Woods carry Ammo choice

[sgtbones]

I might us my 180 gr JSP for woods carry.  I also have Underwood 200 gr and 180 gr XTP's. Too many choices for the ten.  I guess it is a good problem to have.

[Rooster41]

Ill be using handloaded Hornady XTP's also in a 180 grain.  I wish Federal made a hunting round in their Fusion line.  I really like the Fusion bullets.  I have them for my 357 Mag, 308, 243 and a 12 gauge slug.  Ive taken deer with both rifles and the slug.

[DAVIDF]

The TMJ is very different than a genuine FMJ. It's a soft-lead, swaged, plated bullet. They don't experience jacket separation the same as jacketed bullets do, but they do deform like a swaged lead bullet (not unlike Hornady lead bullets). This makes the nose shape and meplat less of a performance factor, compared to hard-cast flat-nose bullets. Add to that, the plating thickness and hardness can vary a lot from manufacturer to manufacturer, and some of them lot to lot. They aren't designed nor intended to be used as a hunting or defense bullet, but that doesn't mean they won't be effective in those situations, at least sometimes.

The TMJ may work very well for hunting actually. There is a guy over on a Marlin forum who uses 240gr TMJ in a 444 for hunting Elk and swears by them. Like you are saying they can deform but not very likely to have jacket separation as they are bonded like Speer's Gold Dot. Gold Dot's do very well in barrier blind tests such as thru safety glass that requires a very tough bullet to perform well. I think the TMJ would hold together even better, but have not seen any tests.

[DM1906]

The TMJ is very different than a genuine FMJ. It's a soft-lead, swaged, plated bullet. They don't experience jacket separation the same as jacketed bullets do, but they do deform like a swaged lead bullet (not unlike Hornady lead bullets). This makes the nose shape and meplat less of a performance factor, compared to hard-cast flat-nose bullets. Add to that, the plating thickness and hardness can vary a lot from manufacturer to manufacturer, and some of them lot to lot. They aren't designed nor intended to be used as a hunting or defense bullet, but that doesn't mean they won't be effective in those situations, at least sometimes.

The TMJ may work very well for hunting actually. There is a guy over on a Marlin forum who uses 240gr TMJ in a 444 for hunting Elk and swears by them. Like you are saying they can deform but not very likely to have jacket separation as they are bonded like Speer's Gold Dot. Gold Dot's do very well in barrier blind tests such as thru safety glass that requires a very tough bullet to perform well. I think the TMJ would hold together even better, but have not seen any tests.

Apples and oranges. I don't disagree that some TMJ bullets my be well suited for effective hunting, caliber/cartridge notwithstanding. I would use them, if not for the legalities. However, a bonded jacket bullet, especially a hollowpoint such as the GDHP, is very different than any TMJ, HP or otherwise. Very few TMJ bullets (copper electro-plate, by definition), are capable of higher velocities, even many pistol velocities. The most popular TMJ/plated bullets in many pistol calibers actually do very poorly, with only a couple exceptions. Berry's .41M and .44M are the only exceptions I've found (none of Ranier's did), while X-treme .40 and .45 HP's do very well, 1400-2000+ FPS. Copper plated rifle bullets are a different animal, and designed for the much higher velocities. A 240 gr. .444 at 2300+ FPS is hardly comparable to a 180 gr. 10mm at 1200 FPS, in almost any context.

[DAVIDF]

The TMJ is very different than a genuine FMJ. It's a soft-lead, swaged, plated bullet. They don't experience jacket separation the same as jacketed bullets do, but they do deform like a swaged lead bullet (not unlike Hornady lead bullets). This makes the nose shape and meplat less of a performance factor, compared to hard-cast flat-nose bullets. Add to that, the plating thickness and hardness can vary a lot from manufacturer to manufacturer, and some of them lot to lot. They aren't designed nor intended to be used as a hunting or defense bullet, but that doesn't mean they won't be effective in those situations, at least sometimes.

