Ndravetsky
Active member
I probably wouldn’t shoot at an animal over 500 yards. I need more practice for anything longer.
Best grain bullet for elk. 7mm PRC
- Thread starter Ndravetsky
- Start date
Last year I built a 7 PRC with a 26" Proof on a Tikka action. I loaded it with the 170gr HHT with rl26 at 3130 fps. Shoots solid sub moa. I made my cartridge and bullet choice based on marketing. We have been beating the light for caliber high vel Hammer drum forever. Not because Hammers need to be run fast but because they can. We have been getting reputation that Hammers need to be run fast to work well. That is not true. Hammers have a wider window of working vel than any other bullet I know of. They work very well down to 1700-1800 fps (depending on which bullet) with full deformation and shedding of the nose. And for the most part no ceiling on max impact vel. Same weight retention throughout the range of impact vel. This means that we don't have any trouble with penetration on the high vel impacts that most bullets have trouble with. This eliminates the need to run heavy and slow in order to have good bullet performance at close or normal range hunting distances.
I tell people every day that the only wrong choice when choosing a Hammer Bullet is if we choose one that is not stable in the rifle's barrel twist. After that it is purely opinion or personal preference which bullet is best. As long as the bullet is fully stable the bullet will perform properly. If a hunter feels better about running a heavier bullet, then I believe he should. Confidence in your setup cannot be overlooked. If a hunter feels iffy about the pill he is running, then I believe his chances of something going wrong will increase due to human error.
All that said, the heavier bullets will have an advantage over the lighter bullets as the range increases. Generally speaking, this starts to matter about 500y out and becomes more critical as you go farther out.
Brian and I both ran heavy for caliber last season. Each shot a bull elk and cannot complain about the performance one ounce. My bull was hit high shoulder at 350y and dropped to the shot. As expected with a spin hit. So not much to glean from that but it worked perfectly. Brian shot his bull with the 160gr HHT from his 6.8 Western running 3050 fps. His bull was shot at 150y running away behind the shoulder and exited the off shoulder. Bull made it about 20y after the impact where he stopped running because he was sick. Brian stuck another hurried shot in him that was too far back and the bull was done. That was what I would call stellar performance on a big bull that was juiced up to run away. No high vel was needed with either of these bull elk.
As far as 8" twist stability with the 170gr HHT goes, we just sent my rifle up to Alaska with the Norther Hunter podcast guys to do some stability testing for us at sea level and cold temps. We sent the 170gr HHT as well as a prototype 176gr HHT. We were hoping to have it be a direct replacement for the 177gr HH. At sea level and 0* temp the 176gr HHT tumbles at 400y and the 170gr HHT had no issues out to 800y. As per the Miller formula for stability the 176gr HHT prototype was fully stable in the 8" twist at this extreme atmosphere. The formula is wrong and we are done trying to get heavier than the 170gr HHT. These bullets just get too long and have issues. These issues will likely show up in hunting situations and terminal performance even if they fly well. This is the same reason that the 177gr HH was discontinued.
Someone had said earlier that they were able to get the lighter bullets to shoot better than the 170gr HHT. I was wondering if the load with the 170gr HHT was shot at longer distances to see how accuracy was? I have a feeling the moa of the group may get better as the distance is increased. I think a lot of very good loads that don't seem so good at 100y are tossed.
I tell people every day that the only wrong choice when choosing a Hammer Bullet is if we choose one that is not stable in the rifle's barrel twist. After that it is purely opinion or personal preference which bullet is best. As long as the bullet is fully stable the bullet will perform properly. If a hunter feels better about running a heavier bullet, then I believe he should. Confidence in your setup cannot be overlooked. If a hunter feels iffy about the pill he is running, then I believe his chances of something going wrong will increase due to human error.
All that said, the heavier bullets will have an advantage over the lighter bullets as the range increases. Generally speaking, this starts to matter about 500y out and becomes more critical as you go farther out.
Brian and I both ran heavy for caliber last season. Each shot a bull elk and cannot complain about the performance one ounce. My bull was hit high shoulder at 350y and dropped to the shot. As expected with a spin hit. So not much to glean from that but it worked perfectly. Brian shot his bull with the 160gr HHT from his 6.8 Western running 3050 fps. His bull was shot at 150y running away behind the shoulder and exited the off shoulder. Bull made it about 20y after the impact where he stopped running because he was sick. Brian stuck another hurried shot in him that was too far back and the bull was done. That was what I would call stellar performance on a big bull that was juiced up to run away. No high vel was needed with either of these bull elk.
