Assume the following - using a .458 WM or Lott and are hunting buff and elephant - in a 500 grain bullet - all the various solids "equal"? There is the Trophy Bonded Sledgehammer, the Barnes Banded, Nosler Flat nose, Woodleighs. Is there any real difference in them?

No difference

no difference ... i refer to effect on the animal and performance on the bullett , i am not talking aboput if they will "fly" the same from your rifle ...there may be differences here but as afar as effectiveness ...no difference.

there will be a lot of opinions on this post ...lets make sure not to confuse bullet placement with bullet performance.

as long as the muzzle velocity is the same and the grains are the same , all perform much like each other ...

sometimes we complicate these matters because we have more time thinking about hunting than actually hunting !!!

If there is, I doubt if it is enough for you or the elephant to notice it.

465H&H

let me post a different opinion! There is a huge difference between solids. Some will brad, some will bend, and the meplat shape has a lot to do with their action in the animal.

Many of the round nose bullets veer off course, and miss the intended vital organ one wants, some shapes will pennetrate deeper than others. Some are not suitable for use in double rifles, but work fine in a single barreled rifle. Gentlemen, it would take a book to tell the differences, and just like any type bullet, some are good,some are better, and some are worthless!

I will say, if the bullet get to where it is aimed, intact, then it will kill, but make no mistake all solids are not created equally!

....................

There have been a lot of studies/information posted here and elsewhere to the effect that flat nosed solids (large meplat) penetrate deeper due to cavitation effects.

quote:

There is the Trophy Bonded Sledgehammer, the Barnes Banded, Nosler Flat nose, Woodleighs. Is there any real difference in them?

MAC D i agree with you , i was answering just to the names mentioned .....there are indeed a lot of inferior solids

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:
let me post a different opinion! There is a huge difference between solids. Some will brad, some will bend, and the meplat shape has a lot to do with their action in the animal.

Many of the round nose bullets veer off course, and miss the intended vital organ one wants, some shapes will pennetrate deeper than others. Some are not suitable for use in double rifles, but work fine in a single barreled rifle. Gentlemen, it would take a book to tell the differences, and just like any type bullet, some are good,some are better, and some are worthless!

I will say, if the bullet get to where it is aimed, intact, then it will kill, but make no mistake all solids are not created equally!

....................

Mac!

Can you give us one or two verivied instances of a RN steel jacketed solids going off course?

465H&H

/

quote:

We take the same two bullets and fire each into a huge slab of steak

T-bone, porterhouse,filet,N.Y.Strip????why shoot up good steak? No difference....

465 and Dogcat,

My PH, Myles McCallum, the quiet half of Charlton-McCallum, has cetainly seen alot of elephant and buffalo killed. Plus he shoots Woody FMJ's in his 416 Rigby.

He told me he did not care for the TB Sledge Hammer as they did tend to bend. Given their relatively light weight bronze ogive and heavier bonded lead base, that is not surprising.

I have one of his 416s Woodys recovered from my buffalo and it is worn smooth on one side and bent slightly.

He shot an elephant off his tracker once in the ear and the FMJ turned inside out but killed the elephant.

I blamed the rifling twist more than the bullet.

There is certainly less variation among the various monos and FMJ's than between soft points.

Andy

No one want to take a chance an answer ALF's question? I'll take a stab at it although I sure don't claim to be a compendium of knowledge on cavitation.

1. Both will cavitate in water but the cavitation will be more pronounced with the FN solid.

2. Neither will cavitate in meat as cavitation does not occur in solids. (Bet we get a different answer from 500 grains.)

4. No

465H&H

I totally agree with MacD37 ..... he summed it up perfectly ........

If cavitation does not occur in meat (which is 70% water), then why is the permanent wound channel from an FN solid larger than the diameter of the bullet?

I have a question...

Who determined that meat or humans or whatever are 70% water?? I've heard this since I was a kid and I don't really follow.

My scale says I'm 52.5% water and I really don't feel that hydrated much less 70%.

/

Alf,

Someone needs to volunteer to be freeze-dried to settle the percentage question.

Any recommendations?

Rumor has it that Walt Disney already has been. Wonder if they'd let us at him?

quote:

Yet if we shoot, prod, poke the above into water once the bullet, arrow, spear knife has passed through the water there is no cavity,

Hi
I totally agree with Alf. he knows what he is talking about the docotors are very good on killing according to the reasercher in swedish health organisation. each year more people are killed by doctors than by road accidents
regards
YES

/

/

quote:

When last did you chew on your glass of water

I have not chewed on water for a while, the brain freeze is not pleasant but some do.........

hi Alf
nearly all of my near relatives are phsicians and when thay are citical to my hunting i show them those statistics . average physician can be good för a little town slaughter before reaching retirement age . regards
yes

ALF!

If you shoot a solid bullet into soft clay, a bar of soap or balistic gelatin (solids by your definition) they will leave a permanent wound cavity much larger than bullet diameter. In fact the higher the water content of balistic gelatin the larger the wound cavity. That is why it is critical to keep water content at the same %. WHY?

I don't see a reason for treating a solid (bullet) as water when impacting a soft solids. So if we shoot a soft solid (meat tissue) with a solid bullet we are actually shooting it with water?


465H&H

/

It is futile to compare the media that is used to stop a bullet. The only media that reacts like live tissue is live tissue and that is the only media worth taking note of. The value of using test media such as water, lies in comparing how bullets react. How deep do they go, how much do they break, do they keep going straight? We have learned that, if a bullet reacts in a certain way in water and another way in building material, it is likely to behave in a certain way in live tissue. Some test media are closer to reality than others. One can go only so far on the range and in test media. After that it is a-hunting we have to go.

I agree with Gerard.

From my 2005 hunt.

450gr North Fork TC-FN vs. 465gr TCCI/A-Square RN

450 Dakota Penetration in:

SOLID (wood)
39.3 inches vs.50.6 inches

WATER
126 inches vs. 49.6 inches average

ELEPHANT
60-64 inches vs. 32-34 inches

Andy

1. RN & FN into water, which will cavitate?

Both will cavitate, temporarily, with the FN a larger cavity that soon collapses with the passing projectile.

2. RN & FN into huge slab of steak?

Both will cavitate, temporarily AND permanently, with the FN leaving a slightly!!! larger cross sectioned permanent cavity and inducing a slightly larger temporary cavity. The temporary cavity having no more a lasting effect than a blow by a fist or hammer at best.

Cavitation implys straight line penetration if it contributes to the bullet's translational stability. In specific, absolute terms, the FN retains more of it's stability through the mechanisms of shoulder stabilization, center of mass proximity to center of form and the reduction of side interference due to vapor cavitation. The FN will generally penetrate straighter (in slight and absolute terms!!!)

The remarkable attribute of flat nose solids is that you get better wound channel AND deeper pentration, all with no downside, so long as your rifle feeds them flawlessly.

So I firmly believe that a proper driving band flat nose solid is the superior solid.

But then the old standby steel jacketed Woodleigh round nose solids do their job well.

JPK

Both RN steel jacketed and FN mono-metal solids have advantages and disadvantages.

FN mono advantages
1. Better wound channels
2. Better penetration
3. Relatively cheep to manufacture

FN disadvantages
1. Feeding problems in some magazine rifles.
2. Not available in factory ammo. Feeding problems preclude major ammo manufacturers from using them.
3. More problems with bending in the heavier weight for caliber bullets
4. May not stabilize in slower twist rifles

RN steel jacketed solids advantages
1. Available in factory ammo
2. Shorter length makes them more useful in more calibers (i.e. 458 Win.)
3. Feed well in most rifles
4. Still adequate penetration in good loads
5. Most factory rifles have twist rates designed for their length

RN disadvantages
1. very expensive in some brands
2. Steel jackets can be hard on barrels (esp. double rifles)
3. RN pushes rather than cuts through tissues (i.e. less blood loss, vein and artery cutting)


OK what have I missed?

The better solid would be a combination of the two. A FN mono-solid with a tungsten nose insert to provide an indestructible cutting edge and give the bullet a shorter length and move the center of gravity forward of the bullets midpoint creating a dart effect(better stability).

465H&H

465,

You have missed only one thing.

A truncated cone Flat Nose Woodleigh.

Andy

"3. Relatively cheep to manufacture"

Depends on how well they're made...usually the most expensive to manufacture not the cheapest.

"1. Feeding problems in some magazine rifles."

Mr. Geometry says More likely a rifle problem...but no doubt someone has some rifle somewhere that doesn't like a particular FN.

quote:

FN disadvantages
1. Feeding problems in some magazine rifles.
2. Not available in factory ammo. Feeding problems preclude major ammo manufacturers from using them.
3. More problems with bending in the heavier weight for caliber bullets
4. May not stabilize in slower twist rifles

1. I have repaired my share of rifles that would not feed all manner of bullet styles. If a rifle will not feed a properly designed FN, sooner or later it will hang up with RN as well, and vice versa.

2. The non availability in factory ammo is probably a cost factor as well as the fact that ammo manufacturers like to play it safe. Call it tradition, customer demand, whatever. Any manufacturer who wishes to do an objective test will find that feeding is not a factor. For the ammo manufacturer to try and tell a customer that his perception is wrong, is unheard of. Right or wrong, give them what they ask for, is the easy way to sell things, not so?


3. Bending occurs when a bullet that is too long for the twist is used and it is therefore a selection problem, not a bullet problem. When the correct bullet is used, bending does not occur. A similar wrong choice in any other style of bullet or construction will result in a similar failure.

4. Same as above. Make the right bullet choice and good external and terminal ballistics are a given.

Gerard may or may not be right in his responce but even if we assume he is correct, it is immaterial to the question. If a bullet is not available in factory ammo it is still a disadvantage.

465H&H