The TMJ may work very well for hunting actually. There is a guy over on a Marlin forum who uses 240gr TMJ in a 444 for hunting Elk and swears by them. Like you are saying they can deform but not very likely to have jacket separation as they are bonded like Speer's Gold Dot. Gold Dot's do very well in barrier blind tests such as thru safety glass that requires a very tough bullet to perform well. I think the TMJ would hold together even better, but have not seen any tests.

Apples and oranges. I don't disagree that some TMJ bullets my be well suited for effective hunting, caliber/cartridge notwithstanding. I would use them, if not for the legalities. However, a bonded jacket bullet, especially a hollowpoint such as the GDHP, is very different than any TMJ, HP or otherwise. Very few TMJ bullets (copper electro-plate, by definition), are capable of higher velocities, even many pistol velocities. The most popular TMJ/plated bullets in many pistol calibers actually do very poorly, with only a couple exceptions. Berry's .41M and .44M are the only exceptions I've found (none of Ranier's did), while X-treme .40 and .45 HP's do very well, 1400-2000+ FPS. Copper plated rifle bullets are a different animal, and designed for the much higher velocities. A 240 gr. .444 at 2300+ FPS is hardly comparable to a 180 gr. 10mm at 1200 FPS, in almost any context.

Yes, I agree. For clarity, I was referring only to Speer's TMJ which, correct me if I am wrong, is bonded like their Gold Dots. That is the bullet that Underwood uses for their "Full Metal Jacket" loads.

[DM1906]

The TMJ is very different than a genuine FMJ. It's a soft-lead, swaged, plated bullet. They don't experience jacket separation the same as jacketed bullets do, but they do deform like a swaged lead bullet (not unlike Hornady lead bullets). This makes the nose shape and meplat less of a performance factor, compared to hard-cast flat-nose bullets. Add to that, the plating thickness and hardness can vary a lot from manufacturer to manufacturer, and some of them lot to lot. They aren't designed nor intended to be used as a hunting or defense bullet, but that doesn't mean they won't be effective in those situations, at least sometimes.

The TMJ may work very well for hunting actually. There is a guy over on a Marlin forum who uses 240gr TMJ in a 444 for hunting Elk and swears by them. Like you are saying they can deform but not very likely to have jacket separation as they are bonded like Speer's Gold Dot. Gold Dot's do very well in barrier blind tests such as thru safety glass that requires a very tough bullet to perform well. I think the TMJ would hold together even better, but have not seen any tests.

Apples and oranges. I don't disagree that some TMJ bullets my be well suited for effective hunting, caliber/cartridge notwithstanding. I would use them, if not for the legalities. However, a bonded jacket bullet, especially a hollowpoint such as the GDHP, is very different than any TMJ, HP or otherwise. Very few TMJ bullets (copper electro-plate, by definition), are capable of higher velocities, even many pistol velocities. The most popular TMJ/plated bullets in many pistol calibers actually do very poorly, with only a couple exceptions. Berry's .41M and .44M are the only exceptions I've found (none of Ranier's did), while X-treme .40 and .45 HP's do very well, 1400-2000+ FPS. Copper plated rifle bullets are a different animal, and designed for the much higher velocities. A 240 gr. .444 at 2300+ FPS is hardly comparable to a 180 gr. 10mm at 1200 FPS, in almost any context.

Yes, I agree. For clarity, I was referring only to Speer's TMJ which, correct me if I am wrong, is bonded like their Gold Dots. That is the bullet that Underwood uses for their "Full Metal Jacket" loads.

As I said, I don't disagree that some "TMJ" bullets may be suited for other duties. However, a TMJ bullet is not "bonded" or "jacketed", in the same sense as is a bonded or jacketed bullet. Every TMJ/plated bullet is "bonded", by the nature of the process, but is only bonded in the same sense the chrome on your truck bumper is "bonded". Bonded jacketed bullets can be such due to their unique process, because the jacket is a pre-formed shell/cup, with a soft lead core swaged into them. Also, there are several process options to "bond" a true jacketed bullet, mechanical (adhesive, cor-lok, etc.) chemical, induction, electrolytical, among a few, all varying in their unique performance values. The Speer TMJ bullet may acceptable for "woods defense", as claimed by Underwood, but I find their product labeling misleading, perhaps disingenuous. They label them "FMJ", while they are, in fact, "TMJ", or more appropriately, plated. They are not the same, although most consumers wouldn't know the difference, or wouldn't care, and probably wouldn't see any difference in the result. Speer is one brand among many, and as we know, no one brand is the best in any category. Without actually testing them (I haven't), I remain skeptical as to the their TMJ's comparative quality.

