quote:

Originally posted by John S:
Mac-
I would imagine that most old double rifles couldn't handle a higher velocity, structurally speaking, and be usable for any length of time, due to the higher pressures needed for the extra speed. I also would guess the bullets employed back in the days of their golden era wouldn't stay together at much higher velocities.

Double guns have nothing to do with how well the cartridges did their job! They would have killed as well in a single shot, or a bolt rifle without any changes, and continue to do so today! We are talking cartridge effeciency, and velocity here, not rifle types! In fact, there was no reason to make them go faster, they did fine as they were! About the only thing velocity gives you is flatter trejectory, which isn't needed with large dangerous game. Dangerious game is not dangerous at long range,and that is the only place trejectory matters.

quote:

So, IMO the double guns were the reason the velocities were kept to the levels used. I notice that when Rigby designed their fantastic 416 they didn't hold to those low levels, nor did H&H when they came with the 375, nor Gibbs with the 505. But then, they were designed for bolt rifles, which we all know are quite inferior,

Double rifles was not the reason velocieties were low, all cartridges in all rifles back then were low. The same bullet dia,at the same speed , in any cartridge will opperate at the same effciency no matter what rifle it is in, and the chamberings you mention do not kill better than a like diameter at slower speed today.

quote:

You might be correct as to why Mike's bullets need the speed, he never gave me such reasons when we've discussed it. Greater expansion, tissue disruption and trauma were what I remembered about our chats.

Mike's bullets, soft or solid perform better than other bullets accross the spectrum of speeds, IMO. They open as well at low speed, and they do at high speed. The need for speed with Mike's Bullets has little to do with expansion, but more to do with gaining the pressures needed for trejectory, when compaired to other type bullets.

quote:

In any case, I don't consider 2400-2500fps as hyper velocity for any bore diameter but will admit the recoil can get pretty grim when 500grs is moving that fast. However, my own field results and observations are what I ultimately put the most faith in, next to those of several other very experienced hunters and PHs that I consider friends. And those all tell me that a 450 bore rifle shooting a TSX or NF at 2400+fps is just a more dramatic and instantaneous killer of large game than one of similar size moving 300fps slower.

I, as well, do not consider 2400-2500 fps to be hyper velocity, and no place in my post will you find I do. The window is 2150-2500 fps for optimum performance over all on large game. What I was refering to as HYPER velocity is that produced by cartridges like 338/378 WBY, and 460 WBY, which are far above 2500 fps. Once you pass the 2500fps speed, if it isn't killing good, what you need is a larger bullet, not more speed, for large animals, because all those bullets will pennetrate deeply at 2500 fps. What I, am saying however, is anything above 2500 fps is basicly wasted effort, with large bullets, on large game!

quote:

Your statement about nothing besting the large bore double rifles and N.E. cartridges as killers of large game is your opinion, and one I do not share...to each his own!

As I said the rifle has nothing to do with this discussion. It is a fact that the NE cartridges, and the speeds they have always run, kill as well, or better than the same weight, and size bullet traveling much faster. Once you pass 2500 fps with big bullets, little more than recoil, and shooter opinion, is gained, for all practical purposes. There is a point where gain is microscopic in usefulness, and only wasted powder, and the production of recoil is the only thing gained.

As you say this is only my opinion, but one backed, not only by first hand experience, but with the results of scientific test as well! Opinion, you are not required to agree with, as well! None of this mandates anyone to accept these results, and everyone can, and should use what ever floats their personal boat, as long as it is legal. That doesn't change the facts found by these tests!


Further, it was my opinion that the origenal poster asked opinions on the use of the 338/378 WBY, or the 375 H&H for Buffalo. My opinion is, the 375 H&H is a better choice, and my post told him my reasons for that opinion, nothing more! The thing I posted may be accepted, or refused, at anyone's discrection, but it changes nothing, in what I wrote! ............. BYE!

