On the left below are the North Fork softs concerning which the thread was started. On the right below is a Rhino soft.

Oh goody these "best bullet" threads are almost as entertaining and informative as the .45-70 as a DG rifle thread.

While I am not claiming to be a bullet expert I can tell you that I've seen larger than diameter entrance holes on several occasions. I don't know why that would be so surprising to anybody who’s been around hunting for any length of time.

It would seem to me that it is a simple matter sometimes a larger chunk of hide is torn out during bullet entry. Maybe it has to do with the rotational velocity and shape of some bullets. Possibly the bullet snags a piece of hide on the way in and "corkscrews" a chunk of hide and muscle out.

I don't know for sure the cause but the first buffalo I ever shot was with a 500gr Woodliegh soft point out of a 458Lott. I hit him head on in the neck. The entrance hole looked like a blunt penetrating trauma wound. It looked like somebody shoved a 2 " dowel rod though the hide ripping it open.

Not being a MENSA member I would just have to guess that somehow the bullet grabbed and bunched up a good amount of skin on the entry and tore it open. The bullet was found and was a perfect mushroom behind the diaphram.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

I have a question for the experts you have there (the one who came up with the theory of expansion in flight.) In my picture of the bent bullets above, can he explain why they are all bent to the right?

They were all fired by right-handed shooters

Most of this is over my head but how about all are right hand twist. What is a Mensa?

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:
Oh goody these "best bullet" threads are almost as entertaining and informative as the .45-70 as a DG rifle thread.

"Best bullet? I'm not saying anything about "best bullet" I'm just trying to post my experiences.

In my book a "best bullet" would not waste energy by opening on the hide.

I'd say that a "best bullet" would be one that:

1) always opens AFTER penetrating the nearside skin and ribs (at any velocity or presentation angle), stays max diameter through the thorax then loses the petals to punch through the offside ribs and skin - and so always generates an exit wound.

2) opens to a diameter inversely proportional to resistance (so it penetrates further on tough critters, and flowers to max diameter on soft ones)

3) Acts like a solid on Texas Heart shots


and, Oh yeah!

4) is guided by hindsight rather than simply being launched on a fixed trajectory.

On a serious note, I do like the NF line of bullets. Without any load adjustment I the soft, cup point solid and flat point solid to impact within an inch of each other at 100 yards from my rifle. On top of that I get minimum fouling and great accuracy.

When comparing only soft to soft I don't see any huge difference between the Swift A-frame and the NF 370 gr soft. If I only ever used softs, the Swift would probably get the nod based solely on the weight advantage and deserved reputation for reliability. I tested them and got good accuracy, but they did not impact close to the solids in my rifle.

I used the GS customs to good effect on PG in RSA on my last trip to Africa. They exhibited low fouling and great accuracy. But they only weigh 330 gr and the shipping history to the USA is miserable.

On my first trip to Africa I used Nosler Partitions. They had always been reliable in my NA hunting, but the batch I used on RSA PG simply did not open at all from my 308 Win. Apparently they were trying to match the toughness of the (then) recently introduced Swift A-Frame, and went a little too tough. Having had the experience of shooting pencil holes in PG for 10 days, I will say that a soft that always opens is a worthwhile improvement.

I don't claim that NF, Swifts, GS Customs or Partitions are infallible, but it's a lesson I have to re-learn periodically.

So we add a couple more hunters to the list, including me, who have witnessed larger than caliber entrance holes, by whatever mechanism:

bunching, twisting, corkscrewing, tenting, rasping, slicing, and dicing by explosive back blast.

However, NOT by bullets expanding in the air before impact, unless the Walterhogs have spin actuated explosive self expanding tips.

quote:

So we add a couple more hunters to the list, including me, who have witnessed larger than caliber entrance holes, by whatever mechanism:

Heck, if you're makin' a list, you can add me to it. I witnessed most of the holes Don_G is referring to (not his first buff but all the others), and I have seen larger than calibre entrance hole MANY times. Not usually as big as the one's the NF's made, but bigger than calibre.

Cheers,
Canuck

Gosh, Canuck, that makes seven of us in the whole wide world to admit it.

Now someone must find that plug of hide somewhere in the animal on autopsy. That may give clues to the mechanism.

Or could that plug be so "smithereened" as to be impossible to find?

Count me in... though I thought it was common? My 257 wby alone will punch a 1" ent hole at times. ???

Walter says he had actually SEEN an entry hole his bullet made on a zebra that was at LEAST 4 times the diameter of the bullet - despite the bullet missing the zebra

When asked how, he said "don't ask quetions you don't have the intelligence to understand the answers for!"

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Walter says he had actually SEEN an entry hole his bullet made on a zebra that was at LEAST 4 times the diameter of the bullet - despite the bullet missing the zebra

When asked how, he said "don't ask quetions you don't have the intelligence to understand the answers for!"

Does Walter have any of these for sale?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RIP:
Gosh, Canuck, that makes seven of us in the whole wide world to admit it.

Now someone must find that plug of hide somewhere in the animal on autopsy. That may give clues to the mechanism.
QUOTE]

RIP

You know as long as we are discussing this with a bunch of rocket scientists. I'll just throw this little jewel of sonic dynamic fact in here.

Any object moving at or above the speed of sound creates a sonic wave in front and around it. These sonic shock waves create a hyper compressed boundary layer of air around the super sonic object.

Do you think that that compressed core of air might just on occasion be strong enough to cut a hole in a hide? Or perhaps it can create enough a suction or following effect if you will that is strong enough to clip some hide and muscle as the bullet enters the beast?

I don't know for sure but seems possible to me. As do a plethora of other possibilities. But to have never seen an entrance hole larger than caliber on game seems really odd. It is really pretty common.

I’ll bet Walter knows.


Jorge,

You are a Naval Aviator I read the Navy aero dynamic book a loooong time ago. Help me out here with this sonic dynamics stuff. The fastest I've ever been is about .88 Mach.

SureStrike: All I can tell you is your description of the sonic wave phenomenon is accurate. It seems perfectly logical to me that at high impact velocities, the entrance hole could be made bigger due to hydrostasis. Hell, all I sked for was to talk about penetration and now we find ourselves in the middle of a Doctoral Dissertation! jorge

Dan,

Nice picture contrasting the Soft NF's with the Rhino Solid Shank. All mushrooms look good.

Any comments on how you experienced their terminal effect on game, depth of penetration, size of wound channel and weight retention.

Just curius to know if the Rhino performs the same way in the northern hemisphere as over here.

Chris

I'm glad to see so many of you have observed the same phenomenon that I have, and that the discussion has returned to hunting.

Dan gave me permission to pass this onto you all.

Expanded diameter of sopme of the bullets in his test.

"Swift: .716" x .650" (biggest vs. smallest diameter of the mushroom)

North Fork 1: .743" x .692"

North Fork 2: .778" x .669"

The Swift and NF both expand uniformly (round), so it is a fair comaprison.

I doubt this is enough difference to account for all of the 1/3 increase in penetration, so suspect it was a combination of easier shot path and the heavier bullet (SD .320).

I might add that the NF will look about the same at much higher velocity while the other bullets often change character.

Thanks Dan for posting here.

Andy

465 H&H,

So then we have to figure out what the std. deviation is, and see what falls into that. But before that its the sum of squares and all that other stuff.

I am in a statistics class right now. I thought when I cam to AR I could get away from it. Please stop posting this stuff.

Chris,

So far I have only shot things with the Rhino over there, not over here. However, as I ran across a deal on some Rhino bullets, I will try them out a bit more. At present I do not have enough experience with them to offer a comment on wound channel size or terminal effect on game that would withstand cross-examination by Alf.

Below on the left is the Swift A-Frame, followed by 2 Nosler Partitions which look rather cheesy compared to the other bullets pictured in this thread. (Let the flaming begin... )

Sierrabravo45!

If you remember my post on sample size was a direct answer to 500grains question on how many bullet paths he would have to measure to make a valid comparison between bullets.

I well know your frustration with a college level stat class as I agonized over all of mine. If you get through your stat class with a B or better and use what you learn in real life situations, you will come to appreciate it's value. GOOD LUCK!

465H&H

surestrike,
Thanks for the input on the supersonic shockwave. Now to factor that in as part of the mechanism, along with the variation of rib shots versus rump shots and tissue factors resulting in variable tendencies toward supercaliber entry holes, in conjunction with the shock wave profiles generated by various bullets as they impact. Soon we shall have a Unified Field Theory of Bullet Penetration applicable to softs and solids.

Dan,

Looking at the pictures of the NF and Swift one can see that the NF mushrooms a bit wider and I think Andy pointed out the other aspect for the differential penetration ... "I doubt this is enough difference to account for all of the 1/3 increase in penetration, so suspect it was a combination of easier shot path and the heavier bullet (SD .320).

Both good bullets though. The mushroom of the Rhino bullet seems even bigger than the NF, and when all things are equal it will penetrate less as Mo/Xsa will vary. What we have observed is that the Rhino drops game quickly due to its large expansion when entering the heart - the 9.3 286 gr expanded to 21.5 mm or 2.3 times of original diameter in my wetpack tests.

Moral of the story, the deepest penetrator is not necessarily the most lethal.

Chris

Chris,

Here are some of the penetration results for comparison, all 286 gr. 9.3 x 62:


Barnes X - 30 in.
North Fork soft - 30 in.
Nosler Partition - 23 in.
Nosler ballistic tip - 5 in.
Rhino soft - 28 in.
Woodleigh soft - 20 in.

Reminder: There were not enough shots fired to produce statistically reliable data. Some bullets may have had an easier penetration path (i.e., lots of lung) and some may have had a more difficult path (i.e., bone, muscle).

Has anyone seen the advert for the Swift Scirocco II bullets in SAFARI magazine?

I just love it when I see something like this.

Bullets all lined up in a row, each had progressively mushroomed more than the one before it. Velocities range from around 1700 fps to over 3000 fps.

Anyone who has hunted long enough and shot enough animals would KNOW bullets don't always behave in this manner.

This advert must have been approved by one those we call "arm-chair" hunters

Dan, Many thanks for the penetration stats. Would have thought the Barnes-X would have penetrated much deeper as we generally see in wetpack tests - may be it encountred bone in its path. The Nosler bullet always loses its front core even on thin skinned game, and the thin petals that remain fold back so close to the shank in the first few inches and then progressing with a diameter hardly bigger than original diameter. This behaviour does not make it a bullet that one should choose for DG hunting when better ones are availble. I use my Nosler Partions now as practice rounds. The Ballistic tip seems dead in the water.

Back to the 2-inch NF entrance hole observation. It seems to be not normal to expect such rapid expansion for what a controlled expansion bullet is supposed to do. However, just when we think we have seen everything, then something jumps out of the cupbord.

What did you see with the Rhino ito entrance wound? Was the NF bullet the only one of all the bullets that created a huge entrance hole?

Chris

Here's my guesses as to the rapid expansion of the NF softs.

1) The lead in the nose cavity is is pure soft lead, or a very soft solder-like tin-lead alloy. This would very reliably give exactly the same behavior with every batch of bullets. That behavior would include very rapid expansion - every time. That is a useful characteristic for a soft to exhibit. This would make the NF soft useful for PG, leopard and lion. As anyone knows who has cast bullets, controlling the hardness of a lead alloy is tricky - the hardness changes rapidly with the added antimony, and changes hardness with thermal profile and age. Making them dead soft is a lot more repeatable.

2) The "controlled" part of the expansion comes from the shape of the cavity in the solid annealed copper alloy base. This would give not only the controlled expansion, but also the almost indestructible shank. This makes the softs both reliable and useful for Cape Buff in herd situations, as they are not as liable to exit as the Swifts.

I think this would give the bullet the characteristics I observed in Africa.

Here's what Mike publishes on his website.

quote:

Originally posted by truvelloshooter:

What did you see with the Rhino ito entrance wound? Was the NF bullet the only one of all the bullets that created a huge entrance hole?

It was someone else who reported a 2" entrance hole with a NF bullet. With NF softs, I have observed normal entrance holes. With GS Custom and Bridger FN solids I have observed larger than bore diameter entrance holes, but obviously these bullets did not expand rapidly, as they did not expand at all.

quote:

Would have thought the Barnes-X would have penetrated much deeper as we generally see in wetpack tests - may be it encountred bone in its path.

