Thanks marine! Yeah I don’t advertise or post my videos all over. Most people want entertainment also. I prefer to focus on quality videos with information and examples. Let the videos speak for themselves. The other issue is a lot of my videos and evidence proves a lot of people wrong. Some can open their minds and learn some can’t. Glad you found the channel and if you ever have questions don’t hesitate to ask. Semper fortis brother

Yup definitely a good bullet for it

Yes sir…big fan..try some 85gr rdf…there not tipped expanders but super extra pointy….got em in 130 .264 over upper 50s grain of bang dust…🔥💥

Thank you hope you're having a good hunting season.

There’s differences in tipped vs not tipping on how they do it. Ultimately what they did with the jacket thickness worked well so no reason to change it. Well at least until the tipped game kings which honestly isn’t great. That’s the only bullet they have that is completely different.

The tmk is a very good bullet and will handle business. What grain of tmk are you shooting?

Eld match is 1300-1400 fps minimum impact velocity depending on impact resistance. Lighter stuff 1400 fps minimum impact velocity. The TMK's are pretty close in the 1400-1500 fps impact velocity range depending on impact resistance.

Congratulations on your doe. The TMK’s are really good bullets especially the terminal performance. Good luck this season and happy hunting

I often refer to the TMK's as their version of the eld match. They are actually very similar in performance and design. The tmk has a slightly thicker jacket and a little bigger hole and polymer tip. The eld match has a thinner jacket and a slightly smaller hole and polymer tip. The eld match is the better of the two but not by much. I have both and will happily run either one. My favorite is the eld match especially since my guns really like them. Either way you can't go wrong. Hope this helps with your question. If you have any more questions don't hesitate to ask. Happy hunting

Which performs better in your experience?

@asdfghjk can't tell on coyotes honestly. I prefer the hornady because there about 30 cents vs 45 a pill

Two completely different bullets and design. This video I did covers the differences with pictures of cut open bullets, jacket thickness, etc. It should answer all your questions. If you have any questions after watching it let me know. m.kzfaq.info/get/bejne/r9h9eqigtdqsk3k.html

I honestly don’t get guns built anymore. I just buy a impact action with a prefit barrel and do my own. I helped a friend do one like that and it took me about 20 minutes to put his whole rifle together including the scope. If I wanted a different cartridge then I can just swap barrels and run the same setup. I don’t have to buy a whole new setup I just buy barrels in different cartridges and swap them out as needed.

OTM bullets have larger holes and generally perform well especially at high velocity. They don't have the problem like bullets that have small holes clogging and penciling through. Here's a link for hornady's law enforcement page and if you scroll down they show their ballistics gel testing with their tap ammunition. www.hornadyle.com/rifle-ammunition/75-gr-bthp-tap#!/

Thanks glad you like the videos! Ultimately the goal is to test every single bullet no matter marketing for hunting etc. I actually have the tipped game kings to test for the next video. Unfortunately I don't have a 270 so it won't work out. Thanks for the offer I do appreciate it. I'll add it to the list of bullets to make sure if I see some in 6mm or 30 cal I'll get some.

@@longrangehuntinggroup7223 awesome! Thank you very much!

Hey so yes if you have two of the same bullets like you used in your example. There will be a difference in the wound channel. The 30 cal is wider and has more surface contact to aid in expansion. It’s already wider so when it opens up it will be wider than a smaller caliber can achieve. Mind you we’re not talking about big differences but there is a difference. Think of it like a image in a computer. You can have the same image and make it larger or smaller in scale than the original. So you’re getting the same wounding but the size/scale will change. The 6.5 147 gr is longer and thinner with less surface contact compared to the 30 caliber. So it will get slightly more penetration prior to opening. Sectional design does play a key in it too as the more sectional density the harder it is. The 147 is a heavy for caliber bullet and has a higher sectional density. The 155 in 30 caliber is a medium weight for caliber bullet. So you will see it open up sooner between the sectional density and surface contact. A better comparison that would be even closer would be a heavy for caliber bullet like the 225 eld match and the 147 gr eld match. So yes the 6.5 will have a slightly smaller wound cavity than the 30 caliber.

@@longrangehuntinggroup7223 Thank you so much for the detailed answer. I figured that frontal surface area would affect wounding, and I appreciate you confirming that. There is one more thing that I am curious about, and I would appreciate any input! I am trying to figure out how exactly the TSC scales from a bullet in a smaller caliber to a larger one, or vice versa.. For example, the .224" 77gr TMK and the .308 155gr TMK. They are both of similar construction and have very very similar sectional densities (and I'm assuming penetration). I see in Black Hills gel tests that the .224 77gr TMK makes about a 5-6" temporary cavity while the 175gr .308 makes about an 8" temporary cavity. First of all, do you think this difference is pretty representative of what you'd see in tissue? I know that .308 is twice as energetic as .223, but with the same bullet type, I'm guessing you wouldn't see a literal doubling of cavity diameter? Secondly, I know that temporary cavitation is essentially drag, so it's influenced by velocity, bullet shape, and frontal area. Does that mean that assuming shape and velocity are identical, increasing frontal area would be directly proportionate to the increase in cavity area? For example, going from a .224" 77gr TMK with approx a 0.50" expanded diameter to a .308" 175gr TMK with approx a 0.75" expanded diameter, same impact velocity, would you see a 2.25x increase in the area of the TSC and a 1.5x increase in the diameter? Again, any input is very much appreciated!

