Author Topic: whos bullets are better?BARNES EXPADERS or HORNADY SSTs (Read 1351 times)

jeff223 · « **on:** December 04, 2004, 09:36:38 AM »

i wanted to test the SSTs this year and i was able to do so.my son shot a small buck with a 250gr SST and i shot a doe with the same bullet.the buck was shot through the shoulders and the exit wound looked good.the exit hole was smaller than what i have seen from the Barnes expanders though.the doe i shot was coming at me at about 70 yards and i put one in her and i recovered the bullet under the hide on the bottom of her back leg.the picture shows what was left of the bullet.two deer down with no trouble.the Barnes Expanders in the picture were recovered from deer too.the one with the peddles gone or folded over was recovered from a deer that i shot the same way, a head on shot.the bullet was recovered in the hind leg some where.there is alot more weight left with the Barnes bullet compairing it to the SST.the other Barnes bullets were recovered from deer that i shot at differant angles at some distance.they work very good always opening up the way they should.the SSTs seem to come apart but the Barnes open up and hold their weight and cut an even bigger wound channel

the Expander bullets are the good non spitzer bullets from Barnes and the Horandy SSTs that were used were 250gr.all shots were from my Knight Rifle loaded with 130gr ff 777.

im going back to the Barnes Expanders.im all done monkeying around with the other brands.sure the SSTs worked but the Barnes are better

AndyHass · « **Reply #1 on:** December 04, 2004, 10:15:37 AM »

It depends what you mean by "worked better". Yes, they opened up larger. That isn't always a good thing. The bigger the bullet opens up, the less penetration you get.
For example, I shot a deer with Barnes expander 3/4 oz shotgun slugs. The first shot (it was running and already wounded) must have opened big because it took half the guts out the far side. If this would have been a shoulder shot, I would have lost half the meat on the deer, another reason I don't like explosively expanding bullets. The next shot indeed hit the shoulder, and the bullet failed to penetrate into the lungs! The entrance wound was massive yet did not get into the body cavity. I had to chase the deer down and put another round in it later.
SSTs, so far, have never failed to acheive penetration. Unless the shot is long range or frontal, I usually view fail to exit as a bad indication with a ML bullet. I've never had an SST come apart, if they did for you that's not usually good either.
It's personal preference what constitutes a "good bullet" and if you're happier with the results from the Barnes then by all means stick with it. But I don't think the SST is a bad bullet.

jeff223 · « **Reply #2 on:** December 04, 2004, 11:42:47 AM »

Andy i did in fact read your responce on the other topic and i reread your post.i still take it that 400 yard shots at deer are the norm for you under ideal conditions.if thats not the case then thats great.there are enough slob hunters here in Michigan already and leading someone on to thinking 400 shots are OK is not a good thing.

as far as what DEPUTY and myself said to each other is none of your buisness.

i have indeed checked out the ultimate muzzle loaders.i have held two of them in my own hands.at over $1000 a whack i said forget it.i may have talked to DEPUTY in person at some time at a show or where the rifles are built.is he the owner or a rep of ultimate muzzleloaders?if i ever want to go out hunting a horse OH :oops: i mean ZEBRA i will look him up

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 04, 2004, 01:43:25 PM »

Let try to keep it civil here, or I will be forced to lock out this thread also.

jeff223 · « **Reply #4 on:** December 04, 2004, 05:27:18 PM »

ok,no more from me

AndyHass · « **Reply #5 on:** December 04, 2004, 05:59:57 PM »

Quote from: jeff223

Andy i did in fact read your responce on the other topic and i reread your post.i still take it that 400 yard shots at deer are the norm for you under ideal conditions.if thats not the case then thats great.there are enough slob hunters here in Michigan already and leading someone on to thinking 400 shots are OK is not a good thing.

as far as what DEPUTY and myself said to each other is none of your buisness.

Not that this is related to this thread, but nowhere did I ever say that 400 yard shots are "the norm", or suggest that everyone go out and do it. It is disappointing that Redhawk felt the need to lock what could have been a useful thread (though the way it was being taken it was warranted). I'd think we should all know after the last go-round that personal attacks are not warranted simply because you disagree with someone. :roll:

DEPUTY · « **Reply #6 on:** December 05, 2004, 03:58:02 AM »

No i do not rep for the company period i just use there gun! that i bought and love although i do shoot my omega still the sst has a better bc for over 100yds and beyond, it also has beeter intgreaty. i shot a 120 pound dow with it at 60yds and blew ribs and a large piece of lung out of the deer that was in the brush some feet behind her, sorry i havent shot a horse either or a zebra jeff, and i dont work the shows for ultimate.

jeff223 · « **Reply #7 on:** December 05, 2004, 04:48:16 AM »

i have nothing to say :grin:

jeff223 · « **Reply #8 on:** December 05, 2004, 06:35:15 AM »

i guess i do have a little more to say to Andy and DEPUTY

i made no personal attacks to anyone here and the closest i came to name calling was when i made mention of Moe,Larry and Shemp

i feel the way i responded was very well thought out on my part.their was alot of sarcasism intended though.if someone takes my posts wrong then i dont know what to say.thats the way it goes on these forums.im not sorry for any post i made here and if you think a personal atack was made than thats your problem

i like to visit Graybeards and will do nothing to spoil that for myself.i hope you feel the same way.better days will come and i hope you two guys have some good hunting in the days ahead

have a good day

mostlyaccurate · « **Reply #9 on:** December 05, 2004, 12:50:06 PM »

What's the ballistic coefficient of the SST?

