We have been discussing bullet failure in several recent threads. It has come to mind that not all are defininng failure in the same way. How do you define when a solid bullet fails? Be careful this is a more tricky question than you may realize.

465H&H

Ok! I'll put myself in a position to be thrashed. First let me say of course if the animal dies quickly the bullet did its job. If the bullet deformed in some manner that made it change course through the animal and miss its mark it failed at least in my opinion.

Mark

That's the way I would define it as well.

I'll play devil's advocate here or maybe just the devil. So if you accidently hit an elephant in the neck and the bullet breaks up and only penetrates 6" but a few pieces manage to cut the jugular vein or carotid artery and the elephant drops in less than 100 yards, the bullet didn't fail? Or alternately, the bullet veers off course and instead of hitting the lungs it hit the heart and killed it quickly, it wasn't a failure?
465H&H

OK, I'll bite.

Purpose of Solid: To optimize penetration in order to reach the vital organs of large game.

Solid Bullet Failure: Failure to reach the vital organ the bullet is aimed at due to bullet performance. (Badly aimed shots, bullets driven at a velocity not recommended by the bullet manufacturer, deflections of the bullet before it reaches the animal etc. are not bullet performance problems.)

Fire away!

Brett

465H&H,

The primary failure in your first example is shot placement. However, the bullet did fail in my opinion. I guess I need to rethink my definition a little.

In your second example the bullet failed as it did not reach the intended target organ. This is in line with my definition.

Brett

I had a Federal factory Trophy Bonded Sledgehammer 470 NE rivet and bend when it hit the front leg of an elephant bull. Penetration was minimal. Of course the elephant died as we colected this bullet but it was not from this particular shot.

BigB

quote:

Originally posted by Brett:
OK, I'll bite.

Purpose of Solid: To optimize penetration in order to reach the vital organs of large game.

Solid Bullet Failure: Failure to reach the vital organ the bullet is aimed at due to bullet performance. (Badly aimed shots, bullets driven at a velocity not recommended by the bullet manufacturer, deflections of the bullet before it reaches the animal etc. are not bullet performance problems.)

Fire away!

Brett

I think Brett has made a good start.

I'm going to lift some of his effort to begin mine! Thanks Brett!

Purpose of solid = to reach the components of the CNS or other vital organs of large dangerous game.

Success = acheiving substantial straight line penetration through target media whether muscle, vicera, bone or other. (Tusks and tusk sockets excluded. Breaking of leg bone, hip joint, pelvis, shoulder or spine = success.)

Failure = acheiving insufficient penetration, whatever the cause (except insufficient velocity), or substantially deviating from linear course. (Minimum pentration = 30", exluding tusk and sockets, and excluding penetration shortfall after breaking leg bone, pelvis, hip joint, spine or shoulder [Debatable, possibly too little.] Substantial deviation from linear course = 1" deviation per foot of penetration for the first two feet, 2" thereafter. Excluding deviation after hitting tusk and socket, or breaking leg bone, hip joint, pelvis, spine or shoulder [Debatable, could go either way.])

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by BigB:
I had a Federal factory Trophy Bonded Sledgehammer 470 NE rivet and bend when it hit the front leg of an elephant bull. Penetration was minimal. Of course the elephant died as we colected this bullet but it was not from this particular shot.

BigB

Did it break the front leg bone? If it did, I would rate that as successful performance!

If not, then a failure.

JPK

One of the main failures of solids I have seen and heard of is chnage of direction.

As mentioned above, this can lead to the animal being killed, which purly by accident, but still classified as failure.

We shot an elephant onec, facing us. I put in a brain shot from a 375/404 using a Barnes Super Solid. My PH fired a shot aiming for the heart, shooting through the trunk.

The elephant dropped in his tracks from the brain shot.

Then we found his bullet, a Hornady 500 FMJ from a 460 Weatherby, changed direction in the trunk, and came out 90 degrees from its intended course.

That is an example of failure.

I have heard of bullets fired into an elephant's head from the front. The bullet goes in a certain distance, then changes direction and goes straight up.

Missing the brain completely.

Another failure.

465

Dead straight line penetration, hitting and penetrating the vitals that you were shooting for as long as what you were asking of your bullet is within reason "Success". Define reason--You can't ask your bullet to penetrate 20 trees before hitting your elephant in the rear and expect it to penetrate the brain.

If any solid deforms, breaks up, bends, tumbles, veers off course, regardless of whether it happens to get lucky and kill the animal it is still considered a FAILURE! We are not discussing lucky 1 shot deals--we are concerned with what can occur the next time or the next 10
times.

Brett
Dead on the money.

JPK
No argument with your definition.

Saeed

100% agreement. Dead straight line penetration!

Michael

A solid is not supposed to deform. I will rate deformations as a failure, minor ones may be accepted (lets say +/- 0,5mm) and will not influence penetration, but major deformations are failures in my book. No matter whether it killed the critter or not..
All solid bullets can fail under tough circumstances, some are just less prone to failing...

JPK,

The TBSH 470 I mentioned did not break the leg bone. So in my mind as well as PH the bullet failed to perform.

BigB

I'll come at it a different way and define perfect solid bullet performance: Straight line penetration to and through the vitals, whether brain, spine or heart/lungs, all the way to exit, if possible.

Exit is sometimes not achievable, e.g. on a frontal brain shot or an acutely raking body shot.

But one should expect and get straight line penetration to and through the vitals from his solid bullets.

mrlexma

Agreed 100%. The last two elephant I took with my 50 B&M surprised the hell out of me. One frontal brain shot penetrated the entire head, exited the rear of the brain and somewhere in the body. Second elephant took one broadside penetrating heart and exiting off side, second shot from rear penetrated 7 ft of elephant, penetrated heart a second time and exited front of chest. This from a FN design .500 caliber, 510 gr bullet at 2100 fps. I never had this sort of penetration with my 458 Lott with 500s at 2275 fps! Dead straight penetration gives one confidence to do the job at hand! I now have the same bullet design at 550 grs and in the new 500 MDM will be able to achieve 2150-2200 fps easy.

Dead straight line-exits are great!
Michael

quote:

Originally posted by buffalo:
A solid is not supposed to deform. I will rate deformations as a failure, minor ones may be accepted (lets say +/- 0,5mm) and will not influence penetration, but major deformations are failures in my book. No matter whether it killed the critter or not..

You mean like this?


------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

I think we have to give special consideration to bullets that hit the humerus, femur or certain portions of the scapula and their joints. These bones are so hard in mature elephants that any solid could deform, bend or change course on impact. We may never have a solid that can come through them always unscathed. In my experience a bullet doesn't have to break these major bones to disable an elephant. Twice I have hit a humerus without breaking it and the elephant was efectively disabled as it could not put weight on that leg. A three legged elephant isn't going anywhere nor can it charge. Once the bullet completely penetrated the humerus and the second time it took a large chunk of bone out of the side of the bone. I suspect that seldom is this bone ever completly broken from a bullet but the effect is the same on the elephants mobility.

I also no problem if tumbling or bending occurs in the last few inches of bullet travel. Almost all bullets will tumble when they slow up enough according to Alf. Significant nose deformation is another matter. If the solid mushrooms that will limit penetration, and that is simple terminal balistics fact. It is why soft points penetrate less than well constructed solids.

Keep going guys. I think we are making progress.

465H&H

If the bullet brings the result the hunter expects, it has not failed. Regardless of whether it is recovered or not and regardless of what it looks like when it is recovered. Success cannot be failure.

However, it does not guarantee that the result will be the same, the next time the bullet is used.

It is possible for a bullet shatter completely and bring the game down in the process, but it may not do so every time it shatters. A bullet can bend on impact and tumble, killing the animal in the process, having gone just far enough, but it may not kill reliably every time. When a bullet curves in its path, it could hit a vital organ and kill very effectively. But during the autopsy we will say "Lucky this time, but what about next time?"

We have learned that weight retention with solids is important. We have learned that linear penetration is desirable and that penetration depth must be sufficient to get the job done. We have also learned that we cannot have all this every time. Sometimes things do not happen as planned. So we strive for the best chance at getting it all together. Therefore, when we recover a bullet that has broken, bent or tumbled and failed to give depth and linearity, it is indicative of a problem that should be avoided in future, even though it worked at the time. The learning curve is what sets us apart as intelligent and human.

If a bullet delivers the game every time it is used and recovered bullets show no evidence of tumbling, gives good weight retention and the wound channels go where they are supposed to go, the reliability is noted and we continue to use it.

The number of times I have heard the words "don't know how I missed that one" only to find the animal dead several days later, are many. Sometimes the bullet cannot be blamed and sometimes it can.

Personal experience of bullet failure is what moved me to start making my own. When we strive for perfection in bullet design, even when we come up a little short, we are still in reasonably good shape.

Regarding the deformation of the bullets below.



There is no sign that these bullets tumbled, shed weight or did not deliver more than enough depth of penetration and in a sufficiently straight line. All the elements required for good terminal performance are present, despite what the bullets look like. At GSC we have learned that, in order to be as reliable as possible and to avoid catastrophic failure - severe bending or breaking, the bullet must deform in a predetermined way. The way in which a GSC solid deforms promotes linear penetration, resists tumbling and does not detract from how a good solid should perform. We do not care what it looks like, only that it must work under the widest possible set of conditions.

The way in which these brass and jacketed bullets deformed, does not always promote deep, linear penetration.



Sooner or later the hardest solid will be stressed to the point that it will deform. How it deforms will determine whether it remains a successful solid or whether it will fail.

My definition of a successful solid is:

A bullet that will most frequently deliver the best chance at deep, linear penetration. It should not shed weight and it must maintain a shape that is conducive to linear penetration.

Gerard!

How do you know that the two GS bullets pictured above did not tumble? Your bullets may tumble but not bend because of their construction. Both bullets show more deformation on one side and that could mean they tumbled or were pushed off course. Even soft nosed bullets that show similar mushroomed noses are known to tumble. If that tumbling occurs in the last few inches when they slow to a near stop anyway, does it really matter? I could live with the nose deformation shown on the bullet that hit the leg bone as those bones are so hard any bullet will deform on them. I can't live with the amount of deformation shown on the bullet recovered from the elephant head esp if it was a side brain shot. That bullet might not make it to the brain on a frontal shot on an elephant holding it's head high esp. if it was a big Botswana bull. I am puzzled since none of the GS bullets that 500 grains recovered form elephant heads showed more than a small amount of nose deformation. That is why I asked in another thread if you had changed bullet composition.

465H&H

465H&H,

IMO, a round nose that rivets a bit is LESS likely to tumble than one that has not riveted because the center of gravity is more favorable for the riveted bullet. So to with the flat nose, but they don't tumble to begin with - or at leaast none I have used did (where I could follow the path) or showed signs of tumbling (where I couldn't.)

None of the flat noses I have recovered showed anything like the deformation that the two pictured show, but one, and that one was from the tusk/socket, and looked worse - as did the Woodleigh.

I have a couple of Woodleighs that look worse than the two pictured recovered from the far side zygomatic arch, and they are spilt and flattened, with some core loss, I think they hit while tumbling.

On your comment going something like "If they tumble in the last few inches, what harm...?" Keep in mind that tumbling ends penetration. That round nose may have another foot or two of penetration but fo the tumbling!

JPK

465H&H,

quote:

How do you know that the two GS bullets pictured above did not tumble?

Because I have examined several identical appearing, recovered GSC FN bullets over the last 12 years, and none showed evidence of tumbling. Also, both these bullets went deep and straight. Tumbling bullets do not do that.

quote:

Your bullets may tumble but not bend because of their construction.

They did not tumble. Had they tumbled the evidence would be there and visible, as in the bullet on the right below. Note the oblique abrasion marks above the centerline on the right and below the centerline on the left, proving that the bullet was rotating around its cg fast enough to leave those marks. The left hand bullet similarly shows contact deformation and this proves the direction of travel at various times in the penetration event. Several prove that the bullet was traveling sideways or backwards on contact. This happens because the bullet is too hard and, when it deforms, it does so in haphazard manner, with unpredictable results.

quote:

Both bullets show more deformation on one side and that could mean they tumbled or were pushed off course.

The evidence of the wound channel states otherwise. The right hand bullet below probably deflected after striking and breaking the femur but, after the hit, it continued straight. MV of these bullets was 2600fps (380gr 416 Rigby). Have you ever seen 380gr (or thereabouts) solids from another manufacturer perform at this level?

quote:

Even soft nosed bullets that show similar mushroomed noses are known to tumble.

True, because they lack shoulder stabilisation and they tumble for the same reason a round nose solid is more prone to tumbling than an FN.

quote:

If that tumbling occurs in the last few inches when they slow to a near stop anyway, does it really matter?

No, it does not matter if it is just before the bullet would have come to rest. It is all but spent and is not doing much work anymore. The recovered bullet will reveal when it tumbled. If no abrasion is visible at the microscopic level, it tumbled at very low speed. Tumbling, when the bullet is still moving at significant speed, leaves markings that are visible under magnification.

quote:

I could live with the nose deformation shown on the bullet that hit the leg bone as those bones are so hard any bullet will deform on them.

Many bullets would have broken or bent right there, to the extent that further good performance would be highly coincidental. The GSC FN did not break, retained its weight and continued to perform as a solid should. It was designed to do that.

quote:

I can't live with the amount of deformation shown on the bullet recovered from the elephant head esp if it was a side brain shot. That bullet might not make it to the brain on a frontal shot on an elephant holding it's head high esp. if it was a big Botswana bull.

Here are the words of the hunter who used them:

"He wheeled around at us with his ears flared...I took aim at 25 yards for the spot I remembered in my "Perfect Shot" book then squeezed the trigger. The bull sat back on his ass at the impact then crashed down in the front. On his belly, I put one from the side in his ear then he tipped over on his left side eyes rolling with heavy breaths. A couple more for the coupe de gras and he lay still."

Only one of these was recovered. Probably the frontal shot as side head shots with the 380gr FN from a 416 usually exit.

quote:

I am puzzled since none of the GS bullets that 500 grains recovered form elephant heads showed more than a small amount of nose deformation.

Dan's bullets were loaded to a mv considerably less than the 2600fps of these two bullets. What would a brass solid do when impacting at 2600 on something like a femur? Often they break and even more often they bend and tumble. The GSC FNs did not, because they are designed to retain the qualities that prevent that.

quote:

That is why I asked in another thread if you had changed bullet composition.

The deformed FNs below were recovered from wet sand in 1996. Impact speeds were 3000fps and 2700fps and penetration was linear and deep. Round nosed solids bend, turn and tumble under the same conditions with great regularity. The pictured FNs below and the compressed FNs from the elephant above are 12 years apart and, from then till now, they have continued to work in precisely the same reliable manner, killing elephant and other dangerous game. FNs were first used on elephant in 1997 and, to date, we have not received a single failure report, other than a failure to recover the bullet after the shot. I can live with that.

Gerard!

Thank you again for your thoughtful reply and patience with my questions. A couple or three more comments.

If a bullet tumbles and only goes through soft tissue such as lung or muscle it probably will not have obvious marks of tumbling. Case in point, the brass bullet on the left of your picture indicates it tumbled because of the bending but it doesn't show any obvious marks that it tumbled.

A velocity of 2,600 fps is much higher than most velocities of cartridges used as elephant stoppers. At lower velocities the penetration may not be as much as at such relatively high velocities but on the other hand the bullets may not deform as much at lower velocities.

The FN has shoulder stabilization primarily due to it's FN shape. Once it deforms and has the same shape as a soft point it no longer has any more shoulder stabilization than an expanded soft point of the same shape, yes?

465H&H

quote:

If a bullet tumbles and only goes through soft tissue such as lung or muscle it probably will not have obvious marks of tumbling.

Take it to 50 or 100 magnification and the evidence of tumbling will be there, if the bullet tumbled soon after impact. When it has slowed almost to the end of the wound channel, markings are no longer identifiable.

quote:

Case in point, the brass bullet on the left of your picture indicates it tumbled because of the bending but it doesn't show any obvious marks that it tumbled.

The picture below shows by the diverging blue lines that the bullet has expanded at the nose. It is proof that the myth of the non expanding solid is just that - a myth. The red arrow indicates the approximate direction of travel when it impacted the object that caused it to bend. I will put money on it that it will have abraded edges around the base radius that flare towards the nose. This will prove that it was going base first at a good speed at some point.

quote:

A velocity of 2,600 fps is much higher than most velocities of cartridges used as elephant stoppers. At lower velocities the penetration may not be as much as at such relatively high velocities but on the other hand the bullets may not deform as much at lower velocities.

Deliberately slowing a cartridge down, is a concession to bullets and bullet designs that fail to perform as desired, when driven at higher speeds. Speed is a positive factor if the bullets are up to it. Speed is a negative factor when it causes the bullet to fail to get the job done. When a bullet is capable of faster speeds, penetration does not suffer compared to a similar, slower bullet. However, wound channel volume increases and, visibly, it has greater effect.

quote:

The FN has shoulder stabilization primarily due to it's FN shape. Once it deforms and has the same shape as a soft point it no longer has any more shoulder stabilization than an expanded soft point of the same shape, yes?

No. Look at the picture below at 1, 2, 3 and 4. The rounded shapes and large edge radii will not support cavitation or shoulder stabilisation as these bullets slow down in tissue.

Compare the shape of the the much smaller edge radius and general flat shape of the expanded FN bullets in 5, 6 and 7.
The FNs will remain shoulder stabilised and will support cavitation to much lower speeds than the rounded shapes. The ones in 5 and 6 are also dart stabilised and have shed no weight.

The softs in 1 and 2 have become large round noses with no shoulder stabilisation and they have elevated cavitation speed threshold requirements which are often not met. The softs have also shed some weight. The softs and the solid in 3 are dart stabilised which may not be enough. There is no dart stabilisation with the solids in 4.



So, What is not to like about a copper FN solid that will:
1. Deform much less than lead core solids at similar speeds and will be more reliable because they resist tumbling better and penetrate deeper.
2. Deform about as much as most round nose and truncated round nose brass solids at "traditional" speeds, but are more reliable because they resist tumbling and, on average, will penetrate straighter and deeper.
3. When, at "traditional" speeds, they encounter objects that cause other solids to break, bend and tumble, they deform in a controlled manner, so that the qualities that cause them to be reliable are not detroyed.
4. When driven faster, to levels where other solids fail completely, they still do not shed weight or lose the qualities that make them perform, but simply penetrate deeper, cause more damage and finish the job that the hunter started.

Case in question: The bullet in 3 above, broke the back leg of a cow elephant. It was driven at modest speed, say 2300fps? Less? It weighed 500gr. The right hand FN in 5, broke the femur of a bull elephant and continued another 36" into the elephant. It was going at 2600fps and weighs 380gr, having started as a .416 caliber 380gr FN.