# The pefect bullet?



## Elkoholic8 (Jan 15, 2008)

So if you had to pick one bullet (not necessarily 1 caliber) for deer and elk, what would that 1 bullet be? Barnes Tripple Shock, Accubonds, Core-lokts, any other one that performs great on all animals???


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

That's a tough one. I've used lots of Barnes X, Core-lokts, and others. And each one seems to have killed deer, elk, and bear just as quick as the other. It's more about shot placement than anything. That being said, I would have to go with Core-Lokts because they are a whole lot cheaper to shoot than the others.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

I like all copper bullets. Be it Barnes X or Berger VLD. They do cost a bit more to shoot but the price increase is minimal to me. I would say I put about 200 rounds through my 7mm a year. At $45 to $50 bucks a box for Federal Premium ammo with Barnes TSX bullets (i don't reload yet) I am spending $200 a year on ammo. That would include hunting so it's not that bad.


----------



## sawsman (Sep 13, 2007)

Nosler Partition.


----------



## Cooky (Apr 25, 2011)

sawsman said:


> Nosler Partition.


 Yup.


----------



## waspocrew (Nov 26, 2011)

Barnes TTSX seem to work well for me.


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

Barnes TTSX is my favorite right now. However, the new LRX is starting to make me lean more and more towards it. Same quality construction as a TTSX but more streamlined ogive and a bigger function window.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Nosler Ballistic


----------



## Al Hansen (Sep 7, 2007)

I always used the Hornady 7MM Mag 162 Grn. Soft Point Boat Tail. :O||:


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

sawsman said:


> Nosler Partition.


yep


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

sawsman said:


> Nosler Partition.


Ditto. I gave up on Barnes after two failed to expand.

-DallanC


----------



## gwailow (Jan 20, 2008)

DallanC said:


> sawsman said:
> 
> 
> > Nosler Partition.
> ...


Just out of curiosity, how do you know they failed to expand? I've shot hundreds of them and never once had a situation where it led me to believe they didn't expand....

Blown pedals off the bullet because I was shooting it too fast, yes...failed to expand, no.

Don't want to start an argument, just curious about how you know?


----------



## Frisco Pete (Sep 22, 2007)

There are _premium_ bullets with some mechanical means of controlling expansion like the Barnes TSX variations, Nosler Partition, Accubond, Swift Scirocco II etc. and there are _conventional simple cup-and-core_ bullets like the Core-Lokt, Hornady InterLock, A-Max, Speer Hot-Core, Ballistic Tip (& Silver Ballistic Tip) and others. Locking the lead core into the jacket is by very simple or often no means at all. Premium bullets go to great lengths to lock the core into the jacket. Sometimes by not using a core at all but a mono-metal design like Barnes all-copper.
There are even unusual designs like the VLD that opens up a bit later than just about any other bullet and seems to have an excellent effect on deer size game at least.

Of course the easier to manufacture cup-and-core types are cheaper than the boutique premium bullets so they are much cheaper.

Bullet engineers perforce must engineer their bullets to have a blend of expansion and penetration. This will also vary with impact velocity and range (lower velocity). Not everybody has the same idea on what this blend is, nor are all big game animals alike in size and toughness - let alone shot angle and distance to target. Factor in the huge variation in velocity between the various cartridges and bullet weights within that cartridge and you can see that the engineers have a real headache ahead of them. In addition, testing cannot really be extensively done on live big game creatures to the extent we would probably like.

Figure that the most hunted species in the U.S. is the whitetail and the most used cartridge is the 30-06. So while a 150-gr Core-Lokt or Ballistic Tip may work fine on whitetail at 100 yards from an '06, if you use a .300 Mag or faster RUM, then you will have explosive expansion and under-penetration. Use those same bullets on an angling elk with an '06 and you may not get the penetration you desire. Use a real "stiff" premium 180-gr bullet in the '06 and you may not get good expansion, but the same bullet in a .300 Mag might be wonderful. Go to a smaller caliber or lighter bullet in the same caliber and construction becomes more critical. Generally speaking, while an '06 can get away with lighter conventional bullets, a magnum should use heavy convention or preferably premium bullets - especially critical if you go with the lighter .30 cal weights.

So you can end up with categories. For example, Partitions and AccuBonds are engineered to stick together and retain around 60% of the original weight. Barnes TSX and some others are into the 90%+ retention area. They are often referred to as "deep divers".

There is no best answer, but one can assume that a premium bullet will be more reliable more of the time than a simple cup-and-core bullet. Even among cup-and-core bullets some are "softer" than others. This may even vary with caliber. A Ballistic Tip is relatively "soft" unless it is a .338 version. _Fshrmn_ can attest to the softness of a 100-gr Ballistic Tip from a 25-05 on an antelope. To much expansion too soon when bone was hit - a superficial wound. Too soft/fast/close. On the other hand, from personal experience, an AccuBond from a .270 WSM offered an excellent blend of expansion on antelope at a similar range. Penetration was complete. It also worked as advertised on mule deer end-to-end with 60% weight retention. A light conventional bullet may have been too explosive and a heavy "deep diver" too much penetration at the cost of expansion> 
Yet a similar 180-gr Ballistic Tip from an '06 performed excellently when another friend shot an elk at 400 yards. Velocity was down and the softer bullet expanded well. Even on deer he noticed better blended performance with the Ballistic Tip than his previous 180 Hot-Core Speer at normal to long range. So we see the effect of velocity and range on terminal ballistics.