[DAVIDF]

The TMJ is very different than a genuine FMJ. It's a soft-lead, swaged, plated bullet. They don't experience jacket separation the same as jacketed bullets do, but they do deform like a swaged lead bullet (not unlike Hornady lead bullets). This makes the nose shape and meplat less of a performance factor, compared to hard-cast flat-nose bullets. Add to that, the plating thickness and hardness can vary a lot from manufacturer to manufacturer, and some of them lot to lot. They aren't designed nor intended to be used as a hunting or defense bullet, but that doesn't mean they won't be effective in those situations, at least sometimes.

The TMJ may work very well for hunting actually. There is a guy over on a Marlin forum who uses 240gr TMJ in a 444 for hunting Elk and swears by them. Like you are saying they can deform but not very likely to have jacket separation as they are bonded like Speer's Gold Dot. Gold Dot's do very well in barrier blind tests such as thru safety glass that requires a very tough bullet to perform well. I think the TMJ would hold together even better, but have not seen any tests.

Apples and oranges. I don't disagree that some TMJ bullets my be well suited for effective hunting, caliber/cartridge notwithstanding. I would use them, if not for the legalities. However, a bonded jacket bullet, especially a hollowpoint such as the GDHP, is very different than any TMJ, HP or otherwise. Very few TMJ bullets (copper electro-plate, by definition), are capable of higher velocities, even many pistol velocities. The most popular TMJ/plated bullets in many pistol calibers actually do very poorly, with only a couple exceptions. Berry's .41M and .44M are the only exceptions I've found (none of Ranier's did), while X-treme .40 and .45 HP's do very well, 1400-2000+ FPS. Copper plated rifle bullets are a different animal, and designed for the much higher velocities. A 240 gr. .444 at 2300+ FPS is hardly comparable to a 180 gr. 10mm at 1200 FPS, in almost any context.

Yes, I agree. For clarity, I was referring only to Speer's TMJ which, correct me if I am wrong, is bonded like their Gold Dots. That is the bullet that Underwood uses for their "Full Metal Jacket" loads.

As I said, I don't disagree that some "TMJ" bullets may be suited for other duties. However, a TMJ bullet is not "bonded" or "jacketed", in the same sense as is a bonded or jacketed bullet. Every TMJ/plated bullet is "bonded", by the nature of the process, but is only bonded in the same sense the chrome on your truck bumper is "bonded". Bonded jacketed bullets can be such due to their unique process, because the jacket is a pre-formed shell/cup, with a soft lead core swaged into them. Also, there are several process options to "bond" a true jacketed bullet, mechanical (adhesive, cor-lok, etc.) chemical, induction, electrolytical, among a few, all varying in their unique performance values. The Speer TMJ bullet may acceptable for "woods defense", as claimed by Underwood, but I find their product labeling misleading, perhaps disingenuous. They label them "FMJ", while they are, in fact, "TMJ", or more appropriately, plated. They are not the same, although most consumers wouldn't know the difference, or wouldn't care, and probably wouldn't see any difference in the result. Speer is one brand among many, and as we know, no one brand is the best in any category. Without actually testing them (I haven't), I remain skeptical as to the their TMJ's comparative quality.

Well, at least one person has had very good luck with Speer TMJ's going thru shoulder's of Elk. Those TMJ's seem to stand up very well and aren't limited to loading to a maximum velocity as many other TMJs.

[mt10mm]

I wish underwood would load a 200gr bear tooth type hard cast.

[BuckRimfire]

After reading this

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2911043/m/21810798?r=43810798#43810798

I decided to load mags to fire a string of XTP, XTP, lead, XTP, XTP, lead, (XTP, lead, lead) x whatever fits.  I figured, in the very unlikely event that I need to shoot an animal AND actually get the gun out in time, alternating distracting hollow points and deeply penetrating flatpoints would be the way to go.