OK, looks like time for a field test. Blair can take his 338-378 and a .375 for backup and shoot and film one buff shot with each rifle. Both buff must be similarly positioned, similar shot placement and unspooked when shot. The same brand and approximately the same sectional density bullet must be used in both rifles. Then we can compare the videos and see if a consensus can be reached.

I have not used a 460 wby, but I can say that the slower .500 NE seems to hit game with a much larger hammer than the faster (2300 fps) 470 capstick or 458 Lott.

Dan: isn't the 500NE a bigger bullet? My contention is with similar bore diameter and different velocities. jorge

jorge, I have not done that comparison on buffalo.

quote:

Originally posted by Blair D Calvin:
Just wondering what you blokes opinions would be on what would be more effective.

A 338-378 shooting 275 grain A Frames or a 375H&H shooting similar bullets in 300 grains?

Leaving out the question of ammo availabilty, assuming it was the one and the same.

The above was the origenal question! I take that to be asking for an opinion of their use with those soft point bullets! The tests done on pennetration were done with soft point controled expansion bullets. In that test when those bullets were pushed past 2500 fps, pennetration dropped off,probably because of bullet deformation. Solids tended to veere off in all manner of dirrections to their final exit, instead of a straight line! SO, even the solids were advercely effected by the velocity.

It makes little difference anyway, folks will use what they want, as it should be!

Mac,
I think you are incorrect about Mike's bullets and their relationship to the bore, as compared to other bullets. In fact, it is my belief they actually grip the bore more tightly and hence develope more pressure for a given powder charge. I base this belief on my own testing of them in 12 different barrels and 4 calibers. In each and every case, a given velocity was reached with less powder than a partition or even the TSX. And yet, pressure indications were almost identical. If a duplicate charge was used for both bullets, the NF ammo would show high pressure, ie sticky bolt lift, occasionally gas leakage around the primer and severe case head expansion...all coupled with much higher velocity than the other bullet. Given all of that, I truly doubt they get down the bore with less friction/easier. All of that said, we do agree on their need for speed and their performance on game. We'll just have to agree to disagree on why the N.E. cartridges were limited to 2100fps or less.

For buffalo, my 2 cents would be to go with the 375 versus the 338.

At one time in my younger years, I was a velocity nut. Faster was better. My own experiences and those of hunting partners changed my mind.

Velocity is a great thing to extend the range of your bullet or to flatter its trajectory. I still shoot, and am a staunch advocate of, the 338 Lapua. 250 grains at almost 3000 fps gives it a trajectory path and range similar to a 50 BMG. It stays supersonic and hence retains its energy out past 1000 yards. And the 250 grain bullet has less wind drift that lighter rounds.

Would I use it on buffalo? Not if I had a choice. Why? because most shots you will get will be well under 200 yards. With some of these over 2500 fps rounds, it takes a bullet a little longer to stabilize in flight than lower velocity rounds. Look at the M-16. With a FMJ mil spec round, if you hit anything of any mass of consequence the bullet tends to split into two up to 80 yards. Not a bad thing from a military perspective, since a wounded man takes two others out of the fight to carry him out. But with game, it is my intention to not wound.

Look at the 45 ACP. A fat turtle of a round in the 900 fps range. Yet field experience time and time again has shown that it has more ability to incapacitate than a much faster round with a smaller sectional density.

Or the 416 Rigby. On paper, it sucks compared with its peers. Yet in the field, it does things that defy its paper qualifications.

My belief is that there is an optimal combination of velocity, sectional density and twist for game. Over 100 years ago, those formulas or combinations were developed not by ballistics programs but by trial and error. Don't forget, that was a time in history when you got your ammunition from the rifle manufacturer. It would not have been good for business if your customers started getting stopmed, clawed or bitten because of a combination that was not quite up to par.

When looking at killing power or terminal ballistics, there is a lot of snake oil still peddled today. The subject of terminal ballistics is very complex, involving physics (a point at which a number of makers stop), fluid dynamics, metallurgy, engineering, aerodynamics and biology, to name a few. And even with all disciplines chiming in, we still can't agree on the magic formula. Just look at the thread on twist. Very experienced hunters, shooters and bullet manufacturers with such divergent views.

