Hollow Points in Rifle Projectile Question

[TCTex]

Hollow Point question???

I am looking at a couple of NOE rifle bullet molds in GB’s that will be offered in a couple of months. They will be heavy for caliber bullets in 30 and 35 calibers utilized for hunting large”er” game. My question is this, do cast HP projectiles have range limitations? Or it might be better to ask if the HP’s BC hover heavily and ask if they really drop at extended range, say 150-200 yards compared to the standard profile projectile. In short, is it worth having a HP option on a heavy for caliber rifle bullet moving at 2000 FPS? Or would I do better just not worrying about the HP and just simple continue to water drop and temper the nose of the bullet?

I know I might be asking a few off the way question so thanks for putting up with me… LOL

Duane

[TCTex]

I know I might be asking a few off the way question so thanks for putting up with me…

That is suppose to be, "off the wall questions..."
:coffeecom

:brokenima

[captaint]

Tex - I would think it is a toss up between a wider meplat, flatter point boolit and a HP in terms of ballistic efficiency at say 200 yards. If hunting is the purpose, and it were me, I would just go with the wide flat meplat. Now, lots of folks love the HP's and get them to expand really well and perform. Certainly, you would have a somewhat lighter boolit in the HP, if that's a consideration. We don't want them to be very hard, either way though.. enjoy Mike

[Larry Gibson]

I've been using HP'd cast bullets in rifles and handguns for 40 years and am a great fan of them. However, the alloy must be correct for adequate expansion and the HP must be the proper depth for the intended use. In rifles I often push a soft cast rifle bullet that is HP'd to 2000 - 2200 fps which is entirely adequate for 200 yards. The BC differenece between the HP'd and non HP'd is neglegiable over that range. However, if cast of a softer malleable alloy with a proper depth HP the difference in terminal effects is well worth the effort to use the HP for hunting. There is a reason expanding bullets are required (FMJ non expanding bullets out lawed) for hunting.

Most HP mould stems put too deep a HP in the bullet. The nose will shatter off or the expansion petals will break/slough off too quickly. A good WW + 2% tin with 50% lead added alloy works very well for me. I use several Lyman HP moulds with the HP stem shortened to give not more than 3/16" depth of HP. Forster recommends only 1/*" deep HPs with their HP tool. I find either is correct for most .30 - .35 cal bullets with a velocity of 2000 - 2200 fps.

If you HP a FP and it doesn't expand you've at least still got the effectiveness of the FP bullet. However, with expansion the terminal effect is greater and the animal is most often down quicker. That means less tracking and the potential of a lost animal. Caveat; with any bullet the hunter still must put the bullet into the right place for a clean kill.

Larry Gibson

[TCTex]

Ya’ll are awesome!!! That answers most of my questions!

I get the HP in “Handgun” rounds, they just make sense for their sort range application. (Note I loosely use handgun as a straight wall round original designed to be fired in a semi auto or a revolver. TC’s and bolt actions to me are “Specialty Pistols…)

I wasn’t too worried about the BC. I was going to use a 180 XTP in my 15.75in 357 Max at 2100fps until I called Hornady. The difference in arc isn’t “that” much between the XTP and SSP. There is more difference in velocity IMHO… but that is another can of worms…

The two HP molds I am considering are the NOE 358009 270gr / HP and the NOE 311331 208gr RN / HP. I was figuring “The Swede,” (I am sorry, I just had a Heart Break Ridge moment… ) knows what he is doing with his HP designs for the respected cartridges.

I can work on the alternate allow for the HP’s, that was something I hadn’t thought of. But the velocity of 2000 – 2200 is right were I am looking at…

THANK YOU FOR ALL THE HELP!!!!!!!!!!

Duane

[DLCTEX]

Some have reported better accuracy with a HP boolit over a solid of the same configuration.. YMMV Reason being heavier to base makes boolit more stable.

[MT Gianni]

Some have reported better accuracy with a HP boolit over a solid of the same configuration.. YMMV Reason being heavier to base makes boolit more stable.

Most jacketed target bullets are HP to move the center of gravity to the rear.

[USSR]

Most jacketed target bullets are HP to move the center of gravity to the rear.

Actually, most jacketed target bullets are HP due to the desire to have a more perfect bullet base (the most critical part for accuracy) by having the jacket cover it. That only leaves inserting the lead from the front end, hence the HP.

Don

[35remington]

Ah, USSR, if that were true more target bullets would be softpoints, as they're closed at the base as well.

Since target shooters always choose hollowpoints with tiny hollow points over the alternative softpoints there's something wrong with your "bullet base only" statement. A more precise nose to the bullet can be formed if it is made of jacket material rather than lead, which extrudes from the jacket in the bullet making process in a more variable way.

[TCTex]

USSR is right about the base being the most important part of the bullet. The rest of it I have no idea… LOL

Lets threw a monkey wrench in the works… here is a “did you know…”

It always made me wonder why bullet manufactures didn’t make a heavy front end bullet. Just look at a proper arrow. In fact, in traditional archery, Native American Indians would make their arrows with the heavy part in the front and the narrow lighter weight in the back. Go figure…

All this really does is justify a “need, want, and desire” to buy a mold with an HP cavity as well as a standard nose… Right now I am just trying to think of what a 270gr 35cal projectile will do to a Texas pig. I wonder how much air time the pig will get? Muwahahahahaha

Duane

[selmerfan]

Here's what I did one day while bored. From left to right:
60 gr. 6mm Sierra HP
85 gr. 6mm Sierra BTHP
120 gr. 6.5mm Nosler BT (lost the BT...)
130 gr. 6.5mm Nosler Accubond
140 gr. 6.5mm Sierra BT Gameking
125 gr. .308" Nosler BT
155 gr. .308" Lapua Scenar
165 gr. .308" Nosler BT
http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/2217.JPG


Notice the gigantic hollowpoint on the Scenar. Long-range target and hunting bullet. Very, very accurate design, great B.C. for a .308" 155 gr. bullet.

[Old Ironsights]

That Scenar is crazy. I need some for my Savage 99...

[USSR]

Ah, USSR, if that were true more target bullets would be softpoints, as they're closed at the base as well.

Sorry 35remington, but the reason that Sierra went from the open base MatchKing bullets that they had been producing to the hollowpoint design was to have a bullet with a more perfect base. Why would softpoints be used when hollowpoints are more accurate? You are illogical.

Don

[nanuk]

Sorry 35remington, but the reason that Sierra went from the open base MatchKing bullets that they had been producing to the hollowbase design was to have a bullet with a more perfect base. Why would softpoints be used when hollowpoints are more accurate? You are illogical.

Don

Huh?

what is the difference between "Open Base" and "Hollow Base" designs?

and by your statement, Hollowpoints being more accurate you appear to be supporting 35Rem's allegation.
to wit: if the accuracy comes mainly from the base, then the softpoint WOULD be the bullet of choice, as the consistency of manufacture would be better with the SP.
The hollowpoint suffers from the fact the lead inside has to be formed without any support, when the nose is drawn in.
YET the hollowpoint does appear to be more accurate... so, with the bases being equal, it must have to do with the weight rearward in the hollowpoint.

[Bret4207]

Getting back on topic, HP's are great IF they work. A FN will always work. That's the way I look at it.

[USSR]

Huh?

what is the difference between "Open Base" and "Hollow Base" designs?

and by your statement, Hollowpoints being more accurate you appear to be supporting 35Rem's allegation.
to wit: if the accuracy comes mainly from the base, then the softpoint WOULD be the bullet of choice, as the consistency of manufacture would be better with the SP.
The hollowpoint suffers from the fact the lead inside has to be formed without any support, when the nose is drawn in.
YET the hollowpoint does appear to be more accurate... so, with the bases being equal, it must have to do with the weight rearward in the hollowpoint.

The "hollowbase" in my post was a typo, that has since been corrected. nanuk, the question was the REASON for switching from an open base FMJ bullet to the hollowpoint. The first consideration was not weight distribution, since they could have done that using the open base design. The first consideration was having a more perfect base, which has the most impact on bullet accuracy. "if the accuracy comes mainly from the base, then the softpoint WOULD be the bullet of choice, as the consistency of manufacture would be better with the SP". Have you ever compared the meplat between a softpoint and either a hollowpoint or a match grade FMJ such as the Lapua D46 bullet? I will gladly put my 170gr D46 Match bullets up against the .30 caliber 165gr softpoint bullet of your choice.

Don