(Originally posted 12/31/2021)
richcotte
Platinum Member
Several posts have really got me thinking about the lighter/faster concept and I'm liking the idea. But, it got me to wondering where the break-point is in each caliber. Everything from Steve's thread on Ballistic Comparison to Farleg's Velocity Brackets prove out the concept of lighter/faster as long as you can keep the FPS up, out to your desired range.
I know y’all have played around with pushing the 101HBO in .30 cal to see how fast it will go and ultimately decided it was too light for most applications other than what it was designed for. But, has there been any discussion on it by different calibers? What’s the lightest you can go on a particular caliber and still be an ethical weight/speed combo on an animal? Of course it will vary based on the size/toughness of your intended target, but it seems to me that in every caliber there's probably a point where it gets too light.
Let's use the .224 as an example. (Doesn't really matter what cartridge) For white tail and antelope, using cup and core, I might go as low as 55gr, but would most likely stay in the 62gr range. However, if I switch to HHs, how light can I go in .224 and still be effective and ethical? Can I go all the way down to a 35HH or a 33SH?
Maybe there’s an equation that answers the question..I just don’t know.
harperc
Global Moderator
I wish!
There have been several attempts to mathematically predict minimums, and help comparisons. ft/lbs, pounds feet, K.O values.
I look at the question more as a per cartridge/caliber evaluation. In the past I've trended heavier, in some part to offset inconsistent bullet performance. With Hammer I'm comfortable dropping down in weight to consistently do the same job.
In my 6mm's I'm looking at the 55 grains to do what I've historically asked of that rifle. Mostly small does, and antelope. I don't intend to make it my new elk or bear rifle. Some local bullet weight restrictions might weigh in here as well.
Not likely at this point to try game animals with a .224. Time left to me, as well as still holds a bit of stigma to me. Fair or not there it is.
At the other end of the safe the 248 HH easily replaces the 270-350 grain bullets I've used in my .375. Although the 270 LH is a good one, the 248 is likely better at moderate range.
Going into the woods with multi species tags in hand, I'm likely to default to a load for the worst case scenario. Although
in the past that meant more likely a .338, or .375, good bullets make my .30-06 a better choice than ever.
Those living in places with generous seasons, and tags will likely get comfortable faster.
Generally I guess it starts with being honest about the parameters one really operates in. If there aren't a lot of Cape/Asiatic Buffalo (hyperbole) where you hunt, a .500 might not be the first best choice. On the other hand if you're on a once in a lifetime trip out west for elk, you should go more than marginally armed.
richcotte
Platinum Member
Couldn't agree more harperc especially when stepping off into the woods where I might cross a bigger critter.
For me personally, the question started around the two cartridges I run in AR-15s, 5.56 & 6.8SPC. Historically they've both been geared more toward the 2-legged critters, but if I want to use either for light game or varmint, how light/fast can I go and still be effective.
Guess I'm just gonna have to get some samples from Steve next time I'm in Kalispell and run the numbers...
I guess in the end, just like with most of the other questions on here, it really depends on what the shooter is looking to do...
harperc
Global Moderator
Dec 31, 2021 at 4:24pm richcotte said:
Do you have a minimum legal?
Personally I'd feel better with one of the more intense .224's.
In the 6.8 I would be pretty comfortable on the smaller big game with the 85 grain.
rh300um
Platinum Member
I’d have no problems shooting a 64 gr HH in a 223 AR at your described game with the right twist barrel and load.
Just my 2cents
Happy New Year
joe16
Platinum Member
That sounded convincing.
Just my two cents
Joe
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday rich & others
Hmmm how light is to light
I dont think we can just go by weight alone
Let's take the 101 blackout as a prime example
If we break this pill down of where it has not met the triangles parameters
The shank dosent have enough weight to keep penertrating @ultra high velocities
Now if we were to take some of the petal weight & shift that to the shank im sure it would be a whole different outcome also if the hp was reduced to 1.5mm that would help but most likely to the detriment of the blackout uses
Another example is the 375 cal deadblow vrs hh the shanks actual weight is so critical yet a 279 DB is heavier than the 248 HH yet the 248 is supreme on penertration & performance
Now let's take the 224 & is the 33 or 35 gr to light for whitetail or like Im going to say no on the outside parameters but it must be getting close to being the same as the 101 B O with the exception the shanks weight of around 26/28gr should be capable of getting through to the vitals from most angles on a whitetail or likebut insurance wise i think a 30gr plus shank (in 22 cal ) will be better insurance & in the hh design the petals are going to help out that bit more so on those sums id say the 52hh &51ah is going to be a really good balance but once again if its the longer shots that may present or taken the heavies will reign supreme
Also backing this up is from a incredible amount of 50/55 gr cup & core kills with a 222&223 ive witnessed but shot placement is paramount in 22cal imo
All this above is fascinating to me also I like to no where the line is drawn & the next step in the way we look @ things im sure will involve twist rates & hence SF
Also we haven't got into boat tail vrs flat base projectiles yet alone the actual designs
The tinkerers are about to find out a bit more soon on some lightweights & maybe we might get closer to finding out how light is to light
So much to learn & the party is just beginning
Cheers
edd
Full Member
richcotte said:
However, if I switch to HHs, how light can I go in .224 and still be effective and ethical? Can I go all the way down to a 35HH or a 33SH?
If you are looking for a "yes" or "no" answer, put me in the "no" column.
richcotte
Platinum Member\
If you are looking for a "yes" or "no" answer, put me in the "no" column.
Nope, not looking for something that simple. Yes the question developed around two rifles/calibers that I own and want to develop loads for, but the real question is about finding the lower limit of this equation for any/all calibers. Just because Hammer makes a 101 gr .308 pill, doesn't mean it's effective on animals in cartridges other than what it was designed for.
So, let's change the example to .308 Win... The 124HHs look like they'll make an excellent light game load that will shoot fast and flat out to a few hundred yards. What will the 101HBO do out of a 308Win? Is it too light? Does it have enough retained shank weight? Again, just an example that I bring up because we already have some good data on that pill tanks to testing done by farleg and others.
riceman
Global Moderator
This 101 bk hh has been around for yrs just not mentioned much til we started seeing how fast we could go.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
So many bullets - so little test time (except for Farleg). He is the only one with unlimited "targets of opportunity!"
Some of us feel fortunate to be able to "test" on 10-15 deer a year. Most others, far less
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday
here’s a little more weight to the lightweight side or less of it
these are some old 222 loaded with 40 gr 22 magnum pills ( they have a slight different makeup to the 22 magnum pills of today just like the 22 PowerPoint that are now made in the USA you guys messed them up )
we use to be able to buy these from Winchester Australia in a 10500 case before they closed down & in the 222 they were my go to pill & ive shot 100’s of thousands of them on a fairly wide variety of animals the biggest 1 bovine ( head shot ) to rabbits & starlings now on deer this pill from a 22-250 is a lot like the 101 blackout in the rum yet move that to 222 velocity & it’s a very nice pill & in the 22 hornet it shines ( its why I’ve still got these as I need to pull the pills for the hornet don’t own 222 anymore)
on fallow & red deer ,goats & pigs this pill is as light as we found we could go with carefully placed shots (no racking ) & still got pretty darn good results but for a more consistent pill the 50 or 55 gr sp were a better option if angles increased or big bones / plates encountered in faster 224 bigger pills were better
so I just look @ it this way on everything else a drop in weight has been easy to do from a conventional cup & core to hammers
mmm just ticking
all this aside I still am one if in doubt go a bigger pill or even better a bigger calibre
the smaller calibers just don’t have a lot of insurance behind them but can be lethal if placed correctly
cheers
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday
I’d say I messed up on the 35hh as that should have around a 21 gr shank & that is very much on the light side of shanks & while I think it will kill a whitetail I’m reserved it will be a consistent performer but then I look @ the hh design & my mind goes hmmm this is possible but I’m still liking the 50 gr plus sizes
I don’t have the 35hh yet but I’m pretty sure it won’t be long as a new import permit has just gone to our police
Cheers
ButterBean
Platinum Member
Yep, The 101 wasn't to light it just needs tweaking, Redesigned as Farleg described and it would be devastating
Steve Davis
Administrator
Yes, Rich Coyle was the first one that I remember using the 101g HBO in a high powered rifle. He was definitely ahead of the curve. I remember thinking he was nuts! He quickly proved me wrong by Hammering deer with great results. He was running that bullet 1000 fps slower than what has been done recently showing a line that is difficult to cross. From our perspective making a bullet dedicated to ultra high velocity impacts would potentially result in Hunters using them at normal vel impacts with poor results. Same issues that were delt with twenty years ago with conventional bullets and the 3000 fps mark. Heck there are still many bullets out there that struggle with 3000 fps.