Probably not, but can't be sure. That is the behavior I expect from an X. The Barnes X opens to a mushroom similar to the size of the NF and Rhino. Here are the differences I see:


Barnes X - Sometimes does not open at all. Sometimes becomes unstable unless chosen light for caliber. Fouls barrels. Not very accurate. But usually works fine.

Rhino - Usually opens, but sometimes not (350 grain .375 on kudu broadside). OK accuracy but not great. That being said, I have laid in an ample supply of 9.3 and .375 Rhino bullets.

North Fork soft - Always opens (in my experience), excellent accuracy. The lack of fouling of this bullet and the excellent accuracy can probably be attributed at least in part to the use of small driving bands. As I develop new hunting loads, I am using North Fork softs. (And in .474 caliber, I have laid in a lifetime supply of the North Fork cup nose bullet.)

Penetration of all 3 seems to be about the same, but differences may show up after more extensive use. The exception to this is when the Barnes X becomes unstable and does weird things.

A lead meplat will always expand more rapidly than a HP. Which is one reason I prefer bonded bullets to a Barnes X.

The last three years I have shot many rock chucks with a 22-250 improved using HPs and Ballistic Tips. My freind shoots a 223 with 60 grain Hornady or 63 grain Sierra SP. Even though my 55 grain HP and Ballistic tip bullet is going 3700 fps and his SP 3000 fps, his bullet blows rock chucks in two at 150 yards and mine does not.

This is partly due to sustained frontal area of SP vs BT or HP. The chucks are big enough to absorb quite a large pressure wave from the HP and not get torn in two. FA combined w reasonable velocity rules!

PS Saeed oyu may want to anneal some of your Walterhog bullets and see if it helps keep the expanded bullet from fracturing.

Andy

quote:

Barnes X - Sometimes does not open at all. Sometimes becomes unstable unless chosen light for caliber. Fouls barrels. Not very accurate. But usually works fine.

I have been using the Barnes X for years, and found them to be very accurate, no fouling whatsoever - we molly coat them, just as we do with all bullets we hunt with.



300 grain Barnes X in our 375/404 rifle

Yes, a lot of people swear by Barnes X. And a lot of people swear at them. I am the group that has not found very good accuracy with them, and I have noticed excessive fouling with them in several rifles. For the purpose of the bullet test, it seemed a good idea to include them since they are a popular bullet for African hunting. And in the bullet test they did well - in the same club with Rhino, North Fork and Swift A-Frame. Nonetheless, there are important differences between bullets in that group which may lead some shooters to choose one over another.

Add me to the group who have never had good luck with Barnes X.

3-4 inch groups w my 450 Dalota while the NF, Swift, Woodleigh, and TB Speer were all clover leafs or better!

I prefer the larger frontal area of a bonded bullet to the penetraiton of a wadcutter like the X after its 4 X petals shear off, which they do in the 450 Dakota and Saeeds 375 x 404.



Pictured; 400, 450 and 500 grain .458 caliber Barnes X from 450 Dakota w 1-12 twist.

Buffalo are such a deep chested animal a tumbling wadcutter is still effective as Saeed has proven for many years.

Andy

I will be going to Tanzania next week to primarily hunt cape buffalo. Originally, I had planned to use the North Fork soft in my 416 Rem but for a short period of time they were unavailable due to a problem with the copper raw material. I worked up an accurate load with the Barnes 400 grain TSX bullet at 2400 fps. I was feeling pretty good about it until Mike Jines posted that one of his TSX bullets didn't open properly (even though it did the job) and others are now talking about stability after entry. I went back and loaded a few 370 NF softs for backup in case I don't like the way the Barnes acts on the first buffalo. I will also take the NF 370 grain solids for the second shot and a very few cup points for general principle. I will try to recover any bullets that don't exit and will post the results here in early November.

quote:

I prefer the larger frontal area of a bonded bullet to the penetraiton of a wadcutter like the X after its 4 X petals shear off, which they do in the 450 Dakota and Saeeds 375 x 404.

