What do you think about Sierra MK for hunting?

Sierra makes a wonderful match bullet that shoots very well in most rifles. So good that many are tempted and some do use them for hunting. I have used them some and the problem I found is inconsistency. One time they will ice pick through an animal without expanding at all and the next time they are like a hand grenade with violent expansion. There are better choices. The Berger 175gr VLD 30 caliber match bullet is a deer killing machine.

Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't.

Sierra, the company who designs and manufactures the MK, says don't use it for hunting. That's enough for me.

Others, perhaps lots of them, will disagree, perhaps vehemently!

IMO, there are plenty of good bullets designed for hunting, to use one that is not designed for hunting.

Wasn't the .50 caliber MK used for sniping in Afghanistan?

Do a search on this forum there is a 144 pages on the pro and cons of using match kings for hunting. This subject has been more the hashed out.

If we want to talk about Match kings we could restart the old forum up.

gatehouse, you little troll ~

I use the 142 grain matchking (.264) for very long range varmint shooting (note, not hunting but shooting).

As previously stated Sierra does not recommend them for hunting, and they are the ones that make them..

However this is the bullet loaded in Federal Match ammo,as well as other factory Match ammo, and is widely used in Police Sniper rifles, usually with the 168gr MK.

In the intrest of Science I have killed 2 wild pigs, a coyote and a wild tutkey with 168gr. Federal Match.

There has also been a lot of ballistic gealatin tests done, and a lot of post mortom studies on the actual shootings of humans, and I have been present for one such post mortom.

Usually at distance of 100 yards ands in, sometimes farther the bullet will enter, penetrate a few inches, yaw and break into 2 not quier equal pieces. Some times there are secondary fragments as well.

Usually these 2 pieces then veer off from straight line penetration making a Y bullet path.

Also sometimes as stated by an above poster the bullet just goes through the target without breaking appart.

In the two pigs I killed I got the yaw, 2 piece Y pattern wound, range @40 and 50 yards, in the turkey I got fragmentation, distance @30 yards, in the coyote, he was facing me at @175 yards. The bullet went through in a straight line exiting the rear ham with no apparent expansion, and no hide damage. [He is mounted lifesize at my house].

There is no definate rhyme or reason, to how this bullet will perform in living tissue, as it is NOT DESIGNED for any type of TERMINAL performance.

After using it on game, I would not use it again for hunting.

Also some LEO Agencies have gone to a different projectile for their Sniper rifles, baised upon Matchking results in actual shootings.

Ballistic Tips have proven to be a good choice as they are accurate and have predicable wounding results.

Hornady TAP projectiles are also being used.

In short I think Sierra knows their bullets best. Use a bullet designed for hunting, when hunting.

Here we go again. Several tons of excellent hunting bullets out there and some troll has to ask about target bullets. And some way-kewl dude has to say oh yeah, that's all I use.

I talked to a guy who said he uses them for deer, moose, elk, bears, everything.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatehouse:
I talked to a guy who said he uses them for deer, moose, elk, bears, everything.

Yea, but has he shot any yet?

better yet, has he brought any home?

olarmy wrote:

quote:

Sierra, the company who designs and manufactures the MK, says don't use it for hunting. That's enough for me.

I couldn't agree more. Why would one even consider a matchking for hunting when there are so many other bullets out there that are better suited for the application?

It defies logic.

quote:

Yea, but has he shot any yet?

Probably donated the venison to the food banks in ND & MN, shortly before the x-rayed all the frozen packages looking for lead fragments.

I'm thinking they would be excellent grizzly bullets...

I have killed 16 whitetail with Federal Gold Medal Match 168s-308. One shot kills. Shoot 'em in the head or anywhere in the neck=dick in the dirt--dead deer--BANG FLOP.

I don't condone slob shooting. Bullet placement is what it is all about. It is not what you shoot them with as much as it is where you shoot them.


The Sierra GameKing has worked good for me too. I have found while shooting DCM matches that the 180gr GameKing will out perform the MK in most 30-06 rifles(03-A3, 03-A4, M1Garand...etc) in the accuracy department. I cannot explain this phenomenon. I load them around 2500fps and they consistantly shoot tighter and flatter than 175 or 190 MKs.

