quote:

Originally posted by Antlers:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike70560:
I am thinking about buying a Blaser double, modify it for a single trigger, chamber it in 45-70, use the Peter Capstick sling method, and hire Mark Sullivan as my PH. I think I covered everything.

....forgot the MatchKings.

You have gone and spoiled my secret

The deepest penetration possible may be the Texas heart shot taken on Mr Garrett by the lawyers after a hunter follows his advice and is trampled while using an illegal and underpowered cartridge on DG.

Oh Crap, here we go, I know I am getting ready to open a can of worms here, but I can keep quite no longer.

I neither agree with Garrett, nor detract from, but I can give you a reasonable opinion on the matter, as I have tested some of the things discussed on this thread. I test a combination of wet news print and magazines, some especially JPK knows this. JPK-we are talking direct comparisons between bullets--medium is irrelevant, as some have said does not matter if it is dog poo, let's not go there for yet again another marathon of disputes please!

1. I believe velocity is a major factor in deep penetration. I believe that there is breaking points on both ends of the spectrum, hi and low. I believe that with some of the particular solids we use today that those points are between 2000 fps and 2400 fps. With the velocity of 2100 to 2250 fps being optimum with a particular bullet. Less than 2000 then penetration starts to drop off--more than 2400 or so it starts to drop off.

2. I believe that every different nose profile will and can behave differently. While it is pertinent to compare say the Garrett bullet to say a 500 gr Barnes Banded 458 caliber solid, the real test to solve this once and for all would be to compare the Garrett bullet to itself at different velocities.

I have NOT worked with the Garrett bullets so I cannot make much comment on them directly.

What I can describe are two tests directly related to velocity and two particular bullets.

I have 5 different .500 caliber cartridges (NOT .510 caliber-true .500) One is a super short that would equal a 500 SW in a 16 inch rifle--another is a 50 B&M little larger cartridge, both in bolt guns. 3 different tests with 2 bullets, both being equal with a slight meplat change.

This is a 455 gr FN Solid, Meplat of about .35 caliber.

Test #1--50 Super Short 455 FN Solid 1750 fps.
Bullet penetrates 43 inches of medium-dead straight.

Test #2--50 B&M 455 FN Solid 2170 fps
Bullet penetrates 55 inches of the same medium!

With this bullet-on this day-the drop off in velocity also caused a drop off in penetration.

A few months ago I set out on a test mission to prove this once again--to myself. I took my 416 B&M and the 350 gr Barnes Banded FN bullet to the test at two different velocities, 2100 fps and 2450 fps, same gun, same bullet, same medium being changed out after two rounds, no one round was able to go through shot medium.

The 350 Barnes at 2100 fps penetrated 2 inches deeper than the same bullet at 2450 fps. Not much difference at all--and either bullet would do the job in the field, but a difference none the less.

In the test with the 416 we show that higher velocity we get some drop in penetration.

Now we have two tests, one showing the lower velocity giving less---one showing the higher velocity giving less, thus my belief that there is a optimum range for any given bullet, and for the most part I think that is between 2000 and 2400 fps for a rule of thumb--not an absolute because of different nose profiles may and will perform at different levels.

I have tested a lot of 45/70 in past years, but never over a 470 gr Cast performance. The various 420-430 and up to 470 at velocities from 1750 fps to 1950 fps do not come close to any 416-458-.500 caliber rifle with bullets at 2000-2400 fps. Again, I favor 2100-2250 fps for that sort of work. Also I don't intend to slam the 45/70 as I have a foot tub full of them and love it! But.........?

I find high velocity with this sort of bullet and in particular the flat meplats, hits very very hard up front causing damage and trauma. It is my belief that these bullets at high velocity hit so hard up front that they are expending great amounts of energy very quickly on target, therefore slowing down or decelerating quicker than a bullet that is traveling slower to begin with and not expending so much energy up front. The trauma can be traced easy in the medium that I use, it is very evident. At what point it becomes a real issue would be probably far above 2400 fps, but I think that is the point it starts to become evident.

I have not studied the Garrett cartridges in 45/70, never even seen one, so it is not of much value for me to comment on that, as stated, however I do know that nose profile can work miracles with penetration, that is fact. I am sure he is getting excellent penetration with the cartridges, but again the test is to run that same bullet at a higher velocity if possible, and then check the difference. If I had to wager I suspect that bullet at 2100 fps would penetrate far deeper than what it does at 1500 fps!

I have planned to extend the tests with various velocities, in fact I wanted to get to it last week, but never made it. I have some loads sitting in the test bin now, but it will probably be a few weeks before I get to it now.