I am curious to know what the muzzle velocities were in your 450 Dakota for the respective bullet weights and the distance.

It seems you over-stretched the X-bullet - i.e. exceeeded its threshold strength. If it does not hit bone, it should actually keep all its petals. Downloading should solve the problem, if acceptable to you.

Chris

Truvelloshooter,

The velocity is 2,650 fps for 400 grain, 2,475 fps for 450 grain and 2,350 fps for 500 grain.

Many other bullets I tested held up to these velocities or higher without fracturing.

I like velocity so loading down is not an option for me.

Andy

.

First the earth cooled....jeez, ask a simple question....Really guys, it was (is) most enlightening. Bottom line is I think I can't go wrong with North Forks, A Frames or TSXs. It all depends on what my rifle likes best. Again thanks to all you "forty pound heads" for the dissertations. jorge

Your welcome jorge! I think Saeed put up the best points here,showing us that readily available bullets are super accurate and deadly.The rest show that they are standing on shaky legs.By the way Jorge,i think i know which ride you were on when you took that picture at Disneyland.You were on the golden nugget super loop coaster weren't you?

quote:

I prefer the larger frontal area of a bonded bullet to the penetraiton of a wadcutter like the X after its 4 X petals shear off

Andy,

What is it that you do not like about bullets that lose their petals? Weight loss and/or smaller diameter that reaches the vitals, etc? Have you ever seen or heard of the 4 petals veering off at high velocity at such an angle that they penetrate the heart as secondary projectiles?

Have you not observed in your hunting that the smaller Barnes-X (400 grainer), in its cylindrical form after it lost all its petals, becoming more devastating by virtue of its big flat meplat vis-a-vis the heavier NF bullet with its bigger and well-kept mushroom?

Chris

Chris,

My life experience has taught me that a large sustained frontal area (a bullet that does not sweep backwards when it expands like a badmitton birdie or a parachute) combined with high velocity will completely destroy the heart of the largest game animal, not just put a diameter or slightly larger hole through the heart!

I have shot alot of american bison with a 375 improved, with 300 grain Bitterroot, the original and still best bonded hunting bullet at 2,800 fps. It expands to one inch diameter with 95-98 percent weight retention, and Alf, it makes a much larger than diameter entry wound!

I've also used 250-275 gtain Bitterroots at up to 3,100 fps, and even more destruction.

I like velocity.

But I am something of a weirdo in that department as most African hunters are fairly conservative.

The Bitterroots are just indestructible, and are actually more reliable than most FMJ's. So I am spoiled by the best expanding bullets ever manufactured.

No way a Barnes X wadcutter at any velocity can match a good bonded expanding soft point.

Just my personal experience but one based on hundreds of large animals.

I do not like monometal Hollow Points.

What chance does one fragment of four have of hitting the heart, or large vessels above the heart?????

And would you not prefer to completely destroy the heart rather than put a small fragment size hole in it even if you won the lottery and actually hit it with one of those precious little X petals?

I'm just not an X guy, but God bless you, like our generous host Saeed, if you have had good luck with them.

Do me a favor and try a NF or Bitteroot instead.

Andy

Alf,

You said that it was not possible to have a larger than diameter entry wound.

You have been proven wrong by many of us here.

Yes, I think it is a good idea that you withdraw. You are wrong as usual.

You need to hunt more and read less.

Andy

.

ALF, you make sense because your objective is on finding a good bullet while others is on getting attention and making a show.That is why I don't get serious once I detect that.You and Saeed were the true winners here.All the other stuff was just smoke and mirrors.

We have some CSI types here, I believe?

If any of them wish to try to estimate the size of the entrance wound on the Nysassaland wildebeast in my picture above, I will send them the uncompressed digital photograph.

The individual hairs are visible, and surely somebody here can donate a few hairs off of that section of a hide.

I realize that this might not yield "scientific proof" by Alf's standards, but evidence that would hold up in a court of law should lend some weight to our claims of larger-than-caliber entrance wounds.

Canuck, do you think your Dad would let you take the next bison with your 416 Taylor? Do me a favor and ask him. I know you have a few NF bullets, do you have any 416 softs?