My view today is to look at field results on what you are shooting. And instead of looking at charts and graphs, look at the subject of terminal ballistics. Unfortunately, most of the study in that area is the result of human autopsies, but termial ballistics is similar on any living creature.

What the field and terminal ballistics tells me anyway is that there are calibers that kill better than they should on paper. And a big bullet (475 to 510) going between 2000 and 22 fps generating in excess of 5000 foot pounds of energy is the right combination for dangerous game. In the lower 40 caliber range, you need an increase in velocity to get the appropriate energy, so the figure of 2400 fps is not out of line. And when we get down to the 338 caliber range, I think you are reaching the point to where the sectional density becomes insufficient on DG regardless of velocity. Plus, if you are pushing a 338 caliber bullet north of 2800 fps, you are closing in on the limits of bullet design and construction for most bullets.

I guess that's more than 2 cents worth!

Jorge,

Only so much penetration for a given animal is required. After that instead of wasting energy, use it to push a bigger bullet. My theory anyway.

John S,

I've had North Fork flat nose solids pressure tested. Not enough other different bullets and loads were tested to make an absolute comparison but the results indicate that there is no more pressure than standard weight for calibre cup and core softs and very probably less.

There are now and have been for near a century relatively fast double rifle rounds. Just two for thought 375 Flanged Magnum, 500/416. Its not the rifle type.

Also, there are plenty of NE rifles which push their standard weight bullets over 2100fps. I kept a log at one point and about 80% of 450 3 1/4" NE rifles were shooting to regulation over 2100fps to about 2165fps. Maybe 2/3 of 470's.

JPK

JPK,
I've fired but a handful of the FPs and CPs so really have little info regarding them. My comments were specifically about his soft points, and while I have not had anything pressure tested in a lab, my results indicate to me they do generate pressure faster than other premium bullets...for whatever reason. You cannot have velocity w/o pressure, a given amount of one is needed to get the other. When 80grs of powder generates 3000fps velocity with a Nosler partition, and no excess pressure signs, and that same charge gives a NF 3123fps and a stuck bolt...this and other similar examples, plus Jim's own cautionary statement inside each box of bullets, makes me believe they do generate higher pressure for a given charge weight than other bullets do.
I'm aware that a newer cartridge like the 500/416 operates at a much higher velocity level than the old ones. Have H&H, WR or any of the other English makers rechambered any of their old rifles for this round? I know some of the old rifles will regulate at over 2100fps, I've owned a few myself. But getting 2145 or 2165fps is not what I am talking about here. When Rigby came with the 416 they went to 2370fps, Gibbs was above 2300fps for the 505 IIRC. If there was anything magical about 2100fps, why weren't these rounds intro'd at that level? In the case of the 505, it certainly qualifies as a big bore, whereas the 416 could be thought of as more a medium.
I hope none of my comments leade anyone to think I am in the hyper velocity camp, because I am not. For big bores I prefer 2400-2500fps using soft points. I rarely if ever carry a solid, see no need for them given the softs we have available today and how they perform. I guess if I ever get serious about trophy elephant hunting the solids will be something I look at a lot harder.

I like bigger bullets for buff so, of the two choices offered, I would choose the .375 (but I would rather have a .458 Lott or something even bigger in my hands for buff).

Still, I do know of a Tanzanian buff that was killed very quickly with one well-placed shot from a .338-378 Weatherby using a Barnes X bullet.

John S,

Don't know about NF softs. Even with the solids you may be right about pressure vs. load. My comments were more about pressure vs velocity/performance. (since the NF fp solids are lighter for (my) calibre they push alot faster for pressure and the performance for that pressure is beyond brand XXX on game)

We have opposite veiws on bullets. I have found no need for softs for buffalo with a big bore rifle, .458" in my case. I tried to carry a soft or two for a buffalo this last trip but when we found the buffalo we wanted we were on elephant tracks and the softs were in the truck. Four buffalo and no softs, no problems so long as the shots are true. And with a double rifle you will get two shots.

