Now you guys play nice!

Rip!

I have never said that FN solids were not very good bullets or that they werent better penetrators than RN steel jacketed bullets. What I diagree with are those who have no experience on buffalo or elephant that pontificate on what RN solids do with out having any experience of their own and gather there opinions from shooting plywood and plastic bags of water, or the same person telling the one with experience what he should do. Go shoot some elephants with both then come back here and maybe I will have some repect for your opinion.

Autopsy is the medical examination of a dead body to find the cause of death. Tracing a bullet path to see if it tumbles does not fit taht definition.

465H&H

I'm a late entry into this fray. My 'big game' experience is rather limited. I've shot one bull elephant (375 H&H solid to the brain broadside, dead with dramatic flop back and over), one 'buff with a .50 A-Squared (it rolled over quite dead with a sholder/spine shot), and one wounded 'buff with .375 (frontal shot in thick brush at ~90 yards never to be seen again). Also whacked one hippo with a .375 (it died).

I've told the following story a couple times on A-R. While hunting 'buff in Mozambique, my hunting partner wounded one, (using a .375 H&H). We tracked it a ~mile and eventually encountered it at about 40 yards. The PH was to my right with a .416 Rem Mag using 400 grain bullets, my friend a few feet to my left with his .375 H&H using 300 grain bullets. They started shooting alternately into the bull 'buff that was standing quartering towards us. As I recall they each fired about 3 shots. With each shot I saw the bull react.

When hit by the 375, the wounded bull would react. When hit by the 416, the wounded bull would move. The difference was obvious.

Who would you rather be punched by? A welterweight or an equally talented light-heavyweight?

I am bonded with my .375 H&H. It was willed to me by a deceased friend (he died on safari). I've shot a lot of critters with it. That said were I to be starting out fresh I'd get a .416 Rem Mag.

It brings a bigger basket to the picnic.

'nuff said

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
Rip!

I have never said that FN solids were not very good bullets or that they werent better penetrators than RN steel jacketed bullets. What I diagree with are those who have no experience on buffalo or elephant that pontificate on what RN solids do with out having any experience of their own and gather there opinions from shooting plywood and plastic bags of water, or the same person telling the one with experience what he should do. Go shoot some elephants with both then come back here and maybe I will have some repect for your opinion.

Autopsy is the medical examination of a dead body to find the cause of death. Tracing a bullet path to see if it tumbles does not fit taht definition.

465H&H

465H&H!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have been trained in and participated in autopsies during my pathology rotation as a medical student. Get out your dictionary and look up the word "autopsy" and you will realize the word applies to more than morgues. An "autopsy" may be an analysis of any event as to what happened and why!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This petty ploy of your misdefining a word is merely a subterfuge, a diversionary fallacy. You have been had.

Similarly you lump me into those who have never shot buffalo or elephant ... let's just cut to the chase: You are sucking wind and blowing hard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Given that the biggest animal I've blasted was a Condor sized Canada Goose that was pissing me off - I'm not in any position to debate the efficacy of this or that as they relate to elephant.

HOWEVER!!! An elephant hardly seems like a viable medium to do serious analytical work as no two are the same and neither are two shots etc. Of course empiricle evidence may lead to some conclusion but those data would hardly be scientific.

As I said a few days ago to someone else...a hunk of lopped off barstock will kill an elephant or buff just as dead as any factory bullet.

I am really enjoying this little tug of war. Keep it coming, absolutely nothing better than a good "stouch". Off with the gloves!!!

Oh by the way RIP, I applaud you for bringing Cindy into the arguement. Well done Sir, should add more spice to the debate.

This is simply a typical degradation of any and all AR conversations. You simply can not put so many megalomaniacs in the same web site and expect anything less.

I want to apologize to the forum members and especially to RIP for losing my cool and going off topic. I try very hard not to do that. This time I failed. It will not happen again.


RIP! I got that definition out of the Thorndike-Barnhardt Dictionary. I guess they are wrong.

465H&H

465H&H,
No problem.

I do not consider it a personal smackdown at all, nor should you. I consider it entertainment.

Where is the You Tube video: "Jeff Rann on Elephant Cindy Garrison: 'She's a Screamer'"

The only smackdown I have ever had was the biggest bovine I ever shot and it was with a .510/570-grain soft at 2400 fps: a double lung chest shot with iron-sighted rifle, knocked that bison off his feet but he jumped right up and ran off.

This thread was just "autopsied" or "necropsied" by fellow members above (whichever you want to call it).

465H&H,

I've seen a visible bullet path just under the skin of a .458" 500gr Woodleigh shot at MV ~2050fps. The shot was an insurance shot taken on a bull buff from quartering away and from slightly above, The shot penetrated ~2' and then went through the spine. After ~1 more foot the bullet began to tumble on two or three axis, as revealed by the bullet path visible through the skin. The bullet was found base forward but in good condition and true, it rolled straight on a table after recovery. No bone was encountered after the bullet penetrated the spine.

I have recovered (from elephants) a couple of more Woodleigh .458" 500gr solids that split at the base, I believe they split as a result of tumbling, though well after their job was done.

I believe that the RN's have a strong tendency to tumble when they have reached a certain velocity. For the .458" 500gr Woodleighs, this velocity seems to be well below initial impact velocity of 2050fps. But when I shot them at MV ~2050fps I found the one for sure that tumbled and the others that split. Pushing them up to 2145fps, I haven't found any evidence of tumbling or any split or damaged bullets.

Conclusion: the .458" 500gr Woodleighs want to tumble at some speed well below 2050fps, but if you push them fast enough that they exit or hit solid bone prior to decelerating to this unknown speed and so they stay front end first.

Since your shootng from a Lott, maybe this is why you don't find the tumbling with the 500grers. They exit or impact impenetrable bone prior to decelerating to a velocity low enough that they want to tumble.

So far a performance goes, the impact effect of a 500gr .458" solid on elephants is noticably greater with MV of 2145fps than 2050fps. Same with knockdown effect, same with knockout effect.

JPK

JPK!

I totally agree that a 500 grain 458 solid bullet performs better in smack down and penetration at 2,150 than at 2,050 fps. The 550 grain Woodleigh is hands and fists better at 2,050 than the 500 at 2,150. And at 2,150 gives near 500 Nitro performance. I also think that any solid bullet be it a FN mono or RN steel jacket is subject to tumbling when it hits very large and hard bones such as spines, leg bones, teeth or tusk sockets. It is too much to expect any bullet to hold up in those bones. An elephant head except for the jaw and tusk sockets is another matter. Those are thin and porous bones and most solids penetrate them readily in my experience. I had one box of Woodleigh solids that showed some splitting at the base, Geoff McDonald did some testing on them and came up with a reason. That batch of bullets used a steel that was too brittle. It appears it was a bullet quality control problem and not a bullet design. I have also used 480 and 500 grain Woodleighs out of the 465 and 470 on elephant head and body shots and buffalo body with no sign of tumbling, at least if it occurred it was not readily apparent.

465H&H

Tumbling is mostly caused by a unmaintained bore and second, twist rate.Knock down power is determined by ENERGY and a good bullet.The more the Energy the greater the knock down power.I'll show you next month, when I knock down my buff, with my 458 Lott, in Zimbabwe.

Shootaway!

The 300 Weatherby shows 4360 ft/lbs of energy with the 165 grain bullet. The 404 Jeffery has 4105 ft/lbs of energy with the 400 grain bullet. Which would you chose to engage a wounded charging buffalo or elephant? Which one hsa the most knockdown power?

465H&H

Good question 465H&H! You got to compare knock-down power with the same bullet and use a good bullet.If I shot the Weatherby on DG I would use the Winchester Failsafe bullet.I think a 165gr or 180gr failsafe bullet is tougher than a cheap 400gr soft.Both these calibers are crap for DG,IMO.If a hunter doesn't use a Lott or cartridge VERY similar,and keep the bore well maintained,then he is not that serious about DG rifles and their performance on DG.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Tumbling is mostly caused by a unmaintained bore...

So, are you claiming personal responsibility for the tumbling phenomenon?

What tumbling phenomenon?

Hmmmmm......

quote:

If a hunter doesn't use a Lott or cartridge VERY similar,and keep the bore well maintained,then he is not that serious about DG rifles and their performance on DG.

quote:

What tumbling phenomenon?

The one you claim to be caused by "a unmaintained bore".

quote:

bore /bɔr, boʊr/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[bawr, bohr] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, bored, bor·ing, noun
–verb (used with object)
1. to weary by dullness, tedious repetition, unwelcome attentions, etc.: The long speech bored me.
–noun
2. a dull, tiresome, or uncongenial person.

I think the importance of the condition of ones bore is really underestimared in that it is a BORING subject.How many times have I seen pictures here of bullets taken from animals and test media that have tumbled,and the bullet itself was to blame? You need the right caliber,bullet and the right bore to perform on dangerous game!

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Good question 465H&H! You got to compare knock-down power with the same bullet and use a good bullet.If I shot the Weatherby on DG I would use the Winchester Failsafe bullet.I think a 165gr or 180gr failsafe bullet is tougher than a cheap 400gr soft.Both these calibers are crap for DG,IMO.If a hunter doesn't use a Lott or cartridge VERY similar,and keep the bore well maintained,then he is not that serious about DG rifles and their performance on DG.

Shootaway!

You misswd the point! That being that muzzle energy is "NOT" a good indicator of knock down power!

465H&H

No,I got the point.It's just that when one compares muzzle energy,the same bullet should automatically be considered.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
No,I got the point.It's just that when one compares muzzle energy,the same bullet should automatically be considered.

I assumed that every one would know that!

465H&H

John “Pondoro†Taylor wrote the following in Big Game and Big Game Rifles:

"[T]he mere capacity to kill, alone, is not enough. Before a rifle can be termed a safe, suitable and satisfactory weapon for elephant, it must have sufficient power to be able to be absolutely relied upon to knock down an elephant under all conditions. “Shockâ€, as applied to heavy, massive-boned animals like elephant, does not refer to killing power, but to the ability of the rifle to knock the animal down."

Taylor knew that muzzle energy when it comes to dangerous game does not tell the full story. He was right then and the same is still true today.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
John “Pondoro†Taylor wrote the following in Big Game and Big Game Rifles:

"[T]he mere capacity to kill, alone, is not enough. Before a rifle can be termed a safe, suitable and satisfactory weapon for elephant, it must have sufficient power to be able to be absolutely relied upon to knock down an elephant under all conditions. “Shockâ€, as applied to heavy, massive-boned animals like elephant, does not refer to killing power, but to the ability of the rifle to knock the animal down."

Taylor knew that muzzle energy when it comes to dangerous game does not tell the full story. He was right then and the same is still true today.

+1 on that assessment.