Home Main Category Hunting

Another Hog and another A-Max Performance Base

124»

Replies

  • ZeeZee Posts: 28,455 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 Posts: 8,227 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 Posts: 22,429 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 Posts: 28,455 Senior Member
    I believe in miracles.

    :-)
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • snake284snake284 Posts: 22,429 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 Posts: 28,455 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 Posts: 8,227 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 Posts: 28,455 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 Posts: 22,429 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 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 Posts: 28,455 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
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Posts: 14,114 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.
    Meh.
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Posts: 8,609 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"
  • Ernie BishopErnie Bishop Posts: 8,609 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 Posts: 28,455 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 Posts: 28,455 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 Posts: 28,455 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 Posts: 4,629 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 Posts: 28,455 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 Posts: 4,629 Senior Member
    :spittingcoffee:

    Bonjour....
  • snake284snake284 Posts: 22,429 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 Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    Parallax time continuim distortion? :uhm:
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • orchidmanorchidman Posts: 8,438 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 Posts: 22,429 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 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.
  • snake284snake284 Posts: 22,429 Senior Member
    early wrote: »
    Ah, a deliberate time continuum circumvention.

    Absolutely permissible as far as I'm aware.

    Why thank you Bro Early, we'll have to get together and go back a few hundred years and try out the old fashion coffee. Hey I might even try out some old time whiskey. I've heard whiskey made in the 18th and 19th Century was super smooth. And the beauty of it is since I quit drinking in 2010 I can go ahead and have a few, because I will be in the past before I quit so I won't be cheating.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Posts: 14,114 Senior Member
    I just linked it to the other thread to point out that pretty much all of the same points had been brought up just over 3 years ago.
    Meh.
  • snake284snake284 Posts: 22,429 Senior Member
    I just linked it to the other thread to point out that pretty much all of the same points had been brought up just over 3 years ago.

    As for me the argument was still pertinent. We had left things on the table for a long time with snippits of outbursts between us. I still had questions. There's still people working for Hornady that are at odds with each other about this bullet. This leads people to be confused about the issue. However as for me, Zee answered some questions and showed me that there are two view points within the Hornady company. Zee told me some things I had never heard like there was a bit of professional testing on this bullet outside of Hornady and that there were some people within Hornady that knew the product in question better than some others. Taught me a lesson not to believe everything a company says about its product because there may be two factions within. One faction that actually knows the product and then there's the bean counters that only understand the marketing and profits end of the business. When you call even customer service you could possibly get one of either persuasion.

    Anyway, mark this up to a learning experience.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • ZeeZee Posts: 28,455 Senior Member
    I myself was skeptical with the initial concept of the A-Max. I drug my feet. Kicking and screaming. Why? Because I knew what was (inaccurate Nosler Ballistic Tip) and didn't consider that a Match Bullet (SMK) and Hunting Bullet (NBT) could be mated together. I anticipated a jack of all trades and master on none. Then........I tested it and got hands on experience................and never looked back. Just pushed it forward beyond what had initially been considered.

    It.......is ......awesome.
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
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