6.8 SPC Forums banner
561 - 565 of 565 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,742 Posts
Discussion Starter · #561 · (Edited)
I'm still testing bullets but not at the rate I used to. I've had to make room in my workshop for a new project restoring a 1960 MGA which I've owned since 1980. I've reorganized my brass and bullets to save space, but decided it was time to dispose of all the recovered bullets. I've done well north of 500 tests. The bullets were all sorted in zip-lock bags by test. The copper bullets made it into the recycle bin. Here's a pic of just the Barnes and Hornady GMXs that were tested before they were sent "down-range" on their final journey.

Thanks to all those that have contributed bullets for testing.

Brown Wood Font Close-up Metal



This does not signal the end of this thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
I'm still testing bullets but not at the rate I used to. I've had to make room in my workshop for a new project restoring a 1960 MGA which I've owned since 1980. I've reorganized my brass and bullets to save space, but decided it was time to dispose of all the recovered bullets. I've done well north of 500 tests. The bullets were all sorted in zip-lock bags by test. The copper bullets made it into the recycle bin. Here's a pic of the Barnes and Hornady GMXs that were tested before they were sent "down-range" on their final journey.

Thanks to all those that have contributed bullets for testing.

View attachment 76119


This does not signal the end of this thread.
Thats a great collection of bullets. I have a nice box full of bullets I've tested but I've only done around 50 tests. I always just did them for the hell of it, until one day my dad told me I should try to share my results with people. That's when I decided to start making YouTube videos and sharing my results on here. I'm definitely not a great video editor or creator but I enjoy sharing my tests. I've done so many ballistics gel tests that I never made videos on because I was too lazy to set up cameras and edit videos. I didn't label most the bullets I've captured so at this point I barely remember what is what
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
119 Posts
I'm still testing bullets but not at the rate I used to. I've had to make room in my workshop for a new project restoring a 1960 MGA which I've owned since 1980. I've reorganized my brass and bullets to save space, but decided it was time to dispose of all the recovered bullets. I've done well north of 500 tests. The bullets were all sorted in zip-lock bags by test. The copper bullets made it into the recycle bin. Here's a pic of just the Barnes and Hornady GMXs that were tested before they were sent "down-range" on their final journey.

Thanks to all those that have contributed bullets for testing.

View attachment 76119


This does not signal the end of this thread.
The weight retention of the copper Bullets at least the Barnes is unmatched by any lead bullet by far.
120 gr 6.5cm still 119 gr into the 4 jug of water >2900 fps @ muzzle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,742 Posts
Discussion Starter · #564 ·
115gr XP from Winchester

While driving through Colorado last week, I stopped in a Scheel’s, a retail sporting goods store. They had a shelf full of 6.8 ammo, more than I’ve ever seen in one location. Their selection included the new 115 XP from Winchester that many on the forum have inquired about. It has been a while since doing a 6.8mm terminal performance test, so I plunked down $35 ($5 cheaper than Midway) and brought a box home to test.

The XP is a non-bonded, lead-core bullet with a larger than normal plastic ballistic tip – a unique feature as you can see in the side-by-side comparison with the 110 PTS from S&B and the 120 MKZ from CavityBack, all factory ammo. The XP’s tip was easy to pull exposing a lead core with no expansion cavity. The copper jacket was 0.015” thick at the tip. In the cut-away comparison with the SST, there are no internal locking rings in the flat-based XP’s copper jacket. Contrary to Winchester’s #1 marketing statement, the addition of a ballistic tip does not facilitate bullet expansion. I’ve tested numerous tipped bullets and their expansion was greater with the tips removed (see link below). Also, adding a ballistic tip to a bullet designed without a tip typically retards expansion. Muzzle velocities were less than the advertised 2625 fps. BC was measured with a LabRadar.

6.8 SPC Bullet Performance

From 6.8 SPC II - ARP 1:11 barrels (75F)
115gr XP muzzle velocities (fps)
2470 from 12.5”
2555 from 16”
2625 Advertised
[BC (G1) 0.317 measured, 0.135 without the tip]

Font Poster Publication Advertising Wood


Office supplies Office instrument Writing implement Font Writing instrument accessory
 
  • Like
Reactions: sfs13 and Yamaraja

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,742 Posts
Discussion Starter · #565 ·
Observed Terminal Performance: 115gr Winchester XP

Terminal performance testing was accomplished with the standard set-up comprised of a gallon water jug in front of a bullet trap containing a 1500-page phonebook backed up by 15 magazines and bulk paper. As expected, the XP is a fragmentation bullet similar to the SST. The water jug’s reaction to the impact was mild. Recovered bullets were mushroomed with weights ranging from 55 to 65 grains. Penetrations were through the phone book and a couple of magazines which has proven effective on deer. The lead cores remaining in the copper jackets were loose and fell out when removed from the bullet trap. Similar to the SST, hunters may find the copper jacket separated on the off-side deer’s hide due to the loose core. Some ballistic tips were found whole. Lead fragmentation was occurring almost immediately after impact as can be seen in the right-side picture insert. This specific test required a re-do because the bullet hit the top, handle-side of the jug which is angled at 45 degrees and has less water depth causing the bullet to yaw. However, the impact clearly showed multiple fragments going through the foam-core panel backing the jug. Lead fragments were also found with the other bullets but were not as easily seen in a photograph.

This off-center impact is a segue to the issue I had with this bullet; 3-shot groups were 1.75 to 3 MOA at 100 yards in rifles that are otherwise accurate. Groups seemed to get worse at 200 yards which made hitting a gallon jug problematic. No testing was performed at a further distance. If anyone else has shot this bullet, please share your experience with accuracy.

Organism Font Adaptation Metal Soil


Note: Go to the First Page for Quick Links to other bullets tested
 
561 - 565 of 565 Posts
Top