An old test in Handloader magazine showed Matchkings either shattering or not expanding at all at all velocities from 3200 fps down to 1500. Sierra says don't use them so don't use them. Sierra's hunting bullets are usualy just as accurate anyway.

Gatehouse - you really are going to go to Hell!

Folks, this bad man is bored and trying to resurrect a thread that is older than Frankenstein - and smells much the same!

Rgds Ian

Craig Boddington used them in Zambia in his big 8mm Magnum. Send him an email.

I've been afraid to use them for fear they would disintegrate on large deer size game without penetrating. If I remember correctly, their literature says they are not to be used for hunting?

Red C. Iam about to I expect to hear from I hate the MK growd that they are not a hunting bullet. We had one thread that went over 140 pages on MK for hunting it comes up every once in a while.

I have shot over a dozen deer and one elk with 180 gr 30 cal MK's out of a 26in 06. and a 300 wm I have had nothing but little holes going in and about 3 inch holes going out. From what I have seen they preform as well as any other plain cup and core bullet.

Let the hate and fly

So for you who don't want to use them for hunting don't. They have worked well for me.

Iam really feeding the trolls when I should

I guess Iam just

You all have a nice day

I'm rather new and I don't remember seeing the other thread. However, If your first hand experience has been good with the MKs, man I'd keep using them, too, in fact, you've got me thinking about using them. They shoot great! Thanks for the info. I'm like you, I doubt the debate will be settled in this thread. Many are going to have STRONG opinions on the subject.

From Sierra's website:

Question: Can I use a MatchKing bullet for deer hunting? They shoot just great in my rifle, so they should be just super for hunting use, right?

Answer: No, it's not recommended. The MatchKing bullets are designed for pinpoint accuracy; with no consideration given to what might happen after impact. If the bullet has arrived on target accurately, its job is done at that point. Hunting bullets must perform in a certain manner after impact. Penetrating ability, expansion characteristics, and even profile must be considered when designing a hunting bullet. Use MatchKings for matches, and game bullets for hunting.

It's still a free country (at least so far) so feel free to use what you want.

but when there are so many good, accurate bullets out there that are designed with consideration given to terminal ballistics, I don't understand using one when its manufacturer recommends against it.

Shoot, there are a lot of folks out there that don't think Sierra can make a good controlled expansion bullet, even when they try!

quote:

Originally posted by Red C.:
I'm rather new and I don't remember seeing the other thread. However, If your first hand experience has been good with the MKs, man I'd keep using them, too, in fact, you've got me thinking about using them. They shoot great! Thanks for the info. I'm like you, I doubt the debate will be settled in this thread. Many are going to have STRONG opinions on the subject.

thaqt's what i love. 30 people will tell you not to use them; sierra will tell you not to use them, but a couple of folks on the internet claim to have shot "dozens" with MKs, then that's all the reason in the world to do so!

quote:

tasunkawitko

You know, your right, it doesn't make sense does it? I suppose I spoke too quickly without really thinking that one through. Trying to be too conciliatory and made a poorly thought out statement. It really doesn't make much sense to use MatchKings for hunting when the manufacturer hasn't designed the bullet for terminal performance. We're taking a chance on loosing the trophy of a lifetime or worse, wounding an animal that we don't recover.

P.S. Is this a conciliatory statement, too?

The SMK will never be market as a hunting bullet but the Berger which is similar is-------hmmmmmm wonder why??? The answer is simple it is a financial decision plain and simple. If you look at the White Paper written by the JAG on this subject it will become readily apparent as to why. Sierra would lose a lot of money by doing this as then the SMK’s would not be legal to use in military ammunition. That is the reason why that is ALWAYS the Company line you will receive if you call and ask about it. That is all that I am going to say about that. Also the SMK is a good hunting bullet --- I have killed too many feral hogs and other animals to count over the years with all types of the SMK’s from the 300 .338 all the way to the 142 6.5 bullet. Attached are pics of a pig shot at 489yds with the 150 7MM SMK 2 weeks ago and fido who was chasing a doe last weekend at 150 yds.

I have never had a SMK fail to produce a kill.
[IMG:left] [/IMG]
[IMG:left] [/IMG]

I missed something: shooting dogs?

quote:

Originally posted by Bobby Tomek:
olarmy wrote:

quote:

Sierra, the company who designs and manufactures the MK, says don't use it for hunting. That's enough for me.

