I've been reading with interest Andy's report on The Nickudu files.

Andy has invested a lot of time and money in his tests and he his providing us with a wealth of useful informations.

Still, if the quest is for a 458 bullet to be used to hunt thick skinned game and buffalo, I found his conclusions debatable because in my opinion he did not considered adequatly some parameters that are more important than just plain penetration.

1) A bullet for thick skinned and dangerous game firstly need to chamber flawlessly every time. This condition rule out for me the excellent GSFN shape on possible follow up shots because it occasionally refuse to feed in my rifle, a CZ 458 Lott. It may apply to others as well.

2) A DG cartridge need to be reasonably accurate on follow up shots within about 2 seconds interval (at 36 km/hour a charging animal in 2 seconds covers 20 metres on the ground). My absolute limit for rapid fire is a 500 grains bullet at 2200 ft/sec, and I feel far more confortable with a 500 grains at 2100 ft/sec. Based on my esperience this is also the limit for most of the people coming to hunt in South Africa. Bullets that need to be pushed at higher velocity for best performance should been excluded.

3) It is desirable to hunt with a bullet not easily deflected by twigs. Therefore, contrary to Andy's suggestion, it is advisable using a heavy bullet at moderate velocity instead of a lighter bullet at higher velocity.

4) At shorter distances the heavier bullets that are not jet properly stabilized will hit the target with a slight angle, loosing velocity and direction. For quick stabilization (and consequent improved in line penetration) shorter tugsten core bullets and/or a quick twist rate of 1/10 are a possibility.

5) Once inside the animal the bullet need to stay on course in order to reach the vitals. For this task non expanding, parallel side bullets are preferable. Most of expanding bullets, Barnes X included, have a tendency to tumble while the expanded section is acting as a parachute. In my opinion those bullets are not really suitable for elephant and buffalo.

6) The ideal bullet must mantain his course even after striking bone. This condition effectively rule out bullets that are too fragiles, as the South African CS Game Ranger, and all the bullets that after striking a major bone may be so deformed not to be able to mantain their straight course. Almost all bullets actually on the market are more than adequate in penetration if no major bone is hit and consequently it appears quite pointless to conduct extended tests that are not taking in consideration the major causes of bullet failure in the field.

7)As the temporary cavitation and the hydrostatic shock play no role in the killing of animals bigger than a deer, the best 458 bullet will be the one that will cut the largest permanent wound channel all else being equal. The tissue (including hart and lungs) is higly flexible so a solid bullet with a broad, flat nose will definitively produce a bigger wound channel than a conventional round nose bullet. Ideally a bullet should expand the maximum that will still allow straight full penetration from any given angle and no more.

8) If the game is not killed on the spot, a conspiquous blood trail is higly desirable. In my opinion all the bullets recovered inside the game must be considered failures because no exit wound was created to provide a good blood trail to follow. The most effective bullets are very seldom recovered from the field for the simple reason that, after killing the animal, the bullet is lost in the bush. On a different angle, if a vital organ is hit, any 308 caliber will quickly and humanely kill elephant and buffalo. Consequently the main purpose of using a 458 is to secure an animal wounded by a shot missing the vital organs.

In order to do so, the ideal 458 bullet for thick skinned animals must be able to fully penetrate a buffalo after breaking his shoulder, leaving a large exit wound on the opposite side. In addition the bullet must be able to penetrate a large elephant skull from any given angle.

In my opinion the above tasks are better achieved by a slow moving, heawy and strongly constructed bullet presenting a very broad meplat, as any expanding bullet that I know of may fail to penetrate adequately after striking major bones.

Considering that the shooting distance will seldom exceed 60 yards, in the quest for the most effective 458 bullet for thick skinned animals and buffalo it may be worth to investigate the performance of a 600 grains solid with a broad flat nose pushed at about 1750 ft/sec, keeping in mind that it may require a shorter twist rate to perform properly.

I think that in a meaningful test the 458 DG bullet, before entering any water filled container, should emulate the breaking a large bone after having perforated thick skin and traversed a certain amount of flesh.

How this can be done I do not know yet and I'm open to suggestions. My actual line of thinking is of a kind of box, to be positioned before the water filled containers, containing water socked newspaper and presenting one side closed with some layers of rubber, obtained by discarted tyre's inner tubes, stapled to the box's frame (skin) and with a thick square of chipboard nailed on the opposite side (bone). Any better ideas?

Well, your post will stir things up.

I don't think that your opinions are much different than most peoples. Based upon my experience, though, expanding bullets are much better killers on buffalo than solids.

I don't think anyone will argue about using stabilized solids, but I do not think velocities higher than 2100 fps hurts anything. A lot of elephant are killed with 400 gr and 500 gr solids around 2400 fps.