I also have another test to relate concerning the dumping of energy quickly that caused the bullet to penetrate much less than normal, but late right now and have to go, wife is getting on my case about meeting family for dinner!

Thanks
Michael

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:

quote:

Drinking beer makes you stronger and I can prove it.
I bought a barrel of beer on Monday and could barely roll it into the garage. By Friday, after just 5 days of drinking beer for 3 hours a day, I could lift that barrel over my head and toss it across the garage.
Case closed!

Funny how that works huh! I have the same thing!

Beer also made me better looking!

michael458,
good info. Is there also a known velocity where a lead bullet loses the ability to be effective? IE at what speed do they deform or breakup. Logically, a monosolid would be much more resistant to breakup or deformation by virtue of its stronger element. Any testing done in this area?

Hi Gents
This one is really old all right. I did this test due to all the hype, which I really couldn't believe but I'm kind of a "you'll have to show me that) kind of a guy. Here is a link to the Apples to Apples test.
http://www.470mbogo.com/PenetrationComparison.html
This does not say a 45-70 could not do the job. It just shows that apples to apples the statement of slower penetrates deeper is BS
Take good care,
Dave

quote:

Originally posted by Remington720:

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:

quote:

Drinking beer makes you stronger and I can prove it.
I bought a barrel of beer on Monday and could barely roll it into the garage. By Friday, after just 5 days of drinking beer for 3 hours a day, I could lift that barrel over my head and toss it across the garage.
Case closed!

Funny how that works huh! I have the same thing!

Beer also made me better looking!

Beer definately makes women better looking.

When you read Randy's tests he compares soft points shot out of faster rifles to the hard cast lead solids shot out of the .45-70. Well DUHH he got better penetration with the hard cast solids.

The fact this topic has re-risen, does it mean "traffic" has been slow lately?

Mike70560,
Why must Mark Sullivan be the goat of so much ridicule here? Do you know him? have you hunted with him? He is probably one of the finest cat men in all of Africa and has shot some of the nicest buffalo Iv'e ever seen. If I don't want to shoot a 45/70 I simply won't, If you don't want (or can't afford) to hunt with Mark Sullivan don't. Did he piss in your wheaties? Why pull him into this. He refuses to even dignify guys like you with a response.
Cheers,

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Manion:
Gentlemen! Will you never learn?

I will walk you through the science behind the slower is better FACTS. Yes, FACT. Not theory. I will only do this once, so please try to keep up.

Bullets, you see, have a finite amount of energy stored in them. We will use a 500 grain bullet as an example.

Now, a 500 grain bullet only has so much energy to expend. Do you want to expend all of that energy "sprinting" to the target or do you want that bullet to reach the target with enough energy to continue its work?

Shoot a 500 grain bullet at 3000 feet per second. It gets there fast. But it is also mighty tired when it reaches its destination. Shoot one at 1500 feet per second, and it has has TWICE (3000/1500=2) the remaining energy to do its work.

Now the 500 grain bullet fired at 3000 fps will slow down fast - it needs a rest! But the 500 grain bullet at half that velocity can continue driving through the target AT THE SAME VELOCITY!!! Because??? Come on...because it is not tired!

You run 200 yards at full speed and see what you've got left when you get there. Trot 200 yards and you have plenty of steam left to do what you went there to do in the first place.

Pushing bullets at higher velocities only tuckers them out.

I am frankly more than a little shocked, yes shocked, at the derisive comments here. With the learned members of this board, many of whom have advanced degrees in the sciences, one would think that they would open their eyes to this most simple and basic application of scientific method.

We mock what we do not understand. Well, no more mocking. Now you should all understand.

Any questions?



(PS-Still working on an answer to Judge G's question...)

ARE YOU REALLY STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE THIS LINE OF HORSESHIT OR IS THIS POSTING JUST A JOKE? to follow your line of reasoning, my 425 grain arrow from my bow at 300 ft/sec would out-penetrate all of these bullets because it would not be tired when it reached the target. if your reply was a tongue in cheek joke/ response, i appologize. if you were serious, God help you!!!

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Manion:
Gentlemen! Will you never learn?

I will walk you through the science behind the slower is better FACTS. Yes, FACT. Not theory. I will only do this once, so please try to keep up.

Bullets, you see, have a finite amount of energy stored in them. We will use a 500 grain bullet as an example.

Now, a 500 grain bullet only has so much energy to expend. Do you want to expend all of that energy "sprinting" to the target or do you want that bullet to reach the target with enough energy to continue its work?

Shoot a 500 grain bullet at 3000 feet per second. It gets there fast. But it is also mighty tired when it reaches its destination. Shoot one at 1500 feet per second, and it has has TWICE (3000/1500=2) the remaining energy to do its work.