So the task is to come up with a 100g 30 cal that won't pancake at 4000 fps but still works at normal velocity. Ok.
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday Steve
Finst off rich
he saw the light yes he wasn't nuts , visionary i say
Steve I dont think you have got your head fully wrapped around this true lightweight side of things yet & im trying not to come across as being a smart ar$e in saying this
Its probably more fitting for a private conversation but also I think its worth putting this out for others to comment on to see if its not just a few of us pushing a barrow
Just bare with me its not on the design side yep you got that covered & you will get that 100 gr or so pill in 30 cal to work pretty easy im sure & scaled to other calibers it will also work out also
that I've got no doubts about
Where I think you haven't got the full handle on these true lightweights is from a marketing position ( ill eat my words if you have got this in the pipeline & accept my apology)
Where these true lightweights excel is preformace wise on game but more importantly the performance of the shooter & the gains in their skills & confidence is paramount
The 2 groups of people these will help the most is people like Joe , kip & Carl etc ( sorry guys to single you lot out ) & the new to the sport of hunting/shooting kids to adults
This is range dependent of coarse & pretty limited also has to be in calibre & weight laws where applicable
The first group will get that straight away as they can use their firearms without the fear of recoil & already kknow the in & outs of what's needed @ what ranges
The second group is the big one for me( although I'm also greedy as I'm getting closer to group 1 )
If we can get a better killing pill that has drastically reduced recoil the confidence of a new hunter is to a level way above the norm
Yes we can load down in the conventional way or go a smaller calibre no doubt on that but im buggered if ive seen anything kill with authority like some of these lightweights let alone a true lightweight ( has limitations animals & range )
Here's where im from
My son & i are Working with a current batch of group 2 ( started last year ) & range work is the first stage with a 22lr then work up through the lines & different combo's within in ea outfit
They get to choose the calibre they want & what ccombo they want to hunt with & by far the most popular is the lightweights & when asked why they all say recoil & flatness of trajectory is what a couple also like
Still a way to go with these groups but so far on animals the impact to tipping is very impressive & confidence is extremely high although a couple have suffered from buck fever or big roo syndrome
This group has gone to way bigger calibres than previous groups & the steps forward they have made is extremely encouraging in such a short space of time
Sorry for the rant its just something im passionate about , no offence intended to anyone
Maybe applicable to some others not so much
Thoughts ?
Cheers
joe16
Platinum Member
Group 1 here that loves to hunt with group 2 and I like the idea of not having to change rifles. Years ago I retired my big magnums now I hunt them freely thank you hammer. My 300 Magnums are pushing 120 levers and 130 shock hammers. I'm currently waiting on the 135 special order from Steve for my 375s. My 65 06 is pushing the 85 with phenomenal performance on game. My little 22 Beanmoore is smoking a long with the 35 h.h.. I can't say enough about the Performance of hammers light for caliber!!
So much so that three of my friends now shoot Hammer bullets.2 6.5 Beaners
shooting the 85s. A 7 Mag shooting the 101 and last but not least a 308 shooting the 120 lever. Granted the last two aren't true light weights but the gentlemen enjoy their rifles more now!!
Hammer bullets are simply awesome LGB
Joe
richcotte
Platinum Member
I’ve got to jump on the bandwagon with farleg on this one, especially with the younger crowd of new hunters.
We work primarily with youth, mentoring them through the learning process of becoming hunters and helping them transition from 22 LR to truly effective hunting calibers is always a challenge. We have tried a few “reduced recoil” options out there and they work great at the range, but the on-game performance has been less than exciting.
I think Fordy may be onto something, but for most of our work, we have to stay with factory loaded ammo for liability reasons. How amazing would it be if Hammer could partner with a well known ammo manufacture to come up with truly effective, light for caliber hunting ammunition with light recoil and devastating performance.
BFD
Senior Member
This has been my question as well, richcotte. I prefer to "fool around and find" myself. Where is the point of diminishing returns of light & fast?
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday bfd
we most definitely welcome any contributions / info you can come up with
it’s all great in the learning curve for us all
cheers
BFD
Senior Member
This is where the adventure begins! 7-08. 308, 300WM, 9.3X62, 303 Brit, OPE! 303! Daggum. Where is the 303 Brit bullet? .311-.312? Even Americans love some No.4MK2 Lee-Enfield Fazakerley guns! I love my blonde Irish Contract rifle!
joe16
Platinum Member
BFD
Fazakerley???? Is that anything like farlegs 500 Freddley?
Sorry BFD I couldn't help myself.
If you don't mind sir what is a Fazakerley.
BFD
Senior Member
Name of the town in England where the Enfield rifle plant was located. I know, coming from me you probably expected something with a bit more fanfare! LOL
les
Senior Member
BFD,
I have an Ispore. The last Enfield actions made. It came from India. It is a fun shooter.
stubing
New Member
Hey men,
I've been tinkering with my 338-06 for several years and finally got it to shoot with 213gr HH. It runs at 2750 fps and on paper that makes it a 600 yard elk rifle in my book (1850 fps and 1600 pounds of energy). That said, the 175gr HH (just spit-balling 3100 fps) is also adequate for 600 yds (1850 fps and 1350 pounds of energy). The 175 is quickly running out of gas at this distance fwiw. Being an old schooler, I'll go with the 213 all day long.
All the best,
Stu
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Stubing,
Just curious. I shoot the 338 Sherman, which is an "improved" 338/06. With 205 Hammer Hunters I get over 3000 fps using N 550. Don't know what your load is.
les
Senior Member
This is a great thread! As I have been trying to get my head around the way Hammers perform, I've come to some conclusions. They might be wrong, but it is where I'm going. Most of my game harvested over the past 12 years has been with a bow. Not many foot-pounds of energy there! My last two elk went less than 40 yards after being hit. My last deer shot with a rifle was with a 270 Weatherby at 473 yards measured (I had a spotter). I missed judged the wind. My elevation was good. I shot at his butt to compensate for the cross-wind. I hit him in the head and he dropped where he was shot. As much as the "Long Range Hunting Group" don't like Hammer bullets, they are correct that the boiler room and the path to it are not much different between an elk and a deer. I'm tired of watching bullets into ballistic gel. Sure it gives information, but it isn't a critter. After playing around with several Hammer bullets, I've pretty much settled on 92 grain or 115 grain Power Hammer in my 6.5 Creedmoor this fall. Hammer has designed a bullet that will destroy the boiler room and they are very accurate, so if I do my part, a quick ethical kill! I'm convinced that foot pounds of energy is an illusion of power. The number one consideration is placement of the bullet. The second is does it destroy the heart - lung area upon impact. 44 years ago I was hunting elk in Oregon. I was packing my elk out when I heard a shot about 20 yards from me. It was followed by 4 more quick shots. I dropped the cape and head and headed over to see the commotion. The hunter had a Browning BAR in 8mm Remington Mag. The bull was 80 yards away and heading over the ridge. The dude yelled, "I'm out of ammo shoot him." I dropped to one knee steadied my 30/06 AI and put one in his head and the elk dropped like a rock. To make a long conversation short, he blamed his gun. We walked over to the elk and I helped him field dress it. He hit the elk five times, not one shot in a vital spot. That elk had absorbed about 20,000 foot pounds of energy from the 8mm. If he got over the ridge, he wasn't going to stop anytime soon and would have died a horrible death. Contrast that with my last two elk shot with arrows with less than 100 foot pounds of energy and died within 50 yards of being hit. That is what has me so excited about the Hammer Bullets. They are designed to be fast and accurate, and then provide terminal performance to destroy the heart-lung area. Foot pounds of energy in my opinion is a poor measure of effectiveness.
ButterBean
Platinum Member
I Concur 100%
gltaylor
Global Moderator
I also agree 100%
On another note - you hit on something some of us are fooling with. In the 6.5 calibers, it's beginning to look like the 85 - 90ish grain weights are going to be the best weight range, across the board, regardless of distances!
edd
Full Member
When bullets penetrate tissue, the injury is directly related to the amount of energy transferred to the target.
littlebighorn
Senior Member
No question that hitting an animal in the vitals is key.
