Karl,

The most important thing will be to have the same depth as the Rubbermaid products the rest of us use.

Reffer to the dimensions above. We need a consistant area of 9 - 9 1/2 inches to shoot into.

the water will stop the bullets, not the plastic so its probably OK.

The main difference between a soft plastic and a hard plastic will be in how the over pressure of the water shatters the container.

If they are not the same product, we would have to ignore or try and interpolate the over pressure.

The results within your caliber will still be relative and be of use to you in making your own decisions.

It will be interesting for instance to see where a FN rips open a container and a RN does not.

This appeared to be meaningful in my test of soft points, as a 270 - 7mm class ctg split the buckets open and slower .308 winchester did not. A .223 and 22-250 did not split the 5 gallon buckets either, so the volume of the buckets did seem to coincide to a quick kill on deer sized game.

(A 375 improved will rip them in two!)

I would buy enough to do one test shot, then retest with one of our more common calibers and see if you get the same results.

In that way we can "calibrate" your containers to ours.

Andy

Andy I have identified some containers here similar to the rubbermaid product, but cannot be 100% sure.Minor differences in the plastics is going to make the tests non comparable, no?

Karl.

Andy,

Sorry to not have responded sooner. Logistics is a problem since I have to drive 20 miles to a range, maybe haul the water, and maybe do the tests at dawn so as to avoid interference. I do have the keys to the range, however.



I will start with my water filled 5 gallon buckets (20 of them, >800 pounds of water), sealed and laid end to end, on the ground, shoot prone at 25 yards.



I will start with the 300 grain FMJ (old Hornady steel jacket) and a 300 grain GSC FN at 2450 fps MV, then move up to the same two bullets at 2750 fps MV in a .375 Weatherby or .375 RUM.



This will check the old versus new solid, and low versus high velocity. All with 1 in 12" twist.



After I bust buckets and get a feel for it, I'll switch to your standardized method, whatever that turns out to be, and get enough repeats for validity.



I will definitely do the preliminaries this weekend.



BTW, I don't have any 350 grain .375's except for some old Barnes Originals softpoints. I will branch out into other varieties of .375cal/300gr Solids.



I might be able to get a second caliber after that: 500 A-Square, .510cal/570 grain GSC FN at 2500 fps versus 600 grain Barnes Monolithic at 2375 fps (equal momentum). This is a 1 in 10" twist, so it could be loaded to match someone's slower twist Jeffery to check effects of twist rate.



Also, I have a 1 in 10" twist .404 Jeffery for comparison to slower twist if needed, for my third volunteer, with 380 grain North Fork FN at 2500 fps, versus 400 grain Woodleigh FMJ solid at velocity to give equal momentum, 2375 fps.



Maybe I will head to the 1000 yard cow pasture and dip creek water with my buckets, rather than haul 800 pounds of water to the range ... anyway, I will start busting buckets this weekend, then advance to standardized.

Andy

Still need someone with a .458 Win ?

Question if i may .. As for the bullet's
are you looking to test only the major manufacter's of solid's in any given Caliber/Diam
or ?

----------
Ruger 458 M 77--- 24 Inch
Custom built - 9.3 x 64 -- 26 inch
11.2x72 Mauser Action 24 1/2

And as for the contaner's ///Size ...shape ...

How hot do you want the round's loaded or are we doing factory round's only ?

Martin,

Welcome to the party.

Your .458 sounds perfectly representative.

Im sure we would all agree that we want to test calibers with hunting loads that you yourself would hunt with in Africa on a hot day. So dont try and make your .458 WM into a 450 Dakota. It actually does prety well just as it is. (57-58 boards in my test at 2,035 and 2,100 fps).

Factory loads are fine if thats what you shoot.

A list of bullets is on the "458 Update" thread. We will want to test the following reloads if you can afford to do so:

400 Barnes RN solid, 450 Barnes RN solid if available, 500 Barnes RN solid, 500 Hornady encapsulated (new style not old copper jacketed steel), 480 and/or 500 Woodleigh, 500 Speer AGS if you can afford them, 450 North Fork FN, 450 GS FN (I can lend you a few), 500 Kodiak (FN) which I can also send you a few of.

RIP, I think I'll try my 1-8 twist 375 improved with the 350 gr Woodleigh. Can I buy 10-12 off you???

Andy

Andy,

I would be more than pleased to have Canuck take over the 1-12" 416 Rem. tests.

Thanks.

Our group needs to decide on which kind of containers they will use.

The 7 gallon Rubbermaid wastebaskets can be had for as little as $2.65 apeice US at Walmart in the office supply department. Cheaper even then you can get them on line from a wholesaler. these are black.

I have also found a source for the 2 1/2 gallon containers Tim suggested. New high density polyethylene "F-Style" bottles. But they are expensive. $4.82 each or a case of 28 for $115.68.

Given their dimensions, this would be adequate for only two test shots.

There is a 5% discount for 4-5 cases, 10% discount for 6-11, 15% for 12-23, 20% for 24-35, and 25% discount for 36 cases or more.

Consolidated Plastics company at 1-800-362-1000, or www.consolidatedplastics.com.

It will cost $57 for a single test shot with the full price 2 1/2 gallon.

If a row of 12 x 7 gallon wastebaskets can be reused with a garbage liner, only 2-3 will probably be blown up by the high velocity FMJ RN or FN. Re-using all but the first few and shooting each bullet three times, total cost for a three (not one but three) bullet string should be about $50 based on loosing three wastebaskets per shot.

Thats a good deal, and 1/3 the cost of using the smaller containers.

So Id like to hear from you guys. Has anyone tried them? Im 90% sure they will both work.

Andy

RIP,

Since you are a pioneer of sorts (the African Sheep rifle), it is appropriate you are the first to get splattered!

Those 5 gallon buckets are 14 inches tall (deep in your case) and a 300 grain .375 that tumbles will go 39 inches (3 1/2 buckets) when shot standing up.

So you should be able to capture your first test shot with 4 buckets but Id put out 6 just in case it does not tumble in the buckets laid on end.

You should also be able to tell us if supercavitation is occuring with those 300 grain FN!

This will be interesting.

Andy

Maybe I can offer some small help. I retired from the West Virginia State Police this past Feb. I have access to our bullet recovery water tank in the firearms lab. I can test 416 Rigby ammo there if anyone is interested...........JJ

Andy,

HO HO GEEZ! That was fun!



I started with 20 of the 5 gallon buckets and lids and ended up with three intact lids and 4 unscathed buckets after three shots. Buckets are 14" deep, 12" across the lid diameter, and ~10-1/2" diameter for bucket bottom which fits snugly into the next bucket lid in the train ... stackable. Ten were lined up in a train horizontally along the ground, filled with water (~ 400 pounds in 10 buckets) and fired into from 25 yards prone.



Out of fondness for the African Sheep Rifle I, I started with the .404 Jeffery, 1 in 10" twist.



1. My FMJ-RN 400 grain "solid" turned out to be the steel jacket/lead core Kynoch, not Woodleigh, though they should be much the same. MV average was 2401 fps for 3 shots chronographed, then one shot fired from prone.



The Kynoch solid keyholed while traversing the second bucket, and continued keyholing through two more buckets and the lid of the fifth bucket, it bounced off the bottom of the fifth bucket (left a dent) and came to rest in bucket #5.



2. The next bullet was the North Fork 380 grain Truncated-Cone-FN, monometal copper solid. MV was 2514 fps. Almost the same momentum as a 400 grainer at 2400 fps. THIS BULLET WAS AMAZING!!!



The North Fork TC-FN passed completely through 8 (EIGHT) buckets and lodged half way through the lid of the NINTH bucket. STUCK IN LID NUMBER NINE. STILL POINTED FORWARD AND PLOWING CALIBER SIZE HOLES UNTIL IT WAS CAPTURED IN THE LID, HALF IN, HALF OUT. MORE THAN NINE FEET OF WATER and SIXTEEN bucket tops or bottoms, plus half way through the seventeenth.



3. A North Fork .423cal/380gr soft (2528 fps MV) split two buckets open and entered the third bucket still pointed forward and bounced off the bottom of the third bucket, leaving a round dent, coming to rest there, perfectly mushroomed, weighing 367 grains, >96% weight retention, 0.824" frontal diameter, almost doubling caliber. There were only six buckets left in this train, and the sixth bucket was seen to bounce up and back a bit. Yes, a friend was video taping and the tape showed the sixth bucket jump, though 4, 5, and 6 buckets were otherwise unscathed.



No doubt which solid is better by this limited sample of water and nylon bucket penetration.



Repeat testing will most likely confirm it.



I think Norbert may have got it right with the supercavitation bubble theory of the super penetrator. Gerard is also likely correct that the FN will out penetrate the RN in game.



Access to that forensic tank would be nice, JJ Miller.



I'll post some photos of a Kynoch solid and a North Fork solid unscathed save rifling marks, and a perfectly mushroomed North Fork soft, and some perforated and fragmented buckets, when I can get around to it.

RIP,

quote:
"I think Norbert may have something with the cavitation bubble theory of the super penetrator."

I think the experiment with the North Fork TC-FN is a perfect demonstration of my supercavitation theory. About 3 meters penetration in water is what I found with similar experiments and published in my website.

I have no sample of the NF ever seen. but I guess it is not only a FN, but forming a protruding edge, which may show the same supercavitating effect as my disk.

It is possible to show an image of the NF and eventually the recovered bullet?

That the Superpenetrator and the FNs are outpenetrating RNs in animals is my saying since I developed the theory and the reason for hunting DG with it.
To be honest, it is not a new theory, but applying classic physics to terminal ballistics, what normally is looked upon as some kind of magic.

Hi Norbert,

I edited my statement to more strongly endorse your science.



I've got a picture of the North Fork TC-FN coming up. I'll get that now and get the other pics to follow ...

On the left is the old/abandoned "ogive FN."

On the right is the new "truncated cone FN."

By North Fork. They are both .423cal/380gr solid monometal copper.



The solid lines on the board are centimeter ruled.

The dotted lines are 1/2 inch ruled.



No protruding edge, but the meplat is wide, and it works.

RIP,
That new NF bullet looks a lot like some other bullet we are familiar with .

Depending on the quantities involved, we may be able to supply some bullets for the FMJ shootout. I will discuss with Gina and see if it could be cost effective.

Hi Gerard,
The North Fork TC-FN 380gr/.423cal does compare favorably to your 380gr/.416cal that I used to kill a 1500 pound cape buffalo with one shot. Your GSC FN may still be ricocheting around Botswana for all I know.

Mike Brady of North Fork also has a third solid design called the "Cup Point" that Ray A. has talked about here. If the TC-FN is a "10" on the penetration scale, the Cup Point is supposed to be a "7" but produce more shock along the way. I think our testers here might be able to verify that by the busted bucket technique.

I will continue with some bucket pictures below.

Best Regards,
Ron Berry

The Keyholing Kynoch FMJ 400gr/.423cal at 2401 fps, first two buckets in the train of five required to catch the bullet:


The nine bucket train required to catch the North Fork TC-FN 380gr/.423cal:


The ninth bucket. Note the North Fork is not in the center of the bucket, but it would have been if the ground my bucket train was on had been straight and level. That bullet flew laser straight until caught nose first in the ninth bucket lid:


The three buckets that stopped a North Fork 380gr/.423cal soft point:

I'll get a closeup of the three fired bullets to compare to the above buckets.

Left to right, all .423 caliber for .404 Jeffery:
1. Kynoch 400 grain FMJ solid, recovered from bucket #5, dented bottom of bucket, lengthwise/sideways impression.
2. North Fork 380 grain TC-FN, recovered from bucket #9, stuck nose first in lid.
3. North Fork 380 grain soft, recovered from bucket #3, dented bottom of bucket, mushroom forward impression.
4. An unfired North Fork 380 grain soft.

Ambient light, no flash, so the base of the mushroomed soft is in shadow, but it was in pristine-rifled condition. Picture could be better, but you get the idea.

BTW, all these bullets feed just fine in my M70 Winchester, African Sheep Rifle I.

RIP,



Great pictures and report.



Now you see why I shoot water buckets!



It actually is more fun than a round of golf.



I strongly urge all of our experimenters to elevate the buckets onto a saw horse and get the buckets parallel to the ground.



Are you sure the North Forks actually contacted water in the last half of its bullet path?



It is important that the same ammount of water be over the the bullet for its entire bullet path for consistant results.



One thing that is so frustrating about using water for FMJ's and solids is that its hard to get a consistant shot path over 9-10 feet!



I am surprised the Kynoch tumbled from a 1-10 twist with a perfectly centered shot. But I would not be so quick to claim super cavitation is at work here from one test shot. Especially when the FN was passing along the top of your buckets.



When I shot the .458 450 gr GS FN into the same buckets it keyholed on the 4th bucket.



I would be impressed as hell if a FN had as much penetration as a RN, let alone more!



If the 300 gr RN and FN from your 375 also show this trend then weve got something to bank on.



It would be interesting to know what the .423 FMJ RN would do if it had not keyholed. (I shot 2-3 times with each bullet in the stop box).



A good freind of mine told me recently that, "Animals were 80% water, not 80% wood."



Thankyou RIP for getting the test going. I hope this inspires the rest of our volunteers to start getting wet!



PS Did the NF FN split any of the buckets, or just the bonded soft point?



Andy

I think that everybody must agree that the wide meplat FN solids are the only way to go on game. That would include:



North Fork

GSC

Speer African Grand Slam

Trophy Bonded Sledge Hammer



Any others?



Of course structural integrity is an issue too, for example:



I have seen the tungsten cores of the Speer AGS drill through the brass nose portion on impact, leaving a small caliber tungsten rod to continue on its way as the jacket dropped off behind.



A monometal solid is best, and copper is hard enough, and more dense than the brass and bronze alloys it would seem.



So why bother testing anymore roundnose solids at all? I wouldn't shoot them if I could get an FN.



The banded copper FN-type bullets are safe in the antique double rifles no doubt. End of story.



A roundnose solid is a no-no, anywhere, anytime.



Any further tests I do will be limited to FN-type bullets only.



And should one stick to only those over 0.300 sectional density?



1. .375cal/270gr GSC FN at 3000 fps

2. .375cal/300gr GSC FN at 2700 fps



Both these loads have equal momentum: 115.7 lbs-ft/sec



The 380 grain North Fork TC-FN load that made it to the ninth bucket (eight plus) has a momentum value of 136.5 lbs-ft/sec. But could the .375 cal penetrate better due to its smaller cross sectional area? Or does the supercavitation bubble negate that concern and make the higher momentum value the winner?



Which would be better in a water tank or an elephant body or elephant skull?



That is my next question, and then I will have a good frame of reference for predicting solid bullet performance.



What is the consensus on best water container? I can recalibrate the NF TC-FN load to a new stack. But the buckets worked well.



Next time I would keep them level and straight on an apparatus of some sort.



I also think that I could add a chronograph for each shot rather than using an averaged string of shots for the batch of ammo before firing into the buckets.



What is the ultimate elephant penetrator in a user friendly rifle? Is it only limited by the user? Bigger is better?

Andy,

Thanks for the post. Good points.

Note that all the buckets were full and held water well. The picture above shows the ninth bucket after I removed the lid, it is still full of water, as you can see by the blue coloration of the clear liquid in the white bucket.



Consensus on the buckets or waste cans? Any better prices or best price opinion? A bucket plus lid was about 5 bucks at Lowes or Home Depot, when I got mine. $100 bucks for my setup.



An open topped waste basket full of water could be patched with duct tape and shot in 4 quadrants, then turned 90 degrees and shot in four more quadrants if square, before discarding? That would be eight shots if a square container could be found.



The North fork TC-FN solid exploded and splintered the lid on the first bucket, as you can see that only a crescent was left of the first lid in the nine bucket train, but did not rupture the sides of any of the buckets going in. Pieces of the target lid did land about 20 feet forward of the front bucket, on the grass.



I got by, barely, without good leveling, but all the buckets were full of water. The North Fork TC-FN stayed nose first in capture in the ninth lid, and that is amazing.



Edit: For clarity I should call the subject North Fork solid the "FP" (Flat Point) as opposed to the GSC "FN" (Flat Nose).



North Fork now has a triad: SP, CP, FP



Soft Point, Cup Point, and Flat Point.

RIP,

quote:
"The 380 grain North Fork TC-FN load that made it to the ninth bucket (eight plus) has a momentum value of 136.5 lbs-ft/sec. But could the .375 cal penetrate better due to its smaller cross sectional area? Or does the supercavitation bubble negate that concern and make the higher momentum value the winner? "

Here we are discussing second order effects. It depends on the relative diameter of the meplat (FN area) and the resulting drag function, which bullet is the winner with respect to penetration. But we don�t need penetration much more than 2 meters. A good balance between stable penetration (supercavitation) and pressure wave generation (tissue damage) results in the best bullet for elephant skulls. With this in mind I designed the diameter of my SuperPenetrator for the .458/ 500 grs at 2350 f/s. For frontal head shots on ele bulls it absolutely sufficient, on ele cows it smashed additionel the first vertebra. For maximum penetration and penetration in solid materials I used very different designs.
Elephant body shots are already effective with good "softs".

RIP,

Would you do me a favor and try and retest your set up re-using the relatively undamaged buckets by lining them with a 7 gallon garbage liner, fold it over the sides of the bucket, and see if you can get the bucket lid to re-seal???

Then repeat the FMJ RN and FN test.

This would give us two test shots and if the buckets can be re-used will amortize the cost substantially.

The 7 gallon open top waste baskets will only cost $30 per test shot, and can be re-used.

I am concerened about cost since we really need 3 shots per bullet to test for uniformity. This is the main advantage of the quick twist.

It may also prove a blunt RN or FN is more consistant that a Woodleigh or Kynock more streamlined RN????

I know this is asking alot since you are the only one testing now, but hope you can at least let us know if the used buckets will hold water with a garbage bag liner.

There is an insert available for the 5 gallon buckets for about $2,50 from Consolidated plastic company that allows a second or third use but the garbage bags would be alot more convenient.

PS I found a rubber mallat was useful for tapping the lids shut. Also critical how high the water line was for a good lid closure.

Andy

Norbert,
I guess the Penetration Index from your website/Alphin would be a good guide as long as the solid bullet is of FP/FN/Super-Penetrator design. That is nice and simple for those of us that last studied engineering almost thirty years ago. It is also nice to be able to catch speeding bullets in buckets of water, an incompressible medium that smacks a supersonic bullet pretty hard. Of course I will have to repeat the tests to verify any solitary results. Fun fun fun.

Andy,
I did fill the buckets to over flowing and pounded on the lids, tilted the buckets and held them up horizontally/on their sides, and checked for leaks, before putting them down on the ground. The Kynoch FMJ RN/steel jacket keyholing in the second bucket is SURPRISING!

That North Fork was in plastic and water all the way, got off center due to the misalignment of the buckets over the ground slope. I was in a hurry to get this preliminary done and did it in a buddy's backyard, with a garden hose to fill the buckets. There will be no questions about the leveling of buckets on the next go around.

I have given away any remaining buckets, so sorry, I won't be trying the garbage bags in perforated buckets. I will be looking for a square cross section container to verify the solitary data points with. The rubbermaid link above did not work for me, so let us know if you have come up with a source for containers. A standardized setup would be good, for a PT/INR (Penetration Test/International Normalized Ratio) for bullets.Thanks.

RIP,

The www.janisan web site will work for ordering the standard rubbermaid recycle soft wastebaskets. Just type it into your browser if the link does not work.

Or better yet, just go to WALMART and buy them in either the office supply ($2.65 each) department or a bit more in the storage section.

They are black in office supply. Other colors in storage.

Thanks to you we now know it takes at least 112 inches water to stop a FMJ.

Probably a bit more since the lids are quite stout.

The rubbermaid containers are 9-10 1/2 inches deep depending on where you hit them, so I would advise our world wide collaborators to line up at least 14 of the wastebaskets for your test shots (9 inches x 14 = 126 inches if bullet path is low for entire distance).

It is very important to crouch, kneel or stand so your line of sight is parallel to center of target array.

It is a confidence builder to see those bullets stuck perfectly straight going into the last board or bucket isnt it?

Your .423 Kynock has a very different ogive profile and cannelure than the 410 grain Kynoch .416 bullets I used in my La Grange stop box test. These were more aerodynamic than the Hornady but not by much. I wonder if yours are acting like a spitzer bullet and turning over because their center of gravity is so far behind its center of form?

Pictures of the 410 gr Kynoch will be shown in the on-line magazine.

Thanks again for being first!

Andy

Andy,
What is needed is a 12 foot long steel I-beam or timber set on sawhorse-like or post supports and leveled (a concrete pad would be nice too). A wood or steel trough would top this and one gallon plastic anti-freeze jugs or milk jugs (have to shoot the lower half only of the milk jugs) would line up snuggly in the 12' long trough.

The plastic jugs that did not explode would show the witness mark of keyholing or stabilized bullet in the capturing container.

The plastic waste baskets and recycling baskets all have sloping sides that nest together in a stack, no good. The containers need to have surfaces that are perpindicular to the line of flight of the bullet, so as not to introduce a deflecting potential.

How about a source for one gallon plastic jugs with a square or rectangular cross section and parallel sides?

Or how about a forensic water tank? There goes the neighborhood!

Andy for the project was wondering if someone might volunteer with something like a 340wby and barnes solids say.Would be nice to see just how the fast medium bores really stack up.





Karl.

Karl,

I do wish someone would step up and offer a .338 or .340, also the .35 calibers.

Any volunteers???

RIP,

For some reason the one gallon milk jugs are notorious for glancing bullets off course. Not enough surface area to be consistant I think.

The one gallon parallel sided and 2 1/3 gallon flat sided jugs are available for about $2.50 to 4.50 US apeice. One of the more expensive ways to recover a bullet. I posted the source for new ones like this in one of my earlier posts. (Consolidatedplastics.com).

I have shot somehting like >300 test shots into five gallon water buckets and a 55 gallon drum of Kind and Knox gelatin, and the very slight taper on the waste baskets is more than offset by the very large and consistant surface area they offer compared to other choices.

Still, I have not used them, and it will take someone like you who actually rolls up their sleeves and gets wet, to see if they work as well as I think they will.

We know laying the 5 gallon buckets in line works as it did for you and Id say that should be our back up position. Especially since it looks like we can re-use alot of them with a liner.

You will see my test set up when Saeed posts my test on rotational velocity and FMJ's. It is pretty much lke you describe.

Andy

Andy,
Come to think of it, the lids of the 5 gallon buckets have a spherical depression in the center right at the aiming point! If not hit dead center, this "dot of curve" in the lid could also provide a small deflection potential.

Also for each slight slope of the waste basket side, the bullet will encounter the opposite or counteracting effect when it gets to the other side of the basket. Cancels out. But the water thickness/depth in each basket varies slightly, greater at the top/less at the bottom, so all hits need to be at the same vertical level, infinitesimally speaking.

Still a crude enough approximation to be workable with the waste baskets if compared for a series of three shots with each bullet? Aye. It ought to tell if there are any marked differences between two makes of solid bullet.

Setting up a row of baskets on leveled 10 foot timbers on saw horses sounds like the way to go for facilitating more testing around the globe and arriving at the PT/INR for a given bullet.

I am with you now. I see the light.

Anyway, it seems that Norbert has validated the 3 meter depth of water for a hunting rifle solid as more than a passing score. My slightly crooked, terrain hugging bucket train won't happen again!

Straight and level!

Karl,
I have some 250 grain/.338 caliber Woodleigh FMJ solids. When I get there, I could try them in any of these:

.338 Win Mag
.340 Wby
.338 RUM
.338 Lapua

Of course an FP/FN type solid will also need to be compared too.

Hey, I'll get around to it by next year for sure, if sumbuddy else doesn't beat me to it. Sure beats golf.

RIP,

I'd forgotten how many guns you have experience with. You could end up never leaving the testing range at this rate.



I reckon just one or two loads in one of the above cases would do for the purpose of 'comparing them to bigbores'.Of course if the next task is to do a complete comparison of medium bores next(or simultaenously) the more the merrier.



Maybe a load or two of 'representative medium bore power' to keep your workload down. 338 RUM?

And the Lapua at over 5000ftlbs as the max penetration from a medium bore?



What do you guys think?



Karl.