Thread: 162gn ELDX not expanding

I reckon there's enough evidence here and on other forums to suggest that magnum speeds, close range and the 7mm 162gr ELD-X aren't such a good mix. For the majority of applications though, I'd say ELD-X has been phenomenally successful, judging by how prevalent it is worldwide, particularly in the way its taken off with 6.5 Creedmoor and 30 cal.

My own experiences with it the 143gr in Creedmoor clearly show it doesn't hold together well at close range (say sub 200m) on larger animals. BUT... that hasn't been a problem. Put it into the front of the chest in line with the front of the foreleg, the classic 'hilar' shot, and see if the deer knows the difference between ELD-X and anything else. Its been one bang flop after another with the ELD-X for me, the one and only runner was that one at 500m I wrote up here, which was a shot placement problem (the "gap" just above the lungs, below the spine). Its the downrange accuracy that I like so much, that BC really works.

Some bullets perform really consistently across the range of weight & calibre, others have an anomaly somewhere in the mix... the 120gr Nosler BT in 7mm is a good example, being that much harder than the other BTs due I believe to having a thicker jacket to core weight. I'd like to see a photo of the different ELD-X weights & calibres all sectioned, from lightest to heaviest, to see if there is a measurable difference in jacket thickness on the 7mm, specifically if it is drawn thinner on the ogive. Just curious to see if there is anything obvious that would explain why we get this feedback. If someone can section a single 7mm pill and photograph it, I can do the 6.5 and .30 here, and compile a little montage to see if we can see any differences.

Would be good if someone can do the 200gr 30 cal as well. Photograph them on a white sheet of paper.