Home Main Category Hunting

Another Hog and another A-Max Performance Base

124

Replies

  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 8,148 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    But, I do have a question for Zee and Ernie and anyone else who has experience with the A-Max bullet as a hunting bullet. How is it on hide or pelt damage? The reason I ask is that I finally booked that once in a lifetime nauga hunt. I'm not exactly sure what one is, but the booking agent told me that the hides were in high demand on a commercial basis, and that if I managed to get a few and not do any significant damage to the hides, I should probably be able to sell them to people he knew for enough to cover the cost of the hunt.

    Needless to say I'm very excited about this, and want to make sure I have just the right bullet.

    Thanks in advance.
    Since Zee shot down the A-Max for that job, let me sidetrack for a moment and offer a perfect big game bullet for that job: Sierra ProHunter.

    I used one in .243 on my mule deer and the result entry hole was the diameter of the bullet and the exit hole was not even the size of a dime. My tanned backskin came out in tip top shape from the tannery using that bullet.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    Anyway, I may give the A-Max a whirl in the ol' 6.8x63 myself. :wink:

    You gonna have a hard time finding an A-Max in 6.8 anywhere in stock.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 7,939 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    I feel I was rather explanatory.

    To your second question........the answer is no.

    Darn. Upon further reflection, I found your response somewhat disheartening. I decided to get a second opinion, so I called down to the local bowling alley and asked to speak to Hector. He's the booking agent I mentioned earlier. I asked him about using a .270 for naugas, fully expecting him to burst into a round of derisive laughter for asking such a silly question. Instead, he assured me that the .270 was perfect for anything on his remote unicorn ranch (I don't think he meant to let that slip), and that some of his past clients had taken trophy naugas with the .270. I pressed him further, asking about using the AMAX bullet, and he didn't offer an opinion. No doubt he's not aware of its great potential as a hunting bullet.

    So, all of this gave me an idea, Zee. Perhaps you can find some .270 AMAX bullets and work up a .270 load with them. Once you find a load that will make a hole in paper at a suitable distance, and give you the accuracy you want (or at least suitable accuracy for the task at hand), take it hunting. If you don't have a .270, perhaps you can borrow one for this experiment. Whatever you do, be sure you bring someone along as a backup, carrying a rifle chambered in something more suitable.

    If you can demonstrate that the AMAX bullet will do well even when fired from a .270, I think you will convince a lot of people that it is a very viable option. Otherwise, those of us who have successfully used the .270 to take game using a 'lesser' bullet can only conclude that the might AMAX is just not the bullet we need.

    I hope you take this suggestion in the spirit it was offered.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    Fortunately, Hornady has realized that the .270 is a piss poor match round and other than being a damned adequate coyote round, not good for much else. Therefore, they have not made an A-Max bullet for such a useless caliber.

    In light of this fact, I regret to inform you that I will be unable to provide you the information you desire.

    I can speak for the .284 caliber A-Max. Being that it is a vastly superior caliber, Hornady has jumped on board. It's a great bullet!

    Hopefully, you will take this information as intended as well.

    ;-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 7,939 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    Fortunately, Hornady has realized that the .270 is a piss poor match round and other than being a damned adequate coyote round, not good for much else. Therefore, they have not made an A-Max bullet for such a useless caliber.

    In light of this fact, I regret to inform you that I will be unable to provide you the information you desire.

    I can speak for the .284 caliber A-Max. Being that it is a vastly superior caliber, Hornady has jumped on board. It's a great bullet!

    Hopefully, you will take this information as intended as well.

    ;-)

    Well shoot.

    Figuratively speaking, that is. After all, you can't shoot what you don't have.

    Guess I'll have to stick with any of the multitude of bullets that I know from experience to work well in the .270.

    Thank you for your attention to this matter.

    :)
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    Fortunately, Hornady has realized that the .270 is a piss poor match round and other than being a damned adequate coyote round, not good for much else. Therefore, they have not made an A-Max bullet for such a useless caliber.

    In light of this fact, I regret to inform you that I will be unable to provide you the information you desire.

    I can speak for the .284 caliber A-Max. Being that it is a vastly superior caliber, Hornady has jumped on board. It's a great bullet!




    Hopefully, you will take this information as intended as well.

    ;-)


    The miracles never cease. How that golden .007 can make so vast a difference in performance, never mind doing it with less BC than the .270 with the same weight bullet. Oh well, I guess I'll just stick to my Game Kings and my Interlocks and if I really want to slum it I can use one of those trashy Combined Technology thingis...
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    I believe in miracles.

    :-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    I believe in miracles.

    :-)

    I do too and I'm praying for the salvation of all .270 dissers!:angel2::tissue::silly::roll2:
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    You know, the difference between the .277 and .284 is probably why they decided to call James Bond 007. It's the difference between mundane and ****!!!

    :-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 7,939 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    You know, the difference between the .277 and .284 is probably why they decided to call James Bond 007. It's the difference between mundane and ****!!!

    :-)

    Yeah. That must be it.:roll:
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    Yeah. That must be it.:roll:

    I'm sure of it.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    Yeah but look REAL close next time and you'll see it's really -.007 :jester:
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • shootbrownelkshootbrownelk Senior Member Posts: 2,035 Senior Member
    If you'd have used a hunting bullet, you'd have gotten better performance.

    I don't know, you can only kill something so dead. Looks like excellent performance to me. Right behind the shoulder would work equally well IMO. Never used the A-Max, I sure will now.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    I don't know, you can only kill something so dead. Looks like excellent performance to me. Right behind the shoulder would work equally well IMO. Never used the A-Max, I sure will now.

    He was being sarcastic. Exceedingly so.

    :tooth:
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 21,093 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    The miracles never cease. How that golden .007 can make so vast a difference in performance, never mind doing it with less BC than the .270 with the same weight bullet.
    Apples to oranges Mike.
    1) .277" A-max bullets don't exist
    2) Can only find 1, count 'em ONE, .277" bullet over 150gr (vs the 162 A-max) and it's a 180gr Woodleigh with a published BC of .519 compared to the .625 BC of the 162 A-M Though QL also lists a Remington LR SP @ 165gr. Though I believe Rem discontinued that line a few years back. Also, it lists their BC as .565 which, by any method you want to figure it, is LESS than .625
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,493 Senior Member
    Zee wrote: »
    He was being sarcastic. Exceedingly so.

    :tooth:

    I wouldn't say "exceedingly." I'm rated at a higher sarcasm level than the average user.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 7,474 Senior Member
    A-Max's do not, but Matrix bullets do make a 165 grain .277 bullet.
    BC (static): 0.7381 (Computer generated).
    From actual shooting testing being done a real world BC is more like .638
    Still pretty good.
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 21,093 Senior Member
    A-Max's do not, but Matrix bullets do make a 165 grain .277 bullet.
    BC (static): 0.7381 (Computer generated).
    From actual shooting testing being done a real world BC is more like .638
    Still pretty good.
    And still an apples to oranges comparison.
    Mass produced "target" bullet vs. a "boutique" bullet :nono:
    I imagine Matrix make comparable .277 and .284 bullets, If you want to compare boutique bullets, then that would be a "fair" comparison IMO.
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Senior Member Posts: 7,474 Senior Member
    Berger's 168 7mm bullet has a BC of .617
    JLK ("Boutique Bullets") lists their estimated BC for their 7mm 168 grain as .690 and for their 180 as .735, but Litz's real world testing shows the 180 grain is really at .645 or a tad higher, which would put JLK's 168 grain much lower than their estimated BC, would put it quite a bit below the Matrix.
    For those who have used both the 168 Berger and the 168 JLK say that their drops are basically the same which would put the 168 grain JLK 7mm Boutique Bullet at around .617
    That is about as "Apple to Apple" comparison as you are going to find IMO.
    knitepoet wrote: »
    And still an apples to oranges comparison.
    Mass produced "target" bullet vs. a "boutique" bullet :nono:
    I imagine Matrix make comparable .277 and .284 bullets, If you want to compare boutique bullets, then that would be a "fair" comparison IMO.
    Ernie

    "The Un-Tactical"
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    Well, glory be!

    While reading Hornady's 8th Edition Manual at 3:30 this morning.

    image-9.jpg

    What? Isn't that what you guys read at ungodly hours of the morning? Anyway, looky what I happened upon.

    image-8.jpg

    Notice the last line.

