I also called sierra a while back to ask them when they were going to come out with an accubond type bullet, the lady I talked to basically told me not to hold my breath. Even if they would make a ballistic tip/boat tail hunting bullet I would give it a shot, something like a SST.

ASS Clown: (What a fitting name) is it too much to ask that you not post a picture of yourself with a rifle in your hands and a bottle of booze on the floor next to you. Listen to your Momma. Put the guns away before you get the booze out.. grow up, Son...

My experience with Sierra bullets is that they come apart worse than all of the other bullets I have tried.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to start an arguement or claim to be a ballistic expert.

But,................

My thoughts are that these bullets are to fragile for big game hunting. Sure, if they make it to the vitals they are extremely effective. A 220 Swift is absolutely devestating "if" it makes it to the boiler room, also. I choose not to use it for big game either. I'm not even arguing that the best or most expensive bullets have to be used. I am arguing that better bullets produce better results. I am also arguing that simply because you use a snorty cartridge (.378 Wby) doesn't mean instant death. If the bullet doesn't or can't make it to the vitals it shouldn't be used for big game.

That said, I am not impuning anybody elses views or choice of bullets. It's just one man's opinion.

Reloader:

I think you are way off the mark.

Ten years ago I shot a blacktail deer at a measured 175 yards with a Hornady 220 grain spitzer out of an 8mm Mag. These bullets were suppose to be designed for the 8 Mag. The deer was steeply quartering away from me and I laced one behind the ribs aiming for the off shoulder. The deer did go down, but I had to finish him with another shot. To make a long story short the bullet was blown all to hell and never hit a bone. Remember, this is at 175 yards. I would guess that Hornady are about as soft as the Sierra's. Now imagine what would happen at 50 yards on the point of an elk shoulder.

I think it is a mistake to assume that any bullet driven fast enough will dispatch an animal with ease.

My own experience tells me that it is worth the extra money to buy premiums. Even for medium game. Use the cheaper bullets for practice.

Now that I think about it this seems to be an old arguement.

Hot Core, Well said.

Well, what can I say?

I have used, and will continue to use, Sierra bullets for all my shooting with long guns. (Handguns is a different story.)

I have NEVER had a Sierra bullet fail to drop any game I have taken, with a single shot, at any range (from 35 feet to 725 yards) with a single shot.

The game has ranged from bumble bees to elk...

I don't think Sierra is in denial. Have you ever been to their factory in Sedalia, Missouri? It is not a big company. To retool in a competitive market with a new product is very risky. They produce as many bullets as they can right now, so they concentrate on what they do best. They are now producing more varmint bullets than anything else at this time of year. Last time I toured the plant, they tested all their bullets downstairs with a Winchester Model 70 action with a Hart barrel, solidly anchored. All their varmint bullets must shoot under 1/2" at 200 yards to be acceptable. Not too shabby.

I asked about the possibility of making .204" bullets. I was told that the market wasn't big enough to justify it yet. It would take a significant number of shooters requesting it for the board to move in that direction. That was before the 204 Ruger, so who knows.