@@asdfghjk2933 so energy is only a potential and is directly dependent on the bullets performance. Gel is a great representation of what will happen in a body. The body and gel will effect how much it opens up. The elasticity of the media causes resistance. If you were shooting something non elastic it would seem like a bigger difference. When dealing with elasticity though it isn’t so cut and dry. The 77 gr you mentioned getting 5/6” of temporary wound cavity sounds right. Also the 8” temporary wound cavity with the 308 175 gr seems right. You aren’t going to see double like the on paper math would suggest. The body can actually absorb some in the elasticity of the body. This is why the whole pistol debate is pointless. Example 9mm vs 45 acp you’re not going to see a big of a difference to change the totality of the situation on a water based mammal being shot. The extra energy is absorbed by the elasticity of the body as it’s within the bodies elasticity threshold. With the rifle situation even while achieving hydraulic shock stretching the media beyond the elasticity threshold. There is still going to be a limit and a certain amount of the potential energy that will be absorbed. When it enters the body normal goes out the window 😂 and you have so many variables etc that will effect how everything goes. What you see in gel is pretty close to what you will see on a animal. The animal though isn’t a solid mass like gel. There is air in the equation especially in the lungs. So in reality it will be slightly less than what you see in gel if you don’t impact bones. If you impact bones it will be closer to what you see in gel. The more increase surface area from the bullet expanding the more displacement and transfer of energy. So the wider the expansion the greater the wounding.

I tried wood which was fine for some bullets. However some of the bullets used cause so much energy transfer that it damaged the wood. On top of that there would be tons of little splinters embedded in the gel. It was a royal pain to get them all out of the gel. The guy who let me shoot there had a ton of those buckets that he didn’t want and they would blow them up with tanerrite. So we used some for doing ballistics gel tests. The setup is completely different now and I have it sitting on a steel butcher’s table. By the way love your KZfaq name.

@Long range hunting Group A steel butchers table is a much better option. It's wild to see how much energy some of those rounds produce. I just found your channel and really appreciate what you're doing. I'm getting back into shooting after a long hiatus, and it feels like starting over from scratch. Technology has changed a lot in the last 10 - 15 years. I picked up a new Tikka that shoots incredible and am now very interested in the precision aspect of shooting. Thank you for the content and excellent info.

@@theawesomeone1844 awesome to hear you’re getting back into shooting. If you ever have questions don’t hesitate to ask. I try to stay active in the comments as much as possible. What bullet are you using and cartridge in your tikka?

@Long range hunting Group I just got a 308 20" UPR. I took it out for its "break in" hick style last weekend. Ran a bore snake with clp down it a couple of times, wiped it down, and fed it some Federal GMM 185 Berger and 175 Sierra. With 3 shot groups, the 185 shot pretty consistent .75 moa, which I was stoked about until I fed it the 175, which were between .33 - .25 moa. I was dumbfounded. I've never shot anything so accurate in my life, especially right out of the box with factory, all be it match grade, ammo. This is the first bolt gun I've bought in, like 20 plus years. My old meat gun, a Remy 700 shots like 1.75 moa when I do everything right. Sub .5 moa is way funner!

@Long range hunting Group and I miss typed in my first message. I'm just getting back into hunting, not shooting. I've been kind of board the last couple of years with my usual and thought I'd try a new challenge. Figured hunting and longer range would be a good change of pace. After much research, I went with the UPR cause it looked like it would fit both bills. I'm super stoked I did.

I don’t remember where but I do have pictures of the terminal performance of the 69 gr tmk’s on coyotes etc. It does very well on them and I have a couple buddies that’s all they use for coyotes, foxes, bobcats, etc.

@@longrangehuntinggroup7223 that’s good to know. My predator rifle is a .223 AR with a 1:8 twist. It shoots 50 grain vmax surprisingly well but I would like to take advantage of that faster twist and possibly use it on whitetail as well. Fur isn’t a worry (have you seen the prices lately), more so population control on coyotes.

@@DRandolphOutdoors1My top choices are the 73 or 75 gr eld match or the 69 gr tmk’s. I’m currently using factory 73 gr eld match for my AR15 for coyotes and hogs. The eld match and tmk’s are very similar in performance terminally and both great bullets. With the 69 gr tmk’s you can also hunt bigger game like deer, hogs, etc.

The only way to extend penetration is to lower the velocity or go with a heavier round. The polymer tip will only hurt penetration not help it..

@@427SuperSnake1 Most have said the TMK is a different jacket. A thicker jacket or thicker base will punch through better. Otherwise I totally agree with your two metrics.

@@Fredmullegun Buddy of mine sectioned one, the TMK is actually a thin jacket!

The tmk has the same jacket and jacket thickness as the smk. The only difference is the tip and the cavity for the tip. The reason you are getting more penetration is because the heavier 77 gr tmk has a higher sectional density. That will help it get more penetration and not expand as rapidly. Fun fact all of sierra’s bullets except the TGK have the same jacket, jacket thickness, and core. The smk, tmk, game king hollow point, and game king soft point are all the same. The only difference is the tip of the bullet. The only bullet that they changed is the tgk. I don’t know why they decided to change it. The tipped game kings have a thick tapered jacket. They also are their worst performing bullets.

What do you mean by a split jacket? Are you talking about a dual core where there’s copper in the middle?

It's on the list of bullets to test

@@longrangehuntinggroup7223 awesome, can't wait to see what you think of it.

I've had a dozen requests for testing that bullet

@@longrangehuntinggroup7223 curious minds lol

No it’s literally in the name tipped “match king”. Besides that cutting them both open you see they have the same core, jacket, jacket thickness, etc. it’s literally the tipped version of the smk.

It’s a acetal resin polymer tip

I disagree. Form factor is different between both. Bearing surface is different so is the boat tail design. Smk 168 is not well balanced at transonic speeds. Tmk 168 . You can read bryan litz's great book on ballistics. That describes in details the issues with smk168

@@jfernandez1942 straight from sierra. “Sierra has enhanced a segment of the MatchKing line by adding the acetal resin tip, thus crowning the Tipped MatchKing (TMK) bullet line.” It’s the same thing just improved. Brian is a expert in internal ballistics and external ballistics. He’s not a expert in terminal ballistics and very clearly states that both in his books and conversations with him. Tmk’s are improved version of the smk. Same jacket, jacket thickness, etc. slight changes to add a polymer tip and achieve more aerodynamics increasing the bc doesn’t change it’s a tipped version of the smk. Any time you add a polymer tip you have to slightly modify. You are trying to cherry pick the 168 gr smk to support your view point. Except even that doesn’t change the fact that the tmk is a tipped match king. A 168 smk or tmk will have more trouble with transonic and subsonic flight then a 195 gr or 200 gr. 168 grs and lighter in 30 cal tend to struggle in transonic flight that’s nothing new. It definitely doesn’t change the fact that the TMK’s are still a tipped version of the smk. Sierra said it, comparing them cut open and measurements confirms it.

@@longrangehuntinggroup7223 It's incredible what increasing the size of a hollowpoint and adding a polymer tip does to terminal performance.

Are you saying bone doesn’t aid in expansion?

@@longrangehuntinggroup7223Correct, that is what I’m saying. If anything, hitting bone will clog the hollow point instead of expanding it. Usually bone will deflect and damage the walls of a hollow point causing deformed expansion. Solid material does not expand hollow points, water does via hydraulic pressure.

@@mattgrow9093 that’s incorrect bones aid in expansion and it’s well known and documented. Hide is what clogs most hollow points. Hits on edges of leg bones can change the direction. But to say a solid object won’t aid in expansion is incorrect. It’s basic physics and even doing controlled testing with gel, bones, and meat against the same setup without bones. You see more expansion with the bones and it’s always that way. Clogging from hide and meat is a bthp problem and it’s only for certain ones. SMK is known for that issue or the Berger vld’s. Berger solved this issue by having a large cavity inside the nose of the bullet. Even if the hole clogs it will still expand. Upon impact the nose collapses forcing expansion. Bullets using polymer or aluminum tips don’t have that issue. Also years of shooting and documenting animals for terminal ballistics shows the same as the controlled testing. Bones aid in expansion the more penetration through bone the more expansion. Not sure who told you that it doesn’t or how you came to that conclusion.

@@longrangehuntinggroup7223 I know because I watch a LOT of ammo ballistic tests shooting into FBI gel and synthetic bone. It’s well known in the gun community that water expands hollow point bullets, not bone 🤦‍♂️ and you have a gun channel….

@@mattgrow9093 no what you’re claiming I’ve never heard anyone say. In fact your giving us a good chuckle over this one. Bones aid in expansion period well known and documented. When a hollow point clogs in self defense it’s the clothing that causes it. Heavy denim jackets and stuff like that. That’s why the fbi does testing for self defense putting pieces of clothing like denim in front of the gel block. In hunting the hide is the cause of clogging. The bullet starts expanding upon impact on the hide. The speed in which it expands is based off impact velocity, bullet construction, bullet design, etc. if it’s going to clog and pencil through it happens right away on the hide. A bullet that doesn’t clog is already expanding by the point it reaches the bone. Bones add impact resistance and force more expansion. We use these for shot placement for different bullets. We shoot places with higher impact resistance (more bones) like high shoulder shots with thick jacket bonded bullets to aid in more expansion. Certain bullets we go for lower impact resistance shots if we’re over a certain velocity for thinner jacketed bullets. Again this is common and basic knowledge and basic physics backed up by field results and testing. Results don’t lie and bullets hitting bones causes more expansion. Not sure if you’re just trolling or getting bad information. If you’re actually serious you should find a better source for your information.