Sierra MatchKings for hunting

[reynolds357]

Natman, they work well. Calling people demeaning names who have actually tried them does not bolster your opinion.

[Art Eatman]

Since I've had great success on game and I get tight groups from my benchrest, I've never even considered using MatchKings instead of GameKings.

[reynolds357]

Art, the reason I switched was because of a bullet failure. We are talking 30 years ago when there was not the proliferation of selection we have today. I shot a huge bodied buck on the shoulder blade, .264 Win Mag 120 grain spitzer. If I remember correctly, it was at that time called a pro hunter. The shot dead on the shoulder blade did not kill the deer. Three weeks later, I saw the same deer. No question about it, it was the same deer. The limp confirmed it. I killed him and when dressing, I discovered that he had a terrible case of gangrene from my shot. The bullet exploded on the shoulder bone. No part of the bullet went deeper than 3". I dug the jacket out and it literally had not a trace of lead left in it. It was in many pieces.
To make a long story short, I switched to Speer Grand Slams. Then a couple years later, at the advice of a very old, very experienced reloader-hunter, I switched to match kings. He told me, "they will explode, but they will penetrate several inches before they do." He was correct.
Now, I mainly use Berger VLD hunting and Ballistic silvertips. I still on occasion hunt with match kings.

[Art Eatman]

We had a discussion here many years ago, and after I emailed Sierra, one of their tech guys contributed.

Some of their bullets can be over-driven. In 30-caliber, the 150-grain SPBT is one. Yeah, I had learned; had had a bullet blow up in a buck's neck. (Paralyzed him but no exit.) But, maybe 25 yards and a muzzle velocity around 3,100. Their flat-based SP most likely would have expanded properly and exited the neck as it's a bit more strongly constructed.

The SPBT works okay with a muzzle velocity of no more than around 2,800. Or, on out at 200+ yards. I had had a nice one-shot kill at 450 with that bullet.

Just offhand, I'd figure that a 120-grain bullet from a .264 needs to be a Tough Mother to NOT blow up. Anyhow, I'm not surprised at the problem. I messed around with a .264 for a while. Great cartridge, but bullet construction is a more critical issue than for other cartridges, IMO.

[shadowviper]

There has been terminal ballistic testing on the matchkings for tactical use, feel free to do your own research but the over ridding finding was jacket separation, at least in the 168gr 308. Generally that's not a good thing in a big game hunting bullet.

They would be fine for head shots if that's your cup of tea. Too unpredictable for heart shots, FMJs would be a better. They don't leave a big enough hole for a lung shot. As far as the should goes, its sketchy best, but I'm sure it would kill them most of the time. Personally, most of the time isn't good enough for me and I'm not sure how grenade like performance on something you want to eat is a good thing.

esides the fact that there are many, many better options for hunting that are much cheaper. There just isn't any reason to hunt big game with these bullets. Shooting varmints with them would probably be fine though.

[Ibmikey]

Refer to my post on "the Hunt" forum, exotic bullets, I dumped a big ole Texas hog with a Sierra TNT 125 gr hp from my AAC Handi Rifle in 300 Blackout. One shot= one dead hog. I also use Game King bullets in this rifle with good short range success.

[natman]

Natman, they work well. Calling people demeaning names who have actually tried them does not bolster your opinion.

I see your point and perhaps I should have chosen the words more carefully.

So perhaps you can suggest a way to describe why someone would use a bullet for a purpose that the manufacturer specifically recommends against with words that are less offensive.

It seems to have obscured my actual point that only soliciting opinions from those who have done a foolish thing while excluding those who had the good sense not to do it skews the result.

[HiBC]

Another chronic issue with shooters:They will take one experience 3 decades ago and hang on to it for eternity.

About 1970 I utterly destroyed an antelope with a 160 gr Sierra boat tail.I had no chrono,but I was putting 70 gr of $1.60 a lb surplus 4831 behind it with a CCI mag primer.

DISCLAIMER!!That was a little over Max back then,and it was a totally different powder than the H4831 of today.That load would be very dangerous with today's H-4831.Don't even think about trying it.

Anyway,it was a zippy load,the bullet blew up,and fortunately the hindquarters were OK.

Silly me,I suspect,because Sierra still is in business,maybe they said "Well,maybe that 7mm design we cooked up for the 7mm Mauser is no longer cutting it with all the 7mm Mags.Perhaps e ought to toughen up those jackets a bit...harden the lead a touch"

Or whatever.