You can see than picking a bullet is a matter of matching game size, likely game/shot distance, bullet weight in caliber, velocity of the caliber (standard or magnum); the size of the bore (small/large) the need for penetration - deep or normal - and a lot of other factors come into play.

Actually there are a lot of good premium bullets out there from a lot of companies, so we live in the golden age of hunting bullets. Those companies engineer their hunting bullets for specific performance. One should always examine why a bullet "failed" in light of some of the above ideas, and tailor future bullet choice based on that and research. There are also other factors besides the bullet at work - shot placement for example.
Always remember that the bullet _causes a blood pressure loss_ (systolic loss) and that loss often takes some bit of time for that lowering of pressure to reach the brain and cause the animal to shut down. So it is _normal_ for a big game animal to NOT drop right in its tracks when hit.

BTW - a dead deer or elk is... dead! If the game is dead on the ground, one can hardly point to the bullet as having failed at its task can you? At just what point did it "fail"?

I am positive that I could be happy with a lot of other bullets besides the AccuBond in my magnum rifle, and that the best choice for it, or even a bullet that works just as well in another of my non-magnum calibers could be any number of bullets and bullet weights out there.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

Frisco Pete said:


> Use those same bullets on an angling elk


I thought elk were vegetarians...


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

gwailow said:


> DallanC said:
> 
> 
> > Don't want to start an argument, just curious about how you know?


It was pretty clear from a post mortem analysis. Bullet missed all bones going between ribs, through heart and out the other side. Heart had a pin-hole going though it with some shock "cracks" from the 3500fps bullet. There was no evidence of petals fragementing and tearing off through the lungs (which I would also catagorize as a failure, IMO), pinhole exiting the far side.

Dont get me started on accuracy either... I tried hundreds of them over 7 different types of powder in all kinds of different amounts to try and get anything to shoot reasonable well. Nothing would shoot as well as a plain old factory box of Remington Corelok's (.75" groups).

I have a bunch of 7mm barnes bullets, XLC's, Tripleshocks etc I'm going to sell or trade very soon as I do spring cleaning. I'm done with them. Its back to accubonds and partitions, they just work.

-DallanC


----------



## Frisco Pete (Sep 22, 2007)

So the Barnes killed the animal - but yet failed?
I can understand that you don't want such a deep diver bullet but rather one with more expansion sooner - or that they might not be as accurate as some others - but fail? I think that would be the wrong terminology here.

Another analogy would be an autopsy on a dead deer where you find that your conventional cup-and-core bullet shed its jacket. This happened to me with a 100-gr Hornady BTSP in a .243 years ago; and yes, I changed bullets and at the time screamed "fail" - having been thoroughly indoctrinated in the perfect mushroom idea by the gun media - but it was only later reading a thoughtful article on bullets by John Barsness, that I realized that while the bullet _failed to reach my expectations_ - it in _nowise_ failed to bring down the deer!


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Frisco Pete said:


> So the Barnes killed the animal - but yet failed?


I said it failed to expand.

IMO I was really lucky I hit the heart on the way through, otherwise there is a strong chance that elk would have gotten away possibly to die elsewhere. I want a huge gapping bloody hole in one side and out the other when I shoot a critter.

-DallanC


----------



## tapehoser (Sep 10, 2007)

Nosler Partition.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Any premium offering from Nosler. Partition, Accubond, or etip. I like lots of other bullets, but I would say that one of these would probably be "perfect" for any situation.------SS


----------



## AF CYN (Mar 19, 2009)

I shoot a 7mm-08 and have killed elk, deer, and pronghorn with Nosler Partitions, Federal Fusions, and Nosler AccuBonds. They all worked very well. I haven't retrieved bullets from everything I've shot, so I can't give feedback on weight retention. Like others have mentioned, I probably rely more on the Fusions because they are less expensive. 

I wish I had more money. I'd love to try out the Winchester XP3, Swift Scirocco, Berger and others.


----------



## campfire (Sep 9, 2007)

I vote for the Nosler Partition, also, and this is why. First I believe that most modern premium bullets will do the job very well. But that was not the original question. It was, "is there a "perfect" bullet?" Well there may not be a "perfect" bullet but the NP and other bullets of similar construction like A frame, ect. come the closest BECAUSE they have the best balance between BOTH expansion and penetration because it is really 2 bullets in one. The front part of the bullet expands easily so you have good expansion but the back part of the bullet is essentially a fully jacketed bullet and provides great penetration. Even if the front part of the bullet blows completely up the back part just keeps on going. Of course, it would be better expansion if the whole bullet were to expand and it would be better penetration if the whole bullet were to penetrate well instead of just half. But that just doesn't exist. So the NP and similarly constructed bullets still provide the best of both worlds.


----------



## jpolson (Jun 12, 2011)

nosler partition


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

*Re: The pefect Mullet?*

I don't think there is really any debate to be had; the Skullet:








I guess I am not on top of all of the latest mullet styles because I have not ever heard of the kinds that were mentioned on this thread, but the names sound cool.


----------