I couldn't agree more. Why would one even consider a matchking for hunting when there are so many other bullets out there that are better suited for the application?

It defies logic.

Why does Sierra not recomend the SMK's for hunting?

Pherhaps this will shed a bit of light on the subject;



MEMORANDUM FOR COMMANDER, UNITED STATES ARMY SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND

SUBJECT: Sniper Use of Open-Tip Ammunition

DATE:

23 September 1985


Summary.

This memorandum considers whether United States Army Snipers may employ match-grade, "open-tip" ammunition in combat or other special missions. It concludes that such ammunition does not violate the law of war obligations of the
United States

, and may be employed in peacetime or wartime missions of the Army.
Background.

Sierra MatchKing 168-grain match grade boat tail For more than a decade two bullets have been available for use by the United States Army Marksmanship Unit in match competition in its 7.62mm rifles. The M118 is a 173-grain match grade full metal jacket boat tail, ogival spitzer tip bullet, while the M852 is the Sierra MatchKing 168-grain match grade boat tail, ogival spitzer tip bullet with an open tip. Although the accuracy of the M118 has been reasonably good, though at times erratic, independent bullet comparisons by the Army, Marine Corps, and National Guard marksmanship training units have established unequivocally the superior accuracy of the M852. Army tests noted a 36% improvement in accuracy with the M852 at 300 meters, and a 32% improvement at 600 yds; Marine Corps figures were twenty-eight percent accuracy improvement at 300 m, and 20% at 600yds. The National Guard determined that the M852 provided better bullet groups at 200 and 600 yards under all conditions than did the M118. [FNa1]

The 168-grain MatchKing was designed in the late 1950's for 300 m. shooting in international rifle matches. In its competitive debut, it was used by the 1st place winner at the 1959 Pan American Games. In the same caliber but in its various bullet lengths, the MatchKing has set a number of international records. To a range of 600 m., the superiority of the accuracy of the M852 cannot be matched, and led to the decision by
U.S.

military marksmanship training units to use the M852 in competition.

A 1980 opinion of this office concluded that use of the M852 in match competition would not violate law of war obligations of the
United States

. (citation omitted) Further tests and actual competition over the past decade have confirmed the superiority of the M852 over the M118 and other match grade bullets. For example, at the national matches held at
Camp Perry

,

OH

in 1983, a new
Wimbledon

record of 2--015 X's was set using the 168-gr. MatchKing. This level of performance lead to the question of whether the M852 could be used by military snipers in peacetime or wartime missions of the Army.

During the period in which this review was conducted, the 180-gr. MatchKing (for which there is no military designation) also was tested with a view to increased accuracy over the M852 at very long ranges. Because two bullet weights were under consideration, the term "MatchKing" will be used hereinafter to refer to the generic design rather than to a bullet of a particular weight. The fundamental question to be addressed by this review is whether an open-tip bullet of MatchKing design may be used in combat.
Legal Factors.

The principal provision relating to the legality of weapons is contained in Art. 23e of the Annex to Hague Convention IV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land of
18 October 1907

, which prohibits the employment of "arms, projectiles, or material of a nature to cause superfluous injury." In some law of war treatises, the term "unnecessary suffering" is used rather than "superfluous injury." The terms are regarded as synonymous. To emphasize this, Art. 35, para. 2 of the 1977 Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of
August 12, 1949