DEPUTY · « **Reply #10 on:** December 05, 2004, 01:17:42 PM »

the 300 sst has .250 bc per hornady.

retrieverhunter · « **Reply #11 on:** December 05, 2004, 05:35:48 PM »

I have only shot EXPANDERS and Powerbelts and take the EXPANDERS hands down. I like the expansion of the Barnes and have been quite pleased with the penetration.

mostlyaccurate · « **Reply #12 on:** December 05, 2004, 08:45:45 PM »

What's the b.c. of the 250 grain SST?

DEPUTY · « **Reply #13 on:** December 06, 2004, 03:25:06 AM »

i belive the 250 has a bc of 150

jeff223 · « **Reply #14 on:** December 06, 2004, 04:55:49 AM »

DEPUTY may be right about this.i dont have a clue about the BC for the SSt or any of the Barnes bullets.there is a number you can call for Barnes and im sure they can help for info 1-800-574-9200.Hornady also has a 800 number that you can call for info.just check out their web site and the number is there.i called them other day about a singleshot pistol bullet they have but i didnt save the number

the SSTs will work for you and they do kill but what i am saying here is this.if you are hunting and have only one shot you might as well make it a good one(your best shot).the SST didnt have much weight retention and the Barnes bullets do.penetration isnt a big issue with a muzz loader anyway.they penatrate very good and the only way you will be able to recover a bullet from a deer ,unless you are very lucky, is to shoot the animal end to end if you know what i am saying.with a bullet that retains its weight will have good penetration.the Barnes open up down to 1000fps and will also hold together at max speed.they leave the biggest exit hole out of all the bullets so far.this is a big plus for the hunter and for wounded
game tracking.

a 250gr SST kill with a max load.this is my rifle and my son.he wanted another buck and i had he use my rifle.the SSTs do work but im going back to Barnes

DEPUTY · « **Reply #15 on:** December 06, 2004, 05:00:49 AM »

at the momment i just cant remember the bc of the 250 have used barnes in the past and in some of my other centerfire rifles. the sst jsut has a beeter bc for the longer range shooting. the banes just didnt group as well at extended ranges it kiss well up close though (125yds) and under

AndyHass · « **Reply #16 on:** December 06, 2004, 06:48:06 AM »

Most published BCs are somewhat inflated. The best way I have found is to back-extrapolate a BC from range shooting (ie use a program to recreate the trajectory you see on the range, and see what BC that is at). Some people have tried to do it using two chronographs, but only used a 100 yard range and produced numbers wildly different from what I see in the "real world".
That being said, the ROUGH BC of SSTs seems to be around .24 for the 200gr and .21 or so for the 250. I am more sure on the 200gr as I have more data there.
The Barnes is sub-2. My two friends that shoot it cannot get it to stabilize over 200 yards, but it's running out of energy there anyways.
If I loaded my gun and knew I was not going to shoot over 100 yards, I would likely go with a similar bullet like the XTP or PR Kieth Nose. But if I don't know that I will go with the SST since it will kill up close too...heart shots don't require much in the way of blood trail or massive damage.

Vapour · « **Reply #17 on:** December 06, 2004, 11:08:29 AM »

If only someone could sabot a bullet down to .338.

My ultimate hunting bullet would be a 250 or 300 grain .338 Match King with a BC's of .750 and .606 at normal muzzleloading velocities. Now that would retain some energy. Just make sure to hit the deer where intended.

jeff223 · « **Reply #18 on:** December 06, 2004, 12:03:02 PM »

now Andy im not trying to flame you here and im not trying to start something all over again but are you saying that you go for the heart shots?i shoot for the center mass of the kill zone(HEART<>LUNGS)i was tought this long ago when i started hunting deer.i am 50 now so you can do the math.now Andy im not flameing you and i want you to keep this in mind when i tell you this but (ONLY A FOOL GOES FOR THE HEART SHOT).if you misstated yourself above then i retract this.

i would like you to think this over some before you reply.also remember there may be new comers to the sport that hang here and i think they should be lead in the right direction.dont you?

Arrroman · « **Reply #19 on:** December 06, 2004, 02:24:21 PM »

Aim small shoot small.

The heart is a smaller target than the whole deer.

Good luck hunting!

