Bullet stability

i posted this a while back, i had a 1\10 twist barrell on a 17rem vixen, it shot hornady h\p 25 gr bullets fantastic then i bought some 25gr vmax to try, same load seated the same they tumbled at 10 yds, i was a bit puzzled so i did a little experiment, i pulled the red tip from ten vmax and loaded them the same as the hornady h\p, bingo 1 ragged ten shot group at 100 yds , so in my case its the length of the bullett that causes the stability problem bs.
 
i posted this a while back, i had a 1\10 twist barrell on a 17rem vixen, it shot hornady h\p 25 gr bullets fantastic then i bought some 25gr vmax to try, same load seated the same they tumbled at 10 yds, i was a bit puzzled so i did a little experiment, i pulled the red tip from ten vmax and loaded them the same as the hornady h\p, bingo 1 ragged ten shot group at 100 yds , so in my case its the length of the bullett that causes the stability problem bs.
When you took the plastic nose off the bullet, you changed the COG of the bullet. You essentially moved the COG forward, by half the amount of the length of the plastic cone.
 
When you took the plastic nose off the bullet, you changed the COG of the bullet. You essentially moved the COG forward, by half the amount of the length of the plastic cone.
Scratching my head on this one.

Surely if you take weight off the front the CoG moves back, not forward. And as the density of plastic is about 1.2 g/cc and copper 8.7 g/cc the effect would be moving it back about 15% of the length of the tip. Presuming the tip to be about 100 thou long on a 25gr VMax that a shift of just 15 thou in the CoG. Obviously enough to make a difference in this case but it must be right on the edge of stable.
 
Scratching my head on this one.

Surely if you take weight off the front the CoG moves back, not forward. And as the density of plastic is about 1.2 g/cc and copper 8.7 g/cc the effect would be moving it back about 15% of the length of the tip. Presuming the tip to be about 100 thou long on a 25gr VMax that a shift of just 15 thou in the CoG. Obviously enough to make a difference in this case but it must be right on the edge of stable.
A bit exaggerated, but it gets to the point (no pun intended).
.CoG.webp
 
<snip>
I remember arguing on here with the usual suspects (Miki?)

I don't recall we were arguing, you were pointing me in the right direction... :)


@Sharpie said "This is all very well, but when the bullet manufacturers won't even publish how long their bullets are, with or without tips, never mind some sort of BC, frankly we are left guessing."

Which is annoying. I keep asking and all you get are vague replies, or just the info for 1 type of bullet.
 
Scratching my head on this one.

Surely if you take weight off the front the CoG moves back, not forward. And as the density of plastic is about 1.2 g/cc and copper 8.7 g/cc the effect would be moving it back about 15% of the length of the tip. Presuming the tip to be about 100 thou long on a 25gr VMax that a shift of just 15 thou in the CoG. Obviously enough to make a difference in this case but it must be right on the edge of stable.
I think you have that wrong. The CofG moves forwards, not back when you de-tip them. Unless somehow you have a tip that is as least as dense as the otherwise monometal projectile, and, I suppose, is worth putting on. for whatever reason. Polymer (less dense) obviously has lesser disruption to the balance, between tipped and not tipped.

Well, not to my surprise, an olde fashioned cup and core soft point with the "tip" formed from the lead core, sticking out the front, can do very well. Providing the soft point doesn't get mashed up a bit somewhere along the line.

Aluminium, might be a little easier to make than polymer, for lathe turning people, but its the same thing. Putting on such tips can only worsen the stability factor. Might be beneficial I suppose for boosting the BC, or for some other reason, maybe designed as part of a controlled expansion mechanism, but downsides also.

Visualise the bullets as sort of reverse shuttlecocks. They rely on spin stabilisation, not say drag stabilisation such as an airgun diabalo pellet. They just naturally want to fly backwards. Indeed some experimenters (ahem, military peeps with human sized targets to destroy) used to do just that, shooting old FMJs ,pulled from their military ball ammo then pushed back in again the other way around. They definitely expanded mightily, though obviously the BCs were utter rubbish.
 