, states in part that "It is prohibited to employ weapons [and] projectiles . . . of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering." Although the U.S. has made the formal decision that for military, political, and humanitarian reasons it will not become a party to Protocol I, U.S. officials have taken the position that the language of Art. 35(2) of Protocol I as quoted is a codification of customary international law, and therefore binding upon all nations. The terms "unnecessary suffering" and "superfluous injury" have not been formally defined within international law. In determining whether a weapon or projectile causes unnecessary suffering, a balancing test is applied between the force dictated by military necessity to achieve a legitimate objective vis-à-vis suffering that may be considered superfluous to achievement of that intended objective. The test is not easily applied. For this reason, the degree of "superfluous" injury must be clearly disproportionate to the intended objectives for development and employment of the weapon, that is, it must outweigh substantially the military necessity for the weapon system or projectile. The fact that a weapon causes suffering does not lead to the conclusion that the weapon causes unnecessary suffering, or is illegal per se. Military necessity dictates that weapons of war lead to death, injury, and destruction; the act of combatants killing or wounding enemy combatants in combat is a legitimate act under the law of war. In this regard, there is an incongruity in the law of war in that while it is legally permissible to kill an enemy combatant, incapacitation must not result inevitably in unnecessary suffering. What is prohibited is the design (or modification) and employment of a weapon for the purpose of increasing or causing suffering beyond that required by military necessity. In conducting the balancing test necessary to determine a weapon's legality, the effects of a weapon cannot be viewed in isolation. They must be examined against comparable weapons in use on the modern battlefield, and the military necessity for the weapon or projectile under consideration. In addition to the basic prohibition on unnecessary suffering contained in Art. 23e of the 1907 Hague IV, one other treaty is germane to this review. The Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets of
29 July 1899

prohibits the use in international armed conflict:
". . . of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions."

The

U.S.

is not a party to this treaty, but
U.S.

officials over the years have taken the position that the armed forces of the
U.S.

will adhere to its terms to the extent that its application is consistent with the object and purpose of Art. 23e of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, quoted above.

It is within the context of these two treaties that questions regarding the legality of the employment of the MatchKing "open tip" bullet must be considered.

Bullet Description.

As previously described, the MatchKing is a boat tail, ogival spitzer tip bullet with open tip. The "open tip" is a shallow aperture (approximately the diameter of the wire in a standard size straight pin or paper clip) in the nose of the bullet. While sometimes described as a "hollow point," this is a mischaracterization in law of war terms. Generally a "hollow point" bullet is thought of in terms of its ability to expand on impact with soft tissue. Physical examination of the MatchKing "open tip" bullet reveals that its opening is extremely small in comparison to the aperture in comparable hollow point hunting bullets; for example, the 165-grain GameKing is a true hollow point boat tail bullet with an aperture substantially greater than the MatchKing, and skiving (serrations cut into the jacket) to insure expansion. In the MatchKing, the open tip is closed as much as possible to provide better aerodynamics, and contains no skiving. The lead core of the MatchKing bullet is entirely covered by the bullet jacket. While the GameKing bullet is designed to bring the ballistic advantages of a match bullet to long range hunting, the manufacturer expressly recommends against the use of the MatchKing for hunting game of any size because it does not have the expansion characteristics of a hunting bullet.

The purpose of the small, shallow aperture in the MatchKing is to provide a bullet design offering maximum accuracy at very long ranges, rolling the jacket of the bullet around its core from base to tip; standard military bullets and other match bullets roll the jacket around its core from tip to base, leaving an exposed lead core at its base. Design purpose of the MatchKing was not to produce a bullet that would expand or flatten easily on impact with the human body, or otherwise cause wounds greater than those caused by standard military small arms ammunition.
MatchKing performance.

Other than its superior long range marksmanship capabilities, the MatchKing was examined with regard to its performance on impact with the human body or in artificial material that approximates human soft tissue. It was determined that the bullet will break up or fragment in some cases at some point following entry into soft tissue. Whether fragmentation occurs will depend upon a myriad of variables, to include range to the target, velocity at the time of impact, degree of yaw of the bullet at the point of impact, or the distance traveled point-first within the body before yaw is induced. The MatchKing has not been designed to yaw intentionally or to break up on impact. These characteristics are common to all military rifle bullets. There was little discernible difference in bullet fragmentation between the MatchKing and other military small arms bullets, with some military ball ammunition of foreign manufacture tending to fragment sooner in human tissue or to a greater degree, resulting in wounds that would be more severe than those caused by the MatchKing. [FNaaa1]

Because of concern over the potential mischaracterization of the M852 as a "hollow point" bullet that might violate the purpose and intent of the 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets, some M852 MatchKing bullets were modified to close the aperture. The "closed tip" MatchKing did not measure up to the accuracy of the "open tip" MatchKing.

Other match grade bullets were tested. While some could approach the accuracy standards of the MatchKing in some lots, quality control was uneven, leading to erratic results. No other match grade bullet consistently could meet the accuracy of the open-tip bullet.
Law of War Application.

