Sierra on Bullets and Hollow Points

[RandyWakeman]

I keep blowing up bullets and causing a lot of meat damage on deer, sometimes needing more shots than should be necessary. What should I do?

SIERRA BULLETS: Such a situation calls for either lower velocities, less frangible bullets, or both. This may be as simple as changing bullet weights, or altering your load to your hunting situation. Oddly enough, a bullet and load that may not be an ideal choice for a given situation may perform quite well in one gun, and yet may fail under exactly the same circumstances in an otherwise identical gun. We have always maintained that there is no such thing as a "universal" bullet, one equally well suited to all tasks. This is exactly why we produce such an extensive line of bullets in each bore size. Different weights, different nose profiles, and different jacket thicknesses all go into making one particular bullet the best suited to a particular task. Carefully match the bullet to the job at hand, and you will be rewarded with the optimum bullet performance.


Are all hollow point bullets designed for rapid expansion?

SIERRA BULLETS: Absolutely not. Our hollow-points vary in their jacket thickness, antimony content, distance the lead is away from the mouth, degree that the mouth is open and so forth depending on the use and range for which the bullet is designed. Hollow-point configurations can be found in match bullets that may show no mushrooming through tough controlled expansion big game bullets to the varmint bullets.

[sabotloader]

Gosh! I do not know how to interpret this hollow point thing.  It has always been my belief that the hollow point would aid in a more rapid and possibly a more controlled expansion of slower moving (lower velocity) bullets.  But, I am also the person that hangs onto the belief that a round nose bullet will deflect less than a spire point.

What is or Is there and advantage to hollow point bulets?

[RandyWakeman]

What is or Is there and advantage to hollow point bulets?

A longer, higher BC bullet for a given grain weight, for starters. When HP's give way to meplates is another subjective area.

"Controlled expansion" is a misnomer, if only to me. Limited expansion would be the more accurate term. There is just isn't any controlled application available in hunting (without rope burns). :eek:

[sabotloader]

really good answer - and I understand it - thanks.  In a 1/48 twist sidelock I really need that extra length...

[big6x6]

"What is or Is there and advantage to hollow point bulets?"

The hollow point is there for at least one reason.  It is there to INITIATE expansion.  Consider a .429 240gr Sierra "Power Jacket" jacketed hollow point is asked to perform at 44 Special velocities(850fps MAX) to 444 Marlin RIFLE velocities(2400fps).  The bullet may need to have some antimony added to the lead to toughen up the bullet so it doesn't come apart at rifle velocites.  The hollow point helps insure some expansion at 44 Special velocites.  Also consider that the same 444 Marlin .429 240gr bullet is asked to perform at zero yards(2400fps) to 200yds(1600fps).  The hollow point it there to INSURE and INITATE expansion.

[sabotloader]

Big6x6 your response has always been my contention, but I have been wrong so many times...  I have always felt that the the hollow point would fill hydrualically and then push out beginning expansion a faster rate than a spire point.  The shock value as it passes through the animal would be enhanced by this quicker expansion.  At the velocities that these big heavy bullets are traveling a boost of expansion rate would be needed.  On the other hand the velocity of my high power rifles would naturally cause expansion.  And to be safe and cover all bases in this whole matter I started hunting with Noslers Partitions.  My original Elk hunting (years and years ago) was with Hornady 220 grain round nose bullets out of my Win Mag - I would find the copper just inside the skin and the lead continueing on through with poor to great expansion. Nosler's solved that problem.  I guess I am still am locked into that old premise with my muzzleloaders.  Hollow points for a more rapid expansion and Noslers to hold the bullet together.

Randy's answer as to the hollow point allowing a longer bullet (I hope I am not misquoting) Is also an important aspect of the formula.  The stability factor, the BC, all of that computation is beyond me, but I understand the importance.

My suggestion of controlled expansion is well answered by Randy in his post - I really don't know how I expected it to be controlled - by whom or what?? - I don't know - I do know I want expansion and SHOCK to go along with the piercing damage the bullet does.

Thanks for listening or reading.

[RandyWakeman]

The hollow point is there for at least one reason.  

