11/19/2022
As many of you know, bullet construction and terminal ballistics is a passion of mine. I try to stay on top of all the latest bullets as well. This year, a new lathe turned monolithic copper bullet was released from a company called Apex-Outdoors. It’s a variety of copper hunting bullet that is designed to shed its petals, rather than retain them and mushroom. Other similar designs would come from LeHigh Defense, Cutting Edge, Hammer, etc.
A big difference though with the Apex vs their competitors is how they’re overall constructed. I had to see this for myself. I ordered a box of the 135gr .308” variety the week they were released (this last July if I remember correctly). As I worked on load development, I also cut one in half to see just how the internals are constructed. This is what I found.
So my initial thoughts are:
* I really like what I see and it's exactly what I was hoping to see, and also what I anticipated based on the results I've seen so far on the terminal performance/behavior from others.
* The cavity length is almost half the length of the entire bullet (minus the tip), which is great, and needed, for weakening that entire area sufficiently to allow reliable expansion/deformation, especially at lower impact velocities.
* The cavity overall is pretty wide, which is a good thing, for the same reasons as above. It allows for pressure to build quickly and greatly, internally, to force the material outward. That in turn also allows for better performance regarding terminal stability. The nose will come apart with less overall effort/force/pressure required, and cleanly, and keep the remaining shank running true as it continues to pe*****te.
* The cavity varies in width. It's wider where the tip is inserted due to the broaching and the mouth of the cavity has also been beveled. The broaching does not extend the entire length of the cavity.
* There is indeed broaching done to the cavity, which essentially increases cavity diameter, but more importantly it creates multiple weakened areas that will be where the copper splits during expansion/deformation and thus results in very deliberate, reliable, and consistent formation of petals, as well as ensures it occurs reliably still at lower impact velocities. Like I said before, this helps lower pressure/force required and produces very fast and uniform separation of the petals as well as it ensures terminal stability is not compromised.
* The material cut very easily and did not actually appear very hard at all. It’s obvious it’s a very soft copper. It was actually one of the easier bullets I've cut so far. My assumption would be that this would also have a significant effect on expansion/deformation rate, reliability, consistency, and at both high and low extremes of impact velocity.
To elaborate further on this particular bullet:
One thing that’s actually unique with bullets like the Apex, Hammer, Cutting Edge, LeHigh Defense, etc is how they shed petals and weight. They expand rapidly and that produces a HUGE amount of hydraulic force. Then they shed the petals, and thus weight, and that allows for a huge energy transfer during the whole process of both expanding and then shedding. Then you’re left with a shank or base that now has a much smaller surface area at the front, but it still has a lot of speed and that front is also flat. Rather than a large frontal area like a mushroomed bullet or a mono that retains petals, and thus will quickly arrest its forward momentum due to creating more resistance, the shank or base can keep pushing fast and it produce a good amount of hydraulic force as it does.
It’s a different mechanism than a lead core bullet. If done properly, it can work very well. LeHigh has managed this for years now, and was the first variety I ever had experience with for this type of terminal behavior.
What makes versions like LeHigh, Hammer, Cutting Edge, etc not as good as the Apex though, is that those guys haven’t figured out how to make them completely reliable or superior in regards to both internal and external ballistics as well.
Cutting Edge’s alloy content isn’t the best, and I don’t believe their cavity is engineered well either, although I still need to cut more open to make the full conclusion.
LeHigh bullets don’t leave enough shank/mass and a lot are cast, not turned, and have drive bands and aren’t very aerodynamic.
Hammer… well, the owners are not exactly good people in my eyes (based on personal experience), their cavities are terribly designed and too narrow, which creates issues with reliable expansion, along with their really soft alloy. They’re not aerodynamic at all. All those drive bands they have helps lower engraving forces and friction in the bore, but any increase in muzzle velocity that produces is very quickly lost in flight due to the high amount of parasitic drag all those drive bands produce. The open tips on the bullet doesn’t help either.
