In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

nosler ballistic tips

willie332willie332 Member Posts: 23 ✭✭
Ive heard that Noslers Ballistic Tips have thicker walls than the ones made in the early 90's. Anyone know for sure? In 1991, I had one (.270) come completely apart inside a dandy buck at 90 yards standing in a wide open clearing, so I know the bullet didn't knick a branch or anything. Buck went 300 yards after a quarting away shot and took 2 hours to find because of no blood or exit wound. While gutting, I found 5 pieces off lead. I haven't used them since. But with the price of Partitions and Accubonds going up, Ballistic Tips might be worth trying again if they can stay together. Thanks for your opinion.

Comments

  • willie332willie332 Member Posts: 23 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I've read a lot of good reports on the NBT's as deer bullets. I was glad to learn that my finicky .257 Roberts loves the 100 grain version. 3 shot, 100 yard groups are typically under .3/4 inch and velocity is 3,100 plus.
    Problem is that typical range on the eastern whitetails I hunt is around 50 yards. I recently read that the B.T.'s shine at extended range, but may not hold together at high velocity. (i.e. over 3,000 fps.) So, has anyone had experience with the .257, 100 grains on deer size game with impact velocity in the 3K range?
    Thanks,
    Rob

    Rob
  • awindsawinds Member Posts: 1,139 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Stick with partitions.
  • 101stguy101stguy Member Posts: 43 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Originally posted by willie332
    Ive heard that Noslers Ballistic Tips have thicker walls than the ones made in the early 90's. Anyone know for sure? In 1991, I had one (.270) come completely apart inside a dandy buck at 90 yards standing in a wide open clearing, so I know the bullet didn't knick a branch or anything. Buck went 300 yards after a quarting away shot and took 2 hours to find because of no blood or exit wound. While gutting, I found 5 pieces off lead. I haven't used them since. But with the price of Partitions and Accubonds going up, Ballistic Tips might be worth trying again if they can stay together. Thanks for your opinion.
    [/quote

    This is true. The jacket wall & the base is thicker. You don't have to worry though, Nosler has ensured the interior cavities of these bullets will still unleash a massive amount of interior damage to the animal. The later design simply controls expansion better, especially at higher velocities.
  • MobuckMobuck Member Posts: 14,088 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I only have experience with .284 140 grain and .308 165 grain. I loaded the .284's in a 7x57 at 2850fps +/- and the .308's are in a lot of Ultramax 30/06 reloads I laid in several years back. Both of these produced many one shot kills on various sized deer at 150=300+ yards but ruined lots of meat at closer range. I would rate these early production bullets as marginal for any game larger than deer or if you expect an exit hole. A couple of coyotes hit by the 30/06 were DRT and showed a large exit at 250+ yards.
  • 101stguy101stguy Member Posts: 43 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Mobuck
    I only have experience with .284 140 grain and .308 165 grain. I loaded the .284's in a 7x57 at 2850fps +/- and the .308's are in a lot of Ultramax 30/06 reloads I laid in several years back. Both of these produced many one shot kills on various sized deer at 150=300+ yards but ruined lots of meat at closer range. I would rate these early production bullets as marginal for any game larger than deer or if you expect an exit hole. A couple of coyotes hit by the 30/06 were DRT and showed a large exit at 250+ yards.
    My advice would be do not use ballistic tips if your worried about ruining some meat. As far as your experience with one shot kills; that is precisely what the ballistic tip is about. A bullet that when used in the proper situation, it leaves nothing on the table. Speaking of coyotes; you should see what a 125gr ballistic tip out of a 300 win mag does in a good old fashioned "texas heart shot"! All I could say was WOW!
  • swearengineswearengine Member Posts: 1,308 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I am confused by quite a few hunters who are concerned by the rising cost of components. For example, the Ballistic tips versus the Partitions; .30/round versus .60/round. Theoretically you will only use one round to kill your deer. You are concerned about burning .60 rather than burning .30? The cost of the bullet is the least expensive part of your whole hunting scenario! If you are concerned about the cost of target shooting with them, don't target shoot with them. Find your load for hunting with the Partition and target shoot with a less expensive bullet.
  • sandwarriorsandwarrior Member Posts: 5,453 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I understand that the BT's have thicker jackets now than in the past. I was told once that the Accubond and BT are pretty much the same jacket. I do know that Accubonds and BT's fly pretty much the same, so if you don't like using BT's for hunting then practice with them at less cost and use Accubonds for very similar ballistics. The Partitions are very different from the Accubonds and BT's. Much lower BC, much more drop at distance.

    As far as ruining more meat, I can't think of a bullet, that when put through meat doesn't ruin it. Every single one of them causes hydro-shock. Even an FMJ. Hydro-shock doesn't necessarily travel through the entire body, but it pretty much always travels through the immediate muscle that the bullet hits. Therefore I shoot where the meat isn't. That is in the upper neck area and side of the chest. You have to wait for the shot though. I do my level best to not shoot any animal quartering too much away from or to me. I'll wait until he wanders a bit and I re-range him and try again. Or, just not take the shot. As far as that goes I'll say BT's are excellent bullets for hunting. By coming apart in the animal the entire amount of energy is expended into the animal. Not to mention several wound channels that will make it bleed out faster if it isn't an immediate terminal shot. I shot all my big game animals with bullets that were thinner jacketed than the BT's. And I haven't lost any of them. Nor did I ever have to throw much bloodshot meat away.
    Before you squeeze, calm down, pick your shot, take it, and know you did it right.
  • Rocky RaabRocky Raab Member Posts: 14,438 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Ballistic Tips are great - when used as intended. They insure expansion even at long range and moderate speed. That means they are intended for medium-sized cartridges, moderate speeds and moderate minimum distances.

    If you insist on juicing them up to 3200 fps for your 300 UltraMangleum and shoot a 100-lb deer at 50 yards, then hellllll yes you are going to ruin meat. (A .270 at 90 yards isn't much different, willie.)
    I may be a bit crazy - but I didn't drive myself.
  • 101stguy101stguy Member Posts: 43 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by sandwarrior
    I understand that the BT's have thicker jackets now than in the past. I was told once that the Accubond and BT are pretty much the same jacket. I do know that Accubonds and BT's fly pretty much the same, so if you don't like using BT's for hunting then practice with them at less cost and use Accubonds for very similar ballistics. The Partitions are very different from the Accubonds and BT's. Much lower BC, much more drop at distance.

    As far as ruining more meat, I can't think of a bullet, that when put through meat doesn't ruin it. Every single one of them causes hydro-shock. Even an FMJ. Hydro-shock doesn't necessarily travel through the entire body, but it pretty much always travels through the immediate muscle that the bullet hits. Therefore I shoot where the meat isn't. That is in the upper neck area and side of the chest. You have to wait for the shot though. I do my level best to not shoot any animal quartering too much away from or to me. I'll wait until he wanders a bit and I re-range him and try again. Or, just not take the shot. As far as that goes I'll say BT's are excellent bullets for hunting. By coming apart in the animal the entire amount of energy is expended into the animal. Not to mention several wound channels that will make it bleed out faster if it isn't an immediate terminal shot. I shot all my big game animals with bullets that were thinner jacketed than the BT's. And I haven't lost any of them. Nor did I ever have to throw much bloodshot meat away.
    Before you squeeze, calm down, pick your shot, take it, and know you did it right.
    No, the Accubond & BT jackets are not "pretty much the same". Whom ever told you this is wrong. The Accubond jackets wall (all the way up to the mouth of the jacket is considerably thicker), as well as the base of the bullet. The interior cavity is dramatically different also. Take a 30-180 Accubond & BT, and cross section each of them with a hacksaw. The difference will be obvious.
  • sandwarriorsandwarrior Member Posts: 5,453 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by 101stguy
    quote:Originally posted by sandwarrior
    I understand that the BT's have thicker jackets now than in the past. I was told once that the Accubond and BT are pretty much the same jacket. I do know that Accubonds and BT's fly pretty much the same, so if you don't like using BT's for hunting then practice with them at less cost and use Accubonds for very similar ballistics. The Partitions are very different from the Accubonds and BT's. Much lower BC, much more drop at distance.

    As far as ruining more meat, I can't think of a bullet, that when put through meat doesn't ruin it. Every single one of them causes hydro-shock. Even an FMJ. Hydro-shock doesn't necessarily travel through the entire body, but it pretty much always travels through the immediate muscle that the bullet hits. Therefore I shoot where the meat isn't. That is in the upper neck area and side of the chest. You have to wait for the shot though. I do my level best to not shoot any animal quartering too much away from or to me. I'll wait until he wanders a bit and I re-range him and try again. Or, just not take the shot. As far as that goes I'll say BT's are excellent bullets for hunting. By coming apart in the animal the entire amount of energy is expended into the animal. Not to mention several wound channels that will make it bleed out faster if it isn't an immediate terminal shot. I shot all my big game animals with bullets that were thinner jacketed than the BT's. And I haven't lost any of them. Nor did I ever have to throw much bloodshot meat away.
    Before you squeeze, calm down, pick your shot, take it, and know you did it right.
    No, the Accubond & BT jackets are not "pretty much the same". Whom ever told you this is wrong. The Accubond jackets wall (all the way up to the mouth of the jacket is considerably thicker), as well as the base of the bullet. The interior cavity is dramatically different also. Take a 30-180 Accubond & BT, and cross section each of them with a hacksaw. The difference will be obvious.


    101stguy,

    The comparison was meant to show the similar external/flight ballistics of the two types of bullets...not the terminal ballistic effect. Yes, I know the Accubond is made to stay together under much more energies than is the BT.
  • JustCJustC Member Posts: 16,056 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Guys who lose deer using BT's will lose deer using any bullet[8] I have harvested literaly hundreds of deer on crop damage permits from 10yds to 600-700yds with balistic tips and never lost a single deer. Don't shoot for the shoulder, that is a lazy man's shot. yes it ensures a DRT finish, but wastes a ton of meat in the process. Shoot through the ribs and your balistic tips will make you a beleiver. They are just about all I use for deer.

    as a bonus, they fly almost as true as match bullets.
  • hk-91hk-91 Member Posts: 10,050
    edited November -1
    bquote:Originally posted by JustC
    Guys who lose deer using BT's will lose deer using any bullet[8] I have harvested literaly hundreds of deer on crop damage permits from 10yds to 600-700yds with balistic tips and never lost a single deer. Don't shoot for the shoulder, that is a lazy man's shot. yes it ensures a DRT finish, but wastes a ton of meat in the process. Shoot through the ribs and your balistic tips will make you a beleiver. They are just about all I use for deer.

    as a bonus, they fly almost as true as match bullets.


    +++ i never got why someone would sugest you shot throught he shoulder you just lose way to much meat that way. shoot through the ribs and hit the lungs or heart and the deer wont go far.
  • sandman375sandman375 Member Posts: 4 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Where did you get the info about the BT walls being thicker now? I would like to confirm this. I like the accuracy of the BT, but stopped using them years ago because I'm one of those guys that likes a pass through. If I need to track, I want a good blood trail. I do most of my deer hunting in Georgia from tree stands in thick cover, so entrance wounds are high on the body. If there is no exit and the deer runs far at all, there is little or no blood trail without a pass through. The clincher for me was a 400 pound hog I shout with a 300 WSM and a 180 grain BT. This set up is supposed to be rated for Elk and it did not pass through on a broad side shot behind the shoulder at 125 yards. The hog went down hard, but it illustrated the limitations of the bullet clearly. I now use Barnes bullets exclusively for big game and have not been disappointed. They are just as accurate as the BT and the TTSX has a similar BC, but they are expansive as hell. Swearengine has a good point about the cost of the bullet, but I like to practice with the load I'll use in the field and I practice a lot.
  • JustCJustC Member Posts: 16,056 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by sandman375
    Where did you get the info about the BT walls being thicker now? I would like to confirm this.

    The clincher for me was a 400 pound hog I shout with a 300 WSM and a 180 grain BT.

    They changed the jackets some years back due to the jacket being more of a varmint jacket and responded to the hunter's request for it to be tougher.

    As to the hog, a 400lb DRT is my definition of perfection. The thing about hydrostatic shock is that you LOSE a lot of it's harvesting power when the bullet exits. That energy is expended in the dirt rather than the animal. When the bullet violently expands and exits much slower or not at all, it expends the majority of it's energy in the animal. This is what drops them DRT, not the small perforation and blood loss. Those two things take time to work, and an animal can make it quite a ways before it succombs.

    however, if you are shooting no more than 100yds in the thick, just get some remington corelokts and be done with it. They are cheap, and very violent as well as being accurate to boot.[;)]
  • sandman375sandman375 Member Posts: 4 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thanks for the reply JustC. In most circumstances I would agree that 100% energy expenditure in the game is desirable. The old idea of finding a perfectly mushroomed bullet just under the skin on the far side of the game is still very valid. Maximum energy transfer and maximum wound channel. However, I have been involved in two circumstances when deer were hit well in thick cover that it was necessary to bring in tracking dogs, in the dark, to find the deer. Both shots were well placed, broad side, double lung hits and the bullet did not exit. One was hit with a 140gn Sierra Gameking from a 7mm Rem Mag and the other was a 150gn Ballistic Tip from a .300 WSM. Neither deer travelled over 75 yards. It was that the cover they had available within a step or two after the shot was so thick that a human was practically on hands and knees to get through it. Such is hunting in some parts of Georgia. My basic philosophy is that of 20 game animals hit, I would rather have to track five of them with a good blood trail than one of them with virtually no blood trail. In more open country this is not nearly as much of an issue, but around here, often the deer is already completely out of site by the time you recover from recoil. But, hey, matching the bullet to the game and circumstance is part of the fun. So is kicking ideas back and forth.[:)] For mountain game, give me the Berger Hunting VLD any day. Maximum hydrostatic shock to drop the sheep where he stands on the rock outcropping.
  • 101stguy101stguy Member Posts: 43 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by JustC
    quote:Originally posted by sandman375
    Where did you get the info about the BT walls being thicker now? I would like to confirm this.

    The clincher for me was a 400 pound hog I shout with a 300 WSM and a 180 grain BT.

    They changed the jackets some years back due to the jacket being more of a varmint jacket and responded to the hunter's request for it to be tougher.

    As to the hog, a 400lb DRT is my definition of perfection. The thing about hydrostatic shock is that you LOSE a lot of it's harvesting power when the bullet exits. That energy is expended in the dirt rather than the animal. When the bullet violently expands and exits much slower or not at all, it expends the majority of it's energy in the animal. This is what drops them DRT, not the small perforation and blood loss. Those two things take time to work, and an animal can make it quite a ways before it succombs.

    however, if you are shooting no more than 100yds in the thick, just get some remington corelokts and be done with it. They are cheap, and very violent as well as being accurate to boot.[;)]
    FYI; while the jacket of a nosler varmit BT is thinner, the main difference between the varmit & the hunting bullet is the pure lead core used in the varmit bullet compared to the 2 1/2% antimony lead used in the hunting bullet. Also, the biggest reason for the thickening of the jackets in the hunting bullet was to better fit the flood of "new" ultra-mags that were being introduced into the market that required a bullet that would perform admirably at much higher velocities.
Sign In or Register to comment.