Now the 500 grain bullet fired at 3000 fps will slow down fast - it needs a rest! But the 500 grain bullet at half that velocity can continue driving through the target AT THE SAME VELOCITY!!! Because??? Come on...because it is not tired!

You run 200 yards at full speed and see what you've got left when you get there. Trot 200 yards and you have plenty of steam left to do what you went there to do in the first place.

Pushing bullets at higher velocities only tuckers them out.

I am frankly more than a little shocked, yes shocked, at the derisive comments here. With the learned members of this board, many of whom have advanced degrees in the sciences, one would think that they would open their eyes to this most simple and basic application of scientific method.

We mock what we do not understand. Well, no more mocking. Now you should all understand.

Any questions?



(PS-Still working on an answer to Judge G's question...)

ARE YOU REALLY STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE THIS LINE OF HORSESHIT OR IS THIS POSTING JUST A JOKE? to follow your line of reasoning, my 425 grain arrow from my bow at 300 ft/sec would out-penetrate all of these bullets because it would not be tired when it reached the target. if your reply was a tongue in cheek joke/ response, i appologize. if you were serious, God help you!!!

Get that apology warmed up...

Buckeye

Thanks. Way back when I was testing the 45/70 bullets, mostly the 420 cast performance, 430 True Shot, and a 470 Cast Performance, I found that the meplat of the 420 cast at 1900 would shear off consistently both in test medium and critters. The 470 a little slower at 1750 would not do that, plus the nose profile was a bit different, but the 430 TrueShot with a little less meplat would do far better about not shearing off. Just a difference in the size of the meplat and the hardness I think. I never tested at higher velocity.

470 Mbogo

You are spot on the money! Apples to Apples! By a long stretch proves the point and should end the discussion! Excellent! I have seen your test in the past, good work.

I still have not looked at the Garrett data, but if he is comparing expanding bullets to his 45/70 loads then the point of this thread is rather moot! Of course there is no comparison to the two, Apples and Oranges. I see what one could gain from that comparison but that is working with two completely different dynamics concerning terminal ballistics.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Manion:
Gentlemen! Will you never learn?

I will walk you through the science behind the slower is better FACTS. Yes, FACT. Not theory. I will only do this once, so please try to keep up.

Bullets, you see, have a finite amount of energy stored in them. We will use a 500 grain bullet as an example.

Now, a 500 grain bullet only has so much energy to expend. Do you want to expend all of that energy "sprinting" to the target or do you want that bullet to reach the target with enough energy to continue its work?

Shoot a 500 grain bullet at 3000 feet per second. It gets there fast. But it is also mighty tired when it reaches its destination. Shoot one at 1500 feet per second, and it has has TWICE (3000/1500=2) the remaining energy to do its work.

Now the 500 grain bullet fired at 3000 fps will slow down fast - it needs a rest! But the 500 grain bullet at half that velocity can continue driving through the target AT THE SAME VELOCITY!!! Because??? Come on...because it is not tired!

You run 200 yards at full speed and see what you've got left when you get there. Trot 200 yards and you have plenty of steam left to do what you went there to do in the first place.

Pushing bullets at higher velocities only tuckers them out.

I am frankly more than a little shocked, yes shocked, at the derisive comments here. With the learned members of this board, many of whom have advanced degrees in the sciences, one would think that they would open their eyes to this most simple and basic application of scientific method.

We mock what we do not understand. Well, no more mocking. Now you should all understand.

Any questions?



(PS-Still working on an answer to Judge G's question...)

ARE YOU REALLY STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE THIS LINE OF HORSESHIT OR IS THIS POSTING JUST A JOKE? to follow your line of reasoning, my 425 grain arrow from my bow at 300 ft/sec would out-penetrate all of these bullets because it would not be tired when it reached the target. if your reply was a tongue in cheek joke/ response, i appologize. if you were serious, God help you!!!

Fishing had been a little slow lately, but every once in a while you get a chance to really set the hook! Good thing AR is a catch and release site (most of the time).

jdollar, I suppose if you post a picture of yourself with a hook in your mouth, that'll do for an apology. Doesn't have to be a real hook.

I think people are comparing apples and oranges here. If you are truly shooting non deforming solids, and the bullets are the same caliber and weight, more velocity equal more penetration period. Once you are using expanding bullets or comparing expanding ones vs non-expanding ones, things get more complicated. Gets even more complicated when you start comparing a .375 caliber 300g TSX at 2550 fps vs a 350g Woodleigh PP at 2350 fps out of a 375 H&H ..

Now to lighten the mood, the beginning of an old joke ...

Two seals walk into a club ...



Chuck

Maybe solids have a hull speed like sailboats.

I have a 80' Swan (see picture below). It has a hull speed of 12 knots. I can make it go faster by running both motors at 100% power (about 14 Kts). Damn, does it create a bow wave and burn fuel.

Yesterday, sails furled, engines running (I had the pina colada machine busy) I tapped the throttle and got the boat to 8 knots and cut all power. It continued 514 meters before stopping according to the GPS. Then I ran the boat at 13 knots and cut power. It continued 9meters before losing all headway. That proves conclusively that faster is better, even with a hull speed. (Tide, stink pot skiboats, escaping Haitians and bridges in the way, not calculated).

Therefore, it is my suggestion that every dangerous game bullet look like a classic yacht.



Actually I made all this stuff up because it is too foggy here to go hunting and I don't have anything to do until it burns off.

As to the .45/70 stuff. If your PH doesn't care and the game scout doesn't get you, since I don't sell life insurance.. what do I care. I would like to see the science, though... and the "bow wave-hull speed" idea wasn't all tongue in cheek?

quote:

Originally posted by JudgeG:
Maybe solids have a hull speed like sailboats.

I have a 80' Swan (see picture below). It has a hull speed of 12 knots. I can make it go faster by running both motors at 100% power (about 14 Kts). Damn, does it create a bow wave and burn fuel.

Yesterday, sails furled, engines running (I had the pina colada machine busy) I tapped the throttle and got the boat to 8 knots and cut all power. It continued 514 meters before stopping according to the GPS. Then I ran the boat at 13 knots and cut power. It continued 9meters before losing all headway. That proves conclusively that faster is better, even with a hull speed. (Tide, stink pot skiboats, escaping Haitians and bridges in the way, not calculated).

Therefore, it is my suggestion that every dangerous game bullet look like a classic yacht.



Actually I made all this stuff up because it is too foggy here to go hunting and I don't have anything to do until it burns off.

As to the .45/70 stuff. If your PH doesn't care and the game scout doesn't get you, since I don't sell life insurance.. what do I care. I would like to see the science, though... and the "bow wave-hull speed" idea wasn't all tongue in cheek?

I did think it odd that we would both have the same sailboat.

Adrook, since you say Garrett is an idiot for advocating taking dangerous game with his loads in a 45-70, what would you say about Jim Shockey, who's taken a lot of dangerous game with a muzzle loader? All his shows where he's taking DG with a muzzle loader must be some sort of endorsement in your mind? Given a choice between a 45-70 and a muzzle loader, which would you choose?

There is only one answer to such a silly question and that is: NEITHER!

But assuming your stuck in camp with no legitimate alternative, the 45/70 begins to look pretty good.

Piss on all this gun/bullet stuff.....I want to go sailin' with the Judge!

Gary
DRSS
NRA Lifer
SCI
DSC

Mbogo,

I beg to disagree with the penetration test in the video.

Wooden boards do not react like flesh, which behaves more like a fluid at the speed/level of energy of a bullet strike.

What happens when a bullet strikes an animal is much more complex, and involves shockwaves, tissue displacement, and other factors.

The only way to make a valid comparison would be to shoot a non-deforming solid with wide meplat (a GS would be an ideal candidate) in ballistic gelatin at various speeds, and film the results on a high-speed camera.

Am ready to bet that many people would be greatly surprised by the results.

Just think of a simple experiment: in your bathtub, slowly sink your hand from the surface of the water to the bottom. Easy. Then give a great slap to the water, with all you strength and speed. Despite the much greater energy involved in the second case, your hand will send water all over the place rather than easily going to the bottom. Something like that happens when you shoot a critter.

Where is the limit between "sinking in" and "splashing around", I don't know, but I'd really like to find out.

In Discovery's Mythbusters, they tried to verify if hiding under water would save you from bullets fired at you in anger. Result of the tests: all supersonic bullets (up to .50-caliber) disintegrated in less than 3 feet of water, but slower velocity bullets, like pistol rounds, needed up to 8 feet of water to slow to non-lethal speeds. Shotgun slugs require even more depth (the exact depth couldn’t be determined because their one test broke the rig...!!). http://mythbustersresults.com/episode34

Now, Adrook, as for calling Garrett an idiot publicly and upfront, one should have proper data and done sound repeatable experiments disproving him before to do so. If you really think he's full of shit, set up your rigs and prove your point using thoroughly scientific methodology.

This is a silly suposition, Mythbusters or not.

