Stonecreek brought up the Nosler Solid base on a recent thread. They seem to have a mythical following like the Speer DeepShok. I picked up an old Nolser #2 reloading manual and the solid base which has sectioned bullets for all weights. The solid base looks like the old thin walled ballistic tip without the tip. Bringing me to the modern day ballistic tip which has changed heavily over the years. The modern day ballistic tip has such thick walls at the base , it generally has 50% or more of it's weight in the jacket. To me, it looks like the modern day ballistic tip is now one of the strongest standard bullets out there. What is the opinion of the people? Hopefully this won't generate too many stories about "how I used them 25 years ago" because they are not the same bullet.

Any long time bullet manufacturer and designer has no excuse to not get the design right the first time. They are simple products and are simple to test. Why should it take 25 years to get it right?

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Any long time bullet manufacturer and designer has no excuse to not get the design right the first time. They are simple products and are simple to test. Why should it take 25 years to get it right?

The hand inside the glove, of course, is this "why leave a design unchanged if you know you can improve upon it at a reasonable expense?"

Not only that, but Nosler had great incentive to improve the BT, as there were many early reports that were not favorable!

Sometimes, progress is good!

friar

Properly applied the current production Nosler Ballistic Tip bullets perform exceptionally for what they are intended.

I think bullet development may be harder than it appears on the surface, and I'm glad that manufacturers respond to reports of substandard performance by changing bullet design.

Testing in a lab + limited field testing can only take you so far. Extensive field "testing" may well reveal shortcomings that were not apparent after lab testing.

We see this all the time in the development of pharmaceuticals: after clinical trials (which, if memory serves, includes fewer than 5000 patients), a given pharmaceutical may be released for general use.

Once that happens, millions of people may be treated, and unsuspected side effects that occur 1 time in, say 50,000, may surface.

To me, when you consider the variables (velocity at impact and what tissues the bullet attempts to penetrate, etc.) the development of bullets is analogous.

I've killed quite a few whitetails with a 300 Weatherby, factory ammo, 165 gr ballistic tips. Have not recovered a bullet yet. Very good wound channel.

I have used BT's for over 20 years and have never had one fail. I will agree that they are less explosive now than 20 years ago. However if you used them in their designed velocity parameters and hit behind the shoulder they were devastating on whitetail. My experience has been with 165 and 180 grain in the 300 Win mag, 125 grain in the .308 and 150 and 165 in the 30-06 as well as the .300 Savage. This year I used a 150 BT in the 270WSM to harvest a whitetail at 300 yards and it worked perfect.


They are my favorite bullet for deer.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Any long time bullet manufacturer and designer has no excuse to not get the design right the first time. They are simple products and are simple to test. Why should it take 25 years to get it right?

Not sure. The original X product had it's issues so it was replaced with the TSX. Now we have the TTSX. Some find the SST way too explosive. I guess Hornady didn't learn from Noser that just inserting a plastic tip to their Interlock might not work that well. Maybe they should have thickened up the jacket a little. They basically re-created the old Ballistic Tip.

This year I shot a nice buck with a 130 grain BT out of a 270. The distance was 403 yards. The deer was quarting away from me looking at something in the distance. The bullet hit high on the shoulder bone and traveled forward passing under very close but not hitting the spine. After penetrating maybe 1 1/2 feet it exited on the far side leaving about a 45 cal hole in the skin. When I got to the animal it was laying on all 4 of it's feet. The deer had collapsed and fell straight down. This was the first time for me to see something like this.

In my openion that was perfect bullet performance.

Regards, Keith

I was one of those people that used a 277 caliber BT circa 1985 and it was explosive. I went back to the Hornady Interlock.

Then a couple of years ago I used some of the same, but new design on a couple of deer and an antelope. They worked beautifully with no undue meat damage.

