6.5 Match in Ballistic Gel

[Mr. Stevenson]

https://youtu.be/Xm8wAXkVaxU

 

[SLE]

I shoot both the 143 ELDXs out of a 6.5 creed and 147 ELDMs out of a 6.5 PRC. Both have done well on deer and antelope however I do notice that both work better at distance than they do at close range. With the creed and 143 Xs, it seems anything under 100 yards I get pass through and the animal is not dispatched as quickly. Beyond 200 they seem to work very well.

On the PRC with 147 Ms it was just about the same expect exaggerated which I assume is due to the higher velocity. Last years deer was taken at 545 yds and it dropped in it's tracks and didn't so much as twitch a muscle. Earlier in the season I put two through the neck of an antelope at under 200 yards and it hardly phased it. At 350 yds, the 3rd shot was lights out. It's obvious the M's are going to open more quickly with the lighter case which I think can be good or bad depending on the situation but when you compare the retention data they are within a couple % points. Not sure in a hunting situation there is a noticeable difference. After using both, I have zero issues from an ethics standpoint shooting the Ms out of the PRC.

 

[SupressYourself]

...I put two through the neck of an antelope at under 200 yards and it hardly phased it...

There's your problem. Why do people purposely take neck shots? The only "kill" shot is the spine at the back of the neck. Sure, there are large veins and arteries in there too, but with a whole lot of largely non-vital meat in between. Shoot the thing in the lungs / heart and it may not drop in its tracks, but it's dead every time.

 

[PrairieGhost]

That was extremely interesting. Last year at 500 yards I put a 140 ELD-M through the chest of a coyote and it ran 300 yards. Seven or eight minutes later after walking out to it I had to shoot it in the head with a 22 pistol. Maybe a coyote just didn't have enough resistance to open it up. I am taking a grandson bear hunting, and will carry a Creedmoor if lucky enough to run across a wolf. So now it's Hornady or Berger VLD. Decisions decisions.

 

[Jiffy]

That was extremely interesting. Last year at 500 yards I put a 140 ELD-M through the chest of a coyote and it ran 300 yards. Seven or eight minutes later after walking out to it I had to shoot it in the head with a 22 pistol. Maybe a coyote just didn't have enough resistance to open it up. I am taking a grandson bear hunting, and will carry a Creedmoor if lucky enough to run across a wolf. So now it's Hornady or Berger VLD. Decisions decisions.

I'll fix your problem for you: https://www.barnesbullets.com/product/lrx/

 

[JMF]

I'll fix your problem for you: https://www.barnesbullets.com/product/lrx/

At 686 yards a 145gr LRX @ 3125FPS out of a 7mm will pencil through a mule deer. Shot him twice, hits were 1.5 inches apart right behind the front shoulder, neither expanded at all.

 

[Jiffy]

I've never had a failure on any LRX, TSX, or TTSX out of any rifle I have, at any distance from 10 yards to over 600, on anything I've shot. Ever!

Does it happen, as it does with every bullet ever made?

Yep. Shit happens.

Your experience was an anomaly.

 

[JMF]

It could have been, but that experience was enough for me to switch bullets.

 

[SLE]

There's your problem. Why do people purposely take neck shots?

Well, he wouldn't listen and sit still like a steel gong, I wasn't on a bench, and there was probably some wind and apparently my lead was a tick too much...................I wish every shot was perfect but apparently I don't live in that world. FWIW, directly behind the front shoulder of a big mule deer doe at 80 yards gave me the same result with the creed and the ELD-Xs. If you don't hit bone or some muscle mass, they pass through at close range. At long range I've found them to be pretty good.

- - - Updated - - -

I used to shoot Winchester Ballistic Silvertip's out the ol ot-six and can say those sombeaches will do some damage, however I lost more meat with those damn things than I ever have with any other bullet. I also despise that particular gun and the ridiculously stupid recoil vs performance for what it was. I didn't have very many keep running though, lol and it put down a bunch of animals over a 20 year span back in the day when we had almost unlimited deer tags!

 

[Jiffy]

Those things were nasty!! I use to use them in my 300 Win Mag. I shot a doe in the ass with one and yeah....never chambered another.

- - - Updated - - -

It could have been, but that experience was enough for me to switch bullets.

Was that the only critter you shot with a Barnes product?

On a different note...I want some ballistics gel.

 

[JMF]

Yes, too many other good bullets with higher BC's to need to use them anymore than once.

 

[Jiffy]

If I were a betting man I'd bet you could shoot them for the rest of your life and never have that happen again.

Nevertheless, somebody has to support the other bullet makers too.

 

[PrairieGhost]

- - - Updated - - -

It could have been, but that experience was enough for me to switch bullets.

Same here. At one time I thought the old X bullet was the best thing since sliced bread. I never had a deer drop in its tracks unless I destroyed skeletal structure. As I have said many times X bullets expend half their energy on the hillside beyond the deer. After a dozen deer with X bullets I switched back. Bergers fragment so I make up for that with heavy bullets. I shoot 210gr in my 300 Win.
I think dead right on the spot is an anomaly for an X bullet. Most deer ran 200 yards. A friend shot one with a 110 out of his 300 Win doing 3300 fps. That one did only travel 30 yards. Don't bother telling me they don't make a 110 gr 30 caliber because they did years ago.
I liked the penetration of the X bullet so well I stubbornly stuck with them from 1990 to 2000.

 

[JMF]

If I were a betting man I'd bet you could shoot them for the rest of your life and never have that happen again.

Nevertheless, somebody has to support the other bullet makers too.

Probably not, damn things shot good though.

 

[Jiffy]

I haven't had many go 200 yards.

The majority go about 20-30 and then do a face plant.

I've had a couple "boom flops" as well. Not a whole bunch, but a few. The one that stands out is a mule deer buck at about 80 yards. I shot him with a 80 gr TTSX moving 3000 at the muzzle out of a 243 (yes, it didn't bounce off. weird I know....). Hit him smack in the shoulder and he dropped like I hit him over the head with sledge hammer. All he did was lay there in a heap and do the "dying rear leg pump" for about 3 or 4 seconds.

 

[Wags2.0]

I haven't had many go 200 yards.

The majority go about 20-30 and then do a face plant.

I've had a couple "boom flops" as well. Not a whole bunch, but a few. The one that stands out is a mule deer buck at about 80 yards. I shot him with a 80 gr TTSX moving 3000 at the muzzle out of a 243 (yes, it didn't bounce off. weird I know....). Hit him smack in the shoulder and he dropped like I hit him over the head with sledge hammer. All he did was lay there in a heap and do the "dying rear leg pump" for about 3 or 4 seconds.

barnes suck

 

[PrairieGhost]

The only one I ever recovered sure was pretty. It's a little worn after ten years on my keychain.

 

[espringers]

ok. i just spent 25 minutes of my time watching that. and i am left with the same question i had when i first saw the title of this thread. caveats: i shoot a lot more than i used to and have been stretching it lately on the range with my 6.5 and a nice .308 i bought from a member on this sight last spring with good aftermarket stock, heavy barrel, light trigger, etc.. still not reloading. the 308 bullets are 168g ELD Match TAP Precision and they group nicer than i could have ever imagined. anyways, really enjoying this stuff and how both guns shoot. nonetheless, my ignorance might show with this question... why would anyone choose to hunt with a match bullet in the first place?

 

[Jiffy]

They tend to shoot better. Generally.

For the most part though, "hunting bullets" shoot good enough for what they're intended to be used for.

 

[espringers]

ok. that makes sense. and i suppose the more a person stretches things the more those slight differences become noticeable. thanks.