Solids from my .458, launched at 2250 and impacting supersonically at about Mach 2.0 after about 30 yards, do NOT disintegrate upon hitting fluids, at least not on hitting a buffalo. One transited the entire length of buff before hitting a bone, which it broke.

You can't get away from Judge G's argument. If my solid will penetrate a certain distance at 1500 fps, hitting the game at 2200 fps will cause it to enter (it obviously entered!) and slow down. At the point within the animal where it has slowed down to 1500, it will then penetrate the same distance FARTHER as the bullet impacting at 1500 does from the skin.

So you've got a certain distance in each case. But in the higher velocity case you've got the extra penetration distance over which the bullet slows from 2200 to 1500.

The transfer of energy from a slow projectile is dramatically different than that from the same projectile at high speed. The bullet's kinetic energy is dissipated in four ways: heat, energy used to move tissue radially outward, energy used to form a primary path by direct crush of the tissue, and energy expended in deforming the projectile (which is not to be considered in the present case since we are dealing with solids).

After the high-speed solid has slowed down to the "hit" speed of the slower one, it is surrounded by a mess of tissues under high dynamic stress, shockwaves, temporary cavity, etc. Tissues displacement is a function of the square of velocity, plus a few variables.

That's where sumfin' happens... Like pushing a rod through a hanging fishing net, or pushing it through an entangled fishing net.

I've not yet found a comprehensive and satisfactory analysis of the phenomena involved, but it must be somewhere... Maybe written in German, or Russian, or Hungarian, who knows?

Next time I go hunting swimming pools I will consider some Garrett loads or maybe a .38 Special.

Where is Alf when you need him, or Gerard? Maybe they too are sick of the same old argument.

No one is likely to change their mind here.

quote:

Originally posted by chipolopolo:
Mike70560,
Why must Mark Sullivan be the goat of so much ridicule here? Do you know him? have you hunted with him? He is probably one of the finest cat men in all of Africa and has shot some of the nicest buffalo Iv'e ever seen. If I don't want to shoot a 45/70 I simply won't, If you don't want (or can't afford) to hunt with Mark Sullivan don't. Did he piss in your wheaties? Why pull him into this. He refuses to even dignify guys like you with a response.
Cheers,

My Copper Bullet friend,

It was meant to be tongue in cheek. The post was a list of the favorite arguments on some of the forums.
Mr. Sullivan (or Garret, Blaser, PHC etc) did not piss in my Wheaties as I do not know him or even eat Wheaties for that matter. I would like to be like Sullivan and hunt in Africa for a living . It was not meant to ridicule him as other posts have done about every thing I listed above. I do not know if I can afford him, never have seen his pricing, not interested in cats, elephant is next.

Would have responded earlier but we have been killing ducks all weekend.

quote:

Originally posted by Philip A.:
The transfer of energy from a slow projectile is dramatically different than that from the same projectile at high speed. The bullet's kinetic energy is dissipated in four ways: heat, energy used to move tissue radially outward, energy used to form a primary path by direct crush of the tissue, and energy expended in deforming the projectile (which is not to be considered in the present case since we are dealing with solids).

After the high-speed solid has slowed down to the "hit" speed of the slower one, it is surrounded by a mess of tissues under high dynamic stress, shockwaves, temporary cavity, etc. Tissues displacement is a function of the square of velocity, plus a few variables.

That's where sumfin' happens... Like pushing a rod through a hanging fishing net, or pushing it through an entangled fishing net.

I've not yet found a comprehensive and satisfactory analysis of the phenomena involved, but it must be somewhere... Maybe written in German, or Russian, or Hungarian, who knows?

Kind of like a bow wave, huh? Shape sure is important in sailboats and bullets, too. How the bullet handles its "bow wave" is what meplat/ogive, etc. is all about in solids, I reckon?

I think your above explains the magic 2150 f.p.s. as that's seems where the burden of overcoming your fishnet of confused mass seems seems not to inhibit penetration more than the extra energy is worth.

Anyway, assuming all of the above is true, I have a Searcy .450 N.E. on order. I don't think any elephant is going to tell me that he'd rather have been shot with another bullet than the 480 Woodleigh I plan to brain him with. They seem to work just fine.

IMO, the reasons these things get out of hand is, everyone on both sides of a so-called "DISCUSSION" where any place in the title there are words like "45-70", or "LEVERACTION"the donnybrook starts! The guy who thinks a 45-70 is a dangerous game cartridge, is convinced that you are dumping on his baby, the guy who is a Lever action fan, thinks you are condemning all lever action rifle to jackrabbit hunting. Then if you add Garrett ammo in the same DISCUSSION, you are pissing on the alter to the scientific break-through by Mr. Garrett, which we all know he is the most knowledgeable member of the discovery group who study the science of ballistics, and it's terminal effect on all Pachyderms. Then that post becomes heresy.