From both a legal and medical standpoint, the lethality or incapacitation effects of a particular small-caliber projectile must be measured against comparable projectiles in service. In the military small arms field, "small caliber" generally includes all rifle projectiles up to and including .60 caliber (15mm). For the purposes of this review, however, comparison will be limited to small-caliber ammunition in the range of 5.45mm to 7.62mm, that is, that currently in use in assault or sniper rifles by the military services of most nations.

Wound ballistic research over the past fifteen years has determined that the prohibition contained in the 1899 Hague Declaration is of minimal to no value, inasmuch as virtually all jacketed military bullets employed since 1899 with pointed ogival spitzer tip shape have a tendency to fragment on impact with soft tissue, harder organs, bone or the clothing and/or equipment worn by the individual soldier.

The pointed ogival spitzer tip, shared by all modern military bullets, reflects the balancing by nations of the criteria of military necessity and unnecessary suffering: its streamlined shape decreases air drag, allowing the bullet to retain velocity better for improved long-range performance; a modern military 7.62mm bullet will lose only about one-third of its muzzle velocity over 500 yards, while the same weight bullet with a round-nose shape will lose more than one-half of its velocity over the same distance. Yet the pointed ogival spitzer tip shape also leads to greater bullet breakup, and potentially greater injury to the soldier by such a bullet vis-à-vis a round-nose full-metal jacketed bullet. (See Dr. M. L. Fackler, "Wounding Patterns for Military Rifle Bullets," International Defense Review, January 1989, pp. 56-64, at 63.)

Weighing the increased performance of the pointed ogival spitzer tip bullet against the increased injury its breakup may bring, the nations of the world-- through almost a century of practice--have concluded that the need for the former outweighs concern for the latter, and does not result in unnecessary suffering as prohibited by the 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets or article 23e of the 1907 Hague Convention IV. The 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets remains valid for _expression of the principle that a nation may not employ a bullet that expands easily on impact for the purpose of unnecessarily aggravating the wound inflicted upon an enemy soldier. Such a bullet also would be prohibited by article 23e of the 1907 Hague IV, however. Another concept fundamental to the law of war is the principle of discrimination, that is, utilization of means or methods that distinguish to the extent possible legitimate targets, such as enemy soldiers, from noncombatants, whether enemy wounded and sick, medical personnel, or innocent civilians. The highly trained military sniper with his special rifle and match grade ammunition epitomizes the principle of discrimination. In combat, most targets are covered or obscured, move unpredictably, and as a consequence are exposed to hostile fire for limited periods of time. When coupled with the level of marksmanship training provided the average soldier and the stress of combat, a soldier's aiming errors are large and hit probability is correspondingly low. While the M16A2 rifle currently used by the United States Army and Marine Corps is capable of acceptable accuracy out to six hundred meters, the probability of an average soldier hitting an enemy soldier at three hundred meters is ten percent.

Statistics from past wars suggest that this probability figure may be optimistic. In Would War II, the
United States

and its allies expended 25,000 rounds of ammunition to kill a single enemy soldier. In the Korean War, the ammunition expenditure had increased four-fold to 100,000 rounds per soldier; in the Vietnam War, that figure had doubled to 200,000 rounds of ammunition for the death of a single enemy soldier. The risk to noncombatants is apparent.

In contrast, United States Army and Marine Corps snipers in the Vietnam War expended 1.3 rounds of ammunition for each claimed and verified kill, at an average range of six hundred yards, or almost twice the three hundred meters cited above for combat engagements by the average soldier. Some verified kills were at ranges in excess of 1000 yards. This represents discrimination and military efficiency of the highest order, as well as minimization of risk to noncombatants. Utilization of a bullet that increases accuracy, such as the MatchKing, would further diminish the risk to noncombatants.
Conclusion.