The main reason is to sell bullets! The notion has been that hollowpoints are most always "good." Sierra is not in the muzzleloading market, so their take is more generic. The problem with starting expansion is that in many cases, there isn't enough HP diameter or depth to even start the process-- and some hollow points are easily plugged with fur / hide (the LE 4 denim test was constructed to identify this problem).

These hollow points are seemingly big enough, but recovered from a bullet box at 100 yards (100 gr. Pyrodex)-- expansion is not present:

[sabotloader]

Ouch!  What were these bullets shot at?  Did it envolve some sort of liquid that would start the hydraulic pressure reaction? It doesn't seem that it could be a solid object either or more deformantion should have occured.  I think it would be terribly hard to explain the amount of penetration without expansion - this is really confusing.

I am quite sure that Barnes would not want to see their bullet in that shape after the depth of penetration you have indicated.  Is this the norm?

[RandyWakeman]

http://www.prbullet.com/bullets.htm

This was one of Cecil's earlier series of tests at PR bullet, back when his started making Keith Nose style lead bullets.

There's no real "answer"-- those who want exit wounds will likely find them with jacketed bullets far more consistently than with soft lead, though hard cast has a long record even on African game. Sharp edges from banana peeled jackets cut leather quite a bit better. It is hard to argue that a specific .45 or .50 bullet "won't work"-- they all have.

When some of Barnes own data suggests expansion at 1600 fps or above, it is hard to insure that with Pyro or T7 powered smokers. Even Toby Bridges has expressed a preference for the 250 SST's in his hotter Savage loads, rather then the laser beam effect from the less-likely to expand 300 gr. SSTs.

They all can / have killed, but terminal velocity / range, and bone braking or softer tissue destruction has always been a compromise of sorts. At least, some sort! :roll:

[Longcruise]

Oddly enough, a bullet and load that may not be an ideal choice for a given situation may perform quite well in one gun, and yet may fail under exactly the same circumstances in an otherwise identical gun.

I'm gonna stick my neck out and declare that statement by Sierra to be patently ludicrous

Once started down range from these "identical" guns the only thing that is going to cause a major difference in the terminal performance is the bullet design and if Sierra has put that much variation in their design then it's a poor design.

There are some very good "universal" bullets out there that are designed for a given bore size and performance with almost universal results from any firearm designed for the final purpose of the bullet.  Maybe the real problem is that Sierra doesn't make any "universal" bullets.

[big6x6]

"A bullet recovery box was built and filled with material that would simulate the tissue of a game animal."

Does this MATERIAL exist?  I don't know of any material approaching this other than ballistic gelatin.

[RandyWakeman]

Does this MATERIAL exist?

The argument could be made that tissue from one individual "game animal" does not equal other similar sized game animals at all.

The credence that I give to Cecils's testing is from collection of numerous fresh kills from the highway department, plus a bonus pile of hogs from a local farmer that developed growths and could not be taken to market. Frozen for storage, brought up to body temperature, finally strung up at 100 yards and fired into again and again from various angles-- the bullets / wound channels then analyzed. That's how PR bullet verifies their bullet performance, and even Olin admitted actual animal carcass testing is tough to beat. They can't.

[RandyWakeman]

There are some very good "universal" bullets out there that are designed for a given bore size and performance with almost universal results from any firearm designed for the final purpose of the bullet.  

Good, you can save everyone a lot of time! What is the universal .50 caliber muzzleloading whitetail bullet?

[Longcruise]

Randy, you seem to take my admittedly derisive comments toward the Sierra statement personally!!!  Well, maybe you're a stockholder or maybe you mistook my comments as being directed toward you?

If you examine the statement I quoted from sierra carefully you may wonder as I did just why these bullets fired under identical circumstances are going to behave so differently.  Taking it in the context of any and all bullets, it is especially rediculous.  Taken on it's face, they are saying that if you and I go afield each packing an identical, say, .270 shooting identical ammo at antelope standing at 200 yards and hit in the same spot that one of (their??) bullets will perform well and the other will fail. :eek:

Sorry, but it comes across more as marketing language than factual information!

Apparently they are trying to explain why sometimes their hollow points function properly and sometimes they don't?