The fact is, and 45-70 cartridge is a very fine man killer, a purpose for which it was designed. It is also, a passing cartridge for all North American game, within it's range. wit exact bullet placement with the right bullet, pushed a little faster, in a modern rifle that can stand the pressures of modern cartridges, it can kill some animals it was clearly not designed to be use on. That fact doesn't, in any way, say the the cartridge is even close to the best choice for those animals, especially the one who seek revenge! The fact that a few animals that are more formidable than the cartridge was designed for have been take with the 45-70 cartridge, only means that sombody used poor judgement, when better rounds are available for that purpose. All we see is an animal down with a proud chap behind it with his 45-70. I hve never seen any one of these pictures that has an explanation of how many shots were fored on that animal, and how far he traveled befor the pictures could be taken. I think there is a reason for that omission.

The lever action is not just one animal, but is made in many verieties, some much stronger than others, and some chambered for true Big Bore cartridges, that will, more often that not, do the trick on big nasty animals, at close range.

I'm a person who loves both the 45-70 cartridge, and the lever action rifles.I have lever action, double barreled, ans single shots all chambered for the 45-70.

I'm also a person who has shot a lot of animals with both, but one that has also shot a lot of animals that require better cartridges.

I would take on a big brown bear, or even a cape Buffalo, if I had no other choice, with my 45-70 handloads, and my customized lever rifle, to save my, or someone else's life if that is all I have at hand. However, I use rifles to hunt these animals with rifles, and cartridges that were designed for that purpose.

I'm not here to tell anyone what to use on any animal, but only to make certain that they are aware of the fact that it is not the best idea they ever had to take on things like Cape Buffalo , and elephant with a rifle chambered for the 45-70 Gov, and to be very careful if that is used on the only real dangerous game in North America in tight cover, if there is a better rifle/cartridge combination avaliable to them!

.............This will never end, so go merrily along and do as it suits you, you have my blessing! Please, however, give me a heads up, if I'm with you, before you poke a big Brownie
with any of Mr. Garrett's magic fodder, so I can climb a tree to watch the procedings!

quote:

Originally posted by Nanook 450:
Adrook, since you say Garrett is an idiot for advocating taking dangerous game with his loads in a 45-70, what would you say about Jim Shockey, who's taken a lot of dangerous game with a muzzle loader? All his shows where he's taking DG with a muzzle loader must be some sort of endorsement in your mind? Given a choice between a 45-70 and a muzzle loader, which would you choose?

In my opinion, hunting DG with a muzzleloader falls under the category of a stunt, just like bowhunting DG or using an underpowered cartridge such as the 45-70. To answer your question I wouldn't choose either when there are so many better choices available.

quote:

Originally posted by Philip A.:

The only way to make a valid comparison would be to shoot a non-deforming solid with wide meplat (a GS would be an ideal candidate) in ballistic gelatin at various speeds, and film the results on a high-speed camera.

-----edited-----

Now, Adrook, as for calling Garrett an idiot publicly and upfront, one should have proper data and done sound repeatable experiments disproving him before to do so. If you really think he's full of shit, set up your rigs and prove your point using thoroughly scientific methodology.

Garrett is the one making the claims with biased tests into wet newsprint comparing different types of bullets, if anyone should be taken to task for not providing controlled tests in an accepted medium it is Garrett. For minimal investment Garrett could provide accepted evidence for his outrageous claims, but he would rather shill the unknowing to sell his product.

quote:

Originally posted by 86thecat:

quote:

Originally posted by Philip A.:


-----edited-----

Now, Adrook, as for calling Garrett an idiot publicly and upfront, one should have proper data and done sound repeatable experiments disproving him before to do so. If you really think he's full of shit, set up your rigs and prove your point using thoroughly scientific methodology.

Garrett is the one making the claims with biased tests into wet newsprint comparing different types of bullets, if anyone should be taken to task for not providing controlled tests in an accepted medium it is Garrett. For minimal investment Garrett could provide accepted evidence for his outrageous claims, but he would rather shill the unknowing to sell his product.

Why should anyone use thoroughly scientific methodology to disprove the unscientific methodology used by Mr. Garrett?

CROWD: A witch! A witch! A witch! We've got a witch! A witch!
VILLAGER #1: We have found a witch, might we burn her?
CROWD: Burn her! Burn!
BEDEMIR: How do you know she is a witch?

VILLAGER #3: Well, she turned me into a newt.
BEDEMIR: A newt?
VILLAGER #3: I got better.
VILLAGER #2: Burn her anyway!

BEDEMIR: Tell me, what do you do with witches?
VILLAGER #2: Burn!
CROWD: Burn, burn them up!
BEDEMIR: And what do you burn apart from witches?
VILLAGER #1: More witches!
VILLAGER #2: Wood!
BEDEMIR: So, why do witches burn?
[pause]
VILLAGER #3: B--... 'cause they're made of wood...?
BEDEMIR: Good!
CROWD: Oh yeah, yeah...
BEDEMIR: So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
VILLAGER #2: It floats! It floats!

BEDEMIR: What also floats in water?
VILLAGER #1: Bread!
VILLAGER #2: Apples!
VILLAGER #3: Very small rocks!
VILLAGER #1: Cider!
VILLAGER #2: Great gravy!
VILLAGER #1: Cherries!
VILLAGER #2: Mud!
VILLAGER #3: Churches -- churches!
VILLAGER #2: Heat treated lead bullets!

ARTHUR: A duck.

CROWD: Oooh.
BEDEMIR: Exactly! So, logically...,
VILLAGER #1: If... she.. weighs the same as a duck, she's made of wood.
BEDEMIR: And therefore--?
VILLAGER #1: A witch!
CROWD: A witch!


BEDEMIR: Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?
ARTHUR: I am Randy Garrett, King of the 45/70.

HunterMontana....

You owe me a new keyboard,as this one is covered in an adult beverage...

Dan

[quote]Mbogo,

I beg to disagree with the penetration test in the video.

Wooden boards do not react like flesh, which behaves more like a fluid at the speed/level of energy of a bullet strike.

What happens when a bullet strikes an animal is much more complex, and involves shockwaves, tissue displacement, and other factors.

The only way to make a valid comparison would be to shoot a non-deforming solid with wide meplat (a GS would be an ideal candidate) in ballistic gelatin at various speeds, and film the results on a high-speed camera.

Am ready to bet that many people would be greatly surprised by the results.

Just think of a simple experiment: in your bathtub, slowly sink your hand from the surface of the water to the bottom. Easy. Then give a great slap to the water, with all you strength and speed. Despite the much greater energy involved in the second case, your hand will send water all over the place rather than easily going to the bottom. Something like that happens when you shoot a critter.

Where is the limit between "sinking in" and "splashing around", I don't know, but I'd really like to find out.

In Discovery's Mythbusters, they tried to verify if hiding under water would save you from bullets fired at you in anger. Result of the tests: all supersonic bullets (up to .50-caliber) disintegrated in less than 3 feet of water, but slower velocity bullets, like pistol rounds, needed up to 8 feet of water to slow to non-lethal speeds. Shotgun slugs require even more depth (the exact depth couldn’t be determined because their one test broke the rig...!!). http://mythbustersresults.com/episode34

Now, Adrook, as for calling Garrett an idiot publicly and upfront, one should have proper data and done sound repeatable experiments disproving him before to do so. If you really think he's full of shit, set up your rigs and prove your point using thoroughly scientific methodology.



Philip
Considering that the speed of sound is around 1100 fps and that the slowest speed tested was 1550 I don't think anything is "sinking in". I understand penetration is less with higher velocities but the devastation is greater at the same time. I think that that takes place above the 2400 fps tested. Plywood is very consistent and can be repeated. Wet newspaper is not a consistent or reliable test matter. Bullets will veer out of a test bow within a couple of feet depending on nose shape etc. If your willing to send up three six foot long 10 inch by 10 inch blocks of ballistic gel I would be more than interested in testing it out for you and we will both learn more.
Take care,
Dave

MacD37, thanks for your perspective, I came here to learn something, and as Randy Garrett is a friend of sorts, to see why someone would call him an "idiot" - a very easy thing to say on a discussion board, versus to a man's face. In any event, your post helps me understand this debate, and if I'm ever able to afford to go to Africa, my 375 H&H may have to be backed up by a 458 Lott.

Gentleman,

I’ve read where Whelen, Ackley, and others in the WWII era used cattle and hogs to test bullet/cartridge performance.

