The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting African Big Game Hunting Are lever actions a good choice for a dangerous game rifle?Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Are lever actions a good choice for a dangerous game rifle? | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
sd The evidence has already been posted here and in other threads that under .300 SD bullets, including the 400 grain .458, do not provide acceptable penetration, except when conditions are just right. I have no interest in softs for thick skinned game, so I see no reason to compare apples and oranges. Perhaps you can now list all the buffalo shot with .458 400 grain softs or solids, the angle of entry for each, and the penetration achieved. Otherwise, we can go by the experience of so many African PH's: in .458 cal, at least 450 grains and preferably 500 grains, and at least 2150 fps. Else penetration suffers. [ 06-24-2002, 23:25: Message edited by: 500grains ] | |||
|
| one of us |
SD, I can tell you from experience, that is seeing Buffalo shot with the 400 gr. Barnes X bullets in 458 caliber that they DO NOT have the needed penitration on some ocassions....They will stop on the spine cold but probably break it and thats a big help, but you can't depend on it...they may or may not make it to the off side if you break the shoulder and they ain't worth a flip on a going away shot. I do believe that a 450 gr. Barnes X or solid, if it is a monolithic will compare to a 500 gr. standard bullet in penitration. A "suitable and reliable" Bufflao caliber must have a bullet of sufficient SD at 2100 FPS and that means a 400 gr. 40 cal or a 500 gr. 45 cal...Now that formula can change by going downscale in bullet weight 50 grs. with a monolithic as they are longer per weight...giving them a SD advantage and a boost in velocity. It can also be changed by lowering the bore diameter to say 9.3 or 375 with a 300 gr. which has a .300 or so SD bullet at an increased 2400 FPS. One has to keep everything in balance, and some here have a hard time understanding that 400 grs. is not necessiarly 400 grs. 400 grs can be a perfectly round ball and have almost no penitration at all, and be all but worthless on DG, as most muzzle laoders were BTW, if they had been satisfactory they would still be in use today other than by some who have chosen to use antique weapons, and that's fine as long as they understand that's what they are using. Fortunately real muzzle loading fans do understand that they are at a disadvantage and that's part of their lure to the weapons, same with bow hunters, they are making a statement that they have the where to fore to overcome the lack of range and killing power of there lesser arms with hunting skills. Apparantly some of the cowboy 45-70 LAF fans on this board seem to want us to accept their less than capable guns as perfectably acceptable for Buff and that's where the rub comes in..These guns are not, never will be, acceptable Buffalo rifles, but they can be used if one modifies their hunting methods to match the inferior caliber, much like I do when I hunt mule deer with my 25-35, it will kill deer if I modify my hunting methods to fit the caliber. Todd, It is a one sided arguement IMHO....how else could I have answered it ![[Confused]](images/icons/confused.gif){kind=icon} ![[Razz]](images/icons/tongue.gif){kind=icon} | |||
|
| One of Us |
Todd, I answered you in the other thread. Go look at the answer. As an 'engineer' you should know that the physics of armor penetration are completely different from the physics of penetrating big bags of water (game animals). | |||
|
| one of us |
I dont know if it was george s or 500 grns, you wanted to know where the proof was .450 martini killed DG. Selous had this to say when in africa trying to make a liveing as an elephant hunter. "Since the advent of the .450 bore Martini breech-loading rifle, a great toll has been taken on all game" One must travel for days at times to find elephant or even lesser game like ... | |||
|
| one of us |
OK boys , no one mentioned 400 gr round balls here ![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon} nor X bullets , I was thinking of a 400 gr 45 caliber SOLID . And not really in a 45/70 either , but maybe a 400 gr solid at about 2400 fps ,in the .458 or a .45/110 lever like one fellow talked of building up......I know Ray has said he prefers mostly solids for shooting buff , but it seems to me there are quite a few hunters using heavy softs for the same critters ; 300 gr .375s , 400 gr .416 s and 500 gr .45 s . It is too much for my feeble mind to accept that penetration will be adequate with those softs and completely lacking with a 400 gr 45 caliber SOLID . A .416 soft will at least flatten out to .45 caliber at the first tough resistence it hits , making it at that point the equal of a 400 gr .45 caliber for penetration ...... I guess what I'm trying to get at is sectional density is only one component of the penetration equation . Bullet construction and velocity are going to play just as big a part or more...........it seems to me pretty simplistic to say with a s.d. of .300 to kill a buff you are AOK , and a 400 gr solid of slightly larger diameter will fail , when people are thumping them with 300 gr .375 and 400 gr .416 SOFTS . Which do you suppose would penetrate the best , a 400 gr solid out of an original .404 at around 2100 fps , or a 400 gr SOLID out of a .45/110 lever at 2400 fps ?? | |||
