nosler varmagedon in hornet

[nicholiath]

Has anyone used these in hp or bt through their hornet?

[wymberley]

The HP looks to have a somewhat low BC and SD.

 

The BT bullet OAL at 0.665" is such that it may be a tad long for a magazine feed without a bit of fettling where possible. There also may be a twist rate problem because of that length.

 

With a reasonable selection available, it's probable that there are other choices more suitable and not as expensive I would imagine.

Edited February 5, 2013 by wymberley

[nicholiath]

I have a modified mag for forty gn v max but was just wondering that the hollow point varmagedon looked good.

[wymberley]

Although low compared with some, the HP BC is not too bad so it's worth a try. As the BT is shorter than the V Max and I assume that you're getting that to stablize, the BT is also well worth a go.

 

Taking a guess here, and as you've 'worked' the mag', I assume CZ. Pity, with a 1 in 14 you may have been able to have tried the SPSX mag fed! - seen (and answered) your post on the other thread.

 

Cheers

[nicholiath]

Although low compared with some, the HP BC is not too bad so it's worth a try. As the BT is shorter than the V Max and I assume that you're getting that to stablize, the BT is also well worth a go.

 

Taking a guess here, and as you've 'worked' the mag', I assume CZ. Pity, with a 1 in 14 you may have been able to have tried the SPSX mag fed! - seen (and answered) your post on the other thread.

 

Cheers

 

i spoke to someone on a forum who was using the 50 spsx in cz hornet he said it stabilized through the 1 in 16 due to it being quite a dumpy bullet for its weight

[kent]

I should like to know if you achieve anything tangible, I have avoided non hornet bullets up to press as when you look at the BC its hard to gain much tangible gain due to the velocity drop in the heavier bullets and the effective range window of the Hornet. To me its like trying to shoot 180 grn bullets though a .308 for the ballistic gain they give. Sure they might be great through a .30 cal magnum but a std .308? Let me know if you can convince me otherwise please

[wymberley]

i spoke to someone on a forum who was using the 50 spsx in cz hornet he said it stabilized through the 1 in 16 due to it being quite a dumpy bullet for its weight

 

Theory - or the formula that I use as a quick check - suggests that the SPSX travelling at 2800ft/sec would require a rate of 1 in 14 for its 0.666" length. Having said that, practical experience over-rides theory. Consequently, as I only paid £16.80 for my last 100, joking apart now, give them a go for fox. But as my mentor for the calibre warned me, don't even think about rabbit!

 

Was just about to hit 'Post' when I was notified of a new (Kent's) post. When I tried 40gn in the 223, I noticed a difference in lethal performance to the 55s and 50s even though the ME was on a par-ish. When I started with the Hornet and 40s and, to a degree 45s, I would describe the wounds as 'fatal'. With the 50s, they're mortal if you get my drift. With 40s if you keep the lamp on you can watch the light fade away but with the 50s, they're down with the switch thrown.

[Underdog]

I have just been researching the twist of CZ's in Hornet and can not get any clarity. Some say 1-16 and some say 1-14!

 

Can you guy's measure yours? Just to be sure!

 

U.

[bullet1747]

I have just been researching the twist of CZ's in Hornet and can not get any clarity. Some say 1-16 and some say 1-14!

 

Can you guy's measure yours? Just to be sure!

 

U.

10 inch

[nicholiath]

6 inch if i fold it in half!

[bullet1747]

For got to say it's cold

[Alycidon]

The boys on Saubier do not rate them much.

 

A

[wymberley]

I have just been researching the twist of CZ's in Hornet and can not get any clarity. Some say 1-16 and some say 1-14!

 

Can you guy's measure yours? Just to be sure!

 

U.

 

 

Nothing better to do so had a search - none of the sites, CZ UK, CZ USA, etc, etc mention this aspect in the specification sheets. Obviously, it's not considered a critical selling point. I suspect the answer will come from the PW owners and more than likely prove to be the 16.

 

Edit: Belay that! I looked because I thought I'd seen it somewhere, but no. Then, no sooner had I hit, 'Post', my brain engaged. The Sportsman Gun Centre details this information on their spec' info'. 16 it is.

Edited February 6, 2013 by wymberley

[kent]

Theory - or the formula that I use as a quick check - suggests that the SPSX travelling at 2800ft/sec would require a rate of 1 in 14 for its 0.666" length. Having said that, practical experience over-rides theory. Consequently, as I only paid £16.80 for my last 100, joking apart now, give them a go for fox. But as my mentor for the calibre warned me, don't even think about rabbit!