I would not hesitate to use them again, but have really grown to like the monometal TSX's, TTSX's and GMX's. But I have not had any non-expanding issues with them.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Any long time bullet manufacturer and designer has no excuse to not get the design right the first time. They are simple products and are simple to test. Why should it take 25 years to get it right?

roger

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Any long time bullet manufacturer and designer has no excuse to not get the design right the first time. They are simple products and are simple to test. Why should it take 25 years to get it right?

They did, but the Solid Base was too tough for deer and the Ballistic Tip resulted. Research.

I had heard that they improved the ruggedness of the Ballistic Tip. I used one on a Whitetail 10 years ago, and it turned into particles that looked like copper grains of sand. I haven't used one since, but maybe I'll give them another try.

I don't think most people know just how much science there is in making a bullet. Sure they are simple. Put a little lead in a jacket and put a nice long ogive on it so it flies. Nothin more than that is there? Oh yea it has to work as well out of a 300 ultra as it does out of a 308, and as well at 400 yards as 40? Yep its a simple product.

I happily drove 180 grain ballistic-tips through anything I shot with a .300 Win this year.The biggest test was a good sized Yukon border bull moose at 157 yards. No problem, straight down.

My son keeps popping all his rifle deer with 100 brain Ballistic-tips out of his .257 Weatherby. Exits are rare, but it is also rare for our big Saskatchewan whitetail to take so much as a step.

Great deer!. I haven't tried the 100s, I've had good luck with the 115s in my Roberts.

The Ballistic tip is currently in it's 4th incarnation. Just like the partition, which has been improved through out the years, Nosler has also advanced the ballistic tip.

I was first introduced to the ballistic tip in 1992 in Tucson while working in a gun store. Thought they were cool looking. Was told they were the most accurate hunting bullet on the market. I started buying them in all weights and calibers that worked in my rifles. I bought so many that I sold some a few years ago to replace with Barnes TSX and TTSX but still kept a lot of those ballistic tips.

I have 300 left, all 150 grain .277 and just loaded 100 for my oldest son's brand new custom 270. They worked well every single season in every rifle I used them in since 1992. Never had a problem with any btip in any weight at any speed from any of my rifles or my brother's rifle.

Those bullets were manufactured when he was one year old. He will be using them during January this season in Alabama.

Great bullets! In fact all of my deer this year died from 150 btips from my 280 Remington going a whopping 2750 fps.

quote:

Originally posted by scottfromdallas:
Great deer!. I haven't tried the 100s, I've had good luck with the 115s in my Roberts.

Just for fun, here's the one I got the day before with a 160 Accubond in an STW. For some reason it shot those a bit better than the lighter NBTs.

The Nosler Accubonds work and seem to shoot to the same point as the Balistictips, but I think I liked the 180 grain Balistictip in .338 just a little better of the two. I never had a Nosler B.T. blow up in .338 cal.!

The ballistic tips in .338 have a much heavier jacket than the rest. Dogleg, it is very common for the STW to shoot better with the 160gr bullets vs the lighter ones...it takes longer for the lighter bullets to "go to sleep" than the heavier ones....which just means the lighter bullets have not yet stabilized at 100yards or so and can take up to 200yds to finally do so..but if you check the accurracy at longer ranges it gets much better. At any rate, the 160's are great bullets in the screaming 7STW.

I wished the BT's and the AB's were the same length. The AB's shoot great in a 7x57 I have but just seem to be too tough on southern whitetail (in my experience). I tried the BT's in the same load and the bullets are shorter and also didn't shoot the same. Disappointing but also not surprising.

The new BT's are the same length as the AB's. That was the change between 3rd and 4th gen.

quote:

Originally posted by dwheels:
I don't think most people know just how much science there is in making a bullet. Sure they are simple. Put a little lead in a jacket and put a nice long ogive on it so it flies. Nothin more than that is there? Oh yea it has to work as well out of a 300 ultra as it does out of a 308, and as well at 400 yards as 40? Yep its a simple product.

You sir, have hit the nail on the head.... It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who complain about bullet blow up at short range, which I consider to be inside 100yrds. Or they make assumptions based off one bullet in one particular instance.

I've had fantastic results with BTs over the last 20 years. For deer sized game it is my go to bullet because I know I can count on it to open consistently when the velocity drops below 2000fps. I'm currently having a passionate affair with the 150gr and 168gr in a 700 varmint chambered in .308. Both bullets have done exactly what I asked of them at ranges from 50yrds out to just shy of 400yrds..... all while giving groups that would make any one happy. Even the 120's in my 7mm Ultra did their job. Would they blow up inside 100yrds at 3675fps, absolutely, but if the deer was that close I would put the bullet in the neck anyway. At 300yrds+ they worked like they would have out of a 7mm-08 at closer range.

Deer number two fell to a 150 grain BT out of the .270WSM for me this year. Nice average Pa. buck at right around 200 yards. Just like the other one this year bang flop even though I hit a tad back of my intended sweet spot of tight behind the shoulder. For me the BT is the go to bullet for deer period. I can't argue with the success I have had. Deer just plain go down when hit with them.

I have found the 120gr BT to be the most reliable performer by far in my 260rem. Probably shot about 30 deer over the past few years, no drama, just reliable clean kills. MV is about 2875 fps, kills as close as 10 yards and as far as 340 yards.

I have tried interlocks, partitions, Accubonds, and others. The BT gets it done.

Our family has taken a truck load of big game all with the NBT. I agree with some of the comments about how the NBT has developed over the years and today seems stronger and more efficient than the previous models. We've taken deer, elk, black bear, antelope all with that bullet using 300Wm, 30-06, 270, 243, 22-250 and 223 all with great in the field performance.

I had been shooting Sierra HPBT Match 52g .224 bullets out of my 22-250 when I came across the NBT. A couple of times on the bench and I thought the accuracy was a whisper better with the NBT. Made the switch and it has continued to deliver excellent accuracy.

I called Nosler and asked them about a bullet recommendation for shooting elk at long range with a 300WM. The guy on the phone gave me the company line about the Partition being the bullet they recommend for elk. I related to him my experience with Partitions penciling through deer out of our 270. He then told me that his opinion would be that we would be well pleased with the NBT at longer distances on the elk but not to call him if we shot a cow elk at 50 yards in the shoulder. We have never looked back and continue to use them.

As has been mentioned above the base of the NBT is very thick even in their varmint NBT and we have used the .243 and .224 NBT in 55g and 40g respectively for deer without a fail. I like the accuracy and the performance has not disappointed at all.

I've used a bunch of them over the years, and in general I believe the NBT has steadily improved over the years. This is the same bullet I recommend to friends when they tell me their rifle doesn't shoot like it use to. I'm of the opinion that if a rifle can't be made to shoot ballistic tips accurately it needs professional attention from a gunsmith.

It has been my experience that heavy for calibre ballistic tips have always been a good choice for deer & elk. (I will also admit that the partition is generally my first choice tho)

About 3 years ago I shot a Bobcat at 40 yards with my 6.5 Rem Mag using some 120gr Bal Tips that I had bought a good 20 years ago. These were some of the old bullets that came 100 to a box. I about blew that cat literally in half with those Bal Tips. The only thing holding him together was a 1 inch strip of skin across the ribs. Thats when I remembered why I use 125gr partitions in that rifle.
George

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:

quote:

Originally posted by scottfromdallas:
Great deer!. I haven't tried the 100s, I've had good luck with the 115s in my Roberts.

Just for fun, here's the one I got the day before with a 160 Accubond in an STW. For some reason it shot those a bit better than the lighter NBTs.

One of these days I'm gonna have to get up to Canada to shoot a real Whitetail

I think I might have to agree with you on that one Buglemintoday, those sure are some pretty ones aren't they...

