El Jason
Well-known member
Started at 124 grains. This was a nearly frontal/hard quartering shot from about 60 yards. Bullet entered in front the of the shoulder and was under the hide at the junction of the hind quarter/flank.
Follow your shot, episode two
- Thread starter El Jason
- Start date
Started at 124 grains. This was a nearly frontal/hard quartering shot from about 60 yards. Bullet entered in front the of the shoulder and was under the hide at the junction of the hind quarter/flank.
El Jason
Well-known member
It's by design, similar to a Nosler Partition. The front petals are supposed to shed, unlike a Barnes TSX which retains them. Supposedly, shedding the petals makes for more tissue damage. This is consistent with what I saw, more tissue damage than a TSX but it's not as photogenic if you recover them.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,430
Not to derail this topic but I'm curious as well about the bullet performance. How are the petals shedding (assuming fairly quickly after initial penetration and with limited penetration afterwards) going to produce better results than a larger diameter bullet continuing to penetrate with all of it's momentum intact? Seems like a combination of heavy birdshot and a solid bullet rather than a contiguous bullet using up maximum energy potential in the animal.
Obviously, dead is dead so it works well. But saying it is better seems more like a marketing gimmick to me rather than reality. IMO, the popularity of the Partition is because it was much better than other available bullets at that time, not because it is the best design ever. At any rate, it's just my opinion for whatever it is worth. Congrats on the buck!
Obviously, dead is dead so it works well. But saying it is better seems more like a marketing gimmick to me rather than reality. IMO, the popularity of the Partition is because it was much better than other available bullets at that time, not because it is the best design ever. At any rate, it's just my opinion for whatever it is worth. Congrats on the buck!
If you have any questions, call Steve at Hammer. And SteveE, I can assure you that is not a bullet fail. Hammers are fairly new, but have hundreds of documented kill, including Africa. mtmuley
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,430
I'd be more interested in seeing how far the shed petals penetrated than hearing how much better this bullet is supposed to be from its developer. Solid, non-expanding bullets have probably tens of thousands of documented kills all over the world. Doesn't mean they are a superior design for thin skinned game. Solids are designed to penetrate and penetrate they do exceptionally well.
If it was possible to measure wound channel and tissue damage in a quantifiable way before the petals shed and after, I'm betting the damage would be much more during the expansion part of the wound channel than after it lost part of its mass.
I'm not trying to get into an argument or bash the Hammer, I just don't see an improvement in design over the Barnes or E-Tips. Based on what I see from that performance, I wouldn't be satisfied with that over what I've seen from the TSX. Each to their own, I'm glad we have lots of choices.
El Jason
Well-known member
Gerald,
No worries on derailing the topic. Take it as far into the weeds as you like, sans any supporting links from Toby Bridges or Scott Rockholm.
I'm not articulate enough to fully explain the concept. I could buy Barnes cheaper, and I've killed a lot of animals with the TSX. However, I gave these a try because 1) it is a small Montana based company and 2) even I am smart enough to realize a machined bullet will be more consistent than a cast bullet. I've been very impressed with the accuracy from the Hammers, and hopefully next year I will have more field results to show, including elk.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,430
Well, I guess I better quit posting a contrasting viewpoint if I can't include supporting links from my favorite blue minivan driver. Killjoy.
Hope the Hammer company is successful. We need good businesses in Montana.
Hope the Hammer company is successful. We need good businesses in Montana.
Gerald, one unique thing about the developers of this bullet is that they actually hunt them themselves. Just because they don't behave like a conventional mono means nothing. The Hammer isn't the only all copper bullet that exhibits that behavior. I encourage you to call Steve before forming any opinion. Especially if you have not used the bullet. mtmuley
npaden
Well-known member
I've recovered an E-tip that looks pretty close to that. A direct hit on a rib or other bone at under 100 yards at 3,000 fps and even a standard monolithic bullet won't retain it's petals.
I've recovered another shot that was right at 100 yards and it lost 2 of it's petals. I've recovered 2 or 3 others that all had the standard petals and all were over 100 yard shots.
I would be curious what if the hammer would retain it's petals if it was a longer shot.
I've recovered another shot that was right at 100 yards and it lost 2 of it's petals. I've recovered 2 or 3 others that all had the standard petals and all were over 100 yard shots.
I would be curious what if the hammer would retain it's petals if it was a longer shot.
npaden
Well-known member
JLS - good job on sticking with it and tracking him down.
El Jason
Well-known member
Don't trivialize 50 years of reloading experience, coupled with extensive knowledge of hunting the sagebrush.
