Range Report 143 ELD-X match performance vs. 140 ELD-M

[mrobles3808]

As we near deer season here in Nebraska I figured I'd snag a box of 143 ELDX to load up for my 6.5 creedmoor. Without doing any load development, I gambled on a well none node and loaded a few on top of 41.6 grains of h4350 and went to the range. 5 shots, sub half moa. I was impressed so I went back to the bench and loaded up another batch with 41.8gns. 5 shots and they punch out a hole in the target. I then grouped them out at 330 yards and they still held sub half moa with 5 shots measuring right at 1". After comparing them to my 140 eld-m's the 143's seemed to perform better in terms of --ease of finding the best load and also consistent group sizes. Is this a fluke? Should I shoot the "hunting" bullet for match use? Has anyone else experienced this luck?

 

[Bull Arms]

I load 42.0 grains of H4350 for the ELDx 143gr. and it is very accurate out of my rifle. It is literally the only bullet I've put through the rifle. Can't wait to hunt with it this season.

 

[Rob01]

The ELD-X line was made to be a long range hunting bullet so being accurate at longer ranges isn't a surprise. Whether it shoots better than the 140 ELD-M might be up to the rifle and what it likes or maybe try and tweak the load of the 140 if it's not giving similar performance.

You can by all means run the 143 as a match bullet if it shoots that good in the rifle but the only two downsides are a slightly lower BC and a slightly higher price over the 140 ELD-M.

 

[BLKWLFK9]

eldx has a higher BC than than the eldm ^

 

[Rob01]

eldx has a higher BC than than the eldm ^

No it doesn't.
https://www.hornady.com/support/ballistic-coefficient

 

[SUIScide]

When the 140ELD and 143ELDx came out I thought the 143 had a higher bc than the 140. Did they revise the numbers latter?

 

[Rob01]

They were initial numbers but after testing of production runs the numbers above were what the Doppler was giving them.

 

[BLKWLFK9]

So what are the newly revised bc for both bullets? I saw the numbers for bc at each mach speed, but what bc are they suggesting to use?

 

[Rob01]

Those are the banded velocity numbers and you need to figure what velocity and distance you plan on using them. Some programs allow for multiple BCs too.

If you need one BC and shooting long range then an average of the three would get you close.

The box BC is a 200 yard average as most all manufacturers use. The original boxes had 800 yard averages but to give the customers a more apples to apples comparison Hornady changed to the 200.

 

[JSTARSZ]

Those are the banded velocity numbers and you need to figure what velocity and distance you plan on using them. Some programs allow for multiple BCs too.

If you need one BC and shooting long range then an average of the three would get you close.

The box BC is a 200 yard average as most all manufacturers use. The original boxes had 800 yard averages but to give the customers a more apples to apples comparison Hornady changed to the 200.

Thanks for the Hornady information. That explains a lot of confusion on the numbers when they first came out. I have been amazed at the differences in elevation and windage from the 140 AMAX and the 140 ELD-M at 1400 yards.

 

[Rob01]

Thanks for the Hornady information. That explains a lot of confusion on the numbers when they first came out. I have been amazed at the differences in elevation and windage from the 140 AMAX and the 140 ELD-M at 1400 yards.

No problem. Also the initial numbers still listed some places or if you read early articles also changed after initial production runs started and they were retested compared to the preproduction doppler testing of the prototypes. Like the 140 ELD-M was originally listed at .610 as the 800 average and then went to .620 on later boxes after retesting and now at the 200 average at .646.