But I think the foot pound argument is also about how a bullet performs, once it hits the vitals.
If you shot animals with an expandable broadhead that didn't open up, or worse yet, with a blunt that didn't penetrate, I suspect even hitting the vitals might not be so lethal.
Jack O'Connor preached, many years ago, when arguing with big caliber guys like Elmer Keith that by using a smaller caliber (less kick) you will probably shoot more accurately and therefore put the bullet in the vitals.
But even Hammers have to open up correctly to do their job.
In my eyes, the Hammer design is about as close to perfect as anyone has come up with so far. That's whey I now shoot them exclusively in all my hunting rifles.
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday George
going to put you on the spot & a bit of going through your notes will be needed
If you wouldn’t mind would you please post those velocity bracket charts up of Riceman’s 26 nosler as it sticks out like a sore thumb
also the creedmore shooting the same pills ( I hope it was you that did this chart up as I remember the lighter pills were superior in that also )
yes ea caliber has a sweet spot range of pills that will work the most efficiently across a pretty broad range it’s finding out if it covers the triangles parameters that is the key ( hard part ) & if we can just clear our heads to allow the possibility to occur our fears will be replaced with wow
I also understand it’s extremely hard to convert across if your putting a deer/ elk in the freezer for your family & that’s the only chance you have to do it for the year
If so I say you’ve already made the best choice in using hammers the rest may come in little steps
clearing our heads is so hard & maybe ask ourselves this
if a grendel guy gets great results with x weight pill why can’t I get better results with the same pill in a larger capacity case
cheers
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday stu
if your shot was @600 ea & every time you are 100% correct but what’s your most likely range as both will kill @600 im sure of that now the 175 will be more potent ( hypothetical @ this stage until data comes in ) upto a certain range then the 2 pills you mentioned will cross where this is I’ve not done up the charts to see where potentially this will occur but it will be there
the triangles parameters is key & velocity brackets go a long way to showing us what’s potentially possible
clearing our heads is the hardest step & I see you’ve done that by choosing hammers so little steps from here & we will work out what’s possible so please share your results as you go
no offence intended
cheers
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday edd
I’ve seen you mention energy a few times now it’s no secret I believe it’s crap but I also like the discussion as I may have missed something also a lot of others still use energy of a basis of their decision/s
so if possible would you please share a little insight into your thoughts as not only to help me understand your point it’s to hopefully show other members that it has merit or not
if we just see a one liner for energy now & then vrs the responses that other members put up dismissing energy the discussion is wayed more in favour of the later
now this may be your intention to show why energy is crap & a different way to show it but ea to their own if not a little substance behind it would give it more weight to the discussion or should I say energy
cheers
gltaylor
Global Moderator
OK Farleg,
I got rained out this afternoon, so nothing better to do than to bite the bullet. When you ask for something, I know I'm in trouble
.
Actually, a few of us have been discussing this. It appears that in some calibers there may be a sweet spot. The 6.5 may be one of them.
Attached I have graphs of different 6.5 bullet weights in 3 different range cartridges (capacity and velocity). It's interesting that in each rifle, the lighter weights do better than "heavies" out to 500yds. I never shoot past that, so I haven't chased that data down. If I were to shoot further than that, I personally would go to a bigger caliber and bullet weight - but that's just me. I've seen how much wind can move little bullets even at 4-500 yds. Not for me .
OK All, have at it. You decide what you see
Drop Chart Comparison 26N 6.5Max 6.5CMt.pdf (66.44 KB)
hammerbullets.boards.net
richcotte
Platinum Member
Dec 31, 2021 at 4:24pm richcotte said:
Do you have a minimum legal?
Personally I'd feel better with one of the more intense .224's.
In the 6.8 I would be pretty comfortable on the smaller big game with the 85 grain.
Nope, no minimum.
farleg
Platinum Member
gltaylor said:
OK Farleg,
When you ask for something, I know I'm in trouble .
Hmmmm
Only just getting warmed up
thanks for putting up the charts up & spending the time doing them
I was surprised by the 26n results & I would’ve gone a touch higher weight (110) in the first instance but firmly back to reality now , just the of what are those pills capable of taking
lastly do I dare to ask for some angle shots George & only 1 interests me in that zoomie
cheers
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Farleg -
You are incorrigible!
16+ inches at (most) all angles
with the zoomies.
Haven't done the Texas Heart shot yet, and Don't Know How
.
Mumble,mumble, mumble
joe16
Platinum Member
Mumble mumble mumble.
I love this place
les
Senior Member
I just ordered some 6.5mm 92 gr. Power Hammers to play with. A bit of my "old school" coming out as I have always liked flat based bullets. I've got the 85's coming too. Lots of exploring to do! VitaVuori 540 is looking really good as great powder for the lighter Hammers in 6.5mm. Lots of fun doing load development before hunting season.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
les,
Not "old school". Benchrest shooters have known for years that flat based bullets are more consistently accurate than boat tails. 300 and in, you'll see exactly NO boat tail bullets listed in load data from matches
And by the way, you're gonna LOVE the 85s!
gltaylor
Global Moderator
OK all. I just updated the post from yesterday on comparisons of velocity in four 6.5mm cartridges.
I cleaned up the charts from yesterday and added data for the 6.5-06 Ack Imp.
In every single instance, the lighter / faster bullets outperform heavies up to 500 yds. No contest.
This has been quite eye-opening for a bunch of us!
All comments welcome
ButterBean
Platinum Member
And folks thought I was crazy, I love this place
richcotte
Platinum Member
Just ‘cause you’re crazy ButterBean don’t mean you’re not right…
edd
Full Member
gltaylor said:
In every single instance, the lighter / faster bullets outperform heavies up to 500 yds. No contest.
How are you defining "outperform"?
gltaylor
Global Moderator
"Outperform" as to higher impact velocities, (hence better tissue destruction and penetration based on data gatheted with Hammers) and less drop.
edd
Full Member
Do you really believe an 85 grain bullet going 2690 fps will have better penetration and destroy more tissue than a 123 gr bullet going 2616 fps?
les
Senior Member
Thanks for all your work! It is hard to get your mind around it! It is kind of like getting one's mind around the controlled havoc that the Hammer is designed to employ one you have hit your critter. I've shot two deer with bullets that employ uncontrolled havoc. The one deer was OK because it totally liquidated the lungs and destroyed the heart. The other was a high shoulder shot and the deer dropped where it was shot. When I turned it over, the whole other side front quarter was destroyed. I just love the idea of a bullet breaking up into 5 pieces. Since my self-imposed range is around 500 yards, I'm going lighter. In my book much past 500 yards is a whole different game. I'm not saying it is good or bad, just really different. In all my years of hunting, I've only shot 3 animals near the 500 yard mark, two deer and one elk. Two were under ideal conditions, no wind and a solid rest. The third was more luck than skill due to the wind. Like I said a whole different game. If I had to do the third one over, I'm pretty sure I could have closed the distance a lot before taking the shot. I've got some ladder loads for the 97 grain Absolute Hammer loaded up. If I can get the 3400 fps that Steve talks about, then I'm in a quandary between it and the 85 grainer. There is a lot of work to be done with the new design. I keep checking the Absolute Hammer thread, but it has been pretty silent as of late.
joe16
Platinum Member
Nice work GL!!!
Thank you for your time sir!! Just wondering when you're going to bring up the charts for the 22 calibers, 24 calibers, 25 calibers, 270 calibers, 284 calibers, you get my point. I love you George, can't wait.
In all seriousness. This "IS" extremely eye-opening. As our mate from Down Under says "people clear your heads". Go fast and go light is not just a theme, it's been validated, thank you for your time GL & Riceman.
This place is awesome
Joe
PS Butterbean With a hairdo like that, we would never think you're crazy!
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Good question, and good point.
You chose the extreme fringe of where the 6.5s are "running out of gas" (in my opinion). Will they still kill? Yes. Both. At that differential in speed, both would probably be about equal in tissue damage and penetration. Based upon autopsies performed, there is no distinguishable difference (in Hammers) in degree of tissue damage between those two 2 bullets at same speed. Penetration length difference (in inches) would likely also be minimal.