Good, you can save everyone a lot of time! What is the universal .50 caliber muzzleloading whitetail bullet?

Here are two for the .50 and one for the .45.  I personally guarantee them :grin:

First one is for fans of sabot loaded ronds.  this is a .430 320 grain bullet with a .355 flat meplat (no expansion needed!).  Shoot cast hard from wheel weights and heat treated.



Second is for those who prefer a plain old .50 conical lead slug.



Third is another lead conical for those who like to shoot the .45.



The first slug especially is not just a Whitetail bullet but a do-all for just about anything you will ever hunt.  If you doubt that then suggest you shoot it into a dead pig or better yet, a live one. :grin:   I'll be glad to provide you with an adequate supply of test slugs (and NO, I'm not pushing my product!  I'm not in the bullet business).

[Longcruise]

My pic posting skills seem to be lacking!  Here are url's

http://www.mikeswillowlake.com/images/TempStuff/320wln.jpg

http://www.mikeswillowlake.com/images/TempStuff/pb.GIF

http://www.mikeswillowlake.com/images/TempStuff/whitworth.GIF

[RandyWakeman]

If you examine the statement I quoted from sierra carefully you may wonder as I did just why these bullets fired under identical circumstances are going to behave so differently.  Taking it in the context of any and all bullets, it is especially rediculous.  Taken on it's face, they are saying that if you and I go afield each packing an identical, say, .270 shooting identical ammo at antelope standing at 200 yards and hit in the same spot that one of (their??) bullets will perform well and the other will fail.

I wasn't aware that Sierra had stock! :shock:

You can say "on its face," or "out of context"-- and interpret "failure" as you will as well.

The problem is that is no such thing as "identical" rifles. It is not uncommon for one rifle to shoot a specific bullet extremely well, yet the identical make / model of rifle to spray the same bullet all over the place. With muzzleloaders, it is even worse. ".50 caliber" means nothing specific, and barrel rifling depth and other tolerances are all over the map. So, just because one bullet / one charge shoots superbly for me in one gun, doesn't mean it will begin to group in the next "identical" gun, or any of them for that matter. Many may not think of a sabot that won't load in the first place, or won't group at all as "failure"-- but, it is hard to call a bullet you can't even load a success, or a bullet that sprays 10" groups as any type of great success, either.

The problem is that there just never is anything as "identical circumstances," identical rifles, identical game animals, identical hunting shots. You've probably heard it all the time "Powerbelts don't work," "Barnes bullets don't work," or both "always work." The truth is somewhere in the middle, and there is a lot of middle.

The Sierra comments were only terse, and generic-- and in answer to a "meat damage" question. I'm just reading it as more of the "every gun is an individual" and "there are no absolutes" type of response. It is easy to find velocities that vary 150 fps between guns, so it does not take a big stretch to say terminal performance varies somewhat. Had Sierra substituted "FAILURE" with "LESS THAN OPTIMUM" performance, there would be less dispute-- if there really is any. If there was "the bullet" for whitetail in a specific muzzleloader, that's what we would all be shooting.

Sierra's comment of Oddly enough, a bullet and load that may not be an ideal choice for a given situation may perform quite well in one gun, and yet may fail under exactly the same circumstances in an otherwise identical gun. refers to a "less than ideal choice" sometimes performing well, and that same less than ideal choice performing less than ideally in the same gun. I'm just not reading any absolutes or probabilities into that. After all, .22 rimfire has killed deer, but that hardly makes it one of the best choices.

[Longcruise]

Hi Randy,

Context?

Here's the context:

I keep blowing up bullets and causing a lot of meat damage on deer,

Such a situation calls for either lower velocities, less frangible bullets, or both. This may be as simple as changing bullet weights, or altering your load to your hunting situation. Oddly enough, a bullet and load that may not be an ideal choice for a given situation may perform quite well in one gun, and yet may fail under exactly the same circumstances in an otherwise identical gun.

Your discussion of group sizes and accuracy are out of context in terms of the original discussion as restated above.  The question posed to Sierra was specifically addressing terminal performance and for Sierra to respond as they did is ludicrous.  The idea that you and I shooting identical guns/ammo/ballistics/bullet under identical field circumstances are going to experience radically different terminal performance is rediculous.  At least it is with my bullet selections.  If it's happening with Sierra bullets, they need to go back to the drawing board or better advise their customers as to the performance parameters of each of their bullets.

"Altering your load to your hunting situation".  What the heck are they suggesting?  That we pull bullets and change our load during the course of a day in the field?

You asked me to save all of us time and show you the perfect bullet for the .50 on whitetails.  I showed you two.  One for sabot shooters and one for conical shooters.  Both bullets will work in any modern in-line .50.  Minor differences in field conditions will not marginalize either of these bullets terminal performance as Sierra suggests can happen with theirs.

Differences in barrel sizing are not irrelevant to successfull shooting but they are irrelevant to whether or not these bullets are good choices for whitetail deer or any other game in terms of performance on target.  Getting accuracy with these bullets is a matter of correct sabot/sabot size selection and in the case of the conical correct sizeing of the bullet.

[RandyWakeman]

The idea that you and I shooting identical guns/ammo/ballistics/bullet under identical field circumstances are going to experience radically different terminal performance is rediculous.  

The pics you cited didn't show up. Perhaps you'll eventually become incited enough to make a toll-free call to Sierra to express your displeasure, but "radically" different terminal performance happens all the time.

One example: a 245 gr. HP Powerbelt with 100 grains of Triple Seven hitting Bambi at 25 yards.

My bullet disintegrates  on impact, yours passes right through. That's as radically different as anyone could hope for (or not hope for). You might think that "ridiculous"-- but, it has already happened far too many times to fit that category.

[Longcruise]

I'm not particularly incited and could care less about voicing my opinion to Sierra.  I didn't expect you to become so incited and compelled to defend Sierra though.  My intent was to offer an alternative view to Sierras claim.

Why should you or I or any other member of this forum accept that kind of performance from Sierra bullets?  Your own link to Precision bullets shows a company that has produced a bullet that appears to perform dependably, unlike the Sierra hollow point.  Their bullet seems to be a dandy whitetail bullet and I'd use it without hesitation on whitetails but it does not seem like it would be of much use on larger game.  It would probably not give adequate penetration on an elk for example.  They do have another bullet selection however that would be an all around bullet as is the one that I posted.

Those pics didn't show up probably because of my web host.  It's slow and seems to jump to the "parked" page when the server slows down.  I moved them to a point closer to the surface of the site at this page:

http://www.mikeswillowlake.com/photos.htm

Precision does claim that their hollowpoint will stabilize in all weights up to 350 grains from a barrel with at least a 1/38 twist.  I wonder if they have done any real testing on that?  NEF builds a .44 caliber barrel for their Handi rilfe with a 1/38 twist rate and it won't stabilize bullets over about 260 grains!

[RandyWakeman]

I'm not particularly incited and could care less about voicing my opinion to Sierra.  I didn't expect you to become so incited and compelled to defend Sierra though.  

Not incited or even excited-- just having rough time keeping the food from falling out of my mouth. :shock:

[Longcruise]

Not incited or even excited-- just having rough time keeping the food from falling out of my mouth

Whatever that means!?  Perhaps you could explain?

[RandyWakeman]

Whatever that means!?  Perhaps you could explain?

Could, but not particularly interested.

[Longcruise]

Could, but not particularly interested.

Well, it's your topic but like they say about the kitchen and the heat and all

OTOH, this discussion is probably detracting from your efforts at product promotion :-D

[DannoBoone]

I keep blowing up bullets and causing a lot of meat damage on deer, sometimes needing more shots than should be necessary. What should I do?

They should have told him to quit shooting the meat and go for the
vitals.  When did a good heart/lung shot ever ruin any meat?  

 Oddly enough, a bullet and load that may not be an ideal choice for a given situation may perform quite well in one gun, and yet may fail under exactly the same circumstances in an otherwise identical gun.

