Ballistic Tips work better using heavier bullets.

[147 Grain]

Ballistic Tips (BT's) were designed by Nosler for violent expansion / explosion and medium penetration on light skin type animals like deer.

For most calibers shooting BT's, you're better off using heavier projectiles with bigger Sectional Density's (SD's) than you would normally use for a regularly constructed bullet.

Why?

1. Heavier bullets for caliber are better in a BT because they tone down the violent expansion a bit and still have enough weight leftover for a complete pass-through.

2. The shock-value with the heavier BT will still be more than lighter standard bullets and you get more energy on target.

3. Short range shots also suit the larger round with a higher SD versus standard light weight bullets with less mass.

4. Raking quartering-away shots need a heavier round for adequate penetration.

5. A larger BT'd bullet is more forgiving if you shoot into the shoulder.

 

[147 Grain]

Caution:

Standard bullets generally perform better on deer in lighter to mid-weight sizes.

Ballistic Tipped rounds are the exception to the rule as outlined in the opening post. Reported problems of a BT blowing up too quickly are generally associated with too light of a bullet.

Steve

P.S. I like a bullet to perform two things in my 30-06:

1. Violent expansion / shock.
2. Plenty of penetration for a pass-through.

The two best rounds I am aware of, are....for:

* Light skinned / boned deer: 180-gr. Ballistic Tip from Nosler
* Heavy skinned / boned elk: 180-gr. Partition from Nosler

 

[impact]

Ballistic Tips (BT's) were designed by Nosler for violent expansion / explosion and medium penetration on light skin type animals like deer.

Ballistic Tips were also designed for auto loader type rifles. Before I started using SMKs I used 140 BTs for my 270. They did a number on deer! Even the 140gr will go through a deer. The first neck shot I made with the BTs looked like someone run a 1 1/2 pipe through the deers neck. I expected there to be more of an explosion with major meat damage. I was wrong! The SMK causes more meat damage than the BTs.

I like the 6mm and 243 BTs because the tips are purple

 

[arthurrh]

I'm surprised at all the people who want a complete pass-through from their bullet. From a terminal ballistics perspective pass-through is not a good thing. It means energy is wasted, being expended somewhere other than your target.

It seems that ideally you'd want your bullet to penetrate to vitals and then stop, delivering 100% of it's energy. A clean pass-through might deliver only 20-30%, leaving the animal wounded and running like hell to get away and die somewhere else.

I've seen this with shots from my 7mm weatherby on animals too small for the caliber/bullet combination.

And yes, the purple tips on the Nosler .243/6mm bullets are cool.

 

[jrklaus]

Evidently there are two schools of thought, and I have no idea which is right? Arthurrh outlines one school above. Elmer Keith was a proponent of the pass-through school, on the idea that you would have two holes for a blood trail and that cold air would be let into the vitals more efficiently to speed the killing process. Like I said, I have no idea which concept is better....

 

[wacki]

The SMK causes more meat damage than the BTs.

What is this? SMK?

 

[MLC]

^^Sierra Match King^^


I've used one Nosler BT on deer.
150 grain out of a 308, very effective at well under 100 yards.
I'm going to try the 120 grain 6.5's this autumn.

I've used SD and bullet construction as well as the concept of kinetic pulse to decide on my hunting bullets.
I think that Ackley would've been a fan of the kinetic pulse school because of his love of the 220 Swift for hunting.

 

[impact]

SMKs are Sierra Match King. They are a HPBT. (hollow point boat tail)

 

[impact]

arthurrh this is just MO. But with a pass through I think you get better hydraulic shock with a expanding bullet. Water does not compress! So in a fraction of a second you move that water (blood) it shocks the system even causing internal damage. Damage that may not even be close to where the bullet impacted the animal.

Even with a bow if the arrow passes through the animal it will die much quicker. More bleed out and internal damage!

I had a conversation with a fellow one time about the stopping power of a 38 special vs the 357 mag. he said the same thing you did. That the 38 will thump a person more because it is more than likely not pass through and the person will feel the full FPs of the 38. But the 357 has been noted as having the most one shot kills just because of the hydraulic shock issue.

I understand what you are saying with the thump factor. But massive tissue damage will cause more bleed out.

 

[Fremmer]

I like complete penetration by a soft-point round.

A round will destroy the tissue it passes through. So I want that round to go through both sides of the animal, thereby destroying all of the tissue in its path. IMO, more tissue destruction means more chance of destroying vital organs, nerves, blood vessels, etc. which will (hopefully) cause the deer to drop instantly or very quickly. Naturally, expansion during penetration is good; after all, that's why I'm using a soft-point and not a FMJ. I want the round to expand, but not at the cost of less penetration -- especially if the round hits heavy bone.

Just my opinion. If the Nosler round works for you, keep using it! Whatever works, as long as you get your deer!

 

[arthurrh]

Pass through will get you a better blood trail, no doubt. But if it's a matter of how much energy delivered to the target, it definitely doesn't compare to a bullet that stays in. It's a simple matter of physics.

If you read books, internet, etc., there are a lot of voodoo ballistics going on, bu the truth is it's all basic science. I can definitely see wanting a blood trail on an animal for tracking reasons, because of course we just can't guarantee stopping an animal in it's tracks everytime. But if you want the biggest bang for your buck, a bullet that doesn't quite leave the animal will do the most damage. Ideally say stop about an inch short of exiting. ;-)

 

[Sarge]

I'll take a big hole all the way through, thank you very much.

 

[Charles S]

Physics is a great subject. You do get more energy released on topic without full penetration.

I will take a large exit wound over incomplete penetration any day. I find that the animal is typically more rapidly incapacitated with an exit wound and by chance if they do run, they are much easier to track.

Charles

 

[zeisloft]

arthurrh, please explain your side of basic physics. I believe physics works for both sides of this one.
~z

 

[arthurrh]

The way a bullet damages a target is by transfer of energy. If the bullet passes all the way through, it takes some of it's total energy with it. Say the bullet has 1000 foot pounds when it reaches the animal, but it punches cleanly through. It may take a couple hundred pounds of energy with it, undelivered, or even more. But if it stays in the animal, it delivers all the energy to the animal.

That said, delivery of energy isn't enough, you have to hit vitals, obviously. Once you've done that, the only advantage of passing through the other side is to spill more blood. But damage to the animal past the vitals is neglible compared to hitting the vitals. I'm sure we've all shot something and gone through it and not killed it, at least not instantly.

For example, my 17HMR when shot at animals up close has a tendency to pass cleanly through, and the little critters run away. For sure they die, but it's way below optimal. On the other hand, if I am further way and the bullet expands fully inside the animal at optimal velocity and doesn't make it's way out, that's the animal that drops dead on the spot.

Yes, there are lots of factors in a clean kill, but all other items being equal (velocity, bullet construction, etc.) the bullet that stays in delivers more bang to the animal than the bullet that passes through.

 

[impact]

For example, my 17HMR when shot at animals up close has a tendency to pass cleanly through, and the little critters run away. For sure they die, but it's way below optimal. On the other hand, if I am further way and the bullet expands fully inside the animal at optimal velocity and doesn't make it's way out, that's the animal that drops dead on the spot.

I'm having a real hard time beliving that! Kinda sounds like something you made up.

 

[SakoL61R]

Just a noob here, but have killed a bunch of critters (elk, blacktails, muleys, whitetails and feral hogs) with bow, pistol, shotgun (slugs) muzzleloader and rifle over my 45 years.
Count me as a hunter who really likes an exit wound. Experience on elk, deer and hogs with pistol, shotgun and muzzleloader using large, low velocity projectiles has proven time and again that a double lung shot (big hole in-big hole out) collapses both lungs quickly and puts them down fast. The blood trail is a plus as well.

On Nosler BT's, agreed with 147. For my .308, I use 165's, 30-06, 180's. Impact velocities between 2000 and 2600 fps using BT's have worked very well for me.
Sako

 

[bergie]

Direct from the Nosler website

1. The Ballistic Tip® Hunting bullet's polycarbonate tip resists deformation in the magazine and initiates expansion upon impact.

2. Fully tapered jacket and special lead alloy core allows controlled expansion and optimum weight retention at all practical velocity levels.

3. Heavy jacket base acts as a platform for large diameter mushroom.

I don't see anything about explosion, or even violent expansion, rather "controlled expansion"

However when you are talking about varmint bullets

2. The Ballistic Tip® Varmint's ultra thin jacket mouth assures violent expansion at either end of the velocity scale.

3. The uniform, gradual thickening of the jacket wall at the bullet's mid-section is designed to keep the Ballistic Tip® Varmint together until impact at any velocity.

I use 140 gr. BT's in my .270 handloads. All but one deer that I have shot with this load have been pass throughs. Average range about 150 yards. I use near max loads. No blowups, no massive craters at the exit location, a couple have gone through ribs on both sides of the chest cavity. On the entrance side, a nice round .277" hole, exit side a nice round hole through the rib probably closer to .35". In these deer, the lungs and or heart looked like they had exploded.
The only BT that stayed in a deer was quartering towards me. I missed the near side front shoulder, bullet entered right behind it, travelled the length of the body destroying a lung and the liver and ended up pretty well taking out the upper thigh bone/hip on the far side. Didn't dig out the remains of the bullet, so I don't really know how much of it was left intact, but in my opinion it functioned perfectly. This was the only deer that I have shot with a BT that dropped on the spot.
Of course though, the others were running and continued to go for anywhere between 50 to 100 yards, even with vital components completely destroyed. Most gave no indication of even being hit until they fell over.

bergie

 

[Lycanthrope]

OK, there is a lot of misrespresentation about the Nosler Ballistic Tips.


The Early ones grenaded. A lot. (I liked them)

Nosler changed the jacket design and now offer two types. One a hunting version and the other a varmint version.

Anyhow, I've ran a few 140gr .284 BT bullets through deer at 3300-3400fps and they blow no bigger than a quarter. That's tougher than Nosler Partitions, Honady SP and Core-Lokt bullets at 3000 fps in the same caliber. I have pics of a 160gr Partition that never went through a 100lb whitetail. Don't pay homage to the gun rags......

The new BT bullets are excellent hunting bullets and get a really bad rap.

 

[Picher]

I've shot about 20 deer with Nosler BTs and have found them a great deer round. In my '06, I used 150 grain and in the .270, currently use 130 grain.

That said, I'm a good game shot and consistently shoot deer in the lung/heart area at all ranges. Deer are plentiful here, so I pick my shots and place them carefully. Almost any expanding bullet would work for me, but I like the trajectory advantage I get with handloaded 130 grain bullets. I've shot deer well over 300 yards and haven't been disappointed in the bullet's performance for trajectory, accuracy, or terminal performance.

If I were to use the .270 for heavier game at close range, I'd use the 140 or 150 grain rounds, but may/may not choose Ballistic Tips. BTs are best for longer distance shooting and there's probably no advantage over cheaper bullets when shooting under 150 yards. In fact, inexpensive factory ammo is perfectly fine for those situations.

Picher