That JJHack is either a BSer of the highest caliber or someone who should be taken very seriously.  To me, what he writes sounds very believable.

[DM1906]

After reading this

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2911043/m/21810798?r=43810798#43810798

I decided to load mags to fire a string of XTP, XTP, lead, XTP, XTP, lead, (XTP, lead, lead) x whatever fits.  I figured, in the very unlikely event that I need to shoot an animal AND actually get the gun out in time, alternating distracting hollow points and deeply penetrating flatpoints would be the way to go.

That JJHack is either a BSer of the highest caliber or someone who should be taken very seriously.  To me, what he writes sounds very believable.

While he is a "BSer of the highest caliber", take what he said seriously. Keep in mind, he was referring, specifically, to a .44M in a dedicated hunting revolver, capable of 150-300% of what you'll chamber in your 10mm. Quantity rarely ever outweighs quality.

I've never been an advocate of staggered magazine/cylinder, and would never recommend it. If you know of a way to persuade the target (whatever that may be) to follow your plan, I'm all ears. If you think deer cross where the sign is, because that's where the sign is, well......

[BuckRimfire]

Obviously the 10 mm is second best (or more like third best) to the .43 Magnum*.  So?  The same point would be true: a pencil-thin, deep wound may be fatal eventually, but it probably won't hurt enough to distract the animal from coming at you fast.  OTOH, a decent JHP disrupts more tissue near the surface, where the pain receptors are actually located, and will be more likely to divert the animal's attention, letting you shoot again.

There's just no way I'm going to carry my 7.5" Redhawk while hiking or mountain biking.  Too big and heavy.  My 10 mm carries concealed and comfortably in a fanny pack holster.  The choice is not between the .44 and the 10 mm.  It's between the 10 mm and nothing.  I hope the 10 mm is better than nothing.

*Semi-jokingly used to deflect .45 Colt guys who can't resist pointing out that the .44 isn't really .44".

[DM1906]

Obviously the 10 mm is second best (or more like third best) to the .43 Magnum*.  So?  The same point would be true: a pencil-thin, deep wound may be fatal eventually, but it probably won't hurt enough to distract the animal from coming at you fast.  OTOH, a decent JHP disrupts more tissue near the surface, where the pain receptors are actually located, and will be more likely to divert the animal's attention, letting you shoot again.

There's just no way I'm going to carry my 7.5" Redhawk while hiking or mountain biking.  Too big and heavy.  My 10 mm carries concealed and comfortably in a fanny pack holster.  The choice is not between the .44 and the 10 mm.  It's between the 10 mm and nothing.  I hope the 10 mm is better than nothing.

*Semi-jokingly used to deflect .45 Colt guys who can't resist pointing out that the .44 isn't really .44".

The 10mm is quite a ways down the line, in areas that it really counts. But, as you say, the 10mm is better than nothing. Actually, it's better than most would consider carrying. If you live in brown bear country, the discussion was already had, and you probably already have a .454 or better. Most folks who live in the "other" areas, are lucky to have anything better than hairspray (bear-spray). Any bear that challenges you for your pic-i-nic basket needs to be put down. We stopped relocating these bears long ago. They just return later, looking for their free lunch. A once-spoiled bear is an always-spoiled bear. The problem is, it isn't the bear's fault. I never liked putting them down, but it's a necessary end. Unfortunately, the tree-huggers ensure we always have an overpopulation of them.

*No explanation necessary, but it's actually .429, which is way less than .430.

[BuckRimfire]

*No explanation necessary, but it's actually .429, which is way less than .430.

[Hermit]

Obviously the 10 mm is second best (or more like third best) to the .43 Magnum*.  So?  The same point would be true: a pencil-thin, deep wound may be fatal eventually, but it probably won't hurt enough to distract the animal from coming at you fast.  OTOH, a decent JHP disrupts more tissue near the surface, where the pain receptors are actually located, and will be more likely to divert the animal's attention, letting you shoot again.

There's just no way I'm going to carry my 7.5" Redhawk while hiking or mountain biking.  Too big and heavy.  My 10 mm carries concealed and comfortably in a fanny pack holster.  The choice is not between the .44 and the 10 mm.  It's between the 10 mm and nothing.  I hope the 10 mm is better than nothing.

*Semi-jokingly used to deflect .45 Colt guys who can't resist pointing out that the .44 isn't really .44".

try a 4 5/8 or 5.5 blackhawk...you could go d/a with the Alaskan but follow ups would be a bitch

[DAVIDF]

The TMJ is very different than a genuine FMJ. It's a soft-lead, swaged, plated bullet. They don't experience jacket separation the same as jacketed bullets do, but they do deform like a swaged lead bullet (not unlike Hornady lead bullets). This makes the nose shape and meplat less of a performance factor, compared to hard-cast flat-nose bullets. Add to that, the plating thickness and hardness can vary a lot from manufacturer to manufacturer, and some of them lot to lot. They aren't designed nor intended to be used as a hunting or defense bullet, but that doesn't mean they won't be effective in those situations, at least sometimes.

The TMJ may work very well for hunting actually. There is a guy over on a Marlin forum who uses 240gr TMJ in a 444 for hunting Elk and swears by them. Like you are saying they can deform but not very likely to have jacket separation as they are bonded like Speer's Gold Dot. Gold Dot's do very well in barrier blind tests such as thru safety glass that requires a very tough bullet to perform well. I think the TMJ would hold together even better, but have not seen any tests.

Apples and oranges. I don't disagree that some TMJ bullets my be well suited for effective hunting, caliber/cartridge notwithstanding. I would use them, if not for the legalities. However, a bonded jacket bullet, especially a hollowpoint such as the GDHP, is very different than any TMJ, HP or otherwise. Very few TMJ bullets (copper electro-plate, by definition), are capable of higher velocities, even many pistol velocities. The most popular TMJ/plated bullets in many pistol calibers actually do very poorly, with only a couple exceptions. Berry's .41M and .44M are the only exceptions I've found (none of Ranier's did), while X-treme .40 and .45 HP's do very well, 1400-2000+ FPS. Copper plated rifle bullets are a different animal, and designed for the much higher velocities. A 240 gr. .444 at 2300+ FPS is hardly comparable to a 180 gr. 10mm at 1200 FPS, in almost any context.

Yes, I agree. For clarity, I was referring only to Speer's TMJ which, correct me if I am wrong, is bonded like their Gold Dots. That is the bullet that Underwood uses for their "Full Metal Jacket" loads.

As I said, I don't disagree that some "TMJ" bullets may be suited for other duties. However, a TMJ bullet is not "bonded" or "jacketed", in the same sense as is a bonded or jacketed bullet. Every TMJ/plated bullet is "bonded", by the nature of the process, but is only bonded in the same sense the chrome on your truck bumper is "bonded". Bonded jacketed bullets can be such due to their unique process, because the jacket is a pre-formed shell/cup, with a soft lead core swaged into them. Also, there are several process options to "bond" a true jacketed bullet, mechanical (adhesive, cor-lok, etc.) chemical, induction, electrolytical, among a few, all varying in their unique performance values. The Speer TMJ bullet may acceptable for "woods defense", as claimed by Underwood, but I find their product labeling misleading, perhaps disingenuous. They label them "FMJ", while they are, in fact, "TMJ", or more appropriately, plated. They are not the same, although most consumers wouldn't know the difference, or wouldn't care, and probably wouldn't see any difference in the result. Speer is one brand among many, and as we know, no one brand is the best in any category. Without actually testing them (I haven't), I remain skeptical as to the their TMJ's comparative quality.

If you read Speer's catalog (http://www.speer-bullets.com/resources/catalog/speerbullets-catalog/offline/2013_Speer_Catalog.pdf) the TMJ and Gold Dot appear to be bonded in the exact same manner. In fact, Speer refers to their TMJ as a using Uni-Cor technology which as everyone knows, Speer allows other ammo manufacturers to label their Gold Dots as such. They swage the core the same way as their Gold Dots. So, yes, the Speer TMJ and the Gold Dot are manufactured the same way. With the only difference being the open hollow point of the Gold Dot.