A failure experience decades ago is probably meaningless to a product that is still on the market.Without improvement,it likely would no longer be produced.

If you look to one of the load manuals where J.D.Jones writes the intro to the the 6.5 JDJ handgun cartridge..silhouette/hunting single shot round..he says the typical 6.5 hunting bullet of the day was designed to perform in the 6.5x 54 and 6.5 x55 velocity range.I chose 120 gr 6.5 Ballistic tips to shoot in my MOA in .260 for that reason.
The .264's were relatively specialized and not all that common.IIRC,there was something about a two diameter bore ride factory load bullet they were throated for.

30 yrs ago,the Nosler partition and the Grand Slam were the tougher bullets.They would be a terminal ballistic match.Unfortunately,the BC on them was probably lower than the MK.

But with bullets like the Long Range Accubond,some of the Hornady's,...why apply yesterday's mediocrity in lieu of today's excellence?

Makes no sense.

[GeauxTide]

soliciting opinions from those who have done a foolish thing while excluding those who had the good sense not to do it skews the result.

Well said. I'll never get the time back that I just spent on this thread.

[reynolds357]

Natman, I was using those bullets for hunting long before Sierra decided they were not good for hunting. I was told to use them by someone who had used them for many years with good success. Over the years, I have known many people use them with good success. If you called Sierra and asked them if the match king was intended to shoot people with, I bet they would tell you "no." The vast majority of sniper ammo is Match King. Why Sierra does not want to bill the Match king as a hunting bullet, I have no idea. The bullet is what it is, regardless of what Sierra says about it. Its shape and tiny hollow point allow it to penetrate deeply enough that the bullet will do massive damage when it does come apart.

[JohnKSa]

Natman, I was using those bullets for hunting long before Sierra decided they were not good for hunting.

You almost certainly were using bullets that performed differently in terms of terminal performance than the current MatchKings. That's one of the main points I keep trying to make. Because Sierra doesn't guarantee any particular standard of terminal performance, there is absolutely no guarantee (and no reason to believe) that the terminal performance of the MatchKing line has remained consistent or will remain consistent.

The vast majority of sniper ammo is Match King.

Assuming that's true, why would it be relevant? The requirements for rifle bullet penetration and terminal performance on human targets are much less stringent than the typical requirements for penetration and terminal performance on big game.

Why Sierra does not want to bill the Match king as a hunting bullet, I have no idea.

Because they don't want to have to characterize or guarantee consistent terminal performance. That costs money and they don't want to spend money that they don't have to spend nor do typical customers want to pay for testing that they will not ever use.

[reynolds357]

John, the Sierra does the same thing the Berger hunting bullet does except for the fact it penetrates a little deeper before it frags.

[JohnKSa]

The ones you've tried may do that. The problem is that you can't say that they will all do that, nor can you even say that the next lot you try will perform the same. Sierra invests exactly zero time, effort and money into making sure that the MatchKings perform well and perform consistently in terms of terminal performance. As a result, they guarantee exactly nothing in terms of terminal performance--part of that is that they don't guarantee that the terminal performance will be the same from one lot to the next. That means that there's no way to know what you're getting unless you are working from a single lot and have thoroughly tested that specific bullet (weight, caliber, lot) to characterize its terminal performance.

Because Sierra guarantees nothing as far as terminal performance is concerned, there's nothing that says the next lot of MatchKings out of the factory will perform the same as the last lot.

[natman]

Why Sierra does not want to bill the Match king as a hunting bullet, I have no idea.

From the Sierra FAQ:

No, it's not recommended. The MatchKing bullets are designed for pinpoint accuracy; with no consideration given to what might happen after impact. If the bullet has arrived on target accurately, its job is done at that point. Hunting bullets must perform in a certain manner after impact. Penetrating ability, expansion characteristics, and even profile must be considered when designing a hunting bullet. Use MatchKings for matches, and game bullets for hunting.
http://www.sierrabullets.com/ask-sierra/faq/index.cfm

I've explained it to you, JohnKSa has explained it in great detail, now Sierra has explained it.

[reynolds357]

Nat, I have read Sierra's comments about the bullet many years before you posted it.
Have you shot any game with a Match King?
Have you seen any game shot with a Match King?
If not, you are only pasting information with no knowledge of the actual facts.