AndyHass · « **Reply #20 on:** December 06, 2004, 03:00:37 PM »

My favorite line from "The Patriot"--aim small, miss small.
When you shoot at a deer, you should not be shooting at "the chest" or "the lungs" but rather a tuft of hair, the top of the fold behind the leg, etc etc. In other words, the smallest feature you can pick out on the deer. How can you expect to shoot 1 inch groups if you aim for all of a six inch target?
Maybe I understand you wrong and you mean to use such a mechanism to shoot for the lungs instead of the heart? A heart-shooter is not a fool...what are you going to hit if you miss the heart by a hair? Usually the aorta or the lungs. Either organ will put the deer down...the heart faster. Nothing in my experience drops a deer faster than shooting off the aorta and the top of the heart.
When I shot an open-sighted Traditions Deerhunter and Hornaday HTPs, I once went four consecutive seasons (9 deer) shooting every one in the heart at ranges from 20 to 120 yards. No misses. None of the deer made it more than 30 yards, and that one was at a full-out run when I shot it.
My Omega is capable of sub-inch groups either off a bench or the Harris bipod attached to it. Whenever possible I shoot off the bipod. The heart is about 3-4 inches across and 3-5 inches tall...that's a plenty large target to hit for a sub-inch gun off a steady rest.
Two of my three deer this year were lung-shot however. To zero the gun at 200 yards I am just under 5 inches high at 100...Even though I know that I have a hard time bringing myself to put the crosshairs under the belly since there is no "small feature to aim at" there. Since both of these deer were fairly close (60 and 120) the bullets went a few inches higher and into the lungs. The third was itching its leg with its teeth when I shot it and took it in the head....probably would have been in the front of the heard or front-lower lung otherwise.
Nothing at all wrong with a lung shot, but if you know your gun and you know your range there is nothing wrong with a heart shot either. "Center of mass" shooting is for self-defense. When I'm hunting, I want surgical precision as much as possible under such conditions.

AndyHass · « **Reply #21 on:** December 06, 2004, 03:03:03 PM »

Quote from: Vapour

If only someone could sabot a bullet down to .338.

My ultimate hunting bullet would be a 250 or 300 grain .338 Match King with a BC's of .750 and .606 at normal muzzleloading velocities. Now that would retain some energy. Just make sure to hit the deer where intended.

Hey...quit giving away my dream projects!
Hey Deputy, you think I could get a .358 1-12" twist barrel mated to an Ultimate? Then we'd just have to make the sabots to shoot .308 bullets... and move out of the shotgun-only zone.
When I have the cash in a couple years this will be my pet project I am sure.

DEPUTY · « **Reply #22 on:** December 06, 2004, 03:23:39 PM »

Hummmm ill ask the boys at the shop this week.
Andy check out the scope bases from ken farell! i have one for for my newest ultimate with 25moa built into the base! 600yds for paper might not be that far off! i have some calls into premier reticles and there are going to make me a scope with hashes set out to 700yds! on the horizontial for punching paper! once i get some more load data to them thinking 250 grains of pyro or t7 and the 260 or 285 grain bullet and see what happens ! maybe even just stay with the 300sst this summer will tell it all man we have to get together and punch some holes! some guys i now are using the shepard scope on there ultimates with the p-3 reticle and are making some head turning shots

Vapour · « **Reply #23 on:** December 07, 2004, 05:11:40 AM »

Just curious Deputy, but how much does a Premier Reticle cost?
Like is it worth it to by better glass with a basic reticle and have the improved reticle added after.

On the other note, why hasn't anyone made a fast twist muzzleloader barrel yet? Why are we shooting expensive muzzleloader projectiles when much cheaper (and superior) rifle bullets are available? Heck even gamekings give much better ballistic coefficients than SST's. If MMP can make a .50 to .357 sabot set why not .50 to .338. Combine this with a fast twist barrel and you're good to go.

DEPUTY · « **Reply #24 on:** December 07, 2004, 10:23:14 AM »

figure on spending about 1k for it or more depoending on power and tube! and hashes iam still not sure yet if it will happen! i might jsut stick with target knobs

retrieverhunter · « **Reply #25 on:** December 12, 2004, 04:31:41 PM »

For the money you are talking, you could own a Zeiss or Swarowski? I have abandoned Leupold and Burris for Zeiss (not the high dollar ones but the Conquests) and have gained about 30 minutes of shooting light in both morning and evening over Leupold and Burris. I have actually had less fogging with the Zeiss too. I am not trying to enflame anyone-just asking a question.

DEPUTY · « **Reply #26 on:** December 13, 2004, 03:46:08 AM »

i own two swarovskis ph series now nice really but i cant get custom hashes installed and the tds reticle is close real close. i might have my 6x24 burris for paper testing and just use a ph for the hunting although i have fallen in love with the monarch ucc gold it gives me jsut as much light as my ph series at half the cost :cry: