I am just curious if "heavier than standard" bulelt for caliber could kill or penetrate better than "standard" one. I mean 220-240gr for .308, 350gr for .375, 450gr for .416, 550gr for .458, will animal feel difference against 180gr .308, 300gr .375, 400gr .416 and 500gr .458 ? Of course with the same bullet construction. I mean heavier bullet=slower bullet so where is optimum ?

What do you think about it ?

Jiri

I have found no advantage to using heavier than average bullets for caliber.I find tha in .308"-180gr bullets work fine and in 7mm -160gr is the heaviest that I would consider.Using heavier bullets just increases recoil and bullet drop.If you really want a heavier bullet move up in caliber.

The 165 grain bullet will out preform other weight bullets in energy,velocity and drop at 300 to 500 yards in the .308 Winchester. If you want to use other bullet weights they will work for what ever you are hunting and they won't know the difference with good bullet placement. If you look at ballistic charts they will show the test. Larger calibers with lighter bullets will fly long distance with less drop, but most hunters using larger calibers rifles normally don't shoot long shots. Good Luck

Jiri, some calibres could benefit from heavier than normal bullets. Companies recognize this niche, like Barnes with their "Originals" for example.

Compare these calibres:
25cal (.257) 60gr.- 120gr.
6.5cal (.264) 100gr.- 160gr.
Sectional density for the heavy bullets are .260(25) and .328 (6.5). The heavy bullet tips the advantage toward the 6.5m/m, so the .25 calibre could benefit from something heavier. A similar comparison could be made between the .270, and 7m/m. The advantage goes to the 7m/m.

This is not a good v. bad calibre arguement, but more of a general use v. special use comparison. Not having heavy bullets isn't all bad, it defines the use of that particular calibre, so too does barrel twist, and length.

packrat