PT 1, 30 cal 180 gr Cutting-Edge Maximus gel test at various velocities 308 Win, 30-06, 300 PRC

One of my subscribers sent me some 0.308 180 grain Cutting-Edge Maximus bullets for testing at different velocities simulating different ranges based on ones muzzle velocity.
Low velocities shed larger heave pedals and high velocities fragment much more. All cores were within 2 grains of each other averaging 142 grains.
When testing bullets for big game hunting I strictly use 10% gelatin as that is what the industry has set based on extensive studies and it best represents all hunt-able big game in North America. I use a 308 Winchester for the reduced loads as I do not currently have a 300 Black-Out or I would just use standard/subsonic loads in it, 30-06 for mid range, and a 300 PRC for higher range.
Go-pro breaks up my videos sometimes and I do not have editing capabilities with my current setup so there is a part 2
(I do not and will not use the NATO 20% as that has to do with military use not big game hunting although you get similar results it is not the same and should not be used in testing relating to big game use)

[@rangetime6779]

Thanks for testing these bullets. More areas will be requiring lead free in the future. It's good these monolithic bullets don't act like drill bits.

[@gearguidesguns571]

I appreciate your effort testing monolithic bullets. Not enough gun makers and ammo manufacturers promote or use them. I have shot the majority of my animals (including extensive cull hunting in Australia and africa), with copper/monolithic bullets and in general they are better overall than lead core copper bullets, for hunting. Shoot 1 or 2 bullet weights lower than with lead and shoot them fast (2800 minimum) unless its a 375 or bigger. For example in a 308, shoot a 150 or max 165/168 copper; even a 130 gr is ok. In a 300 Win, shoot a max 180 instead of 190 to 210 lead core. In a 7mm Rem, shoot a 140-155 grain copper instead of a 160-180 lead core. I have used the 7mm Maximus (155 gr) in Africa and they were excellent, but should be shot at 3000 fps or higher muzzle velocity in a 7mm if shooting animals over 450 yards. You can also shoot them at 3000 to 3400 fps muzzle velocities without failure as you could have with a non-bonded, target lead core bullet.

[@simplemindedfella]

Yes, the more I play around with monolithics the more I like them and will probably be switching primarily to them someday whether they force us to or not here in the US. With this current administration who knows sounds like they are trying to band lead ammunition across-the-board because of the toxicity of lead. If that happens I will be prepared. I'm leaning heavily towards the Badlands Bulldozer bullets. With the experience you are listing I'm curious if you have ever tried Badlands bullets?

[@gearguidesguns571]

@@simplemindedfella I started using Badlands bullets in 2021 in load development and used the 128 Badlands Bulldozer in my dad's old Win M70 in 270 win to shoot a WY bighorn (500 yards) and antelope (515 yards), both in 2022. The load is 3210 fps and with a BC of 0.531, it makes an old rifle, "modernized". On both animals, it was a complete pass through, in the chest cavity. The bullets created a great wound channel and neither animal went more than 30 yards. I have also used Cutting Edge Maximus, Laser and the MTH; plus Barnes and the old Lost River Ballistics bullets. The Badlands usually require a bigger jump into the lands than most bullets. I would generally expect between 0.050 to 0.100 to be their happy place. Sometimes they shoot ok just into the lands or like 0.010 out of the lands, but because of their long length, the magazine is the deciding factor with seating, more than the rifle's lands. In my opinion, Copper bullets give a bigger operating range than standard lead core/copper, both in velocity and in effective ranges on animals You can shoot a badlands, Barnes, Cutting edge, etc. at 3200 fps or faster and not have a disaster and if you hit twigs or branches, they will not explode like a target bullet. For sure, these copper bullets will expand well, down to 2000 fps and I'm sure they will work ok, even a bit slower. Too many hunters chase BC instead of reliability and killing ability. BC really is only super critical for extreme ranges. Speed makes up for BC, as long as the BC is reasonable, in hunting distances. We don't need BCs of 0.650-0.800 to kill animals at 400 yards. The nice thing about the Badlands is that their BCs are high, but with less weight than a similar BC lead bullet. They are a bit more fussy regarding seating depth than lead core bullets and also, they will foul a barrel faster than a standard lead core bullet, but a good reloader and shooter will generally have good success. Just don't shoot like 100 rounds between cleanings, like many target shooters do. Also, the bullets are easier to find (direct from the company) than popular Hornady, Nosler and Berger bullets. So far, I can highly recommend them. I have shot hundreds of animals with Barnes tsx and ttsx and have had excellent results from 10 to 725 yards. I have never shot an animal further than these distances with a monolithic.

[@calangel]

How would you compare the MAXIMUS line to Hammers as far as terminals are concerned?

[@simplemindedfella]

Just a little more destructive. Both have good terminals.

[@calangel]

@@simplemindedfella so you're saying the Maximus is a little more destructive in-game?

[@simplemindedfella]

@@calangel yes

[@jeffreywilson690]

Have you tested the atip in 6mm ?

[@simplemindedfella]

No not in 6mm/0.243. Just 0.264 and 0.308

[@jeffreywilson690]

@@simplemindedfella thanks I want to do testing my self. I shoot a rprr in 243 win.

[@andybreglia9431]

You can't simulate longer range by firing lower velocity loads. The rotation speed would be wrong. At, say, 500 yards, velocity would be lower, but rotation RPMs would not appreciably slow down by the time it gets there. Rotation speed factors into bullet expansion.

[@simplemindedfella]

I understand that in theory. All I really know is the manufacturers of bullets I was in contact with said that's how they test them so so it's probably fairly safe to say it's an okay form of testing. On top of that I have tested that theory up to an 80000 RPM difference and it had no noticeable/measurable effects on the bullets. So how big of a difference is it going to take to actually skew results If 80000 RPM isn't enough??? kzbin.info/www/bejne/rKe3naCllL1ob5Y

[@veteranironoutdoors8320]

@Andy Breglia Theres this guy called bryan litz you should really look up. Help keep you from sounding dumb in the future.

[@andybreglia9431]

@@veteranironoutdoors8320 : Rotational speed can make a difference. This is an extreme example. I am aware of attempts to fire bullets designed for the .22 Hornet in a .22 Swift literally become unglued and blow up before reaching the target because of excessive rotational speed. I realize it takes brains to understand this concept.

[@rangetime6779]

@@andybreglia9431 That has to due with the thin jacket construction of the 22 Hornet bullet, Hornady makes 22 caliber SX bullets that will do the same thing and they provide a do not exceed velocity.