The Match King in many different calibers and weights devesdates medium game. I personally do not care what anyone hunts with. The O.P. asked about the Match King, and I gave him real world information.

[JohnKSa]

If not, you are only pasting information with no knowledge of the actual facts.

The only "actual facts" are that Sierra makes no guarantees whatsoever that:

1. The MatchKing bullets will have good terminal performance.
2. The MatchKing line will have the same terminal performance from one lot to the next.
3. The MatchKing line will have the same terminal performance across different calibers and bullet weights.

Have you shot any game with a Match King?

The fact that you have means nothing because of #2 and #3 above. The performance of the bullets you fired means nothing to anyone unless they are using bullets in the same caliber, the same weight and from the same lot that you used.

[natman]

Nat, I have read Sierra's comments about the bullet many years before you posted it.

Then I don't see how you can post something like this:

Why Sierra does not want to bill the Match king as a hunting bullet, I have no idea.

Sierra makes it quite clear exactly why they don't bill the Match King as a hunting bullet.

At least we can scratch "ill informed" off the list.

[JD0x0]

There's nothing to debate. Unless you're looking for a 'pelt saving' projectile, comparable to a FMJ, then there is no use for the MATCHking on game.

Treat them as non-expanding, FMJ type bullets, and you'll know exactly what to expect.

They weren't designed for game. Weren't designed to expand. The 'Hollow point' design is merely for maximum consistency between bullets for higher potential accuracy.

There are rare cases, where you'd get enough velocity to cause some sort of fragmentation, but that does not prove this is a 'hunting' bullet. And a properly designed bullet, will not only cause more trauma, but also should perform much more consistently and provide more reliable and ethical kills.

[reynolds357]

It is obvious that most of you have not shot anything that walks with a Match King. It might punch a clean hole if you are shooting it very slowly. As far as that goes, a TTSX will punch a clean hole if you are shooting it very slowly. A Match King pushed at reasonable velocity is a frag round. Its core usually holds together enough to make a nasty exit.

If you want to see what the match king will actually do to game, go get some 168's for a .308, .30-06, or .300 Win MAg. Shoot some hogs with them. They will work good in the .308 and the 0-6. They will pile the rooting critters up nicely. However, You will be shocked and awed at how well they work from the Win. Mag. You will RELIABLY and REPEATEDLY see devesdating wound channels. Get bullets from 40 different lot numbers if you like. They will all do the same thing.
I have been shooting meat with them for over 30 years, not reading about them on the old interwebs.

[JohnKSa]

It might punch a clean hole if you are shooting it very slowly.

Or it might do the same if shot at a higher speed. Or it might expand a little, or it might fragment. It might do anything a bullet can do except perform like a premium hunting bullet.

More to the point, whatever the last lot did, the next lot might do something different because Sierra makes no attempt to insure the terminal performance remains the same from lot to lot.

They will work good...
They will...
You will be...
You will RELIABLY and REPEATEDLY...
They will all do the same thing.

I must say it's impressive that you feel confident in guaranteeing the terminal performance and the consistency of the terminal performance of MatchKings even though Sierra won't.

It's always interesting to me when someone is absolutely certain that they know more about a product than the people who design it, make it, test it and sell it.

Its core usually holds together...

Now that's something you don't hear much about an awesome hunting bullet. It almost makes one think that just maybe Sierra really does have good reasons for not recommending MatchKings for hunting...

[reynolds357]

You obviously have no clue how they perform on game. Quite obvious you have never tested them.

Yep,Core "usually stay together enough." I have blown Barnes X bullets to pieces in game on a few occasions. By your logic the X must not be a capable game reaping bullet.

If one would really think closely about why Sierra says what they do about the Match King, the answer would be obvious. It seems to me the following reason is the most plausible: The bullet is used widely as a sniper bullet. It creates "problems" to say you are using hunting bullets for sniper application.

[JohnKSa]

You obviously have no clue how they perform on game. Quite obvious you have never tested them.

You are correct. And that puts me in good company since Sierra has no clue how they perform on game nor have they tested them for terminal performance either. Which is precisely why they don't guarantee them to perform as hunting bullets.

If one would really think closely about why Sierra says what they do about the Match King, the answer would be obvious.