If you go back to 400 yds, there's a notable difference. 200 fps difference in impact velocity Is noticeable both in tissue damage and penetration.
I'm not good enough or comfortable shooting 500 yds or beyond. They're safe if they're that far. IF I ever had to shoot that far, as said previously, I'd go with a larger caliber, heavier bullet and still high velocity, but that's just me.
Maybe I should modify the charts and go to 400 yds - where the difference in light/fast is more remarkable
One other thought. I'm a bit prejudiced and have been "corrupted"
. I'm a full on speed demon now. I try not to get below the second level of the velocity brackets for impact speeds. That's why I'm so curious about current work with the 26 Nosler (riceman, and soon Farleg).
gltaylor
Global Moderator
For you, Joe....
More mumble, mumble, mumble
Eric Wilson
Full Member
Here’s a question that seems applicable to this topic. If you have a 9.3x62 shooting the two available hammer bullets which are the same design:
258 shock hammer 2600fps
240 shockhammer 2750fps
These two have approximately the same velocity at 500yds. So between the muzzle and 500yds which one would you pick? Which one will have more “shock value” on the animal? Which one will have more penetration on heavy animals?
I took the 258gr to Africa last year and killed 12 animals ranging in size from springbok to waterbuck, zebra, and Sable. I had no problems with the performance, but wondered if the lower weight with the same twist might give more shock value and penetration due to higher SG.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Eric,
None of the guys that shoot bigger/heavier bullets have responded. Farleg has put forward some interesting stuff previously based upon his tests. Suggest you read some of his data.
The gist of Farlegs results (if I'm remembering right) is that 200fps can make a difference in penetration depth.
All I fool with is much lighter bullets than yours. Again, 200fps increase in vel can be seen to cause somewhat more tissue damage, but not much. To get exponential increase in tissue destruction, you need to have a much greater % increase in velocity. According to the literature, an increase of 1000fps doubles the prior impact energy, for what that's worth.
I'm not the best person to address this. I've gone very heavily to max velocity and smaller pills for what I hunt.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Eric,
I missed one of your questions. I'm also a huge fan of highest possible stability factors. We've demonstrated over and over that SF well in excess of 2 (up to 6 or more) greatly benefit straight line penetration through bone and muscle.
You didn't mention any trouble with straight penetration?
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday Eric
I’ll put a vote in for the 240 & could I have a look @ your pictures of the doe warthog & waterbuck or Nyala please as it may shed some light on the subject
Sorry for short reply but I’ll come back once I’ve got time ( next week most likely) to give my 2 cents worth
Cheers
Eric Wilson
Full Member
quartering away. Entrance, center of shoulder, exit front of shoulder ran 75yds and died
warthog 100-140pounds frontal shot angling downward 25yds
Finishing shot on Sable. Entrance - brisket, 40 yds.
Unfortunately I didn’t take more pictures in the skinning shed. All recovered bullets looked like this with no riveting of the meplat. Only 3 bullets were recovered. They were from angling shots or finishers on zebra, waterbuck, and sable
farleg
Platinum Member
Thanks Eric for the pics
can’t help myself this is interesting stuff
the shank is a great one so glad you caught that as it’s a big key to this equation I believe
To me I’m seeing a little difference in your meplat than the ones I’ve caught or others I’ve seen around your impact the petals seem to be ripped more like a broached pill for which we know that’s not the case
where I have seen this type of thing occurring on some pills sometimes when your sf is not correct now this has only come to my attention after the great minds on here got me ticking & understanding how & what sf does so I’ll take no credit for it’s the guys who helped me understand more that I hope to help others as the only thing I can add to that is it’s not concrete but when we get a higher sf the meplat cleans up to that riveting you talk of especially if velocity is added
all petals have shed so that’s no issue but what I’m seeing is nothing to do with velocity energy but the sf & to me it’s showing up on your animals also especially the bigger ones
the 240 to me will fit the bill better for sure & let’s just take a step back to the 375 it’s showed us going from a 281 to a 248 actually increased preformance all round on the triangle for which going to a higher sf has straightened out out the 281 @ the end of its journey ( also the 329 )
I may have gone over this previously but I just can’t see by dropping 18/20 gr of pill
roughly 10/12 gr shank & 8/10 of petals 2 to 2-5 gr ea will make any difference on most animals as you’ve already got ample to kill well yet also now the sf will drive deeper & rivet that meplat is my thoughts
I’ll come back to velocity on your 2 choices as it’s a interesting situation once we get to where you are but for now
im going to have to get some zzzz nut
please pull my assumptions apart anyone else or yourself Eric
accept my apology if a interpreter is needed & no proof read
I will come back as soon as I can & do you have that doe pic or am I mistaken & was taken by someone else
cheers
Eric Wilson
Full Member
this was the first large animal killed with a 9.3mm hammer bullet. This is a whitetail doe shot at about 93 yds quartering to me. Dropped dead on the spot.
farleg
Platinum Member
Thanks Eric
Great stuff not seeing anything major here or minor like I thought I may, dam it
Time to put my thinking cap on
I’ll come back Ron
Cheers
les
Senior Member
Eric - Thanks for the pictures. That is the kind of killing action that moved me to the Hammer Bullets.
kneedeep
Senior Member
Good morning Eric,
I am curious of the hollow point depth between these two pills. Would you provide the HP of both?
Thanks,
kneedeep
Eric Wilson
Full Member
I don’t have the 240’s but I’ll have to see if I can get them measured when I get some next week.
les
Senior Member
Back again to "How light is too light?" I have a very nice load with my 6.5 Creedmoor with the 124 grain HH. It is right at 2850 feet. Today I went to the range to shoot the light weights. I'll give the best first! I found a very sweet load with the 97 grain Absolute Hammer. Very accurate, no pressure signs, and reasonably fast. Extreme spread was 10 fps for 5 shots, average speed was 3436 fps. The formula was 44.5 grains of RL 15, CCI Mag primers, Lapua brass, OAL 2.69 inches with a quarter turn on the Lee Crimp Die. I was amazed at what the bullet did to a gallon jug of water at 100 yards! Explosion is the only word I can come up with. My best speed with good groups with the 85 grain was 3,347 feet per second. My best load with the 92 grain Power Hammer averaged 3,407 feet and was very accurate.
The blessing and the bane of Hammer Bullets is too many choices! I have a lot more work to do with the 85 gainers. However, today the Absolute Hammer in 97 grains shined. I had pressure issues with my one load with the 107 Absolute Hammer. I'm trying to keep this short. So to recap:
85 grain -3347fps very accurate no recoil!
97 grain AH - 3436fps very accurate felt good!
92 grain PH - 3407fps very accurate - obliterated a gallon jug too!
So is the 97 grain Absolute Hammer too light for Elk? The 124HH falls in line with what would be used if one is thinking conventionally. I'm trying to learn to think in the Hammer Paradigm. What I am most pleased is I am getting 89fps more speed than the 85 grain zoomie. Oh the other good news is I drew my elk tag! So, any opinions on which bullet? Next on the fun parade is working up some loads for the 115 grain Power Hammer.
Addendum: After a cup of coffee this morning and looking over my notebook again. I did have an excellent load with the 85. I'm tossing out one of the readings on my old Chrony Chronograph. Average speed with 4 bullets was 3574. spread was 2fps. Load was Lapua brass, CCI Mag primers, 44gr. of VV N540, OAL 2.575 with a 1/4 turn crimp with a Lee Crimping die. So I got the 85 above the 3500 barrier. Is it too light for an Elk?
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Les,
Please share all of your rifle & load details so I can post.
Thanks.
les
Senior Member
Is there a place that I can see the standard format? I'm still pretty new to the forum. Rifle is a Tika T3 light with a 24 inch barrel.
riceman
Global Moderator
Go to the thread, "share your hammer loads" and post there.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
As Ricemam said, follow the format:
Cal/rifle, barrel brand/length/twist, brass, primer oal and whether crimped, PDR band used, powder, load(s) worked up, velocities, any notes on es/sd/groups, etc.
Thanks
Eric Wilson
Full Member
kneedeep
I am curious of the hollow point depth between these two pills. Would you provide the HP of both?
