Bullet info required

alan

Well-Known Member
Folks
This is probably in the wrong section but I need some info on 7mm.08 bullets:
I have been offered some Hornady SST heads in 139gr. Has anyone used them, and if so was there much meat damage?
the rifle I will be loading for is a Tikka M595.
While I'm at it preffered powder and load?
many thanks
Alan
 
As its approaching a certain time of year, a few subtle hints of the "I need some reloading manuals" type may prove to be of some use

& don't call bullets "heads" :doh:












Heads are where the sailors meet their special friends... :confused:
 
I have used those in my Steyr Scout 7mm-08 and I found them very good. I have never had much damage with that round in any format really. I have just loaded some of the same for my 7 milly Rem, so we'll see soon enough.

I sent them on their way with Vit N140 by the way. I also had some .308 factory loads with the SST and they were fine

Chris
 
Saddler
You call them what you want and I'll call them what I want, if you didn,t know what I meant how come you answered this so quickly. Also you seem to be very familiar with the American military slang for toilets, wonder why?????
 
Saddler
You call them what you want and I'll call them what I want, if you didn,t know what I meant how come you answered this so quickly. Also you seem to be very familiar with the American military slang for toilets, wonder why?????

US Navy, to be exact

My degree is in military history (helps to have some technical knowledge of the subject matter)

An example of technical knowledge, could be:
A bullet is a projectile propelled by a firearm, sling, or air gun. Bullets do not normally contain explosives,[SUP][1][/SUP] but damage the intended target by impact and penetration. The word "bullet" is sometimes colloquially used to refer to ammunition in general, or to a cartridge, which is a combination of the bullet, case/shell, powder, and primer. This incorrect use of 'bullet' when 'cartridge' is intended, leads to confusion when the components of a cartridge are discussed or intended. See the reference section for more detail.

Just seemed odd that you started off a thread "Bullet info required " then call bullets heads, then have a hissy fit when pulled up about it.
You asked a question, you were given an answer...
 
Not disagreeing there Saddler, but your definition there doesn't actually preclude the use of the word 'head' to describe a bullet. It simply doesn't include it.

Hey, I'd like to get into a debate with my local FLO when it says calibre on my ticket and I put .257 and he says that's not acceptable. Oh, you mean cartridge?

Chris
 
Saddler
Degree in Military history WTF has that got to do with 139gr bullet damage?
No wonder members of this site dont like coming on it to ask questions or add comments when they come up against smart arses like you.
I have the info I need from Chris.
end of thread
Alan
 
I've used the standard Hornady 139 grain 7mm and found them very accurate. I have never used the SST as many places do not like "rifles" to turn up with any sort of plastic tipped bullet.
 
I've used the 139 and 154 7 mm SST's in 7mm SAUM with very good results on both paper and deer .
 
I have never used the SST as many places do not like "rifles" to turn up with any sort of plastic tipped bullet.
Really? Why not? I've heard good things about the 7mm Hornady SSTs. It's not like plastic wads in shotgun cartridges that lay a carpet of plastic around the place. These are tiny fragments of plastic.
 
I would suggest that as with many things, being misinformed leads to prejudices.

I meet many shooters, some are club members who load and shoot many many rounds and then some who have a rifle, a box of factory (whatever the shop had) and they go out and shoot things. Now, there's no right nor wrong here, but I do find that the club shooters who also stalk/hunt etc tend to be better informed. Nothing to do with being better shots. I'm not starting a fight on that one. Just better informed in relation to the technicalities of shooting and ammunition. There will be those who see plastic tips as some sort of explosive device. They will have heard tales of heaven knows what perhaps. Not to do with scattering plastic like wads I don't think? But with deer being blown to pieces and such.

I am sorry to say that some of the most niave people that I have met in realtion to firearms and ammunition have been those working for the FC. To them, a rifle is simply a tool. This is how it works and this is what happens when you point it and pull the trigger. All good shots, but completely in the dark as to what happens as the pin hits the primer. To illustrate the point about ballistics, I had one Ranger say to me (during a shooting test) that no deer should ever be taken at distances of more than 150 yards as it was on the accuracy and terminal limits of ammunition. Err right. He was utterly horrified when I said that I had taken deer cleanly as much further than that. To the point I thought they were going to pull our authorisation.

Some people don't ever question rules and when they do, usually the person hasn't a clue as to why the rule was ever a rule.

Chris
 
Aw, don't go and spoil it.

Along with all the other tripe that passes for fact in films.

.44 mag, most powerful handgun in the World..... Oh really.
All those revolvers that seem to make that lovely whizzy sound when you spin the open cylinders .... no they don't.
All the semi automatics that go click click when empty with the slides locked back ... odd
All the shooting that goes on in tight spaces and no one ever seems to find that hard on the ears ..... tried it once, deafening
All the single action pistols that don't seem to need cocking first ....Hmm
All those belts of blanks that get loaded into M60s... bang your dead, oh, no, hang on maybe I missed
Can't remember the film, but there was a murder. Shot with a revolver. The police picked up the spent case as evidence... WTF???

All good fun
 
Really? Why not? I've heard good things about the 7mm Hornady SSTs. It's not like plastic wads in shotgun cartridges that lay a carpet of plastic around the place. These are tiny fragments of plastic.


I tired SST's in the 270 and found them very messy
 
I use them in my 7mm-08 with 42grains of N140. They are really accurate, I have shot 4 deer with them so far and have found them to be quite damaging. None more so than a Nosler BT mind. I used a simple Speer soft point before and preferred those to be honest. I am going to continue using the SST for the next few months before passing judgement.
ATB

Steve
 
SST's are quite popular down our way. I have never got them to shoot well in either my sako 75 or rem 700 7/08, but folks who can, usually report they are great killers but very frangibile. I prefer the stand 139 gn SP. the shoot better and work well on game for me. Cheaper too.

They are marketed as projectiles. Head comes from the missus or your boyfriend if you like. When i see "heads" on a Hornady box or sales information I'll call them that. Why not try to use the correct term? Otherwise fallow are muntjac etc.
 
One thing that might make a small difference in my case is that the Scout is a short barrel. 19" IIRC and I only get about 2400 fps out of it with the SSTs. Whilst fast enough, you guys with the full length tubes may be knocking on the door of 2800 maybe? It isn't my standard load, I usually use Sierra Gameking 140 gr and certainly haven't had an issue with them.

On the point about correct terminology for anything, not just components of ammunition, there is a way to say things guaranteed to cause offence and a way to suggest that the person may be misinformed. So saying something like "Stop calling 4x4s - Jeeps" is likely to get people's backs up isn't it. It may be right, but not the way to make friends exactly.

I know several experienced shooters who still describe deer as having horns. I simply say "Do you know the difference between horn and antler by the way?' And they look sheepish and say, 'oops, I meant antler'. No one needs to get upset.

I have seen the debate over 'bullet heads' many times and frankly I don't know why it would be so contentious. Who cares? It's not like were calling Motorhead -Disco or something really important.

Chris
 
Back
Top