Anyone try the Hornady 143 ELD-X


Jan 25, 2010
Out West
Wanted to see if I was missing anything here on why this bullet for those of us that shoot 140 grain bullets isn't a really well rounded bullet for the 6.5

From Hornady, it has a .625 BC whereas the 140 ELD-Match has a .610 and the next step up, the 147 ELD-Match has a .697.

While the heavier 147 has a bit of a better BC, the ELD-X has superior terminal ballistics as its actually designed as a hunting round. For those of us that shoot both target/steel but also long range hunt, I'm excited to see hunting rounds that are now longer either an off weight spire point or round nose with a shit BC.

The length of the ELD-X is 1.44 but I can't seem to find the bullet length for the 140/147s and was hoping the length wasn't what was going to limit this bullet; for reference the original 140 AMAX is 1.380.


Feb 15, 2017
It shot great out of my 260 and my 6.5 Creedmoor barrels with a 1-8" twist. Worked good on deer for me. I was pushing the about 2800 out of my Creedmoor with Re16. I use the 140 RDF for matches.


Sergeant of the Hide
Jun 11, 2010
Hill Country of Texas
That is all I run in my 6.5 CM and they are fantastic out of my rig. .5 MOA and great terminal performance. They cost 40 dollars more per 1000 than the 140 but I like shooting more than reloading so I just pay the price and enjoy the results regardless of what is in the scope.


Aug 31, 2017
Austin Texas
I shoot them for hunting and steel. I have noticed they aren't quite as accurate as the 140 ELD match though. I imagine something to do with the thinner jackets not being as consistent as the thicker match bullets. But they are still sweet. I'll have to pull pictures but I think I was getting .4 MOA with the match and .6-.75 with the ELDX.
Sep 6, 2006
Southern California
147 eld is 1.435”
140 eld is 1.380” (measurements from bullets I have on hand)

I’ve never shot the 143, but I’ve been shooting he 147 quite a bit, and like it.

I’ve found that all the Hornady match bullets I have shot are really fragile. I mean they all seem to have thin jackets and core separate on impact.


New Hide Member
Feb 6, 2018
Williston ND
I decided a little while back on using the 143s for target/hunting. Shoots really well out of my savage in 6.5CM. At that time the 140s had a lower B.C than the 143 Eldx. I did some playing around with the 147s but I just couldn’t push them fast enough In order for it to make sense ballistcally at distance. Due to longer length and increased weight. 143s are great tho and don’t have to chase a new load to switch from target/hunting applications.
Feb 16, 2007
North Carolina
The 143s hammer in my 20 inch 260. I took and made a head shot on a doe at 337 yards in January.
I’m also running the 143 ELD-X in a 20” .260 CTR. Compared to the 140 Hybrid at the same charge weight, the 143 is getting about 40 fps more (2700 for the 143 vs 2660 for the 130 Hybrid).

I initially wasn’t expecting much and bought a box of 100 for hunting season and it turns out the barrel liked the 143 more than anything other than the 130 Hybrid (which seems unobtanium at the moment but printed groups maybe .1 to .2 better at distance). The price and availability compared to the Bergers have kept it as my go-to bullet for the last several months.
Top Bottom