The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 15, 2009, 01:51 AM   #1
Dannyl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 20, 2009
Location: Cape Town - South Africa
Posts: 627
"Field report" on Hornady SST bullets

Hi All,
Once again, Hornady bullets have performed greatly for me.
Until this season I used the INTERLOCK bullets with 100% succcess but this year I decided to try the SST.

My wife Shot a springbok at 350+ Meters, with a 150Gr' SST Boat-tail, (muzzle velocity 2650 Fps), and I shot a large Gemsbok (Oryx) at 250M with a 180Gr' SST Boat-tail (Muzzle velocity 2550).
Both shots went true to aim and caused a tiny amount of meat- damage (less than a KG lost between the two animals)

Both were neck shots and the bullets were not recovered, but the size of the exits show proper expansion.

I use a locally made powder, so my exact load will not be of much use to anyone out of South Africa, at the range both combinations group sub MOA.



The rifle is a REM-700 30-06.

Regards,
Danny
Dannyl is offline  
Old July 15, 2009, 06:06 AM   #2
VaFisher
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2006
Posts: 596
Glad to hear someone else has found the SST bullet to be a great choice for a hunting bullet.
VaFisher is offline  
Old July 15, 2009, 08:31 AM   #3
314EPW
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2007
Posts: 108
sst

That's all I use here in North Pa.165gr in a .308.
314EPW is offline  
Old July 15, 2009, 11:38 AM   #4
ForneyRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2007
Location: Forney, TX
Posts: 725
They're hard to beat for the price.

The cannelure appears to hold the jacket on as well or better than the bonded bullets, and a lot cheaper. Accuracy is near bonded.
__________________
When all is said and done, there is a lot more said than done.
ForneyRider is offline  
Old July 15, 2009, 12:48 PM   #5
Major Dave (retired)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 12, 2008
Location: Between Dallas and Shreveport, LA
Posts: 569
Good enough for Colorado elk?

Using the .284 SST boatail in a 7 X 57, 139 gr weight, with a MV of about 2900 fps, would they work on cow elk ( approx 400 - 500 lbs live weight)?

Or would 140 gr Barnes Triple Shock X bullets be better?

I have 2 one hundred count boxes of the SSTs on hand, and one 50 count box of the Barnes Triple Shocks on hand.
__________________
Artillery lends dignity to what would otherwise be but a vulgar brawl.

Last edited by Major Dave (retired); July 15, 2009 at 12:56 PM. Reason: Adnl info
Major Dave (retired) is offline  
Old July 15, 2009, 01:06 PM   #6
Dannyl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 20, 2009
Location: Cape Town - South Africa
Posts: 627
139 Gr' SST for Elk, IMO a tad light

Hi Major Dave,
The 139Gr' may sound a bit light, BUT, if it shoots accurately and you can therefore place your shot in the vitals it would most likely bring the elk down.
The problem is if your bullet needs to break a heavy bone on a side shot, or go through heavy musscle on a frontal shot, this is where a light bullet may not be as effective.

Personally, for an animal of that size I would try a heavier bullet, Hornady offers the SST in 162Gr' and interlock Spire point flat bottom in 175 Gr'.

my experience with interlocks and SSTs is that with a bit of experimenting I get to group between 1" to 1/2", so in reality all of them work reasonably well.

Cheers,
Danny
Luitenant (Reserve) IDF
Dannyl is offline  
Old July 15, 2009, 01:23 PM   #7
Major Dave (retired)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 12, 2008
Location: Between Dallas and Shreveport, LA
Posts: 569
7 X 57 with heavy bullets is a bit slow, IMO

Every 10 grains of bullet weight in my 7 X 57 results in 100 fps slower MV.

139/140 = 2900 fps
150 = 2800
160 = 2700
175 = 2550

Colorado is "big country", with 300 plus yard targets quite common - so I wanted to keep the velocity up where bullet drop would be less.

The Barnes X bullets will smash bones easily enough, with the 140 grain loading, at 2900 fps MV.

I figure if 130 grain and 150 grain loads in .270 Win caliber were acceptable for elk, then the 139/140 grain 7 X 57 would be OK, too.

Other opinions are welcomed.
__________________
Artillery lends dignity to what would otherwise be but a vulgar brawl.
Major Dave (retired) is offline  
Old July 15, 2009, 02:00 PM   #8
Dannyl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 20, 2009
Location: Cape Town - South Africa
Posts: 627
what really matters is reaching the vitals

Hi Dave,
I see what you say about long distance shots, and I agree that with 2550 FPS you would have signifcantly more bullet drop. I have the same velocity with the 180 rains in my 30-06, and if I zero at 200M I get 10" drop at 300M which is quite significant.
that is why I use the 150 Gr' for shooting at (smaller) game at long range, and keep the 180 for larger animals, but with patience one can usually get within 250 to 150 M of Kudus and Oryx.

The main issue is accuracy, and using a bullet that flies true to where you aim it, and as long as the bullets hit the vitals and expand they should work fine. so if the 139GR shoots accurately and you are confident with them, from what I know Elk are not like Springbok, who seldom stand still for more than 7 seconds ( please correct me if I am wrong here), and therefore you would have more time to take careful aim, which should help in placing the bullet in the vitals.

Barnes X are great bullets, ( I used some factory ammo with 180Gr Barnes X when I was single and had just got my rifle, and took a large Oryx with them) but these days they cost too much for me, and I could never afford to practice enough with them, so I cannot offer much in that respect.

BRGDS,
Danny
Dannyl is offline  
Old July 16, 2009, 11:57 AM   #9
snuffy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 20, 2001
Location: Oshkosh wi.
Posts: 3,055
Here's my experience with the SST.

It's only a little better than a ballistic tip as far as holding together/not fragmenting goes. Two features that help it do a little better than the BT are the interlock and the cannelure. It is still a cup & core bullet, the core is NOT bonded to the jacket in any way. And no, they're not "AS GOOD" as an interbond!

Here's a series of pics I took of actual field experience with a 7 mag shooting a 154 SST at a 120# whitetail @ 75 yds.

Bullet barely made it to the oposite side.



Entrance wound.



Jacket was just under the front leg outside the chest cavity.



Bloodshot area around the entrance wound. Shows how much shock/energy was deposited.



Here's the jacket and the two chunks of lead that almost made it through the off side. The bigger chunk on the left weighed 10 grains. The rest of the core was shrapnel in the lungs, and in both shoulders.



Draw whatever conclusion you want. I want a bullet to hold together better than that. I've tested them for expansion using water filled milk jugs. Not enough left of the bullet to take pictures of, just a mangled jacket and lead "SAND".

BTW that little buck was DRT,(Dead Right There). Effective? Yeah, but I don't like picking lead out of my meat!
__________________
The more people I meet, the more I love my dog

They're going to get their butts kicked over there this election. How come people can't spell and use words correctly?
snuffy is offline  
Old July 16, 2009, 01:34 PM   #10
Dannyl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 20, 2009
Location: Cape Town - South Africa
Posts: 627
they are good enough for me

Hi Snuffy,
Just to clarify, I did not compare the SST's to Interbonds, my initial post refers to Interlocks that I have always used in the past.

I am certain that there are many bullets out there that are just as good and many that are superior to the SSTs, but for me, the interlocks and SSTs are affordable and reliable. So far all the animals I shot with them ended up DRT with little meat damage.
These range fromWarthogs and Springbuks to very large Kudus and Oryx.

As stated, my finding WRT to these two bullets are that the SST are more accurate than the standard interlocks, and perform well enough.

after reading your post and looking at the photos, may I ask you what was the muzzle velocity?

What you show and tell is similar to what I have seen with game shot at close range with very high velocities ( in this case it was a fellow hunter many years ago, who was using a 7 Rem Mag with muzzzle velocities of 3000 FPS and above)

My closest shot was at a Warthog, from approx 60M; the shot went in from the right shoulder .unfortunately I did not recover the bullet as it exited on the other side, slightly behind the shoulder. he dropped on the spot, and the size of the exit hole indicates good expansion.

I started this trend to share my experience and results with others, not to have arguments, I am not trying to promote Hornady's over any other brand or type of bullets.

Brgds,
Danny
Dannyl is offline  
Old July 16, 2009, 02:57 PM   #11
snuffy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 20, 2001
Location: Oshkosh wi.
Posts: 3,055
I wasn't trying to start an argument, just showing my experiences. The part about not as good as bonded bullets was in reply to this post;

Quote:
The cannelure appears to hold the jacket on as well or better than the bonded bullets, and a lot cheaper. Accuracy is near bonded.
As for accuracy, that's entirely up to the handloader, his rifle, and his skill shooting.
__________________
The more people I meet, the more I love my dog

They're going to get their butts kicked over there this election. How come people can't spell and use words correctly?
snuffy is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06459 seconds with 10 queries