X bullet or Core-loct?

[BeanMan]

One point that hasn't been considered:  What kind of bear are we talking about?  For Grizz I'd use the Barnes, for a black bear it wouldn't matter which of the two  as long as you hit the vitals.


A few years ago I loaded some 220 grain Nosler Partitions and used one to kill a cow elk at about 50 yards.  It did a very good job and exited the far side.  It was a double lung shot with no major bones hit though.  I can't say it did a better job on elk than the 180 grain partitions I loaded and shot other elk with though.  The longer range ballistics (more common to Western Hunting) are better with the 180 for sure.  I'll add that of the 10 or 12 elk I've shot none were farther than 200 yards.  

BeanMan

[Slamfire]

Jack O'conner was once talking about the 30/06  , he felt there wasn't much need for the 220 grain bullet except maybe for african lions as he has seen the 180 grain bullets go through both shoulders on grizzly bears.

Then Elenor borrowed the rifle and brained her elephant with the old 180 grain bullet.  :-D

[Zachary]

In my .30-06, I use 165 Barnes X for deer and hogs.  I must say that the 165X in this gun is way too much for Texas 140 pound deer.  Even on 200lb.+ hogs its a little too much.  Why?  Because that 165X fully penetrates and expands on those big hogs, and they have one heck of a grisle plate.  As such, a 180X would definately be my choice for black bear over the 220 core lokt.

Zachary

[jro45]

Some people like Barns bullets some people don't,  I don't

[Brithunter]

Hi All,

    Hmm all I hear about is hyper velocity :roll:  well velocity is a two edged sword, ask the Africian pros about the Weatherby's despite all the hype they don'y work well. Too much velocity can be the difference between penetrating and skipping along the hide ans that's before we get to bullet break up.

    Finally not all the premium bulets are all they are cracked up to be, I was shown a beautiful double rifle which had ben wrecked by premium solid bullets. They were so hard they had ironed the rifling so it now showed on the outside of the barrels. Darn it, ever had it where the name is on the tip of your tongue. I wil have to phone the guy and speak to him again about it :oops:

     Now for Bears I am thinking that I would use a 220 grn bullet but out of preference I would be using a bigger bore probably my 9.3 with either 233Grn or 246 grn bullets and for real close work switch to the 286 grn RN  :wink: However I am never likely to get the chance of Bear so it's all accademic really.

[Lawdog]

Hi All,

    Hmm all I hear about is hyper velocity :roll:  well velocity is a two edged sword, ask the Africian pros about the Weatherby's despite all the hype they don'y work well. Too much velocity can be the difference between penetrating and skipping along the hide ans that's before we get to bullet break up.

That's funny.  I have talked to many PH's and a number of outfitters while planning our Safari and they all say how good a choice a .300 Weatherby Magnum is.  I have talked to many a hunter that has been to Africa and they have used the .300 Weatherby with great success.  It has been used by literary hundreds and hundreds of hunters.  A poorly placed bullet out of a .300 Weatherby is going to gather you the same results as a poorly placed bullet out of a .30-06.  The .300 Weatherby outs penetrates the .30-06 any day, way, shape or form.  Lawdog
 

[victorcharlie]

Yep.....hit'em right and they fall down....most of the time........when you don't hit'em right then bigger and faster is better........harder to plug a big hole than a little one.......

[Redhawk1]

Hi All,

    Hmm all I hear about is hyper velocity :roll:  well velocity is a two edged sword, ask the Africian pros about the Weatherby's despite all the hype they don'y work well. Too much velocity can be the difference between penetrating and skipping along the hide ans that's before we get to bullet break up.

That's funny.  I have talked to many PH's and a number of outfitters while planning our Safari and they all say how good a choice a .300 Weatherby Magnum is.  I have talked to many a hunter that has been to Africa and they have used the .300 Weatherby with great success.  It has been used by literary hundreds and hundreds of hunters.  A poorly placed bullet out of a .300 Weatherby is going to gather you the same results as a poorly placed bullet out of a .30-06.  The .300 Weatherby outs penetrates the .30-06 any day, way, shape or form.  Lawdog
 

Lawdog, I gave up trying to talk to people about premium bullets and velocity. To many know it alls. I just know what works for me. I have hands on experience as you also do. So why do we even try to convince them other wise. It seems to cause more tension than I care to put out.  

[jerkface11]

I'm glad we have you guys to tell us that velocity equals penetration. Can you go tell the bow hunters that? It seems they're under the mistaken belief that their arrows are going in one side of an animal and coming out the other. I've tried telling them that this won't happen at less than 3000 fps but they don't believe it. Maybe someone could buy them a subscription to guns and ammo so they can see the light.

[Redhawk1]

I'm glad we have you guys to tell us that velocity equals penetration. Can you go tell the bow hunters that? It seems they're under the mistaken belief that their arrows are going in one side of an animal and coming out the other. I've tried telling them that this won't happen at less than 3000 fps but they don't believe it. Maybe someone could buy them a subscription to guns and ammo so they can see the light.

Two different concepts, but I thought you would have a problem understanding that.  So I guess I will give you a little clue. Hit a shoulder bone with an arrow and you would not get penetration.  But like I said two different concepts of hunting. If you have to ask you would not understand.  :roll:

[Ramrod]

If penetration was the only criteria, we might as well just use FMJ. Much cheaper. I don't believe velocity = penetration either. Many times higher velocity=more bullet expansion=less penetration.

[Redhawk1]

If penetration was the only criteria, we might as well just use FMJ. Much cheaper. I don't believe velocity = penetration either. Many times higher velocity=more bullet expansion=less penetration.

Penetration is not the only criteria, speed is also. But you are correct in saying, Many times higher velocity=more bullet expansion

Also a factor to consider is the game one is pursuing. Deer do not need the penetration say an Elk would need.

I shoot a Shiloh Sharps in 45-70 with black powder and they are slow but heavy pure lead bullets. The expansion is from 45 cal to a silver dollar and the exit wound is awesome. But I would not use it on a cape buffalo, due to not having the penetration needed to get to the vitals.

This disagreement could go on for ever, but I use what works for me and you use what works for you. As long as it works we are both right.  

[jro45]

I agree with Redhawk1 about velocity, penetration, bullet expansion. They are all necessary in the right amount thats why we have a choise of rifles
and bullets.

[Lawdog]

I'm glad we have you guys to tell us that velocity equals penetration. Can you go tell the bow hunters that? It seems they're under the mistaken belief that their arrows are going in one side of an animal and coming out the other. I've tried telling them that this won't happen at less than 3000 fps but they don't believe it. Maybe someone could buy them a subscription to guns and ammo so they can see the light.

jerkface11,

I too bow hunt and have killed many a deer, bear, Wild Hog, etc. with everything from an old home made long bow to modern compound bows(my current favorite is a Oneida Black Eagle).  Now in case some of the younger bow hunters don’t know the older long bows didn’t always drive an arrow completely through a deer(I am talking about smaller Blacktail’s).  Recurves did a better job(because of more speed) and compounds pass through happen most all of the time(even more speed).  Goes to show that speed does equal deeper penetration even in archery, doesn’t it?  Lawdog
 

[Redhawk1]

Got them there Lawdog... :-D  :-D

[jerkface11]

Lawdog think about how fast an arrow is going and how much it weighs. Most pellet guns shoot far faster than any bow. But they won't penetrate thru a deer will they? If velocity was all that was required to penetrate we'd all be hunting with a .22-250.

[Redhawk1]

Lawdog think about how fast an arrow is going and how much it weighs. Most pellet guns shoot far faster than any bow. But they won't penetrate thru a deer will they? If velocity was all that was required to penetrate we'd all be hunting with a .22-250.

Show me a pellet that is razor sharp and weighs 400 gr. and I will show you a pellet that will penetrate thru a deer.  :roll:

It is obvious you don't have a clue about this discussion.  :bye:

[RonO777]

Ok here is my 1/2 cent.
Go to barnes.com they will send you a nice dvd on the x-bullet. It has penetration tests on it. It is really neat. I would post some of them but its late and Ive got to get up early to go sit in a tree and watch the squills, I meant for deer

Ron

[mitchell]

Lawdog think about how fast an arrow is going and how much it weighs. Most pellet guns shoot far faster than any bow. But they won't penetrate thru a deer will they? If velocity was all that was required to penetrate we'd all be hunting with a .22-250.

Show me a pellet that is razor sharp and weighs 400 gr. and I will show you a pellet that will penetrate thru a deer.  :roll:

It is obvious you don't have a clue about this discussion.  :bye:

+1


get a grip people !!!!

[RaySendero]

Here's some pics comparing 180 X to 180 Rem RN CL.  Both performed well.  Think the 220 Rem RN CL would be even better than the 180s.


http://www.seahook.com/bestbullet.jpg

[Ramrod]

Thanks for the interesting article Ray.
Two things being argued on this thread are adressed in the article.
First, the author states that yes, the Barnes X penetrates more, but with a small wound channel. (no free lunch).
Second, with all lead core bullets, the higher the velocity, the bigger the wound, but the less the penetration. He states that the .308 Winchester out-penetrated the .300 Weatherby. Imagine that!

[Redhawk1]

Did you all notice that the barnes out penetrated and had the best weight retention.

Very good read there Ray Sendero  

[Lawdog]

Lawdog think about how fast an arrow is going and how much it weighs. Most pellet guns shoot far faster than any bow. But they won't penetrate thru a deer will they? If velocity was all that was required to penetrate we'd all be hunting with a .22-250.

Show me a pellet that is razor sharp and weighs 400 gr. and I will show you a pellet that will penetrate thru a deer.  :roll:

It is obvious you don't have a clue about this discussion.  :bye:

Can't add anything to that.   :-D   Lawdog
 

[jerkface11]

Lawdog think about how fast an arrow is going and how much it weighs. Most pellet guns shoot far faster than any bow. But they won't penetrate thru a deer will they? If velocity was all that was required to penetrate we'd all be hunting with a .22-250.

Show me a pellet that is razor sharp and weighs 400 gr. and I will show you a pellet that will penetrate thru a deer.  :roll:

It is obvious you don't have a clue about this discussion.  :bye:

Can't add anything to that.   :-D   Lawdog
 

Oh so now bullet weight is important for penetration. Earlier velocity was the holy grail. Which way is it guys? Do you want the heavier slower bullet or the lighter faster one? I know i'll go for the heavier slower one every time.

[Redhawk1]

Lawdog think about how fast an arrow is going and how much it weighs. Most pellet guns shoot far faster than any bow. But they won't penetrate thru a deer will they? If velocity was all that was required to penetrate we'd all be hunting with a .22-250.

Show me a pellet that is razor sharp and weighs 400 gr. and I will show you a pellet that will penetrate thru a deer.  :roll:

It is obvious you don't have a clue about this discussion.  :bye:

Can't add anything to that.   :-D   Lawdog
 

Oh so now bullet weight is important for penetration. Earlier velocity was the holy grail. Which way is it guys? Do you want the heavier slower bullet or the lighter faster one? I know i'll go for the heavier slower one every time.

Try comparing apples to apples. You are trying to compare a 20 gr. pellet to a 400 gr. broadhead and arrow.

What you need is to have a good combination of velocity and weight. Also take into account the game you are hunting. There is a time and place for slow and heavy and there comes a limitation on the distance you shoot. The trajectory is not very good with slow and heavy.

It all boils down to your specific needs. Long range, short range, type of game. You don't want to take a 45-70 out to a prairie dog shoot where shots can be 300 yards. It is all common since.

[Lawdog]

jerkface11,

Velocity does equal penetration and you can prove it to yourself if you will take the time.  Seeing you brought up archery, take the same weight arrow/broadhead and shoot it out of a 60 lb. pull long bow, a 60 lb. pull recurve, a 60 lb. pull older compound and a new 60 lb. pull compound bows and see what the results are.  I've done it and the results are from deepest to shallowest are;

1.]  new 60 lb. compound bow
2.]  older 60 lb. compound bow
3.]  60 lb. recurve
4.]  60 lb. long bow

I know i'll go for the heavier slower one every time.

Me, I want the heavier faster one every time.  It will penetrate deeper.  Lawdog
 

[jerkface11]

Well since this thread is about what round you'd use to stop a wounded bear in brush. I'd say it's safe to assume the author expects an animal at very close range. When that bullet hits going 3000fps it will come apart. And the slower one will not.

[Ramrod]

Bullets ain't arrows. Faster bullets expand more, and penetrate less.
jerkface11 wins the Cupie Doll with his last post.

[Redhawk1]

Bullets ain't arrows. Faster bullets expand more, and penetrate less.
jerkface11 wins the Cupie Doll with his last post.

Take a look at the Barnes bullets at 3000 pfs. It did not come apart.
Look at the penetration of 20 inches with the expansion at 3000 fps.

http://www.seahook.com/bestbullet.jpg

Well since this thread is about what round you'd use to stop a wounded bear in brush. I'd say it's safe to assume the author expects an animal at very close range. When that bullet hits going 3000fps it will come apart. And the slower one will not..

Bullet construction plays a factor in that. The barnes X is likely not going to come apart like a standard bullet.

[Ramrod]

Sure looks like all the petals have sheared off at the higher velocities. The author states that the Barnes wound channels were smaller. Looking at the recovered bullet, I can see why. Funny thing, the deepest penetrating Barnes was not going 3000 fps, it was 2700, or 300 fps slower.