Thanks,
kneedeep[/quote]
The 258 gr SH measures 0.636” deep
richcotte
Platinum Member
Several posts have really got me thinking about the lighter/faster concept and I'm liking the idea. But, it got me to wondering where the break-point is in each caliber. Everything from Steve's thread on Ballistic Comparison to Farleg's Velocity Brackets prove out the concept of lighter/faster as long as you can keep the FPS up, out to your desired range.
I know y’all have played around with pushing the 101HBO in .30 cal to see how fast it will go and ultimately decided it was too light for most applications other than what it was designed for. But, has there been any discussion on it by different calibers? What’s the lightest you can go on a particular caliber and still be an ethical weight/speed combo on an animal? Of course it will vary based on the size/toughness of your intended target, but it seems to me that in every caliber there's probably a point where it gets too light.
Let's use the .224 as an example. (Doesn't really matter what cartridge) For white tail and antelope, using cup and core, I might go as low as 55gr, but would most likely stay in the 62gr range. However, if I switch to HHs, how light can I go in .224 and still be effective and ethical? Can I go all the way down to a 35HH or a 33SH?
Maybe there’s an equation that answers the question..I just don’t know.
harperc
Global Moderator
I wish!
There have been several attempts to mathematically predict minimums, and help comparisons. ft/lbs, pounds feet, K.O values.
I look at the question more as a per cartridge/caliber evaluation. In the past I've trended heavier, in some part to offset inconsistent bullet performance. With Hammer I'm comfortable dropping down in weight to consistently do the same job.
In my 6mm's I'm looking at the 55 grains to do what I've historically asked of that rifle. Mostly small does, and antelope. I don't intend to make it my new elk or bear rifle. Some local bullet weight restrictions might weigh in here as well.
Not likely at this point to try game animals with a .224. Time left to me, as well as still holds a bit of stigma to me. Fair or not there it is.
At the other end of the safe the 248 HH easily replaces the 270-350 grain bullets I've used in my .375. Although the 270 LH is a good one, the 248 is likely better at moderate range.
Going into the woods with multi species tags in hand, I'm likely to default to a load for the worst case scenario. Although
in the past that meant more likely a .338, or .375, good bullets make my .30-06 a better choice than ever.
Those living in places with generous seasons, and tags will likely get comfortable faster.
Generally I guess it starts with being honest about the parameters one really operates in. If there aren't a lot of Cape/Asiatic Buffalo (hyperbole) where you hunt, a .500 might not be the first best choice. On the other hand if you're on a once in a lifetime trip out west for elk, you should go more than marginally armed.
richcotte
Platinum Member
Couldn't agree more harperc especially when stepping off into the woods where I might cross a bigger critter.
For me personally, the question started around the two cartridges I run in AR-15s, 5.56 & 6.8SPC. Historically they've both been geared more toward the 2-legged critters, but if I want to use either for light game or varmint, how light/fast can I go and still be effective.
Guess I'm just gonna have to get some samples from Steve next time I'm in Kalispell and run the numbers...
I guess in the end, just like with most of the other questions on here, it really depends on what the shooter is looking to do...
harperc
Global Moderator
Dec 31, 2021 at 4:24pm richcotte said:
Do you have a minimum legal?
Personally I'd feel better with one of the more intense .224's.
In the 6.8 I would be pretty comfortable on the smaller big game with the 85 grain.
rh300um
Platinum Member
I’d have no problems shooting a 64 gr HH in a 223 AR at your described game with the right twist barrel and load.
Just my 2cents
Happy New Year
joe16
Platinum Member
That sounded convincing.
Just my two cents
Joe
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday rich & others
Hmmm how light is to light
I dont think we can just go by weight alone
Let's take the 101 blackout as a prime example
If we break this pill down of where it has not met the triangles parameters
The shank dosent have enough weight to keep penertrating @ultra high velocities
Now if we were to take some of the petal weight & shift that to the shank im sure it would be a whole different outcome also if the hp was reduced to 1.5mm that would help but most likely to the detriment of the blackout uses
Another example is the 375 cal deadblow vrs hh the shanks actual weight is so critical yet a 279 DB is heavier than the 248 HH yet the 248 is supreme on penertration & performance
Now let's take the 224 & is the 33 or 35 gr to light for whitetail or like Im going to say no on the outside parameters but it must be getting close to being the same as the 101 B O with the exception the shanks weight of around 26/28gr should be capable of getting through to the vitals from most angles on a whitetail or likebut insurance wise i think a 30gr plus shank (in 22 cal ) will be better insurance & in the hh design the petals are going to help out that bit more so on those sums id say the 52hh &51ah is going to be a really good balance but once again if its the longer shots that may present or taken the heavies will reign supreme
Also backing this up is from a incredible amount of 50/55 gr cup & core kills with a 222&223 ive witnessed but shot placement is paramount in 22cal imo
All this above is fascinating to me also I like to no where the line is drawn & the next step in the way we look @ things im sure will involve twist rates & hence SF
Also we haven't got into boat tail vrs flat base projectiles yet alone the actual designs
The tinkerers are about to find out a bit more soon on some lightweights & maybe we might get closer to finding out how light is to light
So much to learn & the party is just beginning
Cheers
edd
Full Member
richcotte said:
However, if I switch to HHs, how light can I go in .224 and still be effective and ethical? Can I go all the way down to a 35HH or a 33SH?
If you are looking for a "yes" or "no" answer, put me in the "no" column.
richcotte
Platinum Member\
If you are looking for a "yes" or "no" answer, put me in the "no" column.
Nope, not looking for something that simple. Yes the question developed around two rifles/calibers that I own and want to develop loads for, but the real question is about finding the lower limit of this equation for any/all calibers. Just because Hammer makes a 101 gr .308 pill, doesn't mean it's effective on animals in cartridges other than what it was designed for.
So, let's change the example to .308 Win... The 124HHs look like they'll make an excellent light game load that will shoot fast and flat out to a few hundred yards. What will the 101HBO do out of a 308Win? Is it too light? Does it have enough retained shank weight? Again, just an example that I bring up because we already have some good data on that pill tanks to testing done by farleg and others.
riceman
Global Moderator
This 101 bk hh has been around for yrs just not mentioned much til we started seeing how fast we could go.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
So many bullets - so little test time (except for Farleg). He is the only one with unlimited "targets of opportunity!"
Some of us feel fortunate to be able to "test" on 10-15 deer a year. Most others, far less
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday
here’s a little more weight to the lightweight side or less of it
these are some old 222 loaded with 40 gr 22 magnum pills ( they have a slight different makeup to the 22 magnum pills of today just like the 22 PowerPoint that are now made in the USA you guys messed them up )
we use to be able to buy these from Winchester Australia in a 10500 case before they closed down & in the 222 they were my go to pill & ive shot 100’s of thousands of them on a fairly wide variety of animals the biggest 1 bovine ( head shot ) to rabbits & starlings now on deer this pill from a 22-250 is a lot like the 101 blackout in the rum yet move that to 222 velocity & it’s a very nice pill & in the 22 hornet it shines ( its why I’ve still got these as I need to pull the pills for the hornet don’t own 222 anymore)
on fallow & red deer ,goats & pigs this pill is as light as we found we could go with carefully placed shots (no racking ) & still got pretty darn good results but for a more consistent pill the 50 or 55 gr sp were a better option if angles increased or big bones / plates encountered in faster 224 bigger pills were better
so I just look @ it this way on everything else a drop in weight has been easy to do from a conventional cup & core to hammers
mmm just ticking
all this aside I still am one if in doubt go a bigger pill or even better a bigger calibre
the smaller calibers just don’t have a lot of insurance behind them but can be lethal if placed correctly
cheers
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday
I’d say I messed up on the 35hh as that should have around a 21 gr shank & that is very much on the light side of shanks & while I think it will kill a whitetail I’m reserved it will be a consistent performer but then I look @ the hh design & my mind goes hmmm this is possible but I’m still liking the 50 gr plus sizes
I don’t have the 35hh yet but I’m pretty sure it won’t be long as a new import permit has just gone to our police
Cheers
ButterBean
Platinum Member
Yep, The 101 wasn't to light it just needs tweaking, Redesigned as Farleg described and it would be devastating
Steve Davis
Administrator
Yes, Rich Coyle was the first one that I remember using the 101g HBO in a high powered rifle. He was definitely ahead of the curve. I remember thinking he was nuts! He quickly proved me wrong by Hammering deer with great results. He was running that bullet 1000 fps slower than what has been done recently showing a line that is difficult to cross. From our perspective making a bullet dedicated to ultra high velocity impacts would potentially result in Hunters using them at normal vel impacts with poor results. Same issues that were delt with twenty years ago with conventional bullets and the 3000 fps mark. Heck there are still many bullets out there that struggle with 3000 fps.
So the task is to come up with a 100g 30 cal that won't pancake at 4000 fps but still works at normal velocity. Ok.
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday Steve
Finst off rich
he saw the light yes he wasn't nuts , visionary i saySteve I dont think you have got your head fully wrapped around this true lightweight side of things yet & im trying not to come across as being a smart ar$e in saying this
Its probably more fitting for a private conversation but also I think its worth putting this out for others to comment on to see if its not just a few of us pushing a barrow
Just bare with me its not on the design side yep you got that covered & you will get that 100 gr or so pill in 30 cal to work pretty easy im sure & scaled to other calibers it will also work out also
that I've got no doubts about
Where I think you haven't got the full handle on these true lightweights is from a marketing position ( ill eat my words if you have got this in the pipeline & accept my apology)
Where these true lightweights excel is preformace wise on game but more importantly the performance of the shooter & the gains in their skills & confidence is paramount
The 2 groups of people these will help the most is people like Joe , kip & Carl etc ( sorry guys to single you lot out ) & the new to the sport of hunting/shooting kids to adults
This is range dependent of coarse & pretty limited also has to be in calibre & weight laws where applicable
The first group will get that straight away as they can use their firearms without the fear of recoil & already kknow the in & outs of what's needed @ what ranges
The second group is the big one for me( although I'm also greedy as I'm getting closer to group 1 )
If we can get a better killing pill that has drastically reduced recoil the confidence of a new hunter is to a level way above the norm
Yes we can load down in the conventional way or go a smaller calibre no doubt on that but im buggered if ive seen anything kill with authority like some of these lightweights let alone a true lightweight ( has limitations animals & range )
Here's where im from
My son & i are Working with a current batch of group 2 ( started last year ) & range work is the first stage with a 22lr then work up through the lines & different combo's within in ea outfit
They get to choose the calibre they want & what ccombo they want to hunt with & by far the most popular is the lightweights & when asked why they all say recoil & flatness of trajectory is what a couple also like
Still a way to go with these groups but so far on animals the impact to tipping is very impressive & confidence is extremely high although a couple have suffered from buck fever or big roo syndrome
This group has gone to way bigger calibres than previous groups & the steps forward they have made is extremely encouraging in such a short space of time
Sorry for the rant its just something im passionate about , no offence intended to anyone
Maybe applicable to some others not so much
Thoughts ?
Cheers
joe16
Platinum Member
Group 1 here that loves to hunt with group 2 and I like the idea of not having to change rifles. Years ago I retired my big magnums now I hunt them freely thank you hammer. My 300 Magnums are pushing 120 levers and 130 shock hammers. I'm currently waiting on the 135 special order from Steve for my 375s. My 65 06 is pushing the 85 with phenomenal performance on game. My little 22 Beanmoore is smoking a long with the 35 h.h.. I can't say enough about the Performance of hammers light for caliber!!
So much so that three of my friends now shoot Hammer bullets.2 6.5 Beaners
shooting the 85s. A 7 Mag shooting the 101 and last but not least a 308 shooting the 120 lever. Granted the last two aren't true light weights but the gentlemen enjoy their rifles more now!!Hammer bullets are simply awesome LGB
Joe
richcotte
Platinum Member
I’ve got to jump on the bandwagon with farleg on this one, especially with the younger crowd of new hunters.
We work primarily with youth, mentoring them through the learning process of becoming hunters and helping them transition from 22 LR to truly effective hunting calibers is always a challenge. We have tried a few “reduced recoil” options out there and they work great at the range, but the on-game performance has been less than exciting.
I think Fordy may be onto something, but for most of our work, we have to stay with factory loaded ammo for liability reasons. How amazing would it be if Hammer could partner with a well known ammo manufacture to come up with truly effective, light for caliber hunting ammunition with light recoil and devastating performance.
BFD
Senior Member
This has been my question as well, richcotte. I prefer to "fool around and find" myself. Where is the point of diminishing returns of light & fast?
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday bfd
we most definitely welcome any contributions / info you can come up with
it’s all great in the learning curve for us all
cheers
BFD
Senior Member
This is where the adventure begins! 7-08. 308, 300WM, 9.3X62, 303 Brit, OPE! 303! Daggum. Where is the 303 Brit bullet? .311-.312? Even Americans love some No.4MK2 Lee-Enfield Fazakerley guns! I love my blonde Irish Contract rifle!
joe16
Platinum Member
BFD
Fazakerley???? Is that anything like farlegs 500 Freddley?
Sorry BFD I couldn't help myself.
If you don't mind sir what is a Fazakerley.
BFD
Senior Member
Name of the town in England where the Enfield rifle plant was located. I know, coming from me you probably expected something with a bit more fanfare! LOL
les
Senior Member
BFD,
I have an Ispore. The last Enfield actions made. It came from India. It is a fun shooter.
stubing
New Member
Hey men,
I've been tinkering with my 338-06 for several years and finally got it to shoot with 213gr HH. It runs at 2750 fps and on paper that makes it a 600 yard elk rifle in my book (1850 fps and 1600 pounds of energy). That said, the 175gr HH (just spit-balling 3100 fps) is also adequate for 600 yds (1850 fps and 1350 pounds of energy). The 175 is quickly running out of gas at this distance fwiw. Being an old schooler, I'll go with the 213 all day long.
All the best,
Stu
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Stubing,
Just curious. I shoot the 338 Sherman, which is an "improved" 338/06. With 205 Hammer Hunters I get over 3000 fps using N 550. Don't know what your load is.
les
Senior Member
This is a great thread! As I have been trying to get my head around the way Hammers perform, I've come to some conclusions. They might be wrong, but it is where I'm going. Most of my game harvested over the past 12 years has been with a bow. Not many foot-pounds of energy there! My last two elk went less than 40 yards after being hit. My last deer shot with a rifle was with a 270 Weatherby at 473 yards measured (I had a spotter). I missed judged the wind. My elevation was good. I shot at his butt to compensate for the cross-wind. I hit him in the head and he dropped where he was shot. As much as the "Long Range Hunting Group" don't like Hammer bullets, they are correct that the boiler room and the path to it are not much different between an elk and a deer. I'm tired of watching bullets into ballistic gel. Sure it gives information, but it isn't a critter. After playing around with several Hammer bullets, I've pretty much settled on 92 grain or 115 grain Power Hammer in my 6.5 Creedmoor this fall. Hammer has designed a bullet that will destroy the boiler room and they are very accurate, so if I do my part, a quick ethical kill! I'm convinced that foot pounds of energy is an illusion of power. The number one consideration is placement of the bullet. The second is does it destroy the heart - lung area upon impact. 44 years ago I was hunting elk in Oregon. I was packing my elk out when I heard a shot about 20 yards from me. It was followed by 4 more quick shots. I dropped the cape and head and headed over to see the commotion. The hunter had a Browning BAR in 8mm Remington Mag. The bull was 80 yards away and heading over the ridge. The dude yelled, "I'm out of ammo shoot him." I dropped to one knee steadied my 30/06 AI and put one in his head and the elk dropped like a rock. To make a long conversation short, he blamed his gun. We walked over to the elk and I helped him field dress it. He hit the elk five times, not one shot in a vital spot. That elk had absorbed about 20,000 foot pounds of energy from the 8mm. If he got over the ridge, he wasn't going to stop anytime soon and would have died a horrible death. Contrast that with my last two elk shot with arrows with less than 100 foot pounds of energy and died within 50 yards of being hit. That is what has me so excited about the Hammer Bullets. They are designed to be fast and accurate, and then provide terminal performance to destroy the heart-lung area. Foot pounds of energy in my opinion is a poor measure of effectiveness.
ButterBean
Platinum Member
I Concur 100%
gltaylor
Global Moderator
I also agree 100%
On another note - you hit on something some of us are fooling with. In the 6.5 calibers, it's beginning to look like the 85 - 90ish grain weights are going to be the best weight range, across the board, regardless of distances!
edd
Full Member
When bullets penetrate tissue, the injury is directly related to the amount of energy transferred to the target.
littlebighorn
Senior Member
No question that hitting an animal in the vitals is key.