As to the Nosler's, I have been shooting Nosler's since back in the early 80's. My love of them came about with the introduction to the Solid Base, which at the time was totally new to me. A good friend and neighbor had talked me into working up a load for my Win 70 in .243 for hunting whitetail and using the 85gr Solid Base. Actually he was using the 80gr Sierra, but after a bit of trial and effort I found they simply did not shoot to my liking and so I tried the SB instead and it became "THE" bullet for that rifle for close to 20yrs.

When Nosler came out with the BT I was all over it and had began loading just about every caliber I had with the SB's, and started to switch to the BT"s as mentioned they were simply awesome for accuracy. It only took one or two seasons of using them to find that they were WAY more destructive than the SB's and as such, I shied away from them in most loads. In speaking with Nosler at the time about them they carried on that they were the same bullet as the SB only better, which in my efforts to prove them right only proved them wrong. I sectioned them, measured them and did all amounts of checking which all verified they were NOT the SB with a plastic tip.

Then Nosler dropped the count on all of their bullets and dropped the SB from their line completely. It wasn't enough they discontinued my all time favorite bullet but they cut the count on the others in half, but were still charging 75% of the original cost. When asked about this, they replied that it was so they could keep more stock on the shelves and that most people only shot a few per year anyway. This might have been well and good had Federal not started loading the BT at the same time as the cut back, which in my mind only said they cut back on the hand loaders to facilitate Federal's supply not ours. While I don't argue that this was a good move on their part, the correspondence with them at the time was simply BS on their part, and with the disappointment with their new bullets I simply decided to stock up on what SB's I could and move on.

I have tried several calibers of the BT since, and haven't noted much if any differences in the performance of them compared to the originals. They are still as accurate as ever in every caliber I have tried, and in each one they still do an amazing job of dropping deer and other critters, but they still also do so with about equal damage as the first to come out, with impact velocities in the 2700fps range from what I personally have seen.

I DO freely admit I haven't shot many deer as of late with them, but have used them on quite a few hogs. While a hog is a bit tougher than a deer, it is easy to compare apples to apples when you still have the original 100ct bullets to compare side to side with the latest release in the box of 50.

Personally, as compared to the SST, I have to give credit to Hornady in that at least the SST, is made with the interlock ring which does hold some of the core in place rather than the slick jacket of the BT which doesn't. In their efforts however, I do agree however that they are a bit explosive on impact, but they do drive and hold together better than the original BT's ever did, when compared at similar impact velocities.

The biggest issues I have ever had with the BT is loading them to a good velocity with awesome accuracy and then having my deer walk out at 25-50yds verses the 150 - 200 I had planned on. The deer also do not seem to understand that I don't want a quartering shot, and in most cases simply do not want to give me a broadside to slip one through their ribs.

This all said, I DO feel that the BT is an excellent bullet, and in some calibers they might be better than what they used to be, I simply have a hard time spending the money nowadays simply to try them to see, when for the same or just a slight bit more I can pick up a box of Hornady or Speer with double the amount of bullets and get preferable performance from the same loads without blowing a large amount of preferred meat into the pasture, or having to trim it off due to being bloodshot.

In the calibers I shoot the most, I would be hard pressed not to choose the Partition over anything to be honest. They simply work every time in almost boring fashion. For my .308, or 30-06, and a couple of others, I might have to look into picking up a box of the "newer" BT's as they have always shot at least a half inch better at 200yds than anything else I have been able to find. But for the 243, 25-06 and .270, I might have to stay the course with the Partitions, as I seriously doubt the BT will bring anything more to the table than these are capable of, at the velocity and weights I am loading them with.

quote:

Originally posted by Mke / Tx:

In the calibers I shoot the most, I would be hard pressed not to choose the Partition over anything to be honest. They simply work every time in almost boring fashion.

I can't argue with you on that one. I personally think the Partition is the best bullet design ever created for animals large and small.

quote:

Originally posted by scottfromdallas:

quote:

Originally posted by Mke / Tx:

In the calibers I shoot the most, I would be hard pressed not to choose the Partition over anything to be honest. They simply work every time in almost boring fashion.