|
| one of us |
I will be clear, I don't prefer a soft for buff and I have seen 400 gr. solids fall short when compared to 500 gr. solids and 450 gr. solids..just so noone misunderstands me... At any rate this stuff is making me crazy and it doesn't even make a lot of since, why would anyone want to use the wrong tool for a job in the first place, what are you trying to prove...anyway have at it, it makes little difference in the whole scheme of things since none of us will get out of this world alive anyway and maybe you will speed up the process a little with your foolishness. who knows | |||
|
| one of us |
The 420 grain hardcast have been chronographed at 2425 fps from the 450/110 and 430 hardcast has been timed at 2400 fps. It is my feeling that due to COAL limitations (2.4 inch case and 2.88 COAL) this cartridge is probably at its best with a 450 grain bullet. A 420 grain slug bottoms out at the top of the shoulder and a 460 grainer extends about 1/16 inch below the bottom of the shoulder. 500 grian would probably work but they will eat up case capacity. In my estimation if you can get 2400 fps with 430 grains then 2200-2300 is very possible with 450-460 grain bullets. This duplicates the ballistics that JJHack says are optimum in a .458 caliber rifle. Some bullets that come to mind as ideal (crimp groove in proper location) are Beartooth's 450 grain LBT and Cast Performance's 460 grain WFN. Both are hardcast at 21 Brinnel and have a reputation for being very tough. Another is Alaska Bullet Works 450 grain bonded core flat nose with a hardened bonded core bonded to a heavy copper jacket. | |||
|
| <500 AHR> |
500grains, All you said was that most guys handload the 505 Gibbs and 500 Jeffery with 570 and 600 grain pills. That fact is that these two calibers made their reputation with 525 and 535 grain slugs respectively. I would like you to provide factual evidence that with these factory loads these two cartridges to not provide adequate performance on DG. I would also like you to provide proof that the 8 and 4 bores did not perform well as you contend. For all those that did not know this the 8 and 4 bore standard conical slugs have section densities of .24 - .25! So according to 500grains they are only suitable for deer and rabbit. Penetrating water or steel has little difference other than water is less resistant to penetration ie you will get more penetration in water than steel. Face it 500grains your SD argument is full of holes. Todd E | ||
|
| <The Captain> |
Well, I can't stand any more. GeorgeS, you're apparently well educated. I've noticed your posts. Grammatically correct. Good sentence structure. I'm impressed. However, the rest of you, indeed need a bit of tutoring in the proper use of the English language. Please pay attention to your punctuation, spelling, and sentence structure. Your thoughts will be given a great deal more weight if you express yourself in a grammatically correct way. Let me give you a few examples: Take the word "you're". This word indicates that "you are" something. i.e: you're a punk, you're a jerk, you're a wonderful person. On the other hand, take the word, "your". This word indicates ownership. i.e: your boat, your gun, etc. Trust me, I take handwritten statements for a living. Use the proper grammatically correct English. You will sound more intelligent. It is very difficult to read some of these posts because there is no punctuation. Make my life easier, please. Use proper punctuation, spelling, and sentence structure. Now, back to the discussions. Now, back to the discussions. | ||
|
| one of us |
Todd, If you can shoot through 6 inches of water say with a certain bullet and you shoot a large water tank full of water(10ft across) you will still get around 6 " of penetration. if you have a bullet that can penetrate say 2" of armour and you shoot a 12" thick piece of armour you will not get 2" of penetration. You may instead get the bullet coming back at you with great authority and little damage to the steel at all! It has totally different qualities to penetrate in my experience. Not too mention the ability of steel to destroy the projectile, waste energy as it is deformed, changing a comparison somewhat. Also you punch out a large peice of the metal which can either help or hinder further penetration into the next peice,or cause slippage. Some rounds are designed to tumble badly in a liquid medium like the .223 SS 109 FMJ and will penetrate poorly alongside the Nato 7.62. However they will defeat light armour far and beyond the 7.62. Sectional density is not so important with discarding sabots or TC since they are using very hard substances and very high velocities which I was taught can have a shattering effect on a peice of hard steel, and nothing to do with what we consider regular penetration afterwards. Sorry this is not the opinion of an engineer(no doubt you can all guess ![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif){kind=icon} ) but what a dumb grunt gets taught.One thing I do know Todd is that your comments are 'a little broad', a good technique for fast arguments in real life to snowball people, but losing you votes in the written word where shouting down is a lot less effective.Also most of the people here have been through the 'change the dumb world stage' in the earlier years. If you are an engineer talk a cold shower and stab us with some cold logic instead of getting so worked up. And take a digital camera next time you go hunting ![[Wink]](images/icons/wink.gif){kind=icon} Karl. [ 06-25-2002, 16:22: Message edited by: Karl ] | |||
|
| One of Us |
quote:The 500 and 505 with light bullets (525 and 535 grains) earned their reputation for transmitting shock to an animal, not for deep penetration. In modern times the penetration problem has been corrected by switching to 570 and 600 grain bullets. Now you have shown us that you understand neither sectional density nor the physics of penetration of armor as opposed to in water bags. It is not my duty to serve as your tutor. If you would take the time to speak with someone who has worked with the 4 bore and 8 bore, you would learn of their abysmal penetration abilities. Sure they transmit shock, but you better get a full broadside shot and not hit the shoulder. Art Alphin devised a penetration index. The 4 bore has the same penetration index as a 22 hornet. | |||
|
| <Rusty> |
OK, no dangerous game phots with a Marlin 45/70? How about big game? As far as penetration goes, I'd opt for a 400 grain .416 or a .408 over a .458 any day! You have to load that .458 45/70 up to brutal max bolt action pressures, before it will get the job done. Remember, we are dealing with a hold over black powder cartridge. Still waiting for pictures. Looks like a lot can talk the talk, but so far no one walks the walk, Pilgrims! We band of brothers! | ||
|
| <Dice2> |
Whooooooooaaaa Captain! This is NOT A DAMN CLASS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!!! Wheather you read my posts, which may or may not be correct to your or anybody elses standards, I could care less. It is however sir a place to discuss amoung various hunters and gunlovers, Africa and hunting its game. Now weather I dot my i or cross my t hasn't a thing to do with the heart of the subject matter. Class is dismissed ![[Roll Eyes]](images/icons/rolleyes.gif){kind=icon} | ||
|
| <Dice2> |
OK OK, I have read and heard just about all the readeric concerning the 45/70 and the Triple 4 Marlin in the past several years. First off somebody thought of making the Guide Gun! A short barrel gun with porting, shooting a big slug to use on the bears up north. A very impractical weapon in my opinion. Use that gun without earplugs in your ears and you will never hear the words "hello" again. So best keep plugs in your ears while in the words hey......very impractical. The porting issue and muzzle jump without porting on the Marlin gun is another issue. I own 3 Marlin rifles and yes one must handload them up quite a bit to be able to get the penetration out of the bullet. The muzzle jump is a bunch! I don't favor it as any type of rifle I would want personally as a Cape Buffalo gun. I do love my lever actions, but I fill more comes into play hear on a Dangerous Game Rifle than just penetration of a bullet. I don't pretend to be able to mix figures with an Engineer or Dice words with a Professor of an English class. I do know the LIMITATIONS of the 45/70 and the Triple 4 Marlin. Shooting a bison is not a Cape Buffalo, smacking a 400 pound Russian Boar is not a hippo. I have shot the hard cast bullets into blocks of clay etc. and Garrets loads are impressive, but that still does not constitute the things that a dangerous game rifle must have, in order to meet certain criteria necessary for all situations in the field. This Ozark Country Boy can run his Lincoln on the same track as the formula 1 big boys, but it sure doesn't make it a Ferrari by any means gentlemen. | ||
|
| one of us |
quote:No, Dice, class is not dismissed. Teacher done screwed up, and is gonna get called on it. See comments in non-bold above. I, too, am interested in the subject of communication. But it's a personal problem, and I don't initiate discussions of it on a shooting thread. Since it has been brought up, however, I will note that MY interest in communication has mainly to do with communicating, not with telling other people that their language is fucked up, even though I happen to be capable of it. Next. [ 06-25-2002, 19:30: Message edited by: Recono ] | |||
|
| one of us |
BTW, Captain, not everyone on the web site is as cantankerous as I, and, further, I really mean nothing personal by my attack on your words. I, too, have a thing about "communication," as you can see. \ Welcome to a great web site! Again, most posters here are friendlier than I. Even I am not so bad once I get my coffee. | |||
|
| Moderator |
quote:Todd, I didn't have a digital camera on my first two safaris, either. I scanned the prints onto my PC. You can get your photos scanned onto a CD or floppy at Kinko's. You can then e-mail to me or anyone else willing to post them onto a web hosting site. Then we can all see the many buffaloes you shot; your credibility will increase exponentially. George | |||
|
| one of us |
HI, CAPTAIN, that must be BRASS, I have great experience with those kind of people. Most, not all, but most are very arrogant and hide behind their title.I have been dealing with them for 15 years and found on the job, it is not what you know, but who you b--w.I do not care for brass they do not know anything that is really going on the front line,but in there little minds they think they do.This is the only area in my life that makes me sick as if people could see how these people act they would surely want to give them a beating with out any mercy.I am not surprise to see one of them correcting everyone on how they should spell,I have done more work in one day then 99% of them do in a year. And most the time they just look to see how they can mess with your job or family. They are worse than the gang bangers and the cons.When I have confronted them man to man they run to there buddy, I mean next in the chain of command and cry insubordination like the snivelling cowards they are.I have no love for them. Kev | |||
|
| <500 AHR> |
500grains, Please provide references for your statements. These statements of themselves are mere speculation on your part and/or opinion. Karl, Your analogy is fair, but you misunderstand the physical world. These problems are very complex and it is well beyond the scope this thread to attempt to explain them here. GeorgeS, It is your credibility with those that have hunted that is in jeopardy not mine. I assure of that. You are a hick as you can recognize nothing other than your own narrow views. I would post these pictures if they were available. Sadly they are not. Draw your own conclusions. | ||
|
| One of Us |
quote:I love that quote. | |||
|
| Moderator |
quote:I don't think I have much of a credibility problem here. After a bit of back-and-forth, I can also recognize other people's views as either valid or specious. It's obvious you don't have any proof of your exploits with Cape buffalo. I suppose the film was no good, or the light was bad, or the film developing place burnt down, the PH never sent you copies, your ex destroyed them, or your dog ate them. Or maybe they only happened in your dreams. It's good that the fact you are a poseur who is full of shit has been revealed to everyone here. Perhaps now, you'll spare us any further 'expertise' on things you know nothing about! George [ 06-25-2002, 21:04: Message edited by: GeorgeS ] | |||
|
| <Harald> |
Karl, for a "dumb grunt" you have a keen mind for straight facts about armor penetration. Well said. Your reference to bullets rebounding with "great authority" recalls personal experiences! 500grains, I made a remark about sectional density on the other thread that I will expound on here. Bullet mass and presented area certainly have a lot to do with penetration in any context, but the sectional density, as calculated, is a useless index. To compare with aerodynamics, the ballistic coefficient of a bullet will vary considerably depending on whether its a spire point or a blunt cylinder. Both may have the same SD, but the drag will differ a lot. Same thing with SD. There is more to the story. Also the actual expanded area and mass will change after impact for anything but a solid. The terminology is however not improper; mass per unit area can be expressed as sectional density. There are many kinds of densities, just as there are many kinds of "specific" quantities (i.e., quantities per unit mass, e.g., specific heat, etc.). Hope I got all my punctuation correct! | ||
|
| one of us |
Way to go skip hit'em with that brutal ruler called English Class, or was it called Grammar class in you day? | |||
|
| <Dice2> |
Reconno, would you by chance have a brother on the internet called "IronHorse"? Just kidding I know you don't, but he is one helluva cantankerous soul when you get him pissed. Not to meantion his sidekick "Latigo" a real ball of fire when it comes to dishing out what fors and such. Yall have a great day! Just rememeber to use those lever actions for what they were meant for, black bears, hogs and whitetail deer...Amen! | ||
|
| One of Us |
Harald, Thanks for your comment. True that expansion affects SD. But lower SD bullets are affected more by the expansion than higher SD bullets, all else being equal. Of course there are a myriad of variables that affect penetration. The best we can do is develop rules of thumb and field experience. | |||
|
| <Harald> |
500grains, I hope I don't come off as being too remonstrative. In a perfect world SD would be on the right track because as you suggest the bullet would erode like a rod and longer bullets would have more mass and the same expanded diameter and rate of expansion as shorter bullets. In some well made bonded core bullets it really works out about that way. For the general run of bullets in different brands and even for different weights of the same style in a single make it just doesn't hold true. Since even the best modeling techniques come down unfortunately to the same kinds of generalizations in many cases, I think testing will remain the clearest measure of performance for some time. | ||
|
| <500 AHR> |
GeorgeS, You got me. I haven't even ever shot a gun. You are such an insecure little man. I have never been divorced so I assure you my ex did not destroy then. Actually, if they are still around they are in a box someplace in the basement. I am sure as hell not wasting money to prove to an individual like you that I have shot something. Even if I went to the trouble you would declare them facts, or more accurately you would probably say I was posting pictures of your buffalo hunts. I don't recall seeing any pictures of your hunts only a separated bullet jacket that was supposedly a .475" 500 grain Woodleigh. By the way George, you still have not explained how you managed to shoot all those rounds into that one buffalo, using two different rifles, all while that buffalo charging you from short range! I am truly dying to hear how that all happened. Harald, You explanation of armor penetration is disgustingly simplistic. If you are what you say you are you cannot dispute this statement. While I admit to generalizing I was specific compared to your statements. There is only one DENSITY. Density is a quantitative value per unit volume, period. Facts are facts. 500grains, STILL NO FACTS! I am beginning to believe that you cannot produce any facts to support you statements. So after your last post I see you agree with me that section density is a bogus metric. At least Harald said that and you seem to agree with Harald. Todd E [ 06-26-2002, 07:13: Message edited by: Todd E ] | ||
|
| one of us |
OH GEEZE! Todd E is only 25 years old, and a BS engineer? Keeps his Red Ryder BB gun in a box in the basement? And calls himself an LEO because he fantasizes about enforcing the laws of nature? He wants to play like a god? Consider the true nature of "sectional density": it is a unit-less ratio, defined by arbitrary convention, with no actual physical reality, but it is directly proportional to a physical reality that does have units, so it is a valid concept. PERIOD. There is more than one kind of density, Todd E, besides that between your ears. Is Todd E really a LAF lad? He obviously knows nothing about African big game hunting. I thought this was the "African Big Game Hunting Forum." What's with all this Lever Action Fever stuff? LAF LAF LAF ... tiresome. I am mooning you Todd E. Bite me! Or kiss ol' spot. | |||
|
| one of us |
Todd, I made the simplistic comments about AP  All harald said was I had a sharp eye for my facts.As to calling others 'insecure little men',you are the one who keeps checking himself on the popularity meter buddy."I bet there are more people on my side now than yours george"etc etc Karl. | |||
|
| one of us |
quote:500 is the one making the connection between the 45-70 and 22/24 bores, not me. He offered that they all have killed DG, so I simply called him on it. After all, it must be fact that the 22 Hornet has taken it's share of DG. I've hunted Bears. But I'm sure this won't qualify enough for you, but thats fine, I'm not the one making a big case about hunting such, as you have about hunting African game. BTW this is not about me hunting anything, it was about Bus Pilot asking if the 444 Marlin was suitable for taking DG. And it appears they're not hunting them, but culling them, of which lesser rounds have been used. I've read it here reently, if I remember right. And these folks didn't have any Game Dept issue rifles, but chosen to use whatever they used, and they were'nt using a 470 Capstick. Just so were all on the same page... its the bulletthat kills, not the firearm design, nor the cartridge case. Tell me I'm wrong, please! ~~~Suluuq [ 06-26-2002, 10:51: Message edited by: Rusty Gunn ] | |||
|
| one of us |
HI, I understand this is a African Big Game hunting forum, I think everyone does. I understand that the bolt action is the rifle that would work the best, everyone does.I do not understand why so many people have a problem with the thought of a lever action being able to drop any game around?.The lever action will work within its range as good as any.If a bullet of the same weight is being push to the same fps is there any differents NO.The problem is in many peoples minds is only bolt actions are the only action that is right and any other is wrong, so maybe this should be called BOLT ACTION AFRICAN BIG GAME HUNTING. Kev | |||
|
| One of Us |
Rusty, Will you acknowledge that a client does not always get a perfect shot, or things get fouled up, and the bullet may have to do more than just slip in between 2 ribs on a standing broadside shot? | |||
|
| Moderator |
quote:Todd E, One thing I've NEVER been called is insecure. Your pitiful statements and excuses notwithstanding, it's obvious you have never hunted Cape buffalo. If you have, mail me photos of you with each of your buffaloes; I will scan them, mail them back, AND reimburse you for the postage! How's that?! It's time to put up or shut up! Plenty of people here have seen my Tanzania buffalo; it's even on the outfitter's website. There are three people on this forum who know me personally (POP, Richard Powell, and Fernando), and can confirm that it is me in the photos. A peek at my profile will show a photo of me with my Tanzania buff.I don't know where you read that my buff was charging; I certainly never said it. However, I will state that time seems to slow down when a person is acting under stress (the phenomenon is called "tachypsychia"). The total time of my battle with the buffalo was under 30 seconds, but it seemed like much longer. If you can't shoot three rounds, change weapons, shoot three more rounds, reload and shoot twice more, all within 30 seconds, you have no business hunting buffalo. (It must have been hilarious to watch, though.) Kev, No one is stating that a 500gr. bullet traveling at 2100fps behaves any differently when fired from one type of action or another. However, there is a healthy dose of skepticism as to whether a lever-action repeater like a Win. 86 or Marlin 1895 can do just that without wrecking the gun under Africa conditions. I know there is a .450-110DRC in the works, but as I advised over at MT, you'd better wait until the finished product becomes available before using it as an example. Suluuq, Name names! Who posted that they were culling with lesser rounds, and did they recommend them for a client hunting dangerous game or did they lay out very specific conditions? Use the search feature on this forum, and tell me what you find. You say hunted bears. Which bears? Polar bears, brown bears, grizzly bears, black bears? Did you kill any? Do you have any photos you could share with us? You make broad and definitive statements about what will work on dangerous game, specifically Cape buffalo and elephant, yet you've never hunted them. You may, or may not have hunted dangerous bears, but we don't know what with, whether you were successful, or even if you're telling the truth. BTW, it's not the bullet that kills. If it were, you could fire it at any velocity and achieve the same results. What your line should be is: "It's a proper bullet placed properly, propelled at a velocity sufficient to reach the vitals, and disrupt enough tissue to cause a quick death, that kills." Since velocity is a function of case design and pressure, the action used must be capable of handling those pressures. George [ 06-26-2002, 20:25: Message edited by: GeorgeS ] | |||
|
| <allen day> |
Hookt on foniks reely wurkt 4 me!!!!!!!! AD | ||
|
| one of us |
If I have Harald's explanation correct of the original formula used for that penetration index, it is: code:If that is right, and I worked this out right, here is a simplified formula:Penetration Index = P = 808 d^4 v^2 w^2 Where P is penetration index d is diameter in inches v is velocity in feet/second w is weight in grains If this is a correct interpretation and manipulation, that would show that bullet diameter is proportional to penetration, and much more significant than velocity or weight. [ 06-26-2002, 20:37: Message edited by: ScottB ] | |||
|
| <Harald> |
Todd E, Personal disputes are distasteful, but this has become absurd. I don�t know what "disgustingly simplistic" explanation of armor penetration to which you refer since I have made none here. So, no matter what I am, I can easily dispute that statement. Here is what youstated: "Penetrating water or steel has little difference other than water is less resistant to penetration ie you will get more penetration in water than steel." This statement displays an ignorance of penetration mechanics so profound that it makes me wonder at how you can be so defiant and arrogant to GeorgeS, Karl and others, let alone accuse me of being simplistic in my understanding and question whether I am really a professional in the terminal ballistics field. I really don�t think my own credibility is in doubt here. Bullets behave in water completely differently than against armors. There are few similarities to be found. I would have thought that common sense alone would have suggested this understanding, considering that water is a fluid and metal armor is a solid. The mechanical properties, as any engineer should know, are totally different between rigid solids and fluids, as are the mechanics of their dynamics. If you really are an engineer, as you claim, then you will readily acknowledge this to be true. Even a EE or IE would know this. Heck, most uneducated people would know better or at least suspect this to be true. As far as density is concerned, you are mistaken. In the penetration mechanics world we speak of energy density and areal density quite often. These are not colloquial. Energy density is a concept used by other branches of physics and engineering as well including, fusion confinement and thermal sciences. What you term "density" is properly speaking the mass density, meaning mass per unit volume, but that is not the only proper scientific or engineering term that is a density and not all are expressed in terms of volume, as I have indicated some are expressed in terms of unit area. Most good engineering texts will make the point of referring to "density" as the mass density in order to avoid confusion. ScottB, Please don�t associate my name with that formula. ![[Eek!]](images/icons/shocked.gif){kind=icon} I doubt if any actual test data went into the formulation of this equation any more than it did for the OGW, TKO, BKO or a hundred-odd others. The day that somebody actually performs a parametric analysis of the penetration mechanics of non-deforming solids to derive the drag functions for different shapes I will be a happy man. A proper parametric analysis and Buckingham Pi method will reveal which relations are coupled and which are independent. If I had the resources I would undertake this. I may be able to find something in the fluid dynamics literature that can be adapted, but usually the velocity regime is much too low.[ 06-26-2002, 21:52: Message edited by: Harald ] | ||
|
| one of us |
No problem Harald, I understood you were just revealing the source, not advocating it. Can you look at my simplified formula and see if it was done correctly? If so, that means all you have to do is use a larger caliber for more penetration, and leave velocity and bullet weight alone. Does not make sense to me, but then agian, I don't cipher real well either One thing about your other statement, I have read somewhere that at 2600fps, biullets treat solids as liquids. I did not completely understand that, but I assume it had something to do with the different classes of waves created by releasing kinetic energy; certain ones travel through liquids, certain ones don't. Much is used in the deformation of the bullet itself, because that energy does not travel into the body of the target. Any comments are appreciated. I love formulas. I have several that prove that I am really an excellent shot, but the physics will not allow me to hit the target | |||
|
| one of us |
Just a few observations Sectional Density is THE premier criteria when shooting dangerous game, followed by 2100 FPS minimum velocity IMO.....It is a direct link to penitration, tiz important, particularly during such things as charges. Lead: hard cast are not as indistructable as steel jacketed bullets..even steel jacket bullets bend and break form time to time. What say ye LAF fans....I would be concerned that a lead bullet would splinter if hard and wad up if to soft..I have observed this in lesser calibers and animals? These listed LAF velocities are quite high and I find them suspect, but I will accept that if they are chronographed properly then they may in fact, be a reasonable Buffalo rifle, providing the bullets will break a shoulder and reach the offside in one piece and penitrate a buffalo lenthwise even if the hip socket is encountered..or if used much like a bow or muzzle loader with the first bullet place properly at close range, in which case a 30-30 would probably work... Penitration in steel relates directly to velocity..A 220 Swift will out penitrate a 458 Win in steel...this point has no substance in this thread... Capton, pleze take yo English nowledge and chunk it out da door, we doesn't need no graden..havn't got time or the where to fore to deal with it. Carry on blokes!! | |||
|
| One of Us |
quote:No, I did not say that. Please review. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting African Big Game Hunting Are lever actions a good choice for a dangerous game rifle?
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
| View $GS_USERNAME's Public Profile |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Buddies |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Ignore List |
| Invite $GS_USERNAME to a Private Topic |
| View Recent Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
| Notify me of New Posts by $GS_USERNAME |