But I think the foot pound argument is also about how a bullet performs, once it hits the vitals.
If you shot animals with an expandable broadhead that didn't open up, or worse yet, with a blunt that didn't penetrate, I suspect even hitting the vitals might not be so lethal.
Jack O'Connor preached, many years ago, when arguing with big caliber guys like Elmer Keith that by using a smaller caliber (less kick) you will probably shoot more accurately and therefore put the bullet in the vitals.
But even Hammers have to open up correctly to do their job.
In my eyes, the Hammer design is about as close to perfect as anyone has come up with so far. That's whey I now shoot them exclusively in all my hunting rifles.
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday George
going to put you on the spot & a bit of going through your notes will be needed
If you wouldn’t mind would you please post those velocity bracket charts up of Riceman’s 26 nosler as it sticks out like a sore thumb
also the creedmore shooting the same pills ( I hope it was you that did this chart up as I remember the lighter pills were superior in that also )
yes ea caliber has a sweet spot range of pills that will work the most efficiently across a pretty broad range it’s finding out if it covers the triangles parameters that is the key ( hard part ) & if we can just clear our heads to allow the possibility to occur our fears will be replaced with wow
I also understand it’s extremely hard to convert across if your putting a deer/ elk in the freezer for your family & that’s the only chance you have to do it for the year
If so I say you’ve already made the best choice in using hammers the rest may come in little steps
clearing our heads is so hard & maybe ask ourselves this
if a grendel guy gets great results with x weight pill why can’t I get better results with the same pill in a larger capacity case
cheers
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday stu
if your shot was @600 ea & every time you are 100% correct but what’s your most likely range as both will kill @600 im sure of that now the 175 will be more potent ( hypothetical @ this stage until data comes in ) upto a certain range then the 2 pills you mentioned will cross where this is I’ve not done up the charts to see where potentially this will occur but it will be there
the triangles parameters is key & velocity brackets go a long way to showing us what’s potentially possible
clearing our heads is the hardest step & I see you’ve done that by choosing hammers so little steps from here & we will work out what’s possible so please share your results as you go
no offence intended
cheers
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday edd
I’ve seen you mention energy a few times now it’s no secret I believe it’s crap but I also like the discussion as I may have missed something also a lot of others still use energy of a basis of their decision/s
so if possible would you please share a little insight into your thoughts as not only to help me understand your point it’s to hopefully show other members that it has merit or not
if we just see a one liner for energy now & then vrs the responses that other members put up dismissing energy the discussion is wayed more in favour of the later
now this may be your intention to show why energy is crap & a different way to show it but ea to their own if not a little substance behind it would give it more weight to the discussion or should I say energy
cheers
gltaylor
Global Moderator
OK Farleg,
I got rained out this afternoon, so nothing better to do than to bite the bullet. When you ask for something, I know I'm in trouble
.Actually, a few of us have been discussing this. It appears that in some calibers there may be a sweet spot. The 6.5 may be one of them.
Attached I have graphs of different 6.5 bullet weights in 3 different range cartridges (capacity and velocity). It's interesting that in each rifle, the lighter weights do better than "heavies" out to 500yds. I never shoot past that, so I haven't chased that data down. If I were to shoot further than that, I personally would go to a bigger caliber and bullet weight - but that's just me. I've seen how much wind can move little bullets even at 4-500 yds. Not for me
.OK All, have at it. You decide what you see
Drop Chart Comparison 26N 6.5Max 6.5CMt.pdf (66.44 KB)
How light is too light??? | Hammer Time
Several posts have really got me thinking about the lighter/faster concept and I'm liking the idea. But, it got me to wondering where the break-point is in each caliber. Everything fr
hammerbullets.boards.net
richcotte
Platinum Member
Dec 31, 2021 at 4:24pm richcotte said:
Do you have a minimum legal?
Personally I'd feel better with one of the more intense .224's.
In the 6.8 I would be pretty comfortable on the smaller big game with the 85 grain.
Nope, no minimum.
farleg
Platinum Member
gltaylor said:
OK Farleg,
When you ask for something, I know I'm in trouble
.Hmmmm
Only just getting warmed up
thanks for putting up the charts up & spending the time doing them
I was surprised by the 26n results & I would’ve gone a touch higher weight (110) in the first instance but firmly back to reality now , just the of what are those pills capable of taking
lastly do I dare to ask for some angle shots George
& only 1 interests me in that zoomie cheers
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Farleg -
You are incorrigible!
16+ inches at (most) all angles
with the zoomies.Haven't done the Texas Heart shot yet, and Don't Know How
.Mumble,mumble, mumble
joe16
Platinum Member
Mumble mumble mumble.
I love this place
les
Senior Member
I just ordered some 6.5mm 92 gr. Power Hammers to play with. A bit of my "old school" coming out as I have always liked flat based bullets. I've got the 85's coming too. Lots of exploring to do! VitaVuori 540 is looking really good as great powder for the lighter Hammers in 6.5mm. Lots of fun doing load development before hunting season.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
les,
Not "old school". Benchrest shooters have known for years that flat based bullets are more consistently accurate than boat tails. 300 and in, you'll see exactly NO boat tail bullets listed in load data from matches
And by the way, you're gonna LOVE the 85s!
gltaylor
Global Moderator
OK all. I just updated the post from yesterday on comparisons of velocity in four 6.5mm cartridges.
I cleaned up the charts from yesterday and added data for the 6.5-06 Ack Imp.
In every single instance, the lighter / faster bullets outperform heavies up to 500 yds. No contest.
This has been quite eye-opening for a bunch of us!
All comments welcome
ButterBean
Platinum Member
And folks thought I was crazy, I love this place
richcotte
Platinum Member
Just ‘cause you’re crazy ButterBean don’t mean you’re not right…
edd
Full Member
gltaylor said:
In every single instance, the lighter / faster bullets outperform heavies up to 500 yds. No contest.
How are you defining "outperform"?
gltaylor
Global Moderator
"Outperform" as to higher impact velocities, (hence better tissue destruction and penetration based on data gatheted with Hammers) and less drop.
edd
Full Member
Do you really believe an 85 grain bullet going 2690 fps will have better penetration and destroy more tissue than a 123 gr bullet going 2616 fps?
les
Senior Member
Thanks for all your work! It is hard to get your mind around it! It is kind of like getting one's mind around the controlled havoc that the Hammer is designed to employ one you have hit your critter. I've shot two deer with bullets that employ uncontrolled havoc. The one deer was OK because it totally liquidated the lungs and destroyed the heart. The other was a high shoulder shot and the deer dropped where it was shot. When I turned it over, the whole other side front quarter was destroyed. I just love the idea of a bullet breaking up into 5 pieces. Since my self-imposed range is around 500 yards, I'm going lighter. In my book much past 500 yards is a whole different game. I'm not saying it is good or bad, just really different. In all my years of hunting, I've only shot 3 animals near the 500 yard mark, two deer and one elk. Two were under ideal conditions, no wind and a solid rest. The third was more luck than skill due to the wind. Like I said a whole different game. If I had to do the third one over, I'm pretty sure I could have closed the distance a lot before taking the shot. I've got some ladder loads for the 97 grain Absolute Hammer loaded up. If I can get the 3400 fps that Steve talks about, then I'm in a quandary between it and the 85 grainer. There is a lot of work to be done with the new design. I keep checking the Absolute Hammer thread, but it has been pretty silent as of late.
joe16
Platinum Member
Nice work GL!!!
Thank you for your time sir!! Just wondering when you're going to bring up the charts for the 22 calibers, 24 calibers, 25 calibers, 270 calibers, 284 calibers, you get my point. I love you George, can't wait.
In all seriousness. This "IS" extremely eye-opening. As our mate from Down Under says "people clear your heads". Go fast and go light is not just a theme, it's been validated, thank you for your time GL & Riceman.
This place is awesome
Joe
PS Butterbean With a hairdo like that, we would never think you're crazy!
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Good question, and good point.
You chose the extreme fringe of where the 6.5s are "running out of gas" (in my opinion). Will they still kill? Yes. Both. At that differential in speed, both would probably be about equal in tissue damage and penetration. Based upon autopsies performed, there is no distinguishable difference (in Hammers) in degree of tissue damage between those two 2 bullets at same speed. Penetration length difference (in inches) would likely also be minimal.
