Hornady 178 gr BTHP Match or 178 gr ELD-M for 1000 yards?

[Robo]

Trying to get some opinions on the benefits of the Hornady 178 gr ELD-M over the 178 gr BTHP Match bullets I've been using for some time now in my AI .308. Appears a very small improvement in BC but a fairly decent price difference. I'm pretty happy with my results at distances up to and including 1000+ yards but wonder if others have seen better accuracy with the ELD-M?

 

[308pirate]

You can't transfer someone else's accuracy results with bullet A to your rifle. Not even as a guide.

You'll just have to buy a box of ELD-Ms and work them up.

 

[Robo]

Understand that one. Was just wondering if others who tried both might have noticed a significant change in their own performance. I have a couple of LR Rifles and none of them work the same with the same ammo.

 

[308pirate]

Was just wondering if others who tried both might have noticed a significant change in their own performance.

There's no way to correlate bullet choice with overall performance. You're asking for an impossible correlation.

 

[Tango down]

Hello

Not an answer to your question as I never shot the 178 gr BTHP Match and I do agree with the prior post of trying the ELD-M in your rifle but I understand you are probably just curious to know if ANYONE has better results with the ELD-M over the BTHP Match, even if it does not change the fact that you will still have to try it in your rifle...and YMMV.
I went from the 178 AMAX to the 178 ELD-M. The AMAX were doing exceptionally well in my TRG 22 with 43.5 gr of Varget and so far have not been able to recreate the same level of accuracy with the ELD-M. Nevertheless, after looking more into it, I will give it another shot by playing again with the powder charge and headspace.
Get at least 200 ELD-M and good luck!

 

[Robo]

Hello

Not an answer to your question as I never shot the 178 gr BTHP Match and I do agree with the prior post of trying the ELD-M in your rifle but I understand you are probably just curious to know if ANYONE has better results with the ELD-M over the BTHP Match, even if it does not change the fact that you will still have to try it in your rifle...and YMMV.
I went from the 178 AMAX to the 178 ELD-M. The AMAX were doing exceptionally well in my TRG 22 with 43.5 gr of Varget and so far have not been able to recreate the same level of accuracy with the ELD-M. Nevertheless, after looking more into it, I will give it another shot by playing again with the powder charge and headspace.
Get at least 200 ELD-M and good luck!

Thanks. I know it will come down to trying it out in my own rifle but I was holding out a bit since the increased cost for the ELD-M didn't seem to justify the very marginal reported improvement in BC, at least in the 178gr.

 

[canezach]

Not an apples to apples comparison, but my match load is the Hornady 140 BTHP in my 6.5 Creedmoor. I also have a load with the 140 ELD-M. Otter than a few more clicks to get to 1k, I see no difference in accuracy. The cost difference between the two is pretty negligible. I get the ELDM for $0.28 a bullet and the BTHP is like $0.22 apiece. The BC difference between the two might be greater on the 6.5mm than the 308 (0.610 for the ELDM v. 0.555 for the BTHP). Also, the BTHP has greater variance in bearing surface length than the ELDM, which is typically very consistent. I’ll set my seating die for 2.203” and the ELDM will vary around 0.001 to 0.002 at most. The BTHP will see most in the same range, but I’ll occasionally seat one that comes in at 2.198’ or something weird

 

[Robo]

Not an apples to apples comparison, but my match load is the Hornady 140 BTHP in my 6.5 Creedmoor. I also have a load with the 140 ELD-M. Otter than a few more clicks to get to 1k, I see no difference in accuracy. The cost difference between the two is pretty negligible. I get the ELDM for $0.28 a bullet and the BTHP is like $0.22 apiece. The BC difference between the two might be greater on the 6.5mm than the 308 (0.610 for the ELDM v. 0.555 for the BTHP). Also, the BTHP has greater variance in bearing surface length than the ELDM, which is typically very consistent. I’ll set my seating die for 2.203” and the ELDM will vary around 0.001 to 0.002 at most. The BTHP will see most in the same range, but I’ll occasionally seat one that comes in at 2.198’ or something weird

I have had similar experience with the consistency of my load depth using the BTHPs and the ELD-M but one is for my .308 and the other in my 6.5 Creedmoor. I'm happy with the 178gr BTHP for my .308 and very happy with the 147gr ELD-M for my 6.5 and will probably stick with the BT unless I can't find them and the ELD is more available for the .308.

 

[308220]

Ive been happy with the 178 bthp in my 308. For what a 308 is, i dont think Id see "major" advantages in switching to the 178 eld at long range. 1k yards for example. Its already falling like a rock. Like, do I want to lob a sleek heavy rock, or a weee bit sleeker heavy rock? The bthp works just fine for my purposes.

 

[Robo]

Ive been happy with the 178 bthp in my 308. For what a 308 is, i dont think Id see "major" advantages in switching to the 178 eld at long range. 1k yards for example. Its already falling like a rock. Like, do I want to lob a sleek heavy rock, or a weee bit sleeker heavy rock? The bthp works just fine for my purposes.

Yeah, that makes sense to me, too. Don't think I can turn a .308 into a Creedmoor. I like the BTHP and appears there's no obvious reason to change, unless the ELD-M goes on sale.