There is no reason that a double rifle couldn't shoot the higher velocity rounds like the 500/416 if its in shape to shoot at all. I don't see the point though when you can shoot a .458" or bigger bullet slower for better results at roughly the same rifle weight and felt recoil.

The velocity spread between the 416 Rigby or 505 Gibbs and the NE rounds isn't as great as your numbers would lead one to beleive. Actual velocity for these rounds was just as if not more inflated than the NE rounds.

I do think that there is a performance barrier with solids at about the 2025fps level with round nose steel jacketed bullets. On one side you have adequate and then more penetration on the other ?. In any event, my view is that if you get more than sufficient penetration at XXXfps then you should either ease up on the load, rifle and your shoulder or move to a bigger bore with a hevier bullet. In other words I think 500 Grains is right.

My experience with DG is limited to one rifle and two solids, the .458" NF fn 450gr solid and the .458" Woodleigh 500gr solid. I've taken four buff and eleven elephants with the two bullets, the NF's at 2190fps and two different loads with the Woodleighs, one at about 2025fps and the other at 2135fps. With over five and six feet of penetration with the NF's at their velocity there is no need for more. Better to go up in bore size. The Woodleighs are excellent at 2135fps but fall very short of the performance of the NF's and more velocity wouldn't be wasted - to a point, about 2250 by my guess.

JPK

JPK,
I completely agree that bigger is better when solids are concerned. When I was into double rifles I followed my own advice and kept going up the scale in bore size, from 450 thru to the 577. Ultimately I convinced myself that for me the bolt rifle is infinitely the better tool for my hunting, and the .458" NF soft point is the better bullet. I still harbor a great passion for English double rifles, and to a lesser extent some of the newer rifles.

quote:

Originally posted by John S:
Mac-
I would imagine that most old double rifles couldn't handle a higher velocity, structurally speaking, and be usable for any length of time, due to the higher pressures needed for the extra speed. I also would guess the bullets employed back in the days of their golden era wouldn't stay together at much higher velocities. So, IMO the double guns were the reason the velocities were kept to the levels used. I notice that when Rigby designed their fantastic 416 they didn't hold to those low levels, nor did H&H when they came with the 375, nor Gibbs with the 505. But then, they were designed for bolt rifles, which we all know are quite inferior,
You might be correct as to why Mike's bullets need the speed, he never gave me such reasons when we've discussed it. Greater expansion, tissue disruption and trauma were what I remembered about our chats. In any case, I don't consider 2400-2500fps as hyper velocity for any bore diameter but will admit the recoil can get pretty grim when 500grs is moving that fast. However, my own field results and observations are what I ultimately put the most faith in, next to those of several other very experienced hunters and PHs that I consider friends. And those all tell me that a 450 bore rifle shooting a TSX or NF at 2400+fps is just a more dramatic and instantaneous killer of large game than one of similar size moving 300fps slower.
Your statement about nothing besting the large bore double rifles and N.E. cartridges as killers of large game is your opinion, and one I do not share...to each his own!

John S,
Very interesting observations, especially with regard to the extra velocity when combined with 45 bore.

Jorge,

I remember shooting Mike's old 460 and must say it was impressive, at both ends

quote:

OK, looks like time for a field test. Blair can take his 338-378 and a .375 for backup and shoot and film one buff shot with each rifle. Both buff must be similarly positioned, similar shot placement and unspooked when shot. The same brand and approximately the same sectional density bullet must be used in both rifles. Then we can compare the videos and see if a consensus can be reached.

I knew this would get expensive

John S,

John, as you know Mike Brady from NF well, are you aware of him doing runs of custom weights?

I'm very impressed with the 240HG out of my crappy Accumark, but was wondering if he would make something in a heavier weight, to special order?

And as a side benefit, it would shit Mike!

Thanks and regards,

Blair.

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:


Only so much penetration for a given animal is required. After that instead of wasting energy, use it to push a bigger bullet.

I like this approach.