So I propose a test to put this low velocity vis-à-vis high velocity which penetrates best to rest. This penetration performance test would utilize identical .458 caliber 500 grain FN solid brass or copper bullets using either a .450 Rigby or .460 Weatherby rifle and relating cartridges. Testing as follows:
1) Rifle is correctly fitted with a Strain Gauge PSI testing unit to record pressure levels for each shot fired.
2) Ballistics capture equipment to be used to record velocity of each shot at muzzle and again at 15 yards and 30 yards.
3) Shoot two shots of each velocity beginning at 1300 fps through 2700 fps in increments of 200 fps. Each bullet to be permanently marked on base for positive identification with record maintained of which bullet is loaded at what velocity level.
4) Place elephant at 30 yards (probably best if elephant already dead) in head first position so that penetration can be recorded from head to butt.
5) Commence test and velocity recording of each shot until all shots fired.
6) Commence autopsy of elephant to identify exact penetration of each shot fired.
Hopefully the combined firing of 16 shots would not require the use of multiple elephants.

So…who has a large elephant to donate to for the test? As well as the other equipment??

Jim

John Taylor did that years ago. "African Rifles and Cartridges"
Take care
Dave

Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
William of Occham (1300-1349)

So if I look at this discussion which, in the short time I’ve read the postings on this site, has been pounded to a bloody pulp, some fundamental questions come to mind. Regardless of validity of Mr. Garrett’s tests are there simple questions that provide a far more direct path to the heart of the matter: Is a 45/70 a true dangerous game caliber?

The first of these is that if further increases in velocity are counterproductive why were new higher velocity cartridges developed at all for this specialized use?

Flatter trajectories are often given as an answer but flatter trajectories are a non-factor at ranges under 50 yards. DGR cartridges are highly specialized tools and not subject to the needs and specifications of secondary users. Again the question begs consideration, if 1500 fps works perfectly, why continue to use a round that produces 2150 fps since with any amount of actual use it would become apparent that the former was in fact more effective. Since we are talking about a period of 100 years give or take a bit, it certainly cannot be a lack of time to “shake things out” as it were.

The quality of projectile argument is often sighted by proponents of the 45/70 as the determining factor in the efficacy of the 45/70. If we look at the history of cartridge and bullet development we see a trend towards tougher and much more durable projectiles. Are we to conclude that at no time during the last century more advanced bullets were ever used in a 45/70 thus somehow sullying its reputation? If these “improved”, but not as “improved” as the current crop of “super-bullets” bullets were utilized are we forced to conclude that inferior quality projectiles work adequately at higher velocity but “fail” at lower velocity because of some unstated factor but, that some “newer” projectile suddenly reverses this relationship? So then, if a “super-bullet” renders the use of higher velocity weaponry unnecessary why do we continue to utilize such weaponry if its efficacy were not measurably, at least anecdotally, superior?


Given that we have a reasonably well educated class of individuals working as professional hunters, it is safe to assume that they can and do read various publications that expound concepts at least similar to Mr. Garrett’s. It is also safe to assume that despite various weapons ownership restrictions that they are able to acquire various weapons for their vocational use. It is also safe to assume that they will purchase those weapons that will best fit their needs. If initially they were “mislead” at some point it would become apparent and they would act to correct their original misunderstanding or misinformation. It is also a safe assumption that these individuals are highly motivated to utilize the best “tool” for their work since the side effects of improper tool selection include death by unpleasant circumstance. Exactly how many PH specializing in dangerous game, specifically elephants and or Cape buffalo use a 45/70 to back up their clients? (The defense here is that the 45/70 is a “client” weapon, not a PH “stopper”. This negates their entire argument by the admission that the 45/70 is incapable of being a DGR cartridge on it’s own in the purest sense since this would imply that the cartridge was not adequate for any and all circumstances it’s proposed use might call for.)

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
I actually shot 45/70 level loads into a dead elephant along with 458wm loads. The 458wm loads far, far exceeded the 45/70 loads in penetration and byllet integrity. The 458 loads included 500gr round nose solids at 2145fps and 450gr flat nose solids at 2200fps.

The 45/70 level loads were both hard cast and softer 525 grain bullets. The soft bullets evaporated, the hard cast broke apart, but they penetrated about 28" even though they broke apart.

Not my first choice by a long shot, but I'd rather buff hunt with a 45/70 than sit in camp waiting for the ariline to find my rifles or ammo. (But not elephant!!!)

BTW, no one has come up with even a poor response to the Judge's point, because there is no response. Saeed's comment is regarding expanding bullets, not solids.

JPK

Some of you all ought to read my previous post, quoted above.

JPK

Ya. . . . . well. . . . I once dun kilt a full'd size horse with a .22 CB cap. And that's no S%#!

quote:

Originally posted by DWright:
Ya. . . . . well. . . . I once dun kilt a full'd size horse with a .22 CB cap. And that's no S%#!

YEH, and jess hole mah beer, and watch this shit!............... Words spoken by a hunter just before he pokes a Cape Buffalo with some Garrett ammo, fom an 18" Marlin guide gun!