On the subject of terminal performance (isn't that what they're really
talking about?), if bullets are manufactured uniformly, one gun should
get the same results as its twin (identical gun). All the Rem788's back
in the '60's shooting Hornady 55gr SP's in 22/250 caliber that I ever
shot at 3600fpm blew prairie dogs with the same explosive power as
any other. I've found very good consistency with Hornady bullets in
the lighter CF calibers. (Wish I could say the same about Sierra, which
is giving me an even bigger problem swallowing the above statement.)
Have shot the .17's, 204's, 22's & 25's with no terminal performance
variation in the Hornady bullets. I've HEARD of failures in the larger
caliber bullets, but never experienced it.

I'm equally impressed with the PR bullets. No terminal performance
failures (not even less than optimum performance) have I experienced
with two different barrels. They definately have some serious
knock-down power. In my experience, the QT's are no less of a
great bullet than the DC's. (I wouldn't take that caribou shoulder shot
with a QT, though.)

So are all bullets (even in the same box) made with the exacting
uniformity from all manufacturers? I personally believe the two
mentioned above come very close. But are all of them, even the
more expensive ones? This ol' pup doesn't think so.

[RandyWakeman]

They should have told him to quit shooting the meat and go for the
vitals.  When did a good heart/lung shot ever ruin any meat?

Oddly enough, a bullet and load that may not be an ideal choice for a given situation may perform quite well in one gun, and yet may fail under exactly the same circumstances in an otherwise identical gun.

As for the vitals, sometimes animals just don't pose properly.

The second part I read far more generically: a bullet and load that may not be an ideal choice... may still do the job, as in a 245 gr. 3 pellet Powerbelt on deer at very short range. No guarantee of failure, but not a good choice at least in my opinion.

[wpayne]

The second part I read far more generically: a bullet and load that may not be an ideal choice... may still do the job, as in a 245 gr. 3 pellet Powerbelt on deer at very short range. No guarantee of failure, but not a good choice at least in my opinion.

I read that the same way I think.  Choose marginally appropriate bullets/loads expect marginally acceptable success.

[Longcruise]

I read that the same way I think. Choose marginally appropriate bullets/loads expect marginally acceptable success.

if bullets are manufactured uniformly, one gun should
get the same results as its twin (identical gun).

Couldn't agree more!

may still do the job, as in a 245 gr. 3 pellet Powerbelt on deer at very short range. No guarantee of failure, but not a good choice at least in my opinion.

I'm interested in PowerBelt experiences since I observed a strange one myself.  A friend shot an elk at 45 yards head on with a 295 cop clad HP powerbelt and 115 gr goex ffg.  the powerbeld penetrated the full length of the elk (mature bull) and exited at the back of a hind quarter after breaking the hip.  6 months later he hit a 100# hog (no appreciable shield) with the same bullets (same pack even) at 35 yards broadside with 95 grains of ffg goex and we picked the pieces of the powerbelt out of the inside of the ribcage opposite of the side he hit it on. :shock:

I was sure he had hit the ground or something in between and had killed the hog with shrapnel :eek:  but he insisted that the shot had hit the hog unobstructed right where he aimed.

[DannoBoone]

6 months later he hit a 100# hog (no appreciable shield) with the same bullets (same pack even) at 35 yards broadside with 95 grains of ffg goex and we picked the pieces of the powerbelt out of the inside of the ribcage opposite of the side he hit it on. :shock:

I was sure he had hit the ground or something in between and had killed the hog with shrapnel :eek:  but he insisted that the shot had hit the hog unobstructed right where he aimed.

I've used .44 180gr XTP's to purposely get the result you have described.
Terminal performance failure? Not when ya want a bullet which will NOT
exit, bounce up & over a hill into a neighbor's yard!!!!

Yours is not the first experience I've heard/read about the powerbelts. Just
more proof to me to stick with what works.

[Longcruise]

I've used .44 180gr XTP's to purposely get the result you have described.
Terminal performance failure? Not when ya want a bullet which will NOT
exit, bounce up & over a hill into a neighbor's yard!!!!

I can see the value in that type of performance under those circumstances.

Interesting about those powerbelts.  They are verypopular around here since sabots are not allowed in the ml season most shooters seem to see them as a good legal compromise.

OTOH, it's hard to beat a big hunk of pure lead with a flat nose! :grin: