The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

Al Thompson · January 5, 2000, 01:44 PM

I have some experiance with this idea. The 168's are not designed to expand. The hollow tip is the result of a manufacturing step.

A wildlife control bunch that I know quite well tried the 168's due to the superb accuracy. The results were dismal. The bullet would sometimes drill a hole straight through the deer and sometimes (if a big bone was hit) tumble/yaw enough for decent results. This bunch was killing about a thousand deer a year and has switched to the 165 Ballistic Tip as loaded by Georgia Arms.

The primary weapon is a .308 PSS with a supressor. Another group has used a .270 with 90 grain varmit bullets with good success.

I think the bottom line is that the bullets designed for expansion give much better results.

Giz

January 5, 2000, 01:44 PM	#2
Al Thompson Staff Alumnus Join Date: May 2, 1999 Location: South Carolina Posts: 3,611	I have some experiance with this idea. The 168's are not designed to expand. The hollow tip is the result of a manufacturing step. A wildlife control bunch that I know quite well tried the 168's due to the superb accuracy. The results were dismal. The bullet would sometimes drill a hole straight through the deer and sometimes (if a big bone was hit) tumble/yaw enough for decent results. This bunch was killing about a thousand deer a year and has switched to the 165 Ballistic Tip as loaded by Georgia Arms. The primary weapon is a .308 PSS with a supressor. Another group has used a .270 with 90 grain varmit bullets with good success. I think the bottom line is that the bullets designed for expansion give much better results. Giz