I have and it certainly is obvious. Since they don't design it for terminal performance and don't test it for terminal performance, therefore they can't guarantee its terminal performance or even guarantee that the terminal performance stays consistent from lot to lot.

However, one need not think hard to come up with a reason because Sierra provides one that is perfectly plausible: "The MatchKing bullets are designed...with no consideration given to what might happen after impact."

It seems to me the following reason is the most plausible: The bullet is used widely as a sniper bullet. It creates "problems" to say you are using hunting bullets for sniper application.

That is a possible reason, but it is far from the most plausible. In fact, whether or not it is plausible at all is open to debate.

The bottom line is that when the choice is between a bullet which the manufacturer acknowledges was designed with no consideration for terminal performance and a bullet that the manufacturer claims is designed for hunting, the choice is really, REALLY simple. One can make it easily without the need to devise conspiracy theories about sniping and political correctness.

[reynolds357]

John, you ever use things for purposes the manufacturer says they are not intended? I do it all the time. Life is an adventure.

Seriously, take a box of 168's out one day and work a sound of hogs over with them. They will change your mind. Absolutely no doubt in my mind about that. They perform well.
Many, Many, people shoot match 168's in their ar's at pigs.

[JohnKSa]

John, you ever use things for purposes the manufacturer says they are not intended?

I do, but when I do, I do so with the full understanding that:

1. The item may not perform well for that use.
2. That even if one item seems to perform well for that use, the next one I buy may not because the manufacturer may have changed something that alters the suitability for my purpose since they aren't concerned about particular aspect of the product.

I generally don't do so unless there's a good reason to or a good reason I can't follow their recommendation. I don't go out of my way to ignore manufacturer recommendations when it's just as easy to follow them.

I also generally refrain from advising others to follow my example because of the two reasons above. Unless of course, there's clearly no possibility of any significantly negative outcome. For example advising someone that they can use a roll of masking tape as an improvised bench block isn't likely to result in property damage, personal injury, etc.

Seriously, take a box of 168's out one day and work a sound of hogs over with them. They will change your mind.

No they won't.

First of all, I'm not going to give them a chance to change my mind because:

A. I get to hunt so rarely that I would never consider risking wasting the time and effort by using products that the manufacturer says are a bad choice for the application. I know it seems crazy, but I'm actually going to pick the best products I can find/afford.

B. If I'm going to shoot a big game animal, I'm going to do my best to kill it humanely. Part of that is making sure I'm up to the task. Part of that is making sure my equipment is up to the task.

Second, even if they worked, it wouldn't convince me that they're a good hunting bullet just because they kill things and the core "usually stays together". A 30 caliber bullet will often kill things even if it's a really poor bullet choice for the job at hand. J.H. Patterson killed lions in Africa with FMJ rounds from a .303 enfield. Poachers kill elephants with AKs. That shouldn't change anyone's mind about the suitability of .30 cal FMJ bullets for lion or elephant hunting, it just proves that you can kill things even with bullets that aren't a good choice for the task at hand.

Getting back to your analogy about using things for purposes the manufacturer didn't intend. The fact that I can use a screwdriver for a prybar doesn't change my mind and convince me that screwdrivers are actually great prybars. It just means that I got away with misusing a tool.

The fact that I manage loosen some bolts with a pair of pliers doesn't mean that my mind is now changed and I will try to talk people out of buying wrenches or try to convince them that pliers are great tools for loosening bolts and nuts. It just means that one can often manage to accomplish a task with a tool even when it's not the right tool for the job.

The fact that I can hammer a bunch of nails with a torque wrench doesn't mean I'll change my mind and start believing that it's smart to use a torque wrench for a hammer, it just means that any hard and reasonably heavy object can be used for a hammer in a pinch.

Many, Many, people shoot match 168's in their ar's at pigs.

Many, many people smoke, overeat, don't wear seatbelts, don't lock their doors at night, don't change the batteries in their smoke detectors, don't exercise, use drugs, spend more than they can afford, ignore gun safety rules, break the law and do any number of ill-advised things and get away with their ill-advised courses of action for many years--maybe even all their lives. It doesn't mean what they're doing is smart or that they're making good decisions, it just means that poor decision making doesn't always result in an instant debacle.

[Rob96]

In the case of the 308 Winchester, why would you use the 168 SMK when Sierra has the 165gr BTSP GMK? I load both with the same powder charge and there is no change in the POI.