The purpose of the 7.62mm "open-tip" MatchKing bullet is to provide maximum accuracy at very long range. Like most 5.56mm and 7.62mm military ball bullets, it may fragment upon striking its target, although the probability of its fragmentation is not as great as some military ball bullets currently in use by some nations. Bullet fragmentation is not a design characteristic, however, nor a purpose for use of the MatchKing by United State Army snipers. Wounds caused by MatchKing ammunition are similar to those caused by a fully jacketed military ball bullet, which is legal under the law of war, when compared at the same ranges and under the same conditions. The military necessity for its use-- its ability to offer maximum accuracy at very long ranges--is complemented by the high degree of discriminate fire it offers in the hands of a trained sniper. It not only meets, but exceeds, the law of war obligations of the
United States

for use in combat.
This opinion has been coordinated with the Department of State, Army General Counsel, and the Offices of the Judge Advocates General of the Navy and Air Force, who concur with its contents and conclusions.

An opinion that reaches the same conclusion has been issued simultaneously for the Navy and Marine Corps by The Judge Advocate General of the Navy.

Authored by W.

Hays



Parks

, Colonel, USMC,
Chief of the JAG's International Law Branch

The above text came from here;

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/01/army_jag_bans_e.html



More info here;

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/01/jag_bans_legal_.html

jwp45:

Interesting read, thanks. And it reinforces my opinion that MatchKings are not good hunting bullets. Why would anyone want to use a hunting bullet that:

1)does not have the expansion characteristics of a hunting bullet

2)will break up or fragment in some cases

3)has little discernible difference in bullet fragmentation between the MatchKing and other military small arms bullets,

4)Wounds caused by MatchKing ammunition are similar to those caused by a fully jacketed military ball bullet

Sounds to me like the MatchKing performs about like military ball ammo...not something that I want to hunt with!



Germane quotes from your post:

"While the GameKing bullet is designed to bring the ballistic advantages of a match bullet to long range hunting, the manufacturer expressly recommends against the use of the MatchKing for hunting game of any size because it does not have the expansion characteristics of a hunting bullet."

"Design purpose of the MatchKing was not to produce a bullet that would expand or flatten easily on impact with the human body, or otherwise cause wounds greater than those caused by standard military small arms ammunition."

"It was determined that the bullet will break up or fragment in some cases at some point following entry into soft tissue. Whether fragmentation occurs will depend upon a myriad of variables, to include range to the target, velocity at the time of impact, degree of yaw of the bullet at the point of impact, or the distance traveled point-first within the body before yaw is induced. The MatchKing has not been designed to yaw intentionally or to break up on impact. These characteristics are common to all military rifle bullets. There was little discernible difference in bullet fragmentation between the MatchKing and other military small arms bullets, with some military ball ammunition of foreign manufacture tending to fragment sooner in human tissue or to a greater degree, resulting in wounds that would be more severe than those caused by the MatchKing."

"Wounds caused by MatchKing ammunition are similar to those caused by a fully jacketed military ball bullet, which is legal under the law of war"

I didn't get that out of the read. I got that because the manufactor did not recomend them for hunting was one of the reasons used in the Militarys reasonimg that they were legal and that is why Sierra will never recomend them for hunting the way that Hornady has with the A-Max nd tthe Berger has done with thier match bullets. The Bergers are now advertised as a hunting bullet. If Sierra advetises the SMK as a hunting bullet, then it jepordizes their contract with the Miitary and the Military works in a target enriched enviroment. Therefore buying many many more bullets than do sport hunters.

How many animals have you killed with them? Until you have some actual experience in this matter you are not really very credible in you conclusions just regurgitating. Remember that one test will overcome a thousand expert opinions – I will agree that in some cases SPECIFIC SMK’s are not a good choice BUT if you know the specifics of the bullet in question one can make an informed judgment. Many factors bear into this such as core composition jacket thickness at the base and its taper ratio and the impact velocity that the bullet will be travelling at impact. You see it is not as easy of a comparative as it seems but then again not too many shooters get into the finite detail and then perform the testing to validate ones assumptions.

We were going to go on safari to South Africa in 2002. And as on a previous hunt there, we found that sometimes one has to take rather long shots at some animals.

So we built a rifle specially for this purpose, and chambered it for our 30/404 wildcat.

I tried differnt makes of 180 grain bullets in it, and we got over 3400 fps with all of them with very good accuracy.

So, in the interest of testing, I loaded several different types of 180 grain bullets in it.

Including the Sierra Match Kings.

Our first hunting area was in Zululand, for zebra, reedbuck and nyala. All of these were shot at relatively close range.