I can't argue with you on that one. I personally think the Partition is the best bullet design ever created for animals large and small.

I totally agree also on the partition. Not being argumentative on the BT's, but at least in the .284 bullets the 150 and 120 BT's are pretty darn tough, not far off the Accubond in my experience. As for the Hornady SST, one of our antelope hunters killed this buck with his 7mag, 139gr SST Superformance factory load from abaout 140 yards. I've never seen a bullet blow up like this, in spite of the spine shot.......I won't even consider using an SST anymore.

My Texas muley buck this past November was at a hard angle away from meat about 160 yards. The 7mm Rem Mag 150 BT hit him in the right flank, and wound up in the front left shoulder. A full 36" of penetration.

JG,

Incredible deer. I think I've seen you post the sst pic before which is unreal. I have a bunch of those 120 BTs from Shooters Pro Shop. I have them loaded in my 7-08 but haven't used them yet on game. I've heard they are pretty stout because the jacket uses the same weight as the 140.

That antelope is pretty messed up for sure. I haven't had that experience with the ones I have loaded and shot. That said I am probably not loading to the same velocities either. I only load them in my 308, 270, and 30-06 with velocities ranging in the mid 2600's to a top end of 3000fps from the .270. I have a couple of boxes of 117's a friend gave me in .257 that I haven't tried yet. I bet in my 25-06 AI they would make a pretty nasty mess about like you show there. I know he used them a LOT in his standard version 25 before he traded it off, and I never remember any deer he shot being torn up.

I might look into the newer BT's, but it isn't going to be anytime soon. I already have plenty of bullets on hand that need to be worked through before I purchase any more.

quote:

SIR MAUSER
one of us
Posted 06 December 2012 03:47Hide Post
I've killed quite a few whitetails with a 300 Weatherby, factory ammo, 165 gr ballistic tips.

Why all that power and heavy bullet for a 200 lb. deer..

quote:

Claret_Dabbler
one of us

Posted 23 December 2012 01:09Hide Post
I have found the 120gr BT to be the most reliable performer by far in my 260rem. Probably shot about 30 deer over the past few years, no

that is a plus for the .260 rem. i'm right there with ya,.. Dabblet

Shortly after the original BTs came (in the early 90s?) out a friend asked me to load some and try a head shot. His experience with the bullets was "small hole in, small hole out, and mush in between" when he shot ribs. But he felt like they might blow to smithereens if one hit "solid" bone.

Well, a few weeks later I was in the TX hill country, and on the way to the stand I jumped a small pig. The first round out of the '06 was a 150 grain BT. The pig stumbled but kept running. The second shot, a Hornady Interlock of the same weight, sent him fanny over tea kettle.

When I got to the pig, I could tell it was sick from something. The animal was very thin with almost no backstraps. I left it lying, but the point was this: the NBT literally penciled through that pig's head at about 60 yards and never opened up. Hence the stumble. The Interlock blew the back side of the pig's head out, and he dropped mid-stride. I could never do it again, but the two entrance holes were side by side, about an inch apart.

Later that afternoon I had the occasion to shoot a doe in the side of the head with another NBT, as Melvin had asked me to do. At about 80 yards, I shot her in the left side of the head as she grazed... The carnage was horrible. The doe never knew what happened, but the bullet completely disintegrated her skull, turning the skull cap upside down, held on only by a strip of skin. Both eyes were completely blown out of the sockets, hanging by optic nerves, and there was no brain matter left in the brain cavity. It may sound silly, but I was kind of repulsed by the damage.

A few months later I read from the now late Finn Aagard that he did not like the NBTs, as they were too violent for his taste. That was my conclusion as well... I went to the Speer Grand Slam and have never looked back. I am sure the NBT has improved significantly since then, but I see no reason to change what works, at least for me...

I never used them either, the 150g Partitions in my 270 were way too good to switch. I will try the new Long Range Accubonds when they come out though