Just wondering if anyone has ever done any accuracy testing on lead tipped bullets, i.e. Nosler Partition, Sierra, Speer, etc., after the tips have been deformed.

After hunting 9 days this past week in the Colorado mountains, a few of the Nolser Partitions I was using have the tips deformed on them. I can say the one bullet I used on Sunday was not deformed and flew true to a decent 3 point exactly 300 yards away.

After the hunt, I unloaded the rest of the rounds out of the magazine and noticed 2 of the rounds had very blunt tips from normal.

Therefore, the thought occured about long-range accuracy using these rounds with the deformed tips.

Anyone have any experience?

I buy the Sierra blem bullets that routinely have the tips deformed and can not notice any difference. It burns off within a few feet anyway.

Unless they get such a battering that the OAL changes, I've never noticed much difference.


My 30.06 has a mag box of 3.5" and so batters more or less everything she's fed.

I've tried single loading and loading from the mag to see if there was a difference but found none that couldn't be attributed to my shooting.

I've never seen enough difference to worry about a deformed tip.

A few years back someone did just such a test; it was published in the Gun Digest. As I recall it did make a difference but I don't remember how much.
C.G.B.

I seem to recall that one of the stab and blast magazines did a test on exactly this issue.

Much of the damage in the test was from shells banging around in the magazine due to the recoil. It was a long time ago and I don't remember the conclusion that was reached.

You might search it out on the web and see if you can find it

I couldn't find the article but here is a posting of the abstract.


How does bullet tip damage affect accuracy?
Article Abstract:

Firearms owners usually encounter deformed bullet tips. Several bullets were intentionally deformed in varying degrees and test-fired under controlled conditions. Their accuracy was compared to undamaged bullets fired under the same conditions and the results showed no significant difference.

Author: Sciuchetti, Gary
Publisher: National Rifle Association of America
Publication Name: American Rifleman
Subject: Travel, recreation and leisure
ISSN: 0003-083X
Year: 1992



Read more: http://www.faqs.org/abstracts/...y.html#ixzz1dnpnOKJ8

Well, there was this guy, back in 1907 (Dr Fredrick Mann) that did extensive testing on bullets, and the upshot of all that testing was that the BASE damage on the bullet was a lot more critical than the nose damage (IIRC because it's been awhile) nose damage had almost no effect on the bullets flight).

Now, if your shooting BR and need a group in the "zero's" to place in the top 5, than nose damage might be of some concern

Clearly, bullets with battered tips aren't what you would select if seeking the best benchrest accuracy. However, the flattening of lead tips that happens to rounds in the magazine due to recoil doesn't have a very big effect on "hunting" accuracy.

I use a lot of Nosler Partitions, so this battering is not uncommon. My practice is to load a fresh, pristine round in the chamber and perhaps top round in the magazine, then use the battered tips as the second, third, and fourth rounds in the magazine. My theory is that the first shot at game, and perhaps the second shot under some circumstances, will be at standing or slow-moving game where precision is important. If a third or subsequent shot is needed, then it will almost certainly be at moving game and the loss of a half MOA of accuracy is irrelevant when shooting at something like a twice-shot elk fleeing through the timber or a whitetail with one shoulder shot off stumbling toward the heavy brush.

Yes there was a test in one of the shooting rags some 20-30 years ago. As I recall, they concluded that banging up the sides of the lead tip did little to affect accuracy, however sever blunting would cause them to shoot low at long ranges. I don't recall at what distance the effects became significant. At the time, I was shooting out to 300 yards, and just remember thinking the distances they were further then I needed to worry about.

In one of the studies I read (a long time ago), the writer went so far as to distort the nose of the bullet with pliars. His conclusion was that as long as the damage was forward of the shoulders, it didn't affect anything. On the sides and the foot of the bullet was a different story.

There was a test by one of the writers in Handloader or Rifle magazine a couple of year’s back. He cut the bullets at angles deep into the copper jacket, deformed the lead noses, and generally screwed up the bullets every way he could think of. Even loaded the bullets backwards. At 100 yards (as i remember) they all hit the 12” target. Some of the disfigurements were very accurate. It was an interesting read.

As was pointed out above, American Rifleman did a test about 20 years ago. Perhaps Whitworth can help you out. They tested the effects of bullet deformation of the tip, and deformation of the base. As I recollect they dropped bullets onto a steel plate from a height of about 3 feet. The results were that deformation of the tip had almost no statistical effect on accuracy, while deformation of the base had a significant effect.
As usual, an excellent American Rifleman test.
Peter.

Some years ago i read a great article by John barsness in handloader. He tried many variations such as grinding the lead tips at an angle, flat etc. He also cut notches in the heel of the bullets.

the final result was that the lead tip damage did little to affect group size at 100 meters. but all bullets that had the base area damaged went all over the place.

There was another article many years ago by JB where he looked at bullets for the same batch but one box was dropped & therefore the bullets were slightly dented at random while the other box was un dented (not dropped). Again interesting results - the dropped box of bullets did not group well but the other box of bullet (from the same lot) shot good groups. This particular article was a big breakthrough for me as I was going nuts with some bullets I had while I had developed a great load with another box from the same lot. Closer inspection showed that the bullets were dented at random!

Meplat condition makes a difference in accuracy. Meplat Trimmers

Thanks for the comments folks! From the sounds of things, it won't make much difference. Besides, I plan on using up the deformed bullets on a couple whitetail does on my dad's alfalfa fields next week. I think that will be an appropiate use for them.

Gun scribes, gunsmiths,benchresters, plain old folks have been doing that test for years, and they all say it makes no difference! I'm sure it makes no difference from a hunting standpoint.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
I use a lot of Nosler Partitions, so this battering is not uncommon. My practice is to load a fresh, pristine round in the chamber and perhaps top round in the magazine, then use the battered tips as the second, third, and fourth rounds in the magazine. My theory is that the first shot at game, and perhaps the second shot under some circumstances, will be at standing or slow-moving game where precision is important. If a third or subsequent shot is needed, then it will almost certainly be at moving game and the loss of a half MOA of accuracy is irrelevant when shooting at something like a twice-shot elk fleeing through the timber or a whitetail with one shoulder shot off stumbling toward the heavy brush.

I'm with Stonecreek. In addition to the arguments he presented above, by the time you need to fire the 3rd or 4th (or even the 2nd) shot within rapid succession, you are usually pretty full of adrenaline. Usually, that is not too beneficial a condition to accurate shooting, although one does the best one can...

- mike

I try and shoot the deformed ones off first, rather than last.

I suppose I'm thinking that the more they get battered, the worse they'll.

This has meant that a very large proportion of the rounds I've fired at game hitherto in my hunting career must have been with bullets with slight dings to their nose.

I must say that thinking about it now, it appears not have made a blind bit of difference!

Could we be over-thinking this chaps? I can't imagine it making much of a difference at hunting ranges?

I have been buying seconds from Nolser for years and they shoot the same as the firsts do for whatever that's worth...

It will not make any difference at all in accuracy, the base is the culprit if the base is nicked or deformed you get flyers, the nose can be hammered and still shoot well according to the many thousands of tests run by Whites Lab, and the gun writters that have been doing that for years and writting it up.