    Oh, the conspiracy!!!!!!
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    In addition, I found the following medium game recommendations for the A-Max in Hornady's manual.

    105gr .243cal

    image-13.jpg

    162gr .284cal

    image-12.jpg

    140gr .264cal

    image-11.jpg

    168 & 178gr .308 (The 155 & 208gr A-max were recommended as well. Just on a different pages. You want it as well, I can sure post it for you.)

    image-10.jpg


    They said it..................in writing.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    Buffco wrote: »
    I heard those Amax bullets were for target shooting only. I think you should perhaps do some research.

    You've been lucky twice now.

    You know, I took your advise and did some research. Thanks, Buffy!!!!! Bet that's the first time anyone's actually taken your advise.

    ;-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • JayJay Senior Member Posts: 3,859 Senior Member
    Hard to argue with that book lernin'.

    I guess I was cool befor being cool was cool. I've been loading Amax's in 243 and 308 for game for at least a few years now.

    Big difference between your experience and mine though: You've gone out and shot animals with yours. I just go take my guns for a walk....:tooth:

    I can say that 105 Amax's in 243 kill rabbits and coyotes though....:jester:
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,988 Senior Member
    Jay wrote: »
    Hard to argue with that book lernin'.

    I guess I was cool befor being cool was cool.

    You were also a French Model before being a French Model was cool.

    :jester:
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • JayJay Senior Member Posts: 3,859 Senior Member
    :spittingcoffee:

    Bonjour....
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    If you'd have used a hunting bullet, you'd have gotten better performance.

    I have talked with Zee and evidently he didn't just fall off the turnip truck and decide to use a match bullet to hunt with. There's a little more to the story. He did research on this and it seems that the A-Max isn't your garden variety match bullet. But that doesn't mean all match bullets are created equally. Some manufacturers will tell you their bullet isn't designed to be used for hunting. I believe the Match Kings and some others are a little bit tough for dependable expansion. So I wouldn't give target bullets a blanket go ahead for hunting until I did some research. Depends on what you're hunting and other factors. Of course if you use a solid it doesn't expand very well either and is made for penetration.

    I'm not saying there aren't other target bullets that won't work for hunting. I've killed a couple of deer with Match Kings. Killed them DRT too. But by looking at the damage they inflicted I don't think I'd use Match Kings on a regular basis. I shot one deer in the base of the neck and it cork screwed around up the neck and came out right below the head. The exit wound was not very big. The other one hit the heart. Both were DRT kills but I don't think I'd do that again. From what I'm reading and what Zee tells me, the A-Max will expand well. I don't think that's the case with most match bullets unless some other bullet manufacturers have begun to follow suit.

    But then again, how you gonna know if it will or won't work until you try them?
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    Parallax time continuim distortion? :uhm:
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • orchidmanorchidman Senior Member Posts: 8,110 Senior Member
    early wrote: »
    Parallax time continuim distortion? :uhm:

    Wasn't me. Last time I breached the STC ( Space Time Continuum) you guys elected Obama the first time..............I had a small ooopsie 4 years later and he was elected for a second term.

    I have learned my lesson. :nono:
    Still enjoying the trip of a lifetime and making the best of what I have.....
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 22,394 Senior Member
    orchidman wrote: »
    Wasn't me. Last time I breached the STC ( Space Time Continuum) you guys elected Obama the first time..............I had a small ooopsie 4 years later and he was elected for a second term.

    I have learned my lesson. :nono:

    So you got Obummer elected! You stay your butt on your side of that line next November.

    Yeah and The subject bream was expounding upon in 2013 was very pertinent to the subject matter we've been discussing the last week.

    Oh and I breach that that continuum line thing every day. Just walking from my bed room to my kitchen I breach it. Hey I went to bed in 1993 and woke up in 2011 the other morning. Yesterday I answered 2 questions I asked myself in 1958. Time travel is in your head. Just takes a little imagination. Why can't I answer questions that were asked in 2013 today? If the subject matter is the same, the facts as I know them should be the same also.

    :popcorn:..........:driving:..........:cool:
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    Ah, a deliberate time continuum circumvention.

    Absolutely permissible as far as I'm aware.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement