Ball Ammo Vs. Hollow Points

[Dowter]

I haven't seen this posted anywhere so I'm posting it here.

What are the pros and cons with the differences of ball ammo and hollow points.

This question is purely about sporting purposes so the ability of a hollow points to expand in a body cavity isn't what I'm asking about.

When I say "ball ammo", basically what I mean is any ammo that isn't a hollow point - so this would include "round shouldered" "flat points" and "wad cutters" I'm probably not using correct definitions, so please feel free to correct me on this.

Broadly speaking is one kind of ammo more accurate than the other? And if so why?

Does one shape of bullet chamber better than the other or does it really depend on the gun?

Are there any other reasons that a shooter should chose a hollow point over a ball ammo or vice versa?

Thanks.

[EricW]

I think the consensus is that HP's as a whole tend to be more accurate than FMJ's as a whole. I think the reason probably has to do with the distribution of material. I haven't done a calculation, but I'm guessing the reason is that the HP has a higher moment of intertia for a given weight just because more material is outboard of the bullet's axis. That translates into greater stability for a given spin rate/velocity.

Chambering is a sticky wicket. Most modern handguns will chamber damn near anything. A stock 1911 can be pretty picky. A racegun with a integrally-ramped barrel is fairly forgiving of bullet type.

Is the difference between the two enough to merit one over the other? I think you just have to test with your gun and decide.

[Dowter]

I've also heard that hollow points are also more accurate because at a given bullet weight, the hp is longer meaning that it has more contact with rifling grooves of the barrel.

[Larry White]

Accuracy may or may not be better, I cant say one way or the other. Most fmj bullets have exposed lead at the base, with jhp the jacket material encloses the base, thus less leading and smoke, just a cleaner load. If stage design forces you to shoot thur a barrel or into a confined area sometimes after 3 or 4 rounds there is so much smoke you can't see. Enough of a diffrence for me. Larry

[shred]

FMJ's exposed lead base can contribute to comp-buildup and extra airborne lead, neither of which I need.

[rhino]

Another reason why hollow points can be more accurate than solids is that no matter how hard you try, you can't get a "point" on a given bullet exactly in center (on the axis of rotation) consistently unless you machine them all with a lathe. Hollow points bypass that problem with the little "cushion" of compressed air in front of them serving as the "point." It's more consistent.

[EricW]

I've also heard that hollow points are also more accurate because at a given bullet weight, the hp is longer meaning that it has more contact with rifling grooves of the barrel.

Dowter,

I'm not too sure about that one. Either the bullet slips in the grooves or it doesn't on it's way through the barrel. The stability of a spinning object is determined by the relation of its moment of intertia around its major axis to that of its minor axis. The extra length of the HP is what makes it stable. Think of a boat-tail rifle bullet. Aerodynamics aside, "stretching" the bullet out imparts additional stability over a simple cylinder (kind of like a plain, round nose bullet).

[warpspeed]

HP's are usually more acccurate.

The HP design moves the weight to the back. This stabilizes the bullet w/ greater consistencey and thus better accuracy. Or so I'm told

[Duane Thomas]

According to the flier that comes with a Wilson handgun, "Contrary to popular belief, hardball is the hardest round to make feed reliably, not the easiest." This corresponds with my experiences over the years, at least in .45 ACP. It makes sense, if you think about it. A .45 ball round is a very blunt projectile, kind of like trying to feed a baseball bat into the chamber.

[Run n Gun]

DT,

I’ve never seen a .45 bullet that WASN’T “a very blunt projectile”, in any form fashion shape or kind.

I was talking to John Paul of JP Enterprises about this and he said that the 200gr SWC (HK 68 profile) was the MOST reliable feeder he knew of. I hope he’s right, that’s what I use.

Ed

[Duane Thomas]

I've got a probably about 13,000 rounds of 200-gr. LSWCs through my Wilson gun. The only time it's failed to feed was ONCE out at an NRA instructor training class where they forced me to fire the gun from a left handed, double bent arm, "mirror image reverse Weaver stance" (WTF?) and the gun short-stroked. Don't think you can blame the gun or the bullet for THAT.

[Patrick Sweeney]

Wish I'd been there with a camera, not for the stance, but for the expression on your face. "WTF?" Indeed.

As for accuracy, to steal (and mangle) a quote from Shakespeare; "There are more variables involved in accuracy than are in your comprehension." One of them is the bullet base. It is easier to make a consistent base with a solid copper base (hollowpoint) than an open base. The release of the bullet at the crown can have a distinct effect on accuracy, and a perfect crown is no guarantor of accuracy if the bullets are imperfect.

[Steve Anderson]

Another point in favor of HPs.

The flatten better on steel and don't fragment back like fmj can.

I took a fragment in the hand today from an fmj 38 supercomp out of an old box I was using up.

Bled like hell and is swelling into a nice 6th knuckle.

That has never happened with hps.

SA