If you go back to 400 yds, there's a notable difference. 200 fps difference in impact velocity Is noticeable both in tissue damage and penetration.
I'm not good enough or comfortable shooting 500 yds or beyond. They're safe if they're that far. IF I ever had to shoot that far, as said previously, I'd go with a larger caliber, heavier bullet and still high velocity, but that's just me.
Maybe I should modify the charts and go to 400 yds - where the difference in light/fast is more remarkable
One other thought. I'm a bit prejudiced and have been "corrupted"
. I'm a full on speed demon now. I try not to get below the second level of the velocity brackets for impact speeds. That's why I'm so curious about current work with the 26 Nosler (riceman, and soon Farleg).gltaylor
Global Moderator
For you, Joe....
More mumble, mumble, mumble
Eric Wilson
Full Member
Here’s a question that seems applicable to this topic. If you have a 9.3x62 shooting the two available hammer bullets which are the same design:
258 shock hammer 2600fps
240 shockhammer 2750fps
These two have approximately the same velocity at 500yds. So between the muzzle and 500yds which one would you pick? Which one will have more “shock value” on the animal? Which one will have more penetration on heavy animals?
I took the 258gr to Africa last year and killed 12 animals ranging in size from springbok to waterbuck, zebra, and Sable. I had no problems with the performance, but wondered if the lower weight with the same twist might give more shock value and penetration due to higher SG.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Eric,
None of the guys that shoot bigger/heavier bullets have responded. Farleg has put forward some interesting stuff previously based upon his tests. Suggest you read some of his data.
The gist of Farlegs results (if I'm remembering right) is that 200fps can make a difference in penetration depth.
All I fool with is much lighter bullets than yours. Again, 200fps increase in vel can be seen to cause somewhat more tissue damage, but not much. To get exponential increase in tissue destruction, you need to have a much greater % increase in velocity. According to the literature, an increase of 1000fps doubles the prior impact energy, for what that's worth.
I'm not the best person to address this. I've gone very heavily to max velocity and smaller pills for what I hunt.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Eric,
I missed one of your questions. I'm also a huge fan of highest possible stability factors. We've demonstrated over and over that SF well in excess of 2 (up to 6 or more) greatly benefit straight line penetration through bone and muscle.
You didn't mention any trouble with straight penetration?
farleg
Platinum Member
Gday Eric
I’ll put a vote in for the 240 & could I have a look @ your pictures of the doe warthog & waterbuck or Nyala please as it may shed some light on the subject
Sorry for short reply but I’ll come back once I’ve got time ( next week most likely) to give my 2 cents worth
Cheers
Eric Wilson
Full Member
quartering away. Entrance, center of shoulder, exit front of shoulder ran 75yds and died
warthog 100-140pounds frontal shot angling downward 25yds
Finishing shot on Sable. Entrance - brisket, 40 yds.
Unfortunately I didn’t take more pictures in the skinning shed. All recovered bullets looked like this with no riveting of the meplat. Only 3 bullets were recovered. They were from angling shots or finishers on zebra, waterbuck, and sable
farleg
Platinum Member
Thanks Eric for the pics
can’t help myself this is interesting stuff
the shank is a great one so glad you caught that as it’s a big key to this equation I believe
To me I’m seeing a little difference in your meplat than the ones I’ve caught or others I’ve seen around your impact the petals seem to be ripped more like a broached pill for which we know that’s not the case
where I have seen this type of thing occurring on some pills sometimes when your sf is not correct now this has only come to my attention after the great minds on here got me ticking & understanding how & what sf does so I’ll take no credit for it’s the guys who helped me understand more that I hope to help others as the only thing I can add to that is it’s not concrete but when we get a higher sf the meplat cleans up to that riveting you talk of especially if velocity is added
all petals have shed so that’s no issue but what I’m seeing is nothing to do with velocity energy but the sf & to me it’s showing up on your animals also especially the bigger ones
the 240 to me will fit the bill better for sure & let’s just take a step back to the 375 it’s showed us going from a 281 to a 248 actually increased preformance all round on the triangle for which going to a higher sf has straightened out out the 281 @ the end of its journey ( also the 329 )
I may have gone over this previously but I just can’t see by dropping 18/20 gr of pill
roughly 10/12 gr shank & 8/10 of petals 2 to 2-5 gr ea will make any difference on most animals as you’ve already got ample to kill well yet also now the sf will drive deeper & rivet that meplat is my thoughts
I’ll come back to velocity on your 2 choices as it’s a interesting situation once we get to where you are but for now
im going to have to get some zzzz nut
please pull my assumptions apart anyone else or yourself Eric
accept my apology if a interpreter is needed & no proof read
I will come back as soon as I can & do you have that doe pic or am I mistaken & was taken by someone else
cheers
Eric Wilson
Full Member
this was the first large animal killed with a 9.3mm hammer bullet. This is a whitetail doe shot at about 93 yds quartering to me. Dropped dead on the spot.
farleg
Platinum Member
Thanks Eric
Great stuff not seeing anything major here or minor like I thought I may, dam it
Time to put my thinking cap on
I’ll come back Ron
Cheers
les
Senior Member
Eric - Thanks for the pictures. That is the kind of killing action that moved me to the Hammer Bullets.
kneedeep
Senior Member
Good morning Eric,
I am curious of the hollow point depth between these two pills. Would you provide the HP of both?
Thanks,
kneedeep
Eric Wilson
Full Member
I don’t have the 240’s but I’ll have to see if I can get them measured when I get some next week.
les
Senior Member
Back again to "How light is too light?" I have a very nice load with my 6.5 Creedmoor with the 124 grain HH. It is right at 2850 feet. Today I went to the range to shoot the light weights. I'll give the best first! I found a very sweet load with the 97 grain Absolute Hammer. Very accurate, no pressure signs, and reasonably fast. Extreme spread was 10 fps for 5 shots, average speed was 3436 fps. The formula was 44.5 grains of RL 15, CCI Mag primers, Lapua brass, OAL 2.69 inches with a quarter turn on the Lee Crimp Die. I was amazed at what the bullet did to a gallon jug of water at 100 yards! Explosion is the only word I can come up with. My best speed with good groups with the 85 grain was 3,347 feet per second. My best load with the 92 grain Power Hammer averaged 3,407 feet and was very accurate.
The blessing and the bane of Hammer Bullets is too many choices! I have a lot more work to do with the 85 gainers. However, today the Absolute Hammer in 97 grains shined. I had pressure issues with my one load with the 107 Absolute Hammer. I'm trying to keep this short. So to recap:
85 grain -3347fps very accurate no recoil!
97 grain AH - 3436fps very accurate felt good!
92 grain PH - 3407fps very accurate - obliterated a gallon jug too!
So is the 97 grain Absolute Hammer too light for Elk? The 124HH falls in line with what would be used if one is thinking conventionally. I'm trying to learn to think in the Hammer Paradigm. What I am most pleased is I am getting 89fps more speed than the 85 grain zoomie. Oh the other good news is I drew my elk tag! So, any opinions on which bullet? Next on the fun parade is working up some loads for the 115 grain Power Hammer.
Addendum: After a cup of coffee this morning and looking over my notebook again. I did have an excellent load with the 85. I'm tossing out one of the readings on my old Chrony Chronograph. Average speed with 4 bullets was 3574. spread was 2fps. Load was Lapua brass, CCI Mag primers, 44gr. of VV N540, OAL 2.575 with a 1/4 turn crimp with a Lee Crimping die. So I got the 85 above the 3500 barrier. Is it too light for an Elk?
gltaylor
Global Moderator
Les,
Please share all of your rifle & load details so I can post.
Thanks.
les
Senior Member
Is there a place that I can see the standard format? I'm still pretty new to the forum. Rifle is a Tika T3 light with a 24 inch barrel.
riceman
Global Moderator
Go to the thread, "share your hammer loads" and post there.
gltaylor
Global Moderator
As Ricemam said, follow the format:
Cal/rifle, barrel brand/length/twist, brass, primer oal and whether crimped, PDR band used, powder, load(s) worked up, velocities, any notes on es/sd/groups, etc.
Thanks
Eric Wilson
Full Member
kneedeep
I am curious of the hollow point depth between these two pills. Would you provide the HP of both?
Thanks,
kneedeep[/quote]
The 258 gr SH measures 0.636” deep
