Your choice of C&C Bullets?

bassman said:
You are still missing the point- spitzer is shape of a bullet, loosely translated as being a flatbased bullet with a pointed tip. A spitzer bullet is not necessarily defined as a "lead filled/copper jacket" bullet as you seem to think. A solid copper or a bonded bullet could also be described as a spitzer bullet depending on its shape, not what it is made of or its internal construction...

Summary:

Spitzer is a shape of bullet, not what it is made out of or how it is made.
Click to expand...

This!
 
Dogleg said:
The name 'spitzer' comes from the German word Spitzgeschoss, meaning "pointy bullet".

Cup and core was a derogatory term meaning a bullet made from cup stamped and drawn from sheet-metal and a lead core swaged to shape. Somehow it became part of the vernacular.

Ballistic-tips, Accubonds and Partitions aren't cup and core. The construction technique there is "impact extrusion" where the jacket is punched out of a billet and can be made more of a supporting body with a lead filling than a gilding metal wrapper on a lead core. The original partitions were machined out of rod.

Whether a bullet is bonded has no bearing on whether it is a cup and core or not. Some C&C bullets are bonded, some are not. Some formed bodies are bonded, and some are not.
Click to expand...

I'd say when most people refer to cup and core they are not referring to a bonded jacketed bullet. In the modern/common use of the term, there is no such thing as a bonded cup and core. The Partition would be a cup and core hybrid.
 
sheephunter said:
I'd say when most people refer to cup and core they are not referring to a bonded bullet. In the common use of the term, there is no such thing as a bonded cup and core. The Partition would be a cup and core hybrid of sorts.
Click to expand...

That's because when a lot of people say cup and core they are trying to be insulting. You're the only person that I'm aware of that ever called a partition a cup and core.
 
sheephunter said:
I'd say when most people refer to cup and core they are not referring to a bonded jacketed bullet. In the modern/common use of the term, there is no such thing as a bonded cup and core. The Partition would be a cup and core hybrid.
Click to expand...

Partition could = Dual Cup and Core I suppose... but if you preclude "bonding" from the cup and core design, then I would tend to preclude the Partition design also... as the butt tends to stay together and drive the mushroomed frontal portion with more mass in a linear fashion. As a note, molten lead in a copper shell does form a "bonding" of sorts... just not as technically specific or effective as modern mechanical or chemical bonding technology.
 
Dogleg said:
That's because when a lot of people say cup and core they are trying to be insulting. You're the only person that I'm aware of that ever called a partition a cup and core.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure I called it a cup and core hybrid....as in the front portion is a non-bonded jacketed design. Again, in the modern vernacular, cup and core is not derogatory but just describes a non-bonded jacketed bullet.......but I'm thinking you already know that. You're the only person I've ever heard call it a derogatory term.
 
You are a bunch of great guys!

Introducing all this controversy around the true definition of "cup & core" is bound to make Track feel better... you're all just swell...
 
Dogleg said:
Its not your first post on the subject. A partition can't be a cup and core because at no time in its manufacture was it ever a cup. And you know that.
Click to expand...

It's kind of like some people call Scotties tissues Kleenex, technically wrong but everyone knows what they are talking about. Kleenex has become a pretty universal name for tissue just as cup and core has become a pretty universal name for a non bonded jacketed bullet. I occasionally call a magazine a clip to....most guys with any gun experience know what I'm talking about but a few will always feel the need to correct you....well at least on the internet anyhow.
 
sheephunter said:
It's kind of like some people call Scotties tissues Kleenex, technically wrong but everyone knows what they are talking about. Kleenex has become a pretty universal name for tissue just as cup and core has become a pretty universal name for a non bonded jacketed bullet. I occasionally call a magazine a clip to....most guys with any gun experience know what I'm talking about but a few will always feel the need to correct you....well at least on the internet anyhow.
Click to expand...

Considering that you had never heard the term "Controlled expansion" before a few weeks ago, I don't think your's is the last word on construction technique.
 
LOL...I know you love to win an argument Dogleg but resorting to making things up...come on now. I've used that term a thousand times in the past umpteen years. The day they wrapped a bullet in a jacket they controlled expansion...I'd like to help you out here but I think you have me confused with someone else or perhaps you could point to where I had this epiphany.
 
sheephunter said:
LOL...I know you love to win an argument Dogleg but resorting to making things up...come on now. I've used that term a thousand times in the past umpteen years. The day they wrapped a bullet in a jacket they controlled expansion...I'd like to help you out here but I think you have me confused with someone else or perhaps you could point to where I had this epiphany.
Click to expand...

I may have mixed you up with another argumentative cuss on that one.
 
Holleyman said:
Had good luck with the Sierra Pro-Hunters over the years, nothing spiffy but has worked really well.
Guess I haven't seen the need for the premium bullet with the super premium prices. The softer Pro-Hunters might not retain 100% of their weight but they dissipate their energy in the vitals of the animal, exactly what I want from a bullet. Plenty premium bullets may retain near 100% of their weight but continue trough an animal and wasting it's energy by keeping on going.
Click to expand...
Now that's an interesting word, "energy". I believe that energy kills, besides whatever damage the bullet does to hard and soft tissue; others believe that energy is a myth and plays no roll to killing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom