I saw them at the show.
[URL= ]solids[/URL]
Talking to the fellow there, they have been tested extensively-I asked in what and he said wet newspapers.They have a hard lead core-I believe- and a really thick jacket-if I can remember correctly.I did not see any steel.That is a black plastic tip at the end.He said that they penetrate straight and dont ``fishtail``.They looked pretty good.There is no reloading data on them in the new manual.

There is no bullet made that does not change direction or fishtail sometimes.

If these shoot to the same point of aim as A-Frames, that's a big plus.

I think he said they do.Forgot to mention that he showed me a cutaway version or a solid cut in half.I asked him if the jacket was pure copper and he answered no.I asked if it was brass or anything else and he could not give me an answer.

Different bluest shooting to the same point of aim depends on the rifle - not the bullet.

It really is amazing what sort rubbish comes out of the advertising departments of guns and ammo makers.

And by saying the same point of impact, how close to they mean??

When I did my tuskless hunt a few years back I spent sometime at JFK talking with Bill Hober, president of swift bullets.

He was heading over to Zim to hunt with Dudley Rogers to field test some new solids they were working on for elephant hunting.

I assume this is the finished product.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Different bluest shooting to the same point of aim depends on the rifle - not the bullet.

It really is amazing what sort rubbish comes out of the advertising departments of guns and ammo makers.

And by saying the same point of impact, how close to they mean??

Sort of agree with you Saeed. I have a .375 that shoots excellent groups at 100 with what ever 300 grain I chuck down the barrel.

I'd say, Just get close and even low grade guns and bullets will do just fine

quote:

Originally posted by fairgame:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Different bluest shooting to the same point of aim depends on the rifle - not the bullet.

It really is amazing what sort rubbish comes out of the advertising departments of guns and ammo makers.

And by saying the same point of impact, how close to they mean??

Sort of agree with you Saeed. I have a .375 that shoots excellent groups at 100 with what ever 300 grain I chuck down the barrel.

I think this may be true for fast and smaller chamberings but when you get to slow .458 and above, different bullet construction and material will have a difficult time shooting to the same POI especially if the barrel has fired a few rounds and the bore is not super new.Saeed might be turning them down less for larger diameter when his bores erode-I dont know.

Well I for one am glad to see them come out.. Granted probably not much different than any other premium solid.. But I love Swift A-Frames and glad to see matching solids..

I have found Swift A Frames to be excellent. Some here on AR will bad mouth anything.

Bullets shooting to the same point of impact does not need to be of the same materials, or made by the same manufacturer.

We have tried a lot of them, in many rifles.

Some rifle absolutely refuse to shoot any two bullet types to the same point of impact, regardless of who makes them.

Other rifle will shoot bullets made by different manufacturers, made of different material, to the same point of impact.

It all depends on the RIFLE, not the bullet.

Years ago I built a 416 Rigby Improved.

I looked at our data for the 416 Weatherby Magnum, and found that I used a load on safari the previous year.

Bullets I used were Trophy Bonded Bear Claws, and Barnes Super Solids.

Both 400 grains.

Each is made by a different manufacturer, and of different material.

These shot about about 2.5 inches at 100 yards, which plenty good enough for elephants and buffalo, as long as one keeps his shots inside 100 yards.

I used the same load, loaded 3 rounds of 400 grain Bear Claws, and fired them.

They made one ragged hole at 100 yards.

I took the same cases, loaded them with the same charge, and 400 grain Barnes Super Solids.

I fired these 3 at the same target.

All 6 made one ragged hole of less than an inch.

I stopped right there, and that is the only load, and bullets, I have ever used in that rifle.

WE have had several rifles, which refuse to shoot two different bullets in less than 6 inch groups at 100 yards.

Again, for shooting elephants and buffalo at close quarters, it really would not make that much of a difference.

Is there a NO-clause money-back guarantee backing the claim that they will shoot to the Same point of-impact??

One gent who posts a lot here on AR gets very upset with me when I posted his bullets were just one more step in the line of bullet inventions. Good bullets, I'm sure, but the entire intention of making a new product is to improve on what's already out there. And, it is acceptable advertising to promote one's new product as better, best, etc. This works until the next invention comes along to step to the head of the pack. The new Swift Solids are just that--a new invention touted as the newest and best. Someone will come along shortly with something better than the Swifts. Bullets, no doubt, have made gigantic steps over the decades, perhaps only superseded by improvements in telescope sights. The rifles themselves, are no better or accurate than what was made 100+ years ago. As for bullets, I'll stick with Woodleigh for my old doubles. I won't argue if they are the best, but they are the best for me. And they look so pretty! Seeing some of these new bullet styles is like buying the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition, open the pages, and seeing Janet Reno in a thong.
Bottom line on the bullets--they all will work and will work fine.
Cheers, mates.
Cal

quote:

quote:Originally posted by Saeedifferent bluest shooting to the same point of aim depends on the rifle - not the bullet.It really is amazing what sort rubbish comes out of the advertising departments of guns and ammo makers.And by saying the same point of impact, how close to they mean??

Sort of agree with you Saeed. I have a .375 that shoots excellent groups at 100 with what ever 300 grain I chuck down the barrel.

What a load of ol' marketing crock.

In our sport having two bullets share the same point of impact is unnecessary, given the size of the area we need to place a bullet in order to acquire a trophy. Bullets and bullet performance is an integral part of what we do, but expecting this kind of accuracy......c'mon, whatever happened to "Keep it Simple"?

I was standing in line to talk with them about bullet choices (for a 6.5) when Ross Seyfreid was talking with the owner about these.

To me, the expanded bullet looks like a cup point solid from North Fork, except there is a step off between the point where they attach the polymer ball to the bullet. In a way, it looks like an attempt to give a flat meplat while maintaining a round nose profile for feeding.

It does have a lead core with no steel cup on the sectioned ones I saw.

Like Cal, I really don't see the need (as opposed to want). Unlike Cal, I intend to stick with the Northforks in my .470.

After all, they have dropped 2 buff and 2 elephant for me with no fuss.

As an aside, I was told by Barnes that they were having a meeting with the ATF shortly (I think he said this week) and they expect to be selling their .375 and .458 solids again shortly. They also are still planning on allowing you to order (if you buy direct) their flat nosed solids as an option.

We have many choices now, and obviously most work pretty well. You take your pick, and go from there.

Right now, there is absolutely nothing that can beat the hollow point mono bullets made of copper.

make all the claims in the world, but none at the present time can beat these.

The idea of having any lead is out of date, as the lead does not bring any positive why it should be included.

Bullets made of copper - it makes no difference who makes them - they all just work.

Next are bullets that have a solid shank - like the Bear Claws.

Next are the ones with a partition.

And last are normal soft points.

I appreciate variety and based on the outstanding performance of the A-Frames I am curious about these bullets. On thick skinned game I have used Woodleigh FMJ, Hornady DGS and Barnes Banded Solid with good success and did not note any big difference.

The lead core is important because it allows the bullet to give should it be squeezed in the bore and not ruin the rifling or the fragile interiors of double rifle bores,IMO.The fellow there said also that it allows the bullet to give.

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
One gent who posts a lot here on AR gets very upset with me when I posted his bullets were just one more step in the line of bullet inventions. Good bullets, I'm sure, but the entire intention of making a new product is to improve on what's already out there.
Cal

so does this mean that you never actually tried them before drawing this conclusion? just curious

quote:

Originally posted by maxenergy:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
One gent who posts a lot here on AR gets very upset with me when I posted his bullets were just one more step in the line of bullet inventions. Good bullets, I'm sure, but the entire intention of making a new product is to improve on what's already out there.
Cal

so does this mean that you never actually tried them before drawing this conclusion? just curious

That is correct. I'm sure they are good bullets and do what they are supposed to.
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:

quote:

Originally posted by maxenergy:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
One gent who posts a lot here on AR gets very upset with me when I posted his bullets were just one more step in the line of bullet inventions. Good bullets, I'm sure, but the entire intention of making a new product is to improve on what's already out there.
Cal

so does this mean that you never actually tried them before drawing this conclusion? just curious

That is correct. I'm sure they are good bullets and do what they are supposed to.
Cal

So how did you determine that they are not an improvement?

JWP:
Good day.
Everything new is touted as an improvement. I'm sure all premium bullets are good and live up to what the shooter wants them to do. There are so many variables in shooting as to the shooter himself, the rifle, climate, the bullet, powder, velocity, pressure, and what the bullet strikes that I think it impossible to duplicate the same thing for all bullet tests. But please don't misunderstand, I'm not saying one is inferior to the other or better. I think the new bullets will all work fine. I just stay away from the hype of advertising to get readership or sales. Kind of like the pics I have of Boddington or Elmer Keith shooting .600s with the muzzle pointing to the sky. They just don't recoil that much. And the next bullet that comes along will be good but will it be measurably better than its predecessors? I can't tell? Bottom line--they are all fine but the maker can't say that or he won't have sales. He must state it is improved and his tests confirm that.

I've enjoyed reading the advertising from bonded core, Core Lokt, Silvertip, banded solids, CEB, Woodleigh, Partition, and I've lost count of how many more.

And, of course, it is just my opinion.
Cheers,
Cal

For the big game animals, penetration is of the essence.

And any bullet that has lead in a copper core is likely to shed that core and loose the lead.

This does not happen with copper bullets, or with bullets that have a solid copper shank.

I have seen Nosler Partitions and Swift A-Frames loose all the lead from their rear partition.

Talking of an improvement.

Partition bullets were an improvement over softs.

Solid shank bullet over an improvement over partitions.

Copper HP bullets are an improvement over all the above.

Haven';t seen anything that can be called an improvement over them yet.

How true, Saeed. I guess not much can go wrong with a solid solid.
Cal

These are some of our own Walterhog bullets we make here.

The hollow point parts break off, and the rest become a blunt point solid to penetrate deeper.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
For the big game animals, penetration is of the essence.

And any bullet that has lead in a copper core is likely to shed that core and loose the lead.

This does not happen with copper bullets, or with bullets that have a solid copper shank.

I have seen Nosler Partitions and Swift A-Frames loose all the lead from their rear partition.

Talking of an improvement.

Partition bullets were an improvement over softs.

Solid shank bullet over an improvement over partitions.

Copper HP bullets are an improvement over all the above.

Haven';t seen anything that can be called an improvement over them yet.

Agree with this!

Saeed have you tried any heavier weights, for instance, 350grain, in the WH bullets?

Do you think that extra weight would offer any advantage?

I saw a buff shot with a 380grain Rhino soft point......seemed to lift the 375 into the 416 class.

No, 300 grains it has always been for me.

And anyone who thinks one bullet or one caliber kills better is dreaming!

As long as one uses a reasonable caliber, and places his bullet in the right place, an animal will die.

One concern I have with the design is how well the cute little tip is attached and if the battering it receives in the magazine box can cause it to distort or fall off and cause a jam ?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

I have seen Nosler Partitions and Swift A-Frames loose all the lead from their rear partition.

For the most part this does not happen, There would be people who have shot 000s&000s of NP bullets without such incident,
NP & AF have satisfactorily done everything reasonably required of them time and time again for many people.
-BUT for those who OFTEN put EXtreme demands on their hunting bullets, the fact remains the monos delete the possibility of it all-together,
as well as offering other distinct advantages over the CC designs.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
One concern I have with the design is how well the cute little tip is attached and if the battering it receives in the magazine box
can cause it to distort or fall off and cause a jam ?

ITs a simple basic ages old engineeering fact, that the less parts in a device or component, the less that can potentially go wrong.

The no lead-core and no plastic tip MONOS, are as simple and As good as it gets these days....But nothing is perfect.

So lets see if I understand.Lead squeezes out of the bullet but the bore cannot squeeze the bullet-yeah right.

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

I have seen Nosler Partitions and Swift A-Frames loose all the lead from their rear partition.

For the most part this does not happen, There would be people who have shot 000s&000s of NP bullets without such incident,
NP & AF have satisfactorily done everything reasonably required of them time and time again for many people.
-BUT for those who OFTEN put EXtreme demands on their hunting bullets, the fact remains the monos delete the possibility of it all-together,
as well as offering other distinct advantages over the CC designs.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
One concern I have with the design is how well the cute little tip is attached and if the battering it receives in the magazine box
can cause it to distort or fall off and cause a jam ?

ITs a simple basic ages old engineeering fact, that the less parts in a device or component, the less that can potentially go wrong.

The no lead-core and no plastic tip MONOS, are as simple and As good as it gets these days....But nothing is perfect.

Have to agree mate.

Of all the copper/mono bullets I've tried the Lapua Naturalis offers the best 'squat down' effect of them all.

And superbly accurate in all the rifles I've shot them in.

Wish they made them in 375 calibre and up.