pointed vs flat

[Little Joe]

Have you guys found the pointed bullets are more accurate than the flat nose bullets out at 100 and farther?

I think I have but I may be doing something wrong.I dont know for sure but just maybe?

Out of here,
Little Joe

[Char-Gar]

Joe, I have shot lots and lots of groups at 100 yards with both pointed and flatnose bullets. I have never come to any firm conclusion that one was better than another at that range. I am not saying one is not better than another, but I have never been able to isolate the difference down to just that one aspect. I can always find other things that might account for the difference in how the bullet perform.

As the range stretches out the FN bullets will loose velocity faster than the more pointed one (all else being equal, which it never is) and that can be a factor in accuracy.

There are plenty of guys on this board with a better scientifc mind that I have and can probably give a more informed opinion on this subject. All I know is groups on paper.

[Little Joe]

What is your accuracy standard with a cast bullet at 100?


Out of here,
Little Joe

[Nickle]

My father has a saying, "Accuracy is where you find it".

You're not looking at any significant disadvantage to Flat Nose or Round Nose bullets at 100. The other variables will have far more effect.

Now, you start talking further out, and those Spitzer (pointed) bullets start having advantages that come to the forefront. Exactly how far out to get that advantage depends on numerous factors, not the least of which is velocity.

[joeb33050]

I, also, cannot see the advantage to flat nosed vs. pointed bullets. The 308403 shoots as well as any bullet I have, EXCEPT, a Borton-Darr 185 grain ~.309 pointed-really pointed plain based shallow grease groove bullet that seems to be most accurate. Testing is underway. I think it ain't so much flat nose vs. pointed, it's more about diameter and shape. I think. The SS guys are shooting < 1" 200 yard 10 shot goups on occasion, and <1 3/4" is becoming common. This often with ugly flat nosed many grooved bullets.
joe brennan

[Buckshot]

I think. The SS guys are shooting < 1" 200 yard 10 shot goups on occasion, and <1 3/4" is becoming common. This often with ugly flat nosed many grooved bullets.
joe brennan

................And HAVE BEEN for some time :-).

I read an article once somewhere way back and have been meaning to try it out for myself. Doesn't really have anything so much to do with accuracy as it does trajectory.

I don't recall what boolit was used, but it was prolly a FN. After shooting those at some distance (100 yds? Don't remember) he took the same slugs and drilled a hole in the nose and glued in a wire nail so some small part of the pointy end was exposed.

I was really astounded with how much flatter it shot. Can't quote anything about it other then it has stuck with me all this time.

................Buckshot

[beagle]

Personally, it depends on a lot of things other than SP or FN. Twist, bullet length, velocity, primers and powder type all play a part as well as many other variables.

This winter, George XXX sent me some .30s designed by Fred Ness back in the 40s when the boys were hunting groundhogs with Springfields and getting ricochets. Fred desigied a bullet that was supposedly an anti-richochet design.

It looks like a Lyman 311291 with the nose made flat and a huge HP cavity to make it desintegrate when it hits.

Now, this is a flat, full wadcutter, hollow point. Weighs 152 greains and is a GC design.

I loaded up my 50 samples over 18.0 grains of WC820 and headed to the range. Rifle was a 30/06 NUmber 1 Ruger that's usually good for 1" groups if I do my part.

I chrony'd 3 rounds and got an average of 1724 FPS. I checked impact on the target and was about two inches low but all right in windage.

I settled down and fire 3 rounds that went into 3/4" on the fouled target. I blinked as I was expecting around two inches with that flat nose.

I switched to a clean target and proceeded to put three more into 3/4".

I then plinked a few into the berm but didn't get the big cloud of dirt I was expecting as I wondered what that big cavity would do.

Next, I fired two 10 shot groups. My eyes were getting tired by now and these went 1 1/2".

Now, SPs are good shooters. My 311413HP and also a 30-180-SP RCBS tell me that. In the FN category, the 30-180-FN RCBS and also the Lyman 311041 do very well. But a "wadcutter" at 100 yards the way that one shot amazed me.

Back to the original question. I don't think it makes a difference in the nose shape as long as other conditions are right./beagle

[Bass Ackward]

Oh man. How do we cover external ballistics in one post when books have been written on the subject? The whole key here is range. If range isn't an issue with a certain twist rate, then meplat size isn't either.

As we get older we forget games we played as kids. Like driving down a road and putting our hand out the window in the air stream. Point your hand like a knife blade and it was very easy to hold in place. Place your hand palm to the wind and you could feel the resistance but when you changed the angle of your hand ever so slightly, it drove your arm hard in that direction.

Most of us also had a top to spin. We saw that while you were REALLY, REALLY, REALLY trying to spin that top hard, it wobbled all over the place and eventually it would settle in and go to sleep perfectly. At some point, it would slow down enough that it would fall over again.

Same with a bullet and the nose shape on that bullet. Am I saying that a wide meplat is less accurate? No, but the higher the ballistic coefficient of a design, the less susceptible it will be to wind and it's destabilizing effects. Some people may interpret this as "better accuracy".

If you ever shoot and want to know if a group represents your best effort, test it. Hollow point 3,5 or 10 and shoot them. If you shoot the same size group, you have a stabilized bullet "at that distance". This is why you must test out to the maximum range you will shoot. If your group size drops, then the hollow point is correcting for some destabilizing factor of either load and or design or both. You then will see the maximum potential for group size with that load / gun combo.

So .... many factors go into this, I can't explain them all. From my experience, fairly idiot proof bullet designs (for the ignorant like me) pretty much occur around 60% meplats for rifle designs. So this is where I draw the line. If I need a wider meplat than that for hunting, then I go up in bore diameter where I can maintain BC and the weight to drive it against the wind or in flesh.

But range is still the determiner. Every gun will shoot one hole groups if you move the target close enough.

[1Shirt]

To quote Lindon Johnson who said " I don't know much, but I do know chicken
s---- from chicken salad!", think that all cast boolits are female and have their own personalities. Round nose, spire pointed, flat nosed, HP's, if they arn't cast well, inspected , weighed for consistancy, sized properly, and loaded over an appropriate charge you get what you get down range. Begal and Bass have it pretty well down in my less than humble opinion. If you couple proper loading with proper boolits, in a proper rifle, on a good day at the range, you can have a marriage made in heaven. Unlike picking a mate in marriage, you have the chance to go back, try something else, learn other loading methods, try different sizes etc. Up to 100, I haven't seen much difference between the two if properly loaded. Don't shoot much cast beyond that mark so no comment there. It does seem to me however that I get less wind drift from the pointy ones than I due from the flatpoints or the blunts at 100 at like vol. However that is probably old eyes, old age, and just poor observational qualities.
1Shirt!

[Ricochet]

I never mess around with those anti-ricochet designs.

[1Shirt]

Ricochet, T'aint messin around, it is a learning process in the quest of the Holy Grail of accuracy with cast!
1Shirt!:coffee: