Proper Bullet Jacket Thickness for high BC bullets

[AJMav]

Well the Hornady ELD-X 340 gr bullet came out recently, and has been thoroughly dissected and shot by several members. One thing I took note of is that the jacket thickness was only .015". I was fully expecting .025" baised on the picture in the advertisments, not to mention the complete lack of a core lock feature. The plated Powerbelt ELR I believe are .005".

Looking at modern centerfire bullets there are; tapperd jackets, bonded cores, core locking features, copper partitions, all copper, etc. It's frustrating to see the bullet manufacturing industry not apply these technologies in their new high BC muzzy bullets. At $1.30-$2 EACH its an embarrassment to buy plated putty! Understandably muzzloading is a smaller segment of customers, with unique challenges, but take the .451 and you have pistols/rifles/shotguns all launching the same round.

Trying to educate myself this morning on bullet jacket thicknesses, and was extremely underwhelmed with the info I could find searching google. I think I understand why the avaliable products are designed the way that are; it is a smaller consumer market, many of current muzzy shooters don't shoot magnum or super magnum charges, tooling is prohibitivly expenses for new offerings. I feel the ammo maker that properly combines; High BC/Terminal Performance/ Accuracy (consistency), will absolutley dominate. Understandably it is difficult to create a bullet to function at 50 yards and 250, but it has been done (Terminal Ascent, Barnes, Accubond, etc..)

I pose this question to anyone with an interest in the newer high BC bullets comming out?
*What would you like to have for Jacket thickness or design and why? Or perhaps what changes would you like to have made? --Ty in advance for all input good or bad.....

 

[MrTom]

All good questions. I think I have a system ironed out that works very well for me. Since in my hunting inlines don't need to shoot super hot loads and seldom shoot over 100 yards, I stick with bullets known to that satisfy the demands of those guns inside those parameters, basically Barnes XPB and Expander bullets. XTPs and a couple of Deep Curls do a great job if I need to shoot a lead core bullet. In my smokeless gun, I stick with bullets known to perform well at the greater velocities that smokeless can attain. The 195 Barnes Expander shoots very nicely from the .45 cal smokeless but the Fury .40 cal 225 grain, a bonded bullet, also shoots really well and is what I plan to hunt with simply based on reading what others have experienced on deer sizes game. Pittman makes a ton of nice bullets and the company that bought out Lehigh also makes some great bullets if you don't mind a fracturing bullet.

I'll be the first to admit that some of today's pills designed as BP fodder appear to be lacking in structural integrity after they are pushed just so far. The Powerbelts and now the ELRs are from one same maker and their marketing strategies seem to work well for those who stay uninformed or are just lazy. I also admit that some of the pistol bullets today are made as defense bullets, not hunting bullets pushed to four times their design limits in muzzleloaders. Take the XTP "magnum" version bullets as an example. If one finds his load too hot for the non-magnum version, just shoot the heavier jacketed magnum bullet. Given all the choices today, I feel I can find something that wilkl fill my needs simply by doing some homework. If I was going to request a bullet jacket thickness on a specific bullet, I tend to agree with your .025", maybe even .030" or a tapered jacket thickness from .030"to .025".I also think a bonded bullet would be part of the request. The core would need to be an alloy that can still expand but not be pure lead. But in all of this what-if, I also know that at inline and sidelock speeds perhaps the best bullet is a plain old lead bullet of a design that shoots accurately from the gun that's going hunting.

 

[ElDiablo]

I agree Mr Tom.

I feel the ammo maker that properly combines; High BC/Terminal Performance/ Accuracy (consistency), will absolutley dominate.

Amen!

I’m underwhelmed by most of the muzzy bullet offerings. I hunt everything from javelina to moose with a muzzy. I’m a big fan of two holes for most animals and so I like Barnes, Swift, Nosler Partition and bonded bullets. The problem is that many of the controlled expansion bullets have relatively poor BCs. If you want long range capability you may lean towards the thinner jacketed “target” bullets like Parker, Pittman, Fury etc. which must necessarily be frangible for longer range but I find overly explosive at high speed and close range. What’s perfectly fine for 50 yards may not work at 300+.

I’m still waiting for a perfect muzzy bullet for 50-400 yard shots.

 

[BCS]

"I’m still waiting for a perfect muzzy bullet for 50-400 yard shots."

Thin jacketed soft lead front over a solid copper butt with a high BC.

 

[anonymouscowherd]

Jacket thickness, bonding, etc. all come into play for controlled expansion on game with the bullet moving within a velocity range/window.

Most target oriented bullets - MatchKings, probably the ELD-X, the VLD offerings, etc. - will quite often have thin, nearly minimally so jackets. After all, it only needs to poke a hole on paper, not deal with pounds of fur, fat, flesh and bone to reach vitals and keep going.

Some of the really heavy-for-caliber-if-not-cartridge bullets like the SUB-X will also have very thin jackets, because they are designed to be shot in something like a 300 blackout with a can at just over 1000fps. The ultra high BC lets them keep that velocity for as long as possible, and the thin jackets and plastic tips are designed to let the bullet expand and perform on game at those velocities.