The old way of talking about the stability of a projectile was to describe a point which was the centre of pressure, which was that point on the axis of the bullet where the drag forces on the projectile were said to act.

The distance between the centre of pressure and the COG, multiplied by the perpendicular force acting at the centre of pressure, is the overturning moment.

The larger the overturning moment, the faster the twist needs to be to stop the projectile from tumbling.

By removing the tip, the centre of pressure is being moved back, reducing the distance between the centre of pressure and the COG, and so reducing the overturning moment...
 
I think you have that wrong. The CofG moves forwards, not back when you de-tip them. Unless somehow you have a tip that is as least as dense as the otherwise monometal projectile, and, I suppose, is worth putting on. for whatever reason. Polymer (less dense) obviously has lesser disruption to the balance, between tipped and not tipped.

Well, not to my surprise, an olde fashioned cup and core soft point with the "tip" formed from the lead core, sticking out the front, can do very well. Providing the soft point doesn't get mashed up a bit somewhere along the line.

Aluminium, might be a little easier to make than polymer, for lathe turning people, but its the same thing. Putting on such tips can only worsen the stability factor. Might be beneficial I suppose for boosting the BC, or for some other reason, maybe designed as part of a controlled expansion mechanism, but downsides also.

Visualise the bullets as sort of reverse shuttlecocks. They rely on spin stabilisation, not say drag stabilisation such as an airgun diabalo pellet. They just naturally want to fly backwards. Indeed some experimenters (ahem, military peeps with human sized targets to destroy) used to do just that, shooting old FMJs ,pulled from their military ball ammo then pushed back in again the other way around. They definitely expanded mightily, though obviously the BCs were utter rubbish.
I can see that CoG will move forward as a % of the bullet length, but if you are looking at physical distance from the base of the bullet it has to move back. CoG is effectively the balance point of the bullet on a knife edge - centre mass - remove weight from the front and that balance point moves backwards.
 
The old way of talking about the stability of a projectile was to describe a point which was the centre of pressure, which was that point on the axis of the bullet where the drag forces on the projectile were said to act.

The distance between the centre of pressure and the COG, multiplied by the perpendicular force acting at the centre of pressure, is the overturning moment.

The larger the overturning moment, the faster the twist needs to be to stop the projectile from tumbling.

By removing the tip, the centre of pressure is being moved back, reducing the distance between the centre of pressure and the COG, and so reducing the overturning moment...
Now that's an explanation that makes sense.
 
sorry i didnt mean to open a can of worms, i dont profess to be a gunsmith , or a ballistics expert, it was just one of those things that puzzled me, 25gr vmax tumbled, 25gr hornady h\p worked well, 25gr vmax minus red tip worked brilliant, all i did was to alter the length of bullett and it worked, oh and by the way i only use 25gr begers now, but interesting reading gents bs.
 
Last edited:
Afternoon all, just reviving this. May have been covered elsewhere. I have taken on the above in relation to JBM being more accurate for plastic tips.

I am looking at bullets for a 7 RM. According to JBM it would stabilise sleek bullets up to 175gr e.g nosler ABLR stability factor 1.62 vs 1.325 without entering in a 0.150 ballistic tip. ELD X 175gr also at stability of 1.425 Would this be correct? Hornady 150gr CX 1.49.

I was under the impression that the 175gr sleek bullets wouldn’t be stabilised fully in a 7 RM. Maybe this is based on the Berger calculator or old models
 
I realise that I could buy a 160gr soft point and everything would be fine or a 162gr ELDX. But I am interested to know the full answer and the workings. Rifle is a 9.4 twist. Would have preferred a 7 PRC but not available in chosen rifle.
 
Further to the above if therefore the Jbm ballistics is correct and many of these heavier longer sleeker bullets can be shot in a 7 Rem Mag why would Hornady etc still suggest a min of 1-8 twist for the 175gr ELD x? Would they be working on an older model not factoring in ballistic tips?
 
Back
Top