My preferred whitetail load for years was a 180gr sierra pro-hunter RN bullet loaded at around 2700 fps out of my 30-06. I could keep a 1 1/2" 5 shot group at 100 yards and a 3" group at 200 yards. It's an extremely effective woods load and fully capable of doing the job out past 300 yards. During the shortage I switched over to a sierra 165 gr HPBT gameking due to supply. Once my supply of gamekings runs out I'll likely go back to the pro-hunter but dang that gameking is accurate and effective, just not as effective as that pro-hunter inside of 50 yards. I just don't like a bullet that comes apart on game.
Does anyone actually prefer round nose bullets?
- Thread starter Dogger
- Start date
I know this is an OLD thread and this quote was from 7 years ago, but it is dead wrong.
Fire some 180 gr RN bullets out of a 300 WM at around 3000 fps and some modern 180 gr spitzers out of a 30-06 at 2800 fps. At the muzzle the 300 WM is faster with more energy. But at only 100 yards the 30-06 load is now faster with more energy. At 300 yards the 30-06 will be 300 fps faster even though it started 200 fps slower and have an additional 600 ft lbs of energy. In fact my 308 loaded with spitzers matches a 300WM loaded with RN bullets in speed and energy at only 150 yards. Trajectory however just isn't all that much different at least out to 300 yards.
When most guys consider a bullets BC they only look at trajectory. The old school method was to fire poor BC bullets as fast as possible. But by choosing modern bullets with good BC's I'm now able to carry a much lighter more compact 308 rifle and beat old school 300 WM performance. And do it with 1/2 the recoil.
Sixty or seventy years ago when bullet technology was still in it's infancy spitzers could not always be counted on expand reliably and still give good penetration. RN bullets could and it was worth giving up aerodynamics. RN bullets tended to expand more reliably at slower impact speeds so they were less of a disadvantage at longer ranges where speed was down.
But this isn't the 1940's or 50's. Bullets have improved dramatically and there is no practical reason to use RN bullets other than in tube magazines where pointed bullets might cause problems.
Fire some 180 gr RN bullets out of a 300 WM at around 3000 fps and some modern 180 gr spitzers out of a 30-06 at 2800 fps. At the muzzle the 300 WM is faster with more energy. But at only 100 yards the 30-06 load is now faster with more energy. At 300 yards the 30-06 will be 300 fps faster even though it started 200 fps slower and have an additional 600 ft lbs of energy. In fact my 308 loaded with spitzers matches a 300WM loaded with RN bullets in speed and energy at only 150 yards. Trajectory however just isn't all that much different at least out to 300 yards.
When most guys consider a bullets BC they only look at trajectory. The old school method was to fire poor BC bullets as fast as possible. But by choosing modern bullets with good BC's I'm now able to carry a much lighter more compact 308 rifle and beat old school 300 WM performance. And do it with 1/2 the recoil.
Sixty or seventy years ago when bullet technology was still in it's infancy spitzers could not always be counted on expand reliably and still give good penetration. RN bullets could and it was worth giving up aerodynamics. RN bullets tended to expand more reliably at slower impact speeds so they were less of a disadvantage at longer ranges where speed was down.
But this isn't the 1940's or 50's. Bullets have improved dramatically and there is no practical reason to use RN bullets other than in tube magazines where pointed bullets might cause problems.
I think any deer sized game would be really unimpressed with the difference in energy- any hit in the vitals and they are dead before they know what hit them. So there "really" would not be any difference under 200, as Mr. Thompson stated back when I had but 3 children.... and they were just learning to ride tricycles .... now the oldest training to fly fighter jets.....
I note that Wyosmith says that Remington doesn't make his bullet the same way anymore ..... the market found better answers to the problem, apparently. I know my Grandfather used 150gr .270WIN for his elk way back when..... probably Remingtons.
bamaranger
New member
Interarms Mark X Mannlicher style carbine
I have a soft spot for Mannlicher stocked rifles and got a deal on a Mark X in '06 because the stock had been radically shortened by the previous owner. A pal runs a stockfitting business, and a thick pad and spacer, professionally installed, solved the problem and gave a custom fit. In keeping with the Euro look, the rifle got a fixed 6x Leupold in vertically split mounts, and I elected to shoot heavy roundnose slugs, ala the Mannlicher 6.5 tradition.
Right choice, for a wrong reason, but you can't argue with the results. My first batch of slugs were Nosler 200 gr Partitions. I don't need a 200 gr controlled expansion slug on a 150 lb whitetail, but man, did they group. They also kicked like snot when running just 2400 fps from the stubby 20" barreled carbine. My next batch utilized 180 gr Sierra's, velocity running 2475+, and recoil noticably reduced, accuracy was still outstanding.
The deer I've killed with the combo have all been under 100 yds, one dropped at the shot, the other ran about 30 yds. Given the splendid accuraacy, and the ease of shooting, I'll stay with that load. The rifle is a looker too, if I'm not seeing deer, I admire the Mannlicher Mark X.
I have a soft spot for Mannlicher stocked rifles and got a deal on a Mark X in '06 because the stock had been radically shortened by the previous owner. A pal runs a stockfitting business, and a thick pad and spacer, professionally installed, solved the problem and gave a custom fit. In keeping with the Euro look, the rifle got a fixed 6x Leupold in vertically split mounts, and I elected to shoot heavy roundnose slugs, ala the Mannlicher 6.5 tradition.
Right choice, for a wrong reason, but you can't argue with the results. My first batch of slugs were Nosler 200 gr Partitions. I don't need a 200 gr controlled expansion slug on a 150 lb whitetail, but man, did they group. They also kicked like snot when running just 2400 fps from the stubby 20" barreled carbine. My next batch utilized 180 gr Sierra's, velocity running 2475+, and recoil noticably reduced, accuracy was still outstanding.
The deer I've killed with the combo have all been under 100 yds, one dropped at the shot, the other ran about 30 yds. Given the splendid accuraacy, and the ease of shooting, I'll stay with that load. The rifle is a looker too, if I'm not seeing deer, I admire the Mannlicher Mark X.
Don Fischer
New member
I had a Ruger 77 in 7x57 when they first came out. Tried Hornady, Speer and Sierra bullet's in it in weight's from 140gr to 175 gr, nothing shot for squat! Loved the rifle and was ready to give up and bought a box of Hornady 154gr RN, boy did they shoot well. Never fired anything else in it again. Aside from that I've never felt the desire to use round nose bullet's. If there is any advantage to then, I haven't a clue what it is.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
I imagine that within 200 yards, the only thing that matters is proper expansion and not fragmenting. Trajectory and all that? Irrelevant.
Cheapshooter
New member
A good friend spends three weeks every year hunting in South Africa. Mostly cross bow, and archery now. But he has taken many animals with various rifles as well. He tells me all they use is round nose bullets. From smaller, thin skinned plains animals to dangerous game. They believe the round nose bullets penetrate better. Don't know anything about scientific theory, and ballistic tests. Just that they have been successfully taking animals for a long time with round nose bullets.
Don Fischer
New member
I heard that in Africa they put a lot of emphasis on complete penetration to get a blood trail to follow. I suspect that a spitzer bullet slowed down some to help retain weight would in fact shoot through a great many of the animals over there. If that is true it blow's a hole in their idea about RN bullet's. I don't think RN are bad but notice in most cartridges you find them in heavy weight bullet's. A 220 gr bullet from a 300 mag could be a super load. Take the same rifle and load it up with 110gr bullet's and they simply go splat. Somewhere between the two is an ideal bullet. But at the same time the 220gr round nose will kill whatever it's shot at with good placement. No magic in the bullet, just well chosen for the job needing done!
Cheapshooter
New member
Actually, another of my friends observations after more than ten African hunts is that his PH does not want people even using a 300 Win Mag. He says that there are more game lost when using that round than any other. But for hunting game that requires less than a 375, or other medium to large bores, he praises the 303 British.
Can't say his PH is wrong or right on either the round nose bullets, or cartridge choice. But I can say after decades of being an outfitter, and Professional Hunter in South Africa there are probably tens of thousands of animals that prove his credability.
Cheapshooter
New member
I missed that. I usually watch the date of an OP. But this is a topic as viable, and interesting today as it was almost twenty years ago.
Sure Shot Mc Gee
New member
But. Nowhere's as sturdy as a Farmall.
