I guess this is as good a place as any for this question. If not, mods please move it somewhere more appropriate.
Something I've wondered for quite some time: Why is it that hunting bullets aren't generally as accurate/precise as match grade stuff? I'd think for a bullet that's intended to be used for a serious purpose, it's even more important to be made to a high standard, be as accurate/precise as possible.
Now I'm not talking about comparing Fed. Power-Shok to FGMM, but Fed. Premium should be fair, or maybe Hornady Outfitter vs ELD-M.
Is it just not possible to make an expanding bullet as accurate?
I didn't read the rest of the replies in this thread so my apologies if any of this is a repeat. Here's my perspective as an engineer at a bullet factory.
It depends very much on what you mean by "Hunting bullet". There are several types and each has their own quirks. There are also some aspects that have little or nothing to do with what a bullet design is really capable of.
Overarching themes that may or may not have to do with the bullet-- this certainly isn't all inclusive:
- Barrels have attitude, and not all barrels are equal. Some barrels hate some bullets, some barrels love all bullets, some barrels suck. Hunting bullets at the very least usually have thicker jackets than match or varmint bullets. Bonded bullets have very thick jackets. Monolithic bullets are exceptionally rigid. If you barrel has changes in diameter throughout the length, the problems that come from that (gas blow-by, in-bore tilt, etc.) can be exacerbated with a stiffer bullet. Generally speaking, thinner jacketed bullets (made to the "same" quality) will shoot better in more barrels. At least that has been my experience. That includes the entire spectrum from Savage to Bartlein.
- Allowances. Most all bullet companies accuracy test their bullets before they turn the machine on to run production. The requirements for what passes and what fails are nearly arbitrary up to the point that you're talking the best-of-the-best match bullets. For example, a bullet company might put an accuracy specification of 10 shots into <0.5 MOA for match bullets, but only hold 5 shots into <1.0 MOA for hunting bullets. FMJ bullets may be 1.25-1.5 MOA. This doesn't mean the hunting bullet or FMJ
can't be made to shoot just as good as the match bullet-- it just means that management has made the call that the end-user is likely not going to require that level of precision from that specific bullet, so why waste time ($) perfecting it to the .0001" when 95% of end users will "test" them with 3 shots on a paper plate at 75 yards before a hunt? That doesn't mean the hunting bullets are guaranteed to shoot worse-- Sometimes luck prevails in the tooling lottery and you get hunting bullets that absolutely HAMMER. It's just not going to happen as consistently as with match bullets.
- Powder selection in ammunition. May or may not be conducive to optimal accuracy. Especially with hunting ammo you see trade-offs made, most notably for SPEED.
- Terminal performance should be KING. If a decision has to be made in the design/R&D process that you either get super tight groups or you get expansion, odds are it's going to err towards expansion.
Some specific things that pop up with various general designs (again not all-inclusive):
-Bonded bullets. The lead chemically bonds to the jacket, but also is molten at some point in manufacturing. When it cools, it shrinks and deforms, and it usually doesn't do it especially concentrically (vs. what tooling in a match bullet line does). You'd think you could smack it again and straighten things out, but once the lead is bonded to the jacket, funny things start happening to the jacket when you try to move the lead. Funny things happening to jackets = loss in accuracy potential.
- Thicker jackets are harder to precisely control. They offer more resistance to the tooling. Simple as that. Almost all lead+copper hunting bullets have jackets that are 1.5-2.5x thicker than what you'd expect to see in a match bullet of the same caliber. Good tooling designs can overcome much of this, but at the end of the day it's going to take more work-- massaging tooling, keeping up on surface finishes, etc..--to get a .035" thick jacket "match accurate" than it does a .020" jacket.
- If thicker jackets were tough to form, monolithics are that much tougher. Very rigid construction, a LOT of material flow, and extremely specific tooling necessary to make proper functioning mushrooms. Lead cores are much easier to push around and get centered.
-Soft point bullets get dinged up by almost everything they come in contact with on the exposed lead. Hard to hold consistent BC/drag profiles when you can't hold consistent shape.
- Many hunting bullets have extra jacket "features"-- basically extra tooling/forming steps in them for core retention or to aid in uniform expansion. All of those features are extra forming steps with more tooling that have to be concentric to not negatively affect dispersion. It's harder to line up more processes and not fuck it up, basically.. Plus you're doing it to thicker material.
With match bullets all that anyone cares about is, A) Does it group tight in a wide offering of barrels/cartridges, and B) High consistent BC?!?!? So all of the forming processes are geared to ensure A happens with as much of B as is possible. From my experience there is absolutely zero care given to if a match bullet expands/fragments/whatever in Gel or animals, and that's why you see a lot of companies suggest not to use them for hunting. No testing is done to ensure they work, whereas testing typically IS done with hunting bullets (by people who care) to make sure they hit expansion envelopes. "No comment" on putting the same bullets in two different colored boxes and calling them different things...
