Barnes' website.

I see 1500 FPS thrown around, but 1800 -2000 FPS seems the magic number

 

[wind gypsy]

I see 1500 FPS thrown around, but 1800 -2000 FPS seems the magic number

I keep seeing 1600 thrown around online, but not a thing about it on Barnes' website.

I've seen barnes correspondence where they suggest minimum expansion velocities but also recommend exceeding them by 200 fps for safety margin. On top of that, i've seen different #'s for different bullets in the same series I.E. the 6.5 127 LRX expanding at a lower velocity than the 175 for example. Regardless, I think 1700 is probably on the low end of what I'd want to do with a LRX and that's a far cry from the pills designed for subsonic use.

 

[ElPollo]

I used monos for years and was never really happy with them. I switched back to lead after getting lucky with less that stellar performance and after reading Heffelfinger’s Red Herring article on lead toxicity in game meat. If I had to go back to them, I would try to keep my impact velocities at 2000+ fps and would probably shoot more shoulders. But shooting shoulders just seems like a waste of good meat.

 

[Formidilosus]

Some points from the video-

1) Clear ballistic gel is not analogous to tissue, has extreme variability in density and structure from lot to lot, can show much deeper penetration or much larger expansion than in tissue. It is not a decent stand in for calibrated 10% organic gelatin.

2) Military snipers are not taught and do not have, as a rule, much if any knowledge of terminal ballistics. Being a sniper, even a well experienced one does not carry any weight in this field.

3) Constant use of terms that have no bearing in terminal ballistics- “hydrostatic shock”, “energy”, etc.

4) No understanding of actual wound ballistics

5) Surprised that higher impact velocities resulted in less penetration.


However, this picture is exactly the issue with monolithic bullets at below 2,200’ish fps-




That is what current copper bullets look like when penetrating the chest of an animal at lower impact velocities. The reason that they tend to look better when people recover them, is because there was enough resistance to stop the projectile, which means enough to cause the expansion seen.

 

[clperry]

As someone who appreciates Steve and what he does, this video is a bad look for them. It shows either a grand lack of knowledge or a willingness to ignore a vast amount of readily available information that supports a different viewpoint rather irrefutably. Disappointed in them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Marbles]

I used monos for years and was never really happy with them. I switched back to lead after getting lucky with less that stellar performance and after reading Heffelfinger’s Red Herring article on lead toxicity in game meat. If I had to go back to them, I would try to keep my impact velocities at 2000+ fps and would probably shoot more shoulders. But shooting shoulders just seems like a waste of good meat.

That article by Heffelfinger was a good read, thanks for making me aware of it. In adults, lead exposure from hunting is minimal, it may have some long term negative effects, but nearly certainly less than sitting at a desk for 8 hours a day, and absolutely less than working nightshift. Probably owning a smartphone is a greater health risk for an adult due to the increase in screen time.

Young children in the house are my primary reason for using monos as even low lead levels effect brain development.

 

[Ryan2.0]

When I saw the video up on youtube, I knew it was going to be unbelievably stupid. I was not disappointed.

 

[fwafwow]

As someone who appreciates Steve and what he does, this video is a bad look for them. It shows either a grand lack of knowledge or a willingness to ignore a vast amount of readily available information that supports a different viewpoint rather irrefutably. Disappointed in them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m not a fanboy for ME, but they seem to sometimes respond to feedback, including criticism. Maybe someone with the knowledge can email them.

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

This is exactly what I'd expect from those dudes..
I've pretty much tuned out every one of the Bro hunting experts, it's nothing but commercialization at this point.
I'm seeing more and more guys in the woods kitted out with high end shit that'd make an SF operator blush..

 

[S.Clancy]

After the podcast with Bill from Iron Will it's pretty obvious that ME folks have a 0% grasp on physics/math/engineering.

 

[ElPollo]

After the podcast with Bill from Iron Will it's pretty obvious that ME folks have a 0% grasp on physics/math/engineering.

A friend of mine watches ME just to talk about the stupid shit they say. Is that the demographic of their audience?

 

[S.Clancy]

A friend of mine watches ME just to talk about the stupid shit they say. Is that the demographic of their audience?

I listen to it at work, so it is more of a boredom reducer for me. But they say some spectacularly wrong things when it comes to math/physics/engineering. They are pretty solid on the wildlife science front tho.

 

[Flyjunky]

Some points from the video-

1) Clear ballistic gel is not analogous to tissue, has extreme variability in density and structure from lot to lot, can show much deeper penetration or much larger expansion than in tissue. It is not a decent stand in for calibrated 10% organic gelatin.

2) Military snipers are not taught and do not have, as a rule, much if any knowledge of terminal ballistics. Being a sniper, even a well experienced one does not carry any weight in this field.

3) Constant use of terms that have no bearing in terminal ballistics- “hydrostatic shock”, “energy”, etc.

4) No understanding of actual wound ballistics

5) Surprised that higher impact velocities resulted in less penetration.


However, this picture is exactly the issue with monolithic bullets at below 2,200’ish fps-

View attachment 462580


That is what current copper bullets look like when penetrating the chest of an animal at lower impact velocities. The reason that they tend to look better when people recover them, is because there was enough resistance to stop the projectile, which means enough to cause the expansion seen.

Prime example of what some mono bullet producers consider expansion and why I just don't like them for the type of hunting I do. Google images of barnes expansion velocities and you'll get many pics like above.

 

[ElPollo]

I listen to it at work, so it is more of a boredom reducer for me. But they say some spectacularly wrong things when it comes to math/physics/engineering. They are pretty solid on the wildlife science front tho.

Newberg does a way better job on wildlife science and policy issues than ME.

 

[Formidilosus]

Prime example of what some mono bullet producers consider expansion and why I just don't like them for the type of hunting I do. Google images of barnes expansion velocities and you'll get many pics like above.

As I have said multiple times in the past- if people saw what the mono and deep penetrating bonded bullets looked like going through chests below 2,200’ish fps, they wouldn’t use them.

The Terminal Ascent is one of the better, if not the “best” bonded bullets even at low velocity impacts, and below 2k fps it is still like shooting an FMJ pistol bullet.

 

[Xbow hunter]

What monos "really open up" at under 1100 fps?

Maker Rex bullets open up at 900 fps.

 

[Antares]

Maker Rex bullets open up at 900 fps.

What happens to them with an impact velocity of 2500+ fps?

 

[Deywalker]

As I have said multiple times in the past- if people saw what the mono and deep penetrating bonded bullets looked like going through chests below 2,200’ish fps, they wouldn’t use them.

The Terminal Ascent is one of the better, if not the “best” bonded bullets even at low velocity impacts, and below 2k fps it is still like shooting an FMJ pistol bullet.

How do they compare to the gold dots/fusions? I'm assuming narrower wounds but deeper penetration, somewhere between a mono and a fusion.

 

[Formidilosus]

How do they compare to the gold dots/fusions? I'm assuming narrower wounds but deeper penetration, somewhere between a mono and a fusion.

Pretty much.

The Fusion/Gold Dots are probably the best bonded bullet made from a terminal performance perspective. They have a bit lower BC than others, but retain around 60-70% of their weight which means 30-40% is fragments. That causes very good wounds with very good penetration.

The terminal ascents below 2,200’ish don’t create large wounds- the 130gr 6.5’s at 1,900-2,000fps impacts look like a 40S&W pistol wound. At high velocity impacts the TA’s look like a picture perfect, pretty mushroom…. Gold dots look angry.

 

[Lou270]

The videos are actually pretty good I thought. The commentary was not that great as others have mentioned. It looked to me like all the bullets performed as designed/expected

Lou