I used the 180 grain Match King bullets, and all worked very well.

They did fall apart, but not any more than normal soft points as loaded by the factories.

As a matter of choice, I prefer bullets that hold together and penetrate rather than those that expand explosively for hunting.

But if my only choice is between Match Kings or normal factory soft point, I would pick the Match Kings.

Boss: Haven't killed any and don't plan to.

Looks to me like the military has done sufficient testing for me to reach a conclusion. You call it regurgitating, I would call it relying on previous published research...no need for me to replicate what has been done.

Your opinion differs...

jwp45: You may very well be right as to why Sierra doesn't recommend them for hunting. The rationale sounds plausible. But, on the other hand, the research mentioned in the posting doesn't speak very highly of the MatchKings terminal performance.

I think I'll just stick with hunting bullets for hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
Boss: Haven't killed any and don't plan to.

Looks to me like the military has done sufficient testing for me to reach a conclusion. You call it regurgitating, I would call it relying on previous published research...no need for me to replicate what has been done.

Your opinion differs...

jwp45: You may very well be right as to why Sierra doesn't recommend them for hunting. The rationale sounds plausible. But, on the other hand, the research mentioned in the posting doesn't speak very highly of the MatchKings terminal performance.

I think I'll just stick with hunting bullets for hunting.

SMK's performance is not much if any difference than other cup and core bullets, Ballistic Tips, Game Kings, or Hornadys, etc


A 180 grain 30 cal Ballistic Tip taken from a 5X5 bull Elk this year, This was taken from one of the guy's in camps Elk this year






a great portion of that bullet fragmented


The lungs from my Elk taken with a 300 grain 338 SMK





through the off shoulder




A 200 grain Nosler Partition taken from a Bison a friend of mine hunted them in Utahs and here is his words

quote:

200 gr Nosler partitions recovered from an American Bison Killed on Henry Mountains in Utah.
Bullet on the right broke the shoulder but did not go any further resulting in a very long afternoon of tracking. The bullet upon recovery weighs 74.9 gr.
The other bullet out of the same buffalo weighs 92.5 gr upon recovery.

The bullet 200 grain 30 cal Nosler Partition




Seems that most bullets fragment


300 grain 338 SMK recovered from Moose



http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f17/2-moose-over-900-yards-24248/[/URL]

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
We were going to go on safari to South Africa in 2002. And as on a previous hunt there, we found that sometimes one has to take rather long shots at some animals.

So we built a rifle specially for this purpose, and chambered it for our 30/404 wildcat.

I tried differnt makes of 180 grain bullets in it, and we got over 3400 fps with all of them with very good accuracy.

So, in the interest of testing, I loaded several different types of 180 grain bullets in it.

Including the Sierra Match Kings.

Our first hunting area was in Zululand, for zebra, reedbuck and nyala. All of these were shot at relatively close range.

I used the 180 grain Match King bullets, and all worked very well.

They did fall apart, but not any more than normal soft points as loaded by the factories.

As a matter of choice, I prefer bullets that hold together and penetrate rather than those that expand explosively for hunting.

But if my only choice is between Match Kings or normal factory soft point, I would pick the Match Kings.

Saeed has tons and tons of experience in taking game, is every one going to ignore his results?

Well you know what they say about opinions but on the other hand not everyone has access and shoots with the engineers and ballisticians that design and test these bullets.

I consider myself to be lucky!

Care to share some of your inside information as to which MK's might be "good"?

The 150 SMK in 7mm (the above pics were with the Warp 7) also use the 250gr .338 along with the 300gr but the 300 is only in 1 rifle.

The 190 SMK .30 out of the 300 Slowpoke which is a RUM improved and the 155gr out of my 300WSM BUT it is used where the min impact range will be 150yards the 338 Slowpoke is an improved Lapua first built for competition now have several sporters built for it as well.

Also have used too many to count 142SMK's in 6.5 to kill feral hogs on down. This being said the 150 and the 190 are what I hunt with 90% of the time for long range because of the energy over 500yds. The 142’s which are out of a sporter chambered with the same reamer used for my match rifles in 6.5x284 does not have quite energy or velocity needed for shots over 350yds for that specific bullet IMHO on feral hogs and deer.