As far as 8" twist stability with the 170gr HHT goes, we just sent my rifle up to Alaska with the Norther Hunter podcast guys to do some stability testing for us at sea level and cold temps. We sent the 170gr HHT as well as a prototype 176gr HHT. We were hoping to have it be a direct replacement for the 177gr HH. At sea level and 0* temp the 176gr HHT tumbles at 400y and the 170gr HHT had no issues out to 800y. As per the Miller formula for stability the 176gr HHT prototype was fully stable in the 8" twist at this extreme atmosphere. The formula is wrong and we are done trying to get heavier than the 170gr HHT. These bullets just get too long and have issues. These issues will likely show up in hunting situations and terminal performance even if they fly well. This is the same reason that the 177gr HH was discontinued.
Someone had said earlier that they were able to get the lighter bullets to shoot better than the 170gr HHT. I was wondering if the load with the 170gr HHT was shot at longer distances to see how accuracy was? I have a feeling the moa of the group may get better as the distance is increased. I think a lot of very good loads that don't seem so good at 100y are tossed.
I guess I neglected to say that my personal favorite load in the 7PRC would be the 145gr Hammer HHT at 3400fps.
Also the higher the stability of the bullet the better they will perform on game. So, it's not like the fast twist barrel is wasted on lighter bullets. If I am building a 7mm of any kind it will get an 8" twist even if I don't plan to run anything heavier than the 118gr HHT. In fact I just ordered an 18" Proof barrel to build a 7-08 on a 307 action in a MDT folding stock. I am pretty sure I will not run anything heavier than 132gr HHT in this rig. I could run the 170gr HHT if I wanted to though.
choprzrul
Hammer Time Executive member
^^There's your answer OP^^
Zero at 250 yards, point and shoot to 300 yards, and 24" hold over at 500 yards. Plenty of fps and energy at 500 yards.....and enough margin out to 700 yards if the need arises:
Maybe this thread will help as well:
Thread 'Light Fast and Heavy Fast'
https://hammerbullets.com/hammertime/threads/light-fast-and-heavy-fast.296/
Thread 'Light Fast and Heavy Fast'
https://hammerbullets.com/hammertime/threads/light-fast-and-heavy-fast.296/
Ndravetsky
Active member
Thanks for the info.
Ndravetsky
Active member
Thanks for the info. I’ve always done my load testing at 200 yds. If I’m happy I shoot at 300 to double check. I have had several instances where the heavier bullets group better at 300 yds.
Ndravetsky
Active member
I ran the 145 LRX for years in my 7 RM. everything went flop. My friend turned me on to the hammer line and I’m digging the change in the bearing surface of the bullet that hammer has designed. My plan for now is to try the 162 hht and see how it shoots. If I can get it to group an inch at 200 yds and 3100-3200 fps I’d be very happy. If not I’ll probably try the 145’s. I don’t think the deer or elk will know the difference. Lol
Look at your output data section. This is where my hunting world revolves. Max Point Blank Range and Max Point Blank Range Zero. Zero the rifle at 350y and hold a 5" radius out to 412y without adjusting the hold and top of the back to 500y. Out to 400y all I have to do is concentrate on making the shot. No consideration of elevation. I don't have to think, just make the shot.
Yes Sir! No wrong answer here. You have enough twist to choose any of them. Shoot the one that feels best to you. I won't try and talk you out of any of them.
“I think a lot of very good loads that don't seem so good at 100y are tossed.”
Another good reason to shoot your ladders at minimum 200 yards. When I make up my loads I want to know the energy at 700 yards. I have taken elk at 500 and want to know I have enough energy to bring the meat home.
Ndravetsky
Active member
I have another thread about the 162 hht for the 7mm PRC. There's a guy on there working a load for the 162 hht and has been getting around 3000 fps with n165. I bought the PRC hoping to run heavier bullets at a decent speed. It seems to be the the conclusion so far that the 145hht and 153hht are getting the best results so far. Im always overthinking but realistically the copper bullets are longer than cup/core bullets for weight. I also hear you can drop down in weight cup/core vs copper and get the same energy.