 

Was just about to hit 'Post' when I was notified of a new (Kent's) post. When I tried 40gn in the 223, I noticed a difference in lethal performance to the 55s and 50s even though the ME was on a par-ish. When I started with the Hornet and 40s and, to a degree 45s, I would describe the wounds as 'fatal'. With the 50s, they're mortal if you get my drift. With 40s if you keep the lamp on you can watch the light fade away but with the 50s, they're down with the switch thrown.

Cant say I have ever noticed the lights fading, indeed if we are talking the upper end of the hornets target quarry at modest ranges seem to be dead as quick as the .243" win makes them. I haven't tried them though but dead is dead however described there is no such thing as double dead. Have heard of some instances of tougher jacketed 40 grn bullets failing to expand at hornet reduced impact speeds though

[wymberley]

Cant say I have ever noticed the lights fading, indeed if we are talking the upper end of the hornets target quarry at modest ranges seem to be dead as quick as the .243" win makes them. I haven't tried them though but dead is dead however described there is no such thing as double dead. Have heard of some instances of tougher jacketed 40 grn bullets failing to expand at hornet reduced impact speeds though

 

For the reason given many times before, I like double dead. As I am not going to go running after a wounded quarry, from my position (head and shoulders through a hatch in the truck top), it's necessary to keep a watch on a downed fox for long enough to be certain that it's staying put and if there's any inkling that it may do a runner to take the second shot before it's too late even if it may not have been necessary. In so doing at night with the lamp and even though the fox is down and still, sometimes it takes a while to finally expire - it may have been twitchy when you fired with some adrenaline flowing - and sometimes you can see this process as its eyes gradually dim and the light finally extinguishes. Should you have never seen this, I am in awe of your shooting ability; assuming of course that you shoot at night. Thinking about it though, it may just be that as I shoot on dairy farmland the vast majority I shoot are on chomped grass so they remain pretty much in full view.

[Underdog]

Thanks on the twist queary!

 

I did find it difficult and/but a review by Gunmart said it was 14" Arrrrgh!

 

That aside I have `double tapped` charlies also as a just incase measure, not just with Hornet also.

 

U.

[kent]

 

 

For the reason given many times before, I like double dead. As I am not going to go running after a wounded quarry, from my position (head and shoulders through a hatch in the truck top), it's necessary to keep a watch on a downed fox for long enough to be certain that it's staying put and if there's any inkling that it may do a runner to take the second shot before it's too late even if it may not have been necessary. In so doing at night with the lamp and even though the fox is down and still, sometimes it takes a while to finally expire - it may have been twitchy when you fired with some adrenaline flowing - and sometimes you can see this process as its eyes gradually dim and the light finally extinguishes. Should you have never seen this, I am in awe of your shooting ability; assuming of course that you shoot at night. Thinking about it though, it may just be that as I shoot on dairy farmland the vast majority I shoot are on chomped grass so they remain pretty much in full view.

 

Frankly you might like them double dead but dead is still dead. Yes I have seen foxes go down gasp once and expire on the sport and I have seen them just plain run at the shot then collapse in a heap - this happens with .243 let alone hornet. Heart lung shots kill this way, starving the brain of all oxygen, if hitting them with 70grn varmint bullets at 3700 fps don't achieve double dead a 2800 fps 50grn aint going to fare no better. My comments are aimed towards the 50 achieving more, indeed as some are built for higher impact speeds and faster spin they might well achieve less through lack of fragmentation? this has been reported by others. I think the difference is in the way the words are used. You seem to infer that 40-45 grn do not kill as quick as 50's and yes my response comes across like I have never muffed a shot in my life or had a wounder, actually this is true (of the hornet) so far I have only clean missed one rabbit when my rear mount loosened unexpectedly and unknown (the fact is carrying a smaller gun teaches respect)so you don't try the hard / slightly iffy shots. With the Hornet everything from the time I first day I used it in the field has had perfect placement and died were it stood even with factory bullets traveling at more sedate velocities. There is much to be said for "knowing your limits"

[wymberley]

Frankly you might like them double dead but dead is still dead. Yes I have seen foxes go down gasp once and expire on the sport and I have seen them just plain run at the shot then collapse in a heap - this happens with .243 let alone hornet. Heart lung shots kill this way, starving the brain of all oxygen, if hitting them with 70grn varmint bullets at 3700 fps don't achieve double dead a 2800 fps 50grn aint going to fare no better. My comments are aimed towards the 50 achieving more, indeed as some are built for higher impact speeds and faster spin they might well achieve less through lack of fragmentation? this has been reported by others. I think the difference is in the way the words are used. You seem to infer that 40-45 grn do not kill as quick as 50's and yes my response comes across like I have never muffed a shot in my life or had a wounder, actually this is true (of the hornet) so far I have only clean missed one rabbit when my rear mount loosened unexpectedly and unknown (the fact is carrying a smaller gun teaches respect)so you don't try the hard / slightly iffy shots. With the Hornet everything from the time I first day I used it in the field has had perfect placement and died were it stood even with factory bullets traveling at more sedate velocities. There is much to be said for "knowing your limits"