Even if they tipped them with a polymer or metal tip, if they don’t improve their cavity it won’t help with the reliability regarding expansion and petal shedding. They’ve actually admitted that they tried tips before and it made them less reliable. That’s not surprising to me because their design is very vulnerable to necking over and bending and then not expanding at all. A tip that doesn’t have any other methods to help it drive into the cavity and force the petals apart is going to just make it worse.
Apex Afterburners have the wide and long cavity, with broaching to weaken the ogive. The mouth of the cavity also has a bevel to it. The tip is inserted into that bevel and there’s a slight flat front to the tip itself. The tip will dig in when it impacts as a result, and the whole thing will be forced back into the cavity. The bevel, and broaching, will allow the tip to immediately banana peel the petals back, and very reliably. It doesn’t have the same issues as the other bullets, even at lower impact velocities or if they impact slightly angled.
The Apex Afterburners also don’t have drive bands and as such, they’re very aerodynamic. They feature a bore rider, which still reduces engraving forces and friction, but doesn’t produce parasitic drag in flight. They will retain a lot of velocity due to that, and impact velocity will be really good even at longer distances compared to the other similar options out there. Due to how reliably they’ll shed their petals, and how large the cavity is, and how it’s been weakened with the broaching, they’ll still shed their petals even down to lower impact velocities. Many are advertised down to 1650fps as the minimum impact velocity to produce petal shedding.
Also, because they shed their petals, they don’t lose as much forward momentum, such as a bullet like the Badlands Precision (which look very similar in many ways, and one could possibly even confuse the two brands). The Bandlands Precision bullets are a design that retain their petals. Since the Badlands bullets retain their petals, the high to mid impact velocity shots will experience more of a loss in momentum. Those retained petals are kind of like deploying speed brakes on airplane. Also, the lower impact velocity shots with a bullet like the Badlands won’t experience much expansion, but rather than like the flat front of the petal-less Apex, the Badlands will be more star shaped, and as a result won’t produce as much displacement of fluids and tissues as the flat-fronted shank of the Apex will. Bullets that retain petals, like the Badlands, can also suffer from tumbling in that scenario as well. Of course other examples of monos that retain their petals would be Barnes varieties, Hornady GMX (now CX), Nosler E-tip, etc.
This whole petal shedding terminal mechanism is newer to me, and I’m still adapting to it fully. It’s something I’ve experienced with LeHigh Defense bullets, but I haven’t fully understood just why exactly those worked so well, other than I knew the shedding of weight was an obvious good thing.
Hammers intrigued me at first because they looked to be a really good improvement to the LeHighs. Then all the negatives started showing themselves with Hammers and it ruined them for me. Now we have the Apex bullets and I think it’s a real winner in this type of design. I’m actually as excited as I’ve ever been about a new bullet with these. Even better, the owner has been extremely professional and very awesome to work with. He’s gone out of his way to ensure his bullets are marketed truthfully, which realistic limitations advertised on each bullet, and with realistic BCs as well. This is very important so that the consumer doesn’t start out on a flawed mission based on inflated or incorrect figures and limitations. It really sets Apex apart in that regard.
Will they become my new go-to bullet? That I can’t say for sure just yet. I will say their price has me currently saying no to that, but that’s not a ding on Apex. That’s just the cost of such a product and the engineering that goes into, along with current material costs and the world economy.
My initial results are no worse than what I’ve seen with TMKs or ELDMs or any of my other favorites. So it’s no worse, but it’s also no better, other than no lead to deal with. No need to bury the gut piles to keep from poisoning eagles, for example.
If prices become to where there’s not much of a difference between Apex and my favorite lead core options, I might think about these as my overall go-to. If I hunt in a place where lead is banned, I’d definitely feel confident in these. If I was going to load up monos for a customer, I’d feel confident in loading these for them and recommending them as well to any non-customer.
This is just my review and thoughts on their construction. I will make a separate post/posts regarding actual terminal performance.
