Eld-x bullets... not impressed

[Muley Buck]

Honestly, I was just having a little fun posting that. I'm not trying to get all serious and technical on "bullet performance" here.

 

[Rorschach]

Thanks, man.

The performance you got out of the bullet, in all respects, seems to be what the OP considers "ideal", as do many others, I suspect.

That's a nice exit hole.

Check out this thread it's got all the info on that kill, and more.

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/long-range-hunting/48270-hornady-eld.html

 

[Muley Buck]

Thanks, man.

The performance you got out of the bullet, in all respects, seems to be what the OP considers "ideal", as do many others, I suspect.

That's a nice exit hole.

I haven't had but a couple kills with them so far but my results have been great. My shortest kill range was somewhere around 80yds with very similar results. I really have been happy with the performance of the ELD-X, in my experience that is.

 

[Ndbowhunter]

Weird how folks project their thoughts onto what others write.

200gr 30 cal bullet will kill things irregardless of bullet performance.

a wee 60 or 80 pound animal gets poleaxed by lead tip bullets. I've nearly spit roasted them with frontal shots.. Breast bone to asshole.. huge mess.

These bullets we're getting ****all performance with some zipping through and anytime they met resistance they grenaded.. maybe 5 worked perfectly.

That's variable, and in my mind I don't trust the bullet to break through a tough hide and shoulder on a big carcass and give adequate penetration or if I'm reliant on a neck shot to not pencil through muscle tissue and have a hell time trying to track and find that animal.

Again I was expecting better, maybe I'll try accubombs but no way am I moose or bear hunting with these things.

Off on a deer hunt this evening. Cheers

 

[5MilesBack]

A better equivalent would have been if the broad head had been used around 30 times at varying ranges, resulting in 100 percent one-arrow recoveries, and it occasionally lost its blades, but the hunter still found the game.

In that case I would say some would find the broad head's performance satisfactory, and some wouldn't.

I will agree with that. But IMO if the blades get sheered off a BH on entry on any shot.....it's an inferior product with unacceptable performance.......even if the animal died.

I would expect the ELD-M to perform as described above, but not the X's. Maybe I and some others expected something different with the ELD-X.

 

[Formidilosus]

Bullet talk has to be right up there with scope talk, yet few to none actually learn about either.

Everyone talks this bullet or that, weight retention, "energy", "bullet failure", etc..... yet won't learn anything about terminal ballistics.

 

[luke moffat]

I have never had a bullet "fail" to kill an animal. Heck I shot 3 FMJs (funny story about using my dads gun loaded with what he found cheap at the gun store sometime and I didn't know it) from a .308 from at a moose and it eventually tipped over from 3 .308 through and through holes in it all within 2" of each other, all double lungs. Afterward I looked at the box of ammo and it said FMJ on the side and I was like "well no freaking wonder!!!"

Sure some consistently kill more dramatically at the same time also ruin a whole lot more meat especially when shot in the high shoulder as is common place for many people. I personally will shoot a stouter bullet and live with the the potential of a animal being a bit more wobbly on their feet to save the meat most the time over a more frangible bullet. In the end they all work pretty well from the ones I have tried at game. Just put them in the right place...just how fast they die and how far and how much meat damage they do can very from animal to animal even with the same bullet.

The end result is the same, dead animal...how you get there is up to you and what you are looking for IMO.

 

[Matt Cashell]

Bullet talk has to be right up there with scope talk, yet few to none actually learn about either.

Everyone talks this bullet or that, weight retention, "energy", "bullet failure", etc..... yet won't learn anything about terminal ballistics.

I am ready to learn, what do you got for us?

Perhaps you could start a thread on it and link it from this one.

 

[Formidilosus]

Forgive the drive by post.....

I am ready to learn, what do you got for us?

Perhaps you could start a thread on it and link it from this one.

How fast a thing dies is dependent upon what is damaged, how much is damaged and what the mental state of the thing is. Bullets kill by destroying tissue. The more tissue destroyed, all else being equal, the faster things die. How much tissue that is destroyed is measured by how deep and how wide the wound is. As as long as sufficient penetration is achieved, the wider a wound is the faster it kills.


"Energy" does not factor into it.
What the bullet looks like at the end of the wound channel means little.
"Caliber" only matters in so much as an increase in potential wound channel given like construction and impact speeds.


ELD-X's are designed to perform a certain way. Bergers perform a certain way. Barnes TSX another. Etc, etc.



In the end- "placement, bullet, headstamp". In that order.

 

[5MilesBack]

Ever since the early 80's my mindset was for setting up my rifle for the best possible performance I could get out of it at any angle on an elk. So over the years that included Partitions, A-frames, and Failsafe bullets. The A-frames and Failsafes are absolute penetration machines.......so much so that I have never recovered one in an animal......straight through them....even heavy bone in the shoulder. The Failsafes in particular, while they penetrate almost anything, they do so with a smaller diameter as they don't mushroom as wide as some of the others......but they do blow right on through.

This year was the first year I tried the ELD-X and the Bergers. One deer shot with the 6.5mm ELD-X by my daughter at 375 yards, and one deer shot by me a second later with the 7mm Bergers from the same distance. They both killed their respective deer, but from this point forward I'm only using them for the target range. Just not what I want in a big game bullet.

 

[Matt Cashell]

Thanks for the post, formidilosus.

I still think this discussion deserves its own thread.

I agree with much of your post. Although I must disagree on energy being irrelevant. Energy does have quite a bit to do with how a bullet kills. Energy affects the amount of tissue damaged, particularly the forming of the temporary wound cavity, which causes the bulk of the damage in a bullet wound.

Assuming bullet construction and impact location are equal, greater energy equals greater cavitation, which causes greater tissue damage, and likely quicker death.

 

[Yellowknife]

Bullets kill by destroying tissue. The more tissue destroyed, all else being equal, the faster things die.

"Energy" does not factor into it.

Yeah... I don't get too wound up about muzzle energy in my hunting and shooting, but my engineering side has to point out the your statements are directly contradictory. That whole "Conservation of Energy" law of physics would indicate that tissue destroyed is going to be directly related to the energy available to do that work.

 

[16Bore]

Guys will argue about which end of a toothpick is better.

 

[luke moffat]

Guys will argue about which end of a toothpick is better.

No carbon fiber toothpick no care!!!

 

[Wyatt G]

I thought that was expected when a whitetail is shot with a belted magnum. No? Per hornady that load is carrying over 2900lb ft of energy at 200yds.

A 200 grain 30 cal bullet shouldn't cause that kind of damage on an entrance wound at 2500 fps, i could see it if it was a varmint bullet. My partner shot his buck on the same hunt with a 300 wby and 180gr accubond at a similar distance as me, had a bullet sized entry, jellied the vitals and had a quarter sized exit. I know a 300 wm is overkill for whitetails but there is no excuse for that entrance wound, especially when i hit ribs and not shoulder.

 

[PathFinder]

The biggest gripe, and it's legitimate, that I'm getting from the OP is the inconsistencies from shot to shot. A bullet that pencils on one shot and grenades on the next is garbage. Personally I'm part if the frangible match bullet club, for the same reason I don't hunt with field points. Kinetic energy is important; it's a measure of the bullet's ability to displace/destroy tissue, in all directions radiating out from the wound channel. Frangible, heavy for caliber bullets have long, wide wound channels. The trick is finding the ones that do it consistently. Bonded/controlled expansion bullets have long, narrow wound channels. Results will be consistent, but a great deal of energy is wasted and more tissue is left intact that could otherwise be destroyed. Bullets like Accubonds are a good balance between the two. In the end it's personal preference, but consistent terminal performance vital. You should understand approximately what the bullet will do, and plan shots accordingly.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

Thanks for the post, formidilosus.

I still think this discussion deserves its own thread.

I agree with much of your post. Although I must disagree on energy being irrelevant. Energy does have quite a bit to do with how a bullet kills. Energy affects the amount of tissue damaged, particularly the forming of the temporary wound cavity, which causes the bulk of the damage in a bullet wound.

Assuming bullet construction and impact location are equal, greater energy equals greater cavitation, which causes greater tissue damage, and likely quicker death.

Ft-lbs energy is not a wounding mechanism and will tell you nothing about what a bullet will do in tissue. There is no bullet that needs "1,800 ft-lbs energy to open", but every bullet has a minimum impact velocity for reliable upset.

Knowing that a bullet has ____ ft-lbs of energy does nothing for us. There is no minimum "energy" level needed for killing despite myths. All those formulas -energy, Taylor knockout, etc. we're introduced by people trying to classify "killing ability" before anyone knew what bullets actually do in tissue and how to measure it.


I will will try to start a thread this weekend. .

Yeah... I don't get too wound up about muzzle energy in my hunting and shooting, but my engineering side has to point out the your statements are directly contradictory. That whole "Conservation of Energy" law of physics would indicate that tissue destroyed is going to be directly related to the energy available to do that work.

A 180gr 30cal solid at 3,000fps and a 180gr 30cal frangible at 3,000fps have exactly the same "energy". So how does knowing the energy help you in any way to understand what either bullet will do in an animal?

A 200 grain 30 cal bullet shouldn't cause that kind of damage on an entrance wound at 2500 fps, i could see it if it was a varmint bullet. My partner shot his buck on the same hunt with a 300 wby and 180gr accubond at a similar distance as me, had a bullet sized entry, jellied the vitals and had a quarter sized exit. I know a 300 wm is overkill for whitetails but there is no excuse for that entrance wound, especially when i hit ribs and not shoulder.

It should because that bullet is designed to fully upset (expand) at low impact velocities, while still holding together just enough to get through bone at high impact velocities. An Accubond is a completely different designed bullet than the ELD-X. You would have been equally unhappy with the small wound created by the Accubond at 600+ yards where the ELD-X performs as it should.

 

[Formidilosus]

The biggest gripe, and it's legitimate, that I'm getting from the OP is the inconsistencies from shot to shot. A bullet that pencils on one shot and grenades on the next is garbage. Personally I'm part if the frangible match bullet club, for the same reason I don't hunt with field points. Kinetic energy is important; it's a measure of the bullet's ability to displace/destroy tissue, in all directions radiating out from the wound channel. Frangible, heavy for caliber bullets have long, wide wound channels. The trick is finding the ones that do it consistently. Bonded/controlled expansion bullets have long, narrow wound channels. Results will be consistent, but a great deal of energy is wasted and more tissue is left intact that could otherwise be destroyed. Bullets like Accubonds are a good balance between the two. In the end it's personal preference, but consistent terminal performance vital. You should understand approximately what the bullet will do, and plan shots accordingly.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Given the same same caliber and weight, both type of bullets that ykubstated have the same "energy". The amount of energy told you nothing as to how either bullet will work.

 

[Ndbowhunter]

Again some people are getting it some aren't. I'm not "arguing" here. I'm trying to represent a medium size sample and compare it to hundreds of previous examples.

With a tsx bullet I'm aiming for a break down shoulder shot

Partition style bullet I'm aiming for heart and lung area

With an amax bullet I'll neck shoot or aim for a just behind shoulder quartering away

With an eld-x I'm left guessing.

10" of flesh and skin it pencils

Shoulder or other thick bone it grenades.

And sometimes it behaves like its "supposed to"

That's all.

Carry on

 

[PathFinder]

Given the same same caliber and weight, both type of bullets that ykubstated have the same "energy". The amount of energy told you nothing as to how either bullet will work.

You're 100% correct, that's what I am getting at with the bonded vs fragmenting bullets. Energy is just a measure of potential to do damage. Whether or not the bullet exploits that potential is dependent on its construction. Bonded bullets will use less of their energy to displace and destroy tissue, while something like a Berger or ELD M will likely use all of it.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk