quote:

Originally posted by DoubleDon:
I have used Woodleigh solids in the past. From this day forward I will be using the CEB (Cutting Edge Bullets) BBW #13's.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by DoubleDon:
I have used Woodleigh solids in the past. From this day forward I will be using the CEB (Cutting Edge Bullets) BBW #13's.

Brain1,

I have a rifle just like yours and so does Todd Williams. Both of our rifles shoot CEB BBW#13 570gr .510 solids well.

I have settled on this load for mine.

Jameson brass
Fed 215 primer
97gr of R-15 (no filler)
CEB BBW#13 .510 570 gr solid seated to the top groove and crimped in place with a LFC die against the bottom of the top band.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by DoubleDon:
I have used Woodleigh solids in the past. From this day forward I will be using the CEB (Cutting Edge Bullets) BBW #13's.

Brain1,

I have a rifle just like yours and so does Todd Williams. Both of our rifles shoot CEB BBW#13 570gr .510 solids well.

I have settled on this load for mine.

Jameson brass
Fed 215 primer
97gr of R-15 (no filler)
CEB BBW#13 .510 570 gr solid seated to the top groove and crimped in place with a LFC die against the bottom of the top band.

I'm using the same load Lane, except 105 grains of IMR 4007 SSC. All other components are identical to yours. With that load, the 570gr BBW#13's just touch each other at 50 yards and I'm getting 2100fps out of a 24" barrel. Good bullets IMO!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Lane, did you ever try that load with Barnes? My gun gave about 100fps slower with the same load using Barnes Banded Solids. Just another reason I've been impressed with CEB.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Lane, did you ever try that load with Barnes? My gun gave about 100fps slower with the same load using Barnes Banded Solids. Just another reason I've been impressed with CEB.

quote:

Originally posted by Brain1:
I don't mind buying new stuff I just hate buying stuff that isn't any better than what I'm already shooting. The Woodleigh's shoot badass accurate but have only shot them on cape buffalo, nothing bigger. I talked with the guys at Northfork at DSC and SCI.
I appreciate the offer Lane, drop a few by sometime.

quote:

Originally posted by Brain1:
I don't mind buying new stuff I just hate buying stuff that isn't any better than what I'm already shooting. The Woodleigh's shoot badass accurate but have only shot them on cape buffalo, nothing bigger. I talked with the guys at Northfork at DSC and SCI.
I appreciate the offer Lane, drop a few by sometime.

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
I'd love to try some CEBs in my 450NE but I haave no idea if they will regulate. Presently, I can shoot Hornady DGX/S and Woodleigh softs to POI regulation. jorge

quote:

Originally posted by CCMDoc:

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:
I'd love to try some CEBs in my 450NE but I haave no idea if they will regulate. Presently, I can shoot Hornady DGX/S and Woodleigh softs to POI regulation. jorge

Give 'em a try Jorge - very little to lose and you may be quite happy with them

quote:

Originally posted by bwanamrm:
I've shot elephant with the Woodleigh solids and the Hornady DGS. Both resulted in dead elphants... awhile back it was only Northfork cupped solids on this board now the new trick is CEBs. Fact is most of the solids will do just fine for Zim elephant.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by bwanamrm:
I've shot elephant with the Woodleigh solids and the Hornady DGS. Both resulted in dead elphants... awhile back it was only Northfork cupped solids on this board now the new trick is CEBs. Fact is most of the solids will do just fine for Zim elephant.

Hey Russ,

I suspect they will do just fine for Ele's from any country, not just Zim! I do think there are significant improvements to take advantage of however. But again, factory ammo shooters are a bit limited in choice. Those old round nose solids have worked for over 100 years and will continue to do so. But I've wondered about something for awhile now.

How often have we seen videos of an accomplished elephant hunter, such as Jeff Rann, take a frontal brain shot from close range, only to have the bull shake his head, turn, and run? It's certainly possible that the shot was misplaced, but I wonder, especially with the pro's, if maybe the placement was OK while a slight bullet path deviation, caused by the round nose, occurred resulting in a miss of the brain? At least possible I would think. In the Boddington on Elephant DVD, CB shoots a very large Bots bull at the end of Disc #1 with Johan Calitz. That ele took 7 shots from the 2 of them IIRC. Reading about that hunt later, Craig writes that although the placement was fine, the frontal shot failed due to lack of penetration. He was using Hornady ammo on that hunt in his 450NE. That was a huge bull, but would a flat nosed bullet have provided the necessary penetration over the DGS? Maybe. From those examples as well as others, I prefer the flat nose design of which the Northfork is also.

Less subjective however is the barrel strain data with the DGS and Woodleigh FMJ producing the 2 highest strain readings and the CEB, one of, if not the, lowest.

Many of the opinions held concerning these matters don't really have much objective data to back them up. I'm not one to be swayed by the latest and greatest do-dad to hit the market. But Michael458 and Srose's extensive work on the performance of these bullets has certainly swayed me on this one. One of the things that impressed me most is that they haven't been afraid to call it exactly as it happens. Case in point was the Barnes Banded Solid 9.3 286gr bullet. While generally rating the BBS near the top of the performance charts, this particular bullet failed the penetration tests badly and was reported as such. Also, some of the CEB Raptor work was less than impressive in the beginning and was reported as such. Anyway, I found their data to be persuasive enough to switch to the CEB's as I believe they've produced relevant and objective data from which to form an opinion.

Just my 2 pennies!

Cheers,

Todd

quote:

I have only shot 9 eles - one ele with Woodleigh, 2 shots, first to the heart and second in the spine after it was down and that second one fishtailed badly. No WL for me ever again.

quote:

Originally posted by sjb:
Got to be the Woodleigh Hydrostatic. Straight line perfomance has got to be seen to be believed! Took a tuskless cow and Elephant Bull last year using 400 grain in a 416 Rem Mag. Plus being made in Australia means they are better than any of that stuff made by the Yanks

quote:

BPE killed a lot of Elephants 100 years ago. So does that mean we should still be using it on Ele? Same logic, yes?

The research on the CEB is extensive, but more importantly, they have been taken to the field and proven by a number of experienced safari hunters who post on AR, including me. I am convinced, and yes, before the CEB I killed more than a few head of DG using the bullets available at that time. That's no justification to continue using those bullets when a better bullet is now available - the CEB.

quote:

Originally posted by zhaba:
I used the woodleighs as i was told they are a little easier on the barrels especially with doubles

quote:

I am first to admit that I get confused easily but this is what I got from the report. I have a bullet that shoots well in my 450/400 double rifle. I don't have to worry about the bullet damaging my gun. The ammunition doesn't cost me a days wages every time I pull the trigger so I can practice and become very effective with the rifle.

The rifle being a wonderful, easy to shoot and very efficient choice for buffalo doesn't kick the snot out of me either, so I do a great job of shooting a quartering buffalo. Now bear in mind that on the scale of resistant to penetration,difficulty to put down etc the Cape buffalo is legendary. My buffalo runs a little way and falls down DEAD.

On postmortem I find that my expanding bullet goes through hide muscle and bone, goes all the way across the chest and wrecks the hell out of every thing between resulting in a quick merciful death of my trophy animal. The bullet is found in two separate pieces probably very close to each other in the "chest meat".... Again I'm just a simple hunter so maybe I don't understand what is happening here but I can't figure out at what specific point from the time the trigger was pulled to the point of hand shaking and joy of a successful hunt that this bullet failed.

Just a thought from Jeff Cooper.

● Years ago we coined the appellation, “Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments,” or PII. This peculiarity lies in attributing importance to measurable deviations so small as to be meaningless. You see it in the people who shoot test groups in rifles, awarding a prize to a group which is only thousandths of an inch smaller than those unrewarded. One sees it in speed records awarded in one-thousandths of one mile-per-hour. One sees it in basketball scores which, nearing the century mark, are separated by less than three points. In all such cases Score A is “better” than Score B, but who cares?

An increment may be termed inconsequential when it has no significant relationship to the purpose of the exercise. Of course if the purpose of the exercise is in itself inconsequential some may not think this to be foolish. A very distinguished general at Quantico once caused the sign to be placed over the exit door of every office asking, in brilliant scarlet and gold, “What are you trying to do?” There was a man who knew more about human nature than most.