.308 question on Berger VLDs

[Tradchef]

So I’ve been using my .308 for years tipping over whitetail, mule deer and elk. I switched to a 168 grain Berger VLD from HSM last year to use on a late season cow elk hunt. My shot last year was right at 380 yards and blew right through her and she made it about 10 feet. Pretty good results. This year I just shot a 5x5 raghorn Tuesday evening at 100 yards. Same exact set up. Anchored him with a back of the shoulder shot. He went 30 yards before piling up. Had a fist sized hole on the entrance as I’m assuming since I hit bone the bullet just fragmented. I found pieces of it all over and around where it went in. I have read at short distance the VLDs are super violent. What I’m wanting to know as I’m mainly a bow guy so I haven’t played with too many of the newer bullet types out there but is there a brand that will be better overall for energy transfer without being so violent? I can’t complain as they have killed 7 animals for me in the two years I’ve shot them. I’m just curious as I read a lot of mixed feelings on the VLDs.

 

[marshland_max]

So I’ve been using my .308 for years tipping over whitetail, mule deer and elk. I switched to a 168 grain Berger VLD from HSM last year to use on a late season cow elk hunt. My shot last year was right at 380 yards and blew right through her and she made it about 10 feet. Pretty good results. This year I just shot a 5x5 raghorn Tuesday evening at 100 yards. Same exact set up. Anchored him with a back of the shoulder shot. He went 30 yards before piling up. Had a fist sized hole on the entrance as I’m assuming since I hit bone the bullet just fragmented. I found pieces of it all over and around where it went in. I have read at short distance the VLDs are super violent. What I’m wanting to know as I’m mainly a bow guy so I haven’t played with too many of the newer bullet types out there but is there a brand that will be better overall for energy transfer without being so violent? I can’t complain as they have killed 7 animals for me in the two years I’ve shot them. I’m just curious as I read a lot of mixed feelings on the VLDs.

This is the exact reason I went to an Accubond LR. I don't use the Berger's anymore. Dont get me wrong they are awesome out my rifle, but I'm sticking with the soft bonded type bullets.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[ramont]

I use Barnes TTSX bullets, I prefer them to the Berger bullets.

 

[Formidilosus]

So I’ve been using my .308 for years tipping over whitetail, mule deer and elk. I switched to a 168 grain Berger VLD from HSM last year to use on a late season cow elk hunt. My shot last year was right at 380 yards and blew right through her and she made it about 10 feet. Pretty good results. This year I just shot a 5x5 raghorn Tuesday evening at 100 yards. Same exact set up. Anchored him with a back of the shoulder shot. He went 30 yards before piling up. Had a fist sized hole on the entrance as I’m assuming since I hit bone the bullet just fragmented. I found pieces of it all over and around where it went in. I have read at short distance the VLDs are super violent. What I’m wanting to know as I’m mainly a bow guy so I haven’t played with too many of the newer bullet types out there but is there a brand that will be better overall for energy transfer without being so violent? I can’t complain as they have killed 7 animals for me in the two years I’ve shot them. I’m just curious as I read a lot of mixed feelings on the VLDs.

“Energy” is a useless metric and there is is no free lunch. Once penetration is sufficient to reach vital organs, the wider the wound created the faster things die.

The big entrance wound was from splash back, I.E.- the temporary stretch cavity happened close enough to the skin to rupture it. It doesn’t mean it’s a “bad” thing. All bullet can do it, and all “soft” bullets will do it given the right scenario. The ABLR is no better in this regard. Neither is the Hornady ELD-X, ELD-M, etc.

 

[marshland_max]

“Energy” is a useless metric and there is is no free lunch. Once penetration is sufficient to reach vital organs, the wider the wound created the faster things die.

The big entrance wound was from splash back, I.E.- the temporary stretch cavity happened close enough to the skin to rupture it. It doesn’t mean it’s a “bad” thing. All bullet can do it, and all “soft” bullets will do it given the right scenario. The ABLR is no better in this regard. Neither is the Hornady ELD-X, ELD-M, etc.

My dead animals tell me different about "soft bonded bullets", but that's not factual, thats just been my experience.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[ramont]

I have never understood your insistence that energy is a useless metric, it might not be exact but it's a valid way to compare relative penetration capability. As you said,

Once penetration is sufficient to reach vital organs...

and energy is a convenient way to compare the ability of a bullet to reach the vital organs.

 

[Formidilosus]

I have never understood your insistence that energy is a useless metric, it might not be exact but it's a valid way to compare relative penetration capability. As you said, and energy is a convenient way to compare the ability of a bullet to reach the vital organs.

Energy doesn’t tell you anything about penetration. How do you believe it does?

 

[ramont]

Energy doesn’t tell you anything about penetration. How do you believe it does?

Sure it does, how do you believe that it doesn't?

I will agree that energy can't be used as an absolute rating system but it can be used to compare the energy of some known bullet with good performance to some unknown performer. If I've got a good bullet that I know will penetrate to a depth that allows the bullet to hit the heart/lung area from a certain angle then I can use it's energy as a relative standard for choosing a similar bullet.

You keep saying that energy doesn't tell you anything about penetration but in reality it does take some amount of energy for a specific bullet design to penetrate an animal's body. If a .30 caliber, 168gr TTSX will penetrate through an elk at 100 yards I know that a bullet of similar weight and design will probably perform very similarly if it has the same energy and it impacts the animal under similar circumstances.

I understand that nobody has been able to scientifically prove that 'X' amount of energy will do 'Y' amount of damage to an animal because there are too many variables, but we do know that the game and fish departments limit the type of weapons that can be used to legally hunt game and their regulations are based partially on the energy produced by specific calibers. In fact, air guns are becoming popular and all of the air gun regulations that I've read require that hunting guns need to have specific calibers and muzzle energies so it's obvious that game and fish departments do recognize muzzle energy as a reasonable way to estimate the effectiveness of the firearm.

 

[frankrb3]

This season I switched from the Berger VLD loaded by HSM to the Barnes TTSX all copper bullet. I was tired of biting into bits of lead and copper jacket as a result of the VLD bullets exploding inside of the animals. Like you, it was hard to complain about performance because they were accurate and good at killing everything but I was still not happy with how the bullets broke apart. The Barnes TTSX have great weight retention and do a great job penetrating which I like. I shot a bull this year at about 150 meters and was able to recover a perfectly mushroomed bullet just under the skin on the opposite shoulder. That was after smashing into the shoulder blade as well so it probably would have passed through if it wasn't for the contact with the bone. Now that this season is over for me and I have had the chance to kill a bull elk, antelope and mule deer with the Barnes TTSX I will not be going back to the Berger VLDs. BTW my gun is a tikka T3 lite in 300 WSM if that matters.

 

[EastMT]

Speed times mass equals momentum, or energy.

But the fallacy of energy is that when a highly frangible bullet explodes on impact, the energy equation is now completely out the door as you have these little pieces slowing down much more rapidly if they meet the same resistance as a 180gr piece of bullet.

I used LRAB in a 26 Nosler, the bullet exploded under the skin on the shoulder before hitting the shoulder bone. Basically the shoulder blade of a mountain goat stopped all of the particles due to the energy of the small particles losing momentum so fast. 3000 ft of energy in theory should blast through about any game in the country, except it’s not 3000ft of energy when you have 1 or 2 grain pieces flying through the meat or bones. The hollow point directly behind the tip of the LRAB is highly explosive at short ranges and Nosler themselves have said they are not intended for high speed impacts, but expansion at low speeds. I don’t shoot long range so the BC doesn’t really matter, I could shoot round nose and not know the difference.

I have now switched to 100% Swift a frames or Nosler partitions. They are not near as pretty, but all those tipped bullets (except a few) melt due to friction with the air anyway, so you end up with a hollow point hitting the animal.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[marshland_max]

Speed times mass equals momentum, or energy.

But the fallacy of energy is that when a highly frangible bullet explodes on impact, the energy equation is now completely out the door as you have these little pieces slowing down much more rapidly if they meet the same resistance as a 180gr piece of bullet.

I used LRAB in a 26 Nosler, the bullet exploded under the skin on the shoulder before hitting the shoulder bone. Basically the shoulder blade of a mountain goat stopped all of the particles due to the energy of the small particles losing momentum so fast. 3000 ft of energy in theory should blast through about any game in the country, except it’s not 3000ft of energy when you have 1 or 2 grain pieces flying through the meat or bones. The hollow point directly behind the tip of the LRAB is highly explosive at short ranges and Nosler themselves have said they are not intended for high speed impacts, but expansion at low speeds. I don’t shoot long range so the BC doesn’t really matter, I could shoot round nose and not know the difference.

I have now switched to 100% Swift a frames or Nosler partitions. They are not near as pretty, but all those tipped bullets (except a few) melt due to friction with the air anyway, so you end up with a hollow point hitting the animal.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For me I'm using them in the lowly 7 mm Rem Mag and 30-06. So impact velocities are not to much of a concern. Let's remember that the OP was referring to 308 Winchester. He's had some blow ups with the Berger's. I've experienced no blow ups with ANY Nosler Partions, Accubond, Accubond LR or BT in my 30-06. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the OP would be fine with any of those bullets. The TTSX would also be a great choice if lead is of concern.

I think this discussion is great, but in reality it's a 308 Winchester and a quality bullet is easily obtained and utilized at the velocities one might expect from a 308.

It's opening day tomorrow for us, so im going to be getting ready for that.

Cheers guys, good hunting!

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

Sure it does, how do you believe that it doesn't?

I will agree that energy can't be used as an absolute rating system but it can be used to compare the energy of some known bullet with good performance to some unknown performer. If I've got a good bullet that I know will penetrate to a depth that allows the bullet to hit the heart/lung area from a certain angle then I can use it's energy as a relative standard for choosing a similar bullet.

You keep saying that energy doesn't tell you anything about penetration but in reality it does take some amount of energy for a specific bullet design to penetrate an animal's body. If a .30 caliber, 168gr TTSX will penetrate through an elk at 100 yards I know that a bullet of similar weight and design will probably perform very similarly if it has the same energy and it impacts the animal under similar circumstances.

I understand that nobody has been able to scientifically prove that 'X' amount of energy will do 'Y' amount of damage to an animal because there are too many variables, but we do know that the game and fish departments limit the type of weapons that can be used to legally hunt game and their regulations are based partially on the energy produced by specific calibers. In fact, air guns are becoming popular and all of the air gun regulations that I've read require that hunting guns need to have specific calibers and muzzle energies so it's obvious that game and fish departments do recognize muzzle energy as a reasonable way to estimate the effectiveness of the firearm.

I say that “ft-lbs energy” is not a wounding mechanism, will not tell you how deep a bucket will penetrate, will not tell you how wide a wound will be, and will not tell you the shape of the wound.... Because it won’t. That it a terminal ballistics FACT. In your example- a 168gr TTSX and a 168gr ELD-M with the same MV have exactly the same “energy”. That energy tells you nothing about the bullet, and certainly won’t tell you how deep it will penetrate.


I am am happy to have a discussion on terminal ballistics, but we are going to have to have common ground first. Please read the linked articles and papers-

http://rkba.org/research/fackler/wrong.html

Basic Wound Ballistic Terminal Performance Facts

FBI 9MM Justification, FBI Training Division - Soldier Systems Daily


These articles are specifically about humans, however it is exactly the same for animals. The mechanisms of injury is exactly the same, what kills is exactly the same. Energy is discussed, and explained why it’s a myth with regards to wounding.



If you read those and understand that the material is not “opinion”, that every bullet you think is great on game was designed and tested to those standards, then we can have a discussion.

 

[EastMT]

For me I'm using them in the lowly 7 mm Rem Mag and 30-06. So impact velocities are not to much of a concern. Let's remember that the OP was referring to 308 Winchester. He's had some blow ups with the Berger's. I've experienced no blow ups with ANY Nosler Partions, Accubond, Accubond LR or BT in my 30-06. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the OP would be fine with any of those bullets. The TTSX would also be a great choice if lead is of concern.

I think this discussion is great, but in reality it's a 308 Winchester and a quality bullet is easily obtained and utilized at the velocities one might expect from a 308.

It's opening day tomorrow for us, so im going to be getting ready for that.

Cheers guys, good hunting!

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Yeah, you are probably right. I’ve shoot a 308 now pretty much all the time and the likelihood of a blow up unless it’s a 110 or 125 is pretty slim. I’m shooting 180’s at 2600.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tradchef]

Thanks for the responses. I was looking into the accubonds and the Barnes bullets. As I said before.....as for killing animals the VLDs do very well at distance and are super accurate. Dead is Dead so I have no complaints with that. I just want to see if there is a more efficient bullet and it sounds like there are some good choices depending on what you are looking for.

 

[backcountry_hunter]

FWIW... I don't have any real world experience w/ mono's in a 308. I've shot a 308 for a long time along with other calibers. I shoot mono's out of other rifles but don't trust I have enough velocity in a 22" tube (let alone a 18) to allow barnes mono's to perform like their supposed to. At the muzzle sure but any distance and I start dropping below that magic mental mark. A 308 screams accubonds to me.

It's entirely possible I'm over thinking it or overly concerned....

 

[Chesapeake]

I launch 7mm 168 ABLR bullets at 2850. In all my shots on game(5) they have more or less exploded and only 1 penetrated all the way through. Longest shot was 250. I recovered the rear copper base of one wiped all but clean of lead.

I’d think a 190 at say 2600 from a 308 would probably do well.
A standard Accubond would be better I think. They blow off about 40% of the front and the rear penetrates through.

Coppers I’d want 2000fps impact velocity, accubonds could do a bit lower.
Partitions blow the front off easily as well.


I think impact speed and bullet construction are more telling than energy. A big soft slow bullet could have the same energy as a small soft fast bullet. The big slow one will dig while the fast small one will splash. And if you push the big one fast enough it will splash as well while having massive energy. And a full metal jacket can have big energy but just pencil through.
Energy alone don’t say much to me.

 

[Tradchef]

.View attachment 81998

This was a VLD from my mulie buck at 225 yards. It worked very well and I’d say did what it needed to do. My bull from Tuesday evening at 100 was a different story. Fragments everywhere, dead animal yes, late wound channel yes. Would the accubonds be more of an all around bullet for closer shots and farther shots over the bergers?

 

[Axlrod]

Take a look at the Hammer bullets. They are machined copper. Very accurate and very consistent terminal performance.

 

[Tradchef]

Local company eh? I’ll have to check it out. Thanks for the heads up