 

Perhaps I should have said, 'double dead', inferring dropped with authority. Yes, I am saying that for any rifle working within its limits, a heavier bullet can be more lethally effective assuming, naturally, it's fit for purpose. Additionally, it will better cater for a shot which did not have spot on placement. Because I'm somewhat knadgered and not very mobile, I tend to use this advantage while trying, hopefully, to know and work within my limits.

 

Your ego I feel is such that it restricts you from taking on board any other point of view but your own. Consequently, you carry on being perfect and I'll just carry on trying to do my best.

[kent]

Perhaps I should have said, 'double dead', inferring dropped with authority. Yes, I am saying that for any rifle working within its limits, a heavier bullet can be more lethally effective assuming, naturally, it's fit for purpose. Additionally, it will better cater for a shot which did not have spot on placement. Because I'm somewhat knadgered and not very mobile, I tend to use this advantage while trying, hopefully, to know and work within my limits.

 

Your ego I feel is such that it restricts you from taking on board any other point of view but your own. Consequently, you carry on being perfect and I'll just carry on trying to do my best.

Your opinion but I was rather hoping for some real facts from you to persuade me towards a heavier non hornet specific bullet, obviously the old saying about 1 finger pointing out and three pointing back might be well placed here.

[wymberley]

Your opinion but I was rather hoping for some real facts from you to persuade me towards a heavier non hornet specific bullet, obviously the old saying about 1 finger pointing out and three pointing back might be well placed here.

 

Regret cannot provide facts as all my evidence is empirical.

 

I tried the finger trick that I've never heard of but all I could come up with was the right hand grasp rule.

 

However, I don't think I can persuade you of anything. By our own admissions regarding the occurrence of perfect placements, there's only one of us that has room for improvement

Edited February 7, 2013 by wymberley

[kent]

Regret cannot provide facts as all my evidence is empirical.

 

I tried the finger trick that I've never heard of but all I could come up with was the right hand grasp rule.

 

However, I don't think I can persuade you of anything. By our own admissions regarding the occurrence of perfect placements, there's only one of us that has room for improvement

What about knowing your own personal limitations- perfect placement is available to all if they work within this, its not about bragging

[wymberley]

knowing your own personal limitations- perfect placement is available to all if they work within this,

 

As I've said, I'm in awe of your shooting ability; I don't think that I'll ever be able to achieve perfect shot placement every time.

 

My problem is that I shoot outdoors and - unless zeroing - without socks. Consequently, and especially at night, I don't think that I'll ever be able to suss out any minor local downrange gusts, drafts or turbulence some 150 yards or more away that may render my shot less than perfect assuming it actually started off that way.

 

No, I'm happier recognising that limitation and then attempting to choose the best possible bullet to counter any less than perfect point of impact caused by me or unidentified conditions downrange.

 

FIN

[kent]

As I've said, I'm in awe of your shooting ability; I don't think that I'll ever be able to achieve perfect shot placement every time.

 

My problem is that I shoot outdoors and - unless zeroing - without socks. Consequently, and especially at night, I don't think that I'll ever be able to suss out any minor local downrange gusts, drafts or turbulence some 150 yards or more away that may render my shot less than perfect assuming it actually started off that way.

 

No, I'm happier recognising that limitation and then attempting to choose the best possible bullet to counter any less than perfect point of impact caused by me or unidentified conditions downrange.

 

FIN

your on the wrong track 100% here. Knowing your limitations might mean shooting at 50yds one night 100yds the next Or it could mean much further. Knowing YOUR limitations shouldn't be a boast and it should change with conditions. I don't mention ranges so all you could be in awe of is the fact that I "respect my limitations in shot selection". There are days when I just wouldn't pick up the hornet, there are others when its game on for some long shots. Wind socks we don't have and don't need, watching the sedge rush will do during the day and the feeling on your face at night even heat haze during the summertime - again this all sets changing limitations. In deed if I am blunt this is one reason I like the hornet it teaches respect and doesn't give the hunter too much advantage. I might seriously like to stalk roe with it IF IT WERE LEGAL as the shots would all be very short and carefully considered on placement, I do not think it should be a legal calibre though as some people just don't respect or even know their limitations