And there are no guarantees on penetration. Maybe it is good 90% of the time with a certain rifle and bullet but the next may deflect or tumble. And for buffalo, solids zing through on broadside shots, so who cares what kind of solid it is, if you use them? I am not convinced there is this big need for a "blood trail."

If flat nose bullets won't feed in your rifle, don't use them! I don't think it would make that much difference in the field anyway.

Like you say, what is required, other than energy, is a long bullet of high sectional density and a velocity of 2100 to 2400 fps. Maybe the rest is just for fun and games.

A bullet that fits in your conditions and gives even more versatility is the SuperPenetrator. It penetrates more stable than conventional solids and causes wounding effects almost those of expanding bullets.

Big Game Hunting / Bullets penetration

More on field tests are updated soon.

Will,
I agree 100% (and that's rare) with you. I don't think anyone will find a PH in Africa who doesn't think solids are absolutely necessary for elephant. However, in the case of buffalo, I hear more PH's each year saying that they are backing away from their previous convictions regarding the use of solids. These guys see dozens of buff killed with every manner of rifle/bullet combination each year, therefore I respect their opinions even when it runs contrary to what I previously believed. Mind you I'm not talking about any old soft points. The bullets I hear mentioned most often are Barnes X's, Trophy Bonded Bear Claws, and Swift A-Frames.

Geronimo

Geronomo,



I don't understand why this would be a rare event, as I only ever speak the truth!



The greater effectiveness of softs over solids on buffalo is just based upon my experiences. And if you go back and read John Taylor (my hero) he says the same thing. I wish I had taught him everything he knew!



Being my way to never keep my mouth shut... one time there was a new client in camp that had just wounded a cow buffalo because his solid had passed through a bull, and the client was refusing to pay the gov't trophy fee (cheaper than the regular trophy fee). So me and my big mouth, I was cautioning him about using solids when I discovered his PH, who I had never met before, was sitting there also, who had as usual advised his client to use solids.



So then I laid into the PH about it! PZ, being the typical kind and gentle PH, calmly disagreed.



But I am glad to hear that some are finally coming around to my way of thinking.

I totally disagree with the staement that "a bullet that does not go completly through must be considered a failure." That is pure nonsense. I recovered 4 300 gr Swift A Frames from some very dead animals, moreover, on the ones that the bullet exited, seem to travel much farther. FOr buffalo, I prefer the new conventional wisdom of one soft followed by solids, although I suspect that if you use Barnes Xs like Saeed, a solid is not nessesary. jorge

Andrea,



1) The only bullet I tested that did not feed smoothly in my CZ 550 action was the 500 gr Kodiak FMJ FN, which required very forcefull closing of the bolt and a deep crimp on the bullet. The others fed fine in my rifle. Naturally you should check for reliable cycling in your rifle.



2) I agree with you about being realistic about ones tolerance for recoil. My 450 Dakota weighs 11 pounds with sling, scope and ammo, and recoil is not a problem. I recently shot 20 450 and 500 grain bullets off the bench rest at 100 yards with only a PAST recoil pad for shoulder protection. If recoil is a problem in a light weight factory rifdle I would recommend using 400 and 450 grain bullets by North Fork and Kodiak!



3. You have eloquently described what we call "conventional wisdom" in the United States. I am not aware of any study which proves a heavy bullet of moderate velocity penetrates vegetaiton better than one that has more rotational velocity and a higher velocity. In fact quite the opposite is true. (Look at the 2-3 paragraphs about solids at different rotational velocities and muzzle velocities in my article). I will be publshing the full version of this on the Nickudu files later this summer.



The commandant of the US Marine Corps requested a thorough investigation of penetration of common building materials and vegetation in 1982 prior to our adoption of the 5.56 x 45mm M855 ammunition and the XM16-A2. I did much of this work with Colt and the sniper school at Quantico, VA. We tested most of our small arms and opposing force weapons out to 800 meters, and in no case did a 5.56, 7.62, or 12.7mm bullet penetrate farther at lower velocity. (This was even true of the 5.56mm which broke in two at the cannelure at point blank). The construction of the bullet often had more to do with its penetration than any other factor. For instance the 7.62 x 39 PS with mild steel core (50 on the Rockwell B scale), had nearly as much penetration in the LaGrange stop box I called a "light foilage simulator" than a full power 7.62mm NATO with ball ammo. The North Fork, Barnes, and even the disapointing 500 gr Trophy Bonded will still have alot of mass left after shooting through an Acaccia tree.



4) You accept that a 1-10 twist is desirable, which my tests demonstrated, yet you want a bullet at moderate velocity which has lower rotational velocity? I dont get it.



5) Solids do not always penetrate in a straighter line inside the animal compared to a shorter expanding bullet. The FMJ's almost always pitch or yaw, and eventually turn over 180 degrees. This actually increases the size of its permanant wound cavity.



6) The only bullet I tested that was fragile was the 400 grain Woodleigh, and perhaps the 500 gr. Trophy Bonded Speer.



7) Increasing the temporary cavity makes a huge difference in the volume of the permanant wound. You need to use better bullets! I could completely destory the heart of a 1,200 - 1,600 pound American bison with a 375 improved. A .458, 45-70, 12 ga slug, or a 50 and 54 muzzle loader, just made a hole in the heart. Nor were they very efective on spine shots.



8) I am not qualified to disuss the wisdom of using solids in a closely packed heard of 300 buffalo. In my tests, anything equaling the penetration of the 416 Remington will shoot through a buffalo on a side shot according to the late George Hoffman.



I am on the road right now but when I return home I can look up the protocol for using wet newspapers developed by the International Wound Ballistic Association for your stop box. As I recall it was 40 pounds of newspapers with a plywood front and back, and the density was regulated with a 148 gr WC.



I tried something similar to what you invision about 30 years ago and it represented the penetration I got with 45 acp in 600 pound feed lot steer pretty accurately. This had a layer of wet deer hide, 2 inches of wet newspaper, a corrugated peice of tin roofing, 12 inches of wet newspapers, the tin roofing, 2 inches of newspaper and a wet deer hide.



The problem was getting the newspaper to the same density. IWBA has solved this problem and Ill let you know what they use.



Please do remember that my very simple use of water filled nylon buckets correlates to several dozen 400 gr Swifts recovered from Buffalo by over 90% for expansion and weight retention. That degree of uniformity is going to be very hard to improve on.



Andy

Most of these statments are age old arguements, but I basically agree with most of your posts....

I still prefer a solid and I like TWO holes, one in and one out..In the high grass in the Selous hunting bachlor bulls I want a flat nose solid (my guns feed them and yours needs fixing) and a waist high blood trail that the complete penitration of a solid gets, softs that stop on the off side hide, get nose and mouth blood on the ground....

My preference in softs is North Fork, Nosler and the heavy for caliber Woodleighs like the 350 gr. 375 and 450 gr. 416..but all these good softs, in most instances, stop on the off side hide and "expend all their energy inside the buffalo" which is a statment I think is a croc!! Never the less these are excellent choices for herd hunting...

We all have our prejudices and I'm not likly to change mine, although I have changed my mind several times over the years on what I prefer in the way of bullets...so who knows, better yet who cares..

But I care Ray.....about you....and I figured you are never too old to learn something from me.

Andy,

When I was younger I bought from an old Rhodesian cattle farmer a 9.5 x 57 Mannlicher Schoenauer. He told me that he had bought the rifle new in 1937 and he never found the need for a more powerful gun in his whole life.

Together with the rifle he gave me some boxes of Eley-Kynoch ammunition. He strongly advised me to use the solids only for elephants and the softs for buffalos, lions and everything else.

I asked how many elephants, buffalos etc. he did shot with that gun and he told me that he had killed 54 elephants, about 40 lions and more than 1.000 buffalos. I have no reason to doubt his word and I fully agree that a properly placed soft is more effective on buffalos than a FMJ of the same calibre.

I also know that there is no need of a very powerful gun to kill buffalos and elephants, provided that the bullet reach the vitals.

In effect more elephants and buffalos have been killed by the 450 Martini and the 303 Enfield than by all other calibers put together.

Consequently, in my opinion, the only logical reason for using a more powerful calibre must be the extra insurance of not losing an animal because of inaccurate shooting.

Let me tell you a story:

We all know that a 243 Win. is perfectly capable to kill a kudu. I witnessed more than 50 kudus killed with this calibre in a culling operation and no one made more than 50 metres. Based on this experience one can reasonably conclude that a 243 is an adequate hunting calibre for kudu sized animals.

Last year I shot a kudu bull at about 60 yards. It was a full brodside shot and I had a solid rest. Unfortunately the bullet was deflected by a branch and I gut shot the kudu.

Had I used a 243 the animal was going to be almost certainly lost. As I shot him with a 9.3 x 62 I managed to finish him after a couple of hours tracking.

It may be worth noting the it was only the exit wound that very occasionally was giving some droplets of serum.

Without any blood trail the kudu was going to be probably to end as "wounded and lost".

So I'm not against using "enough gun" per se, provided that I'm still able to shoot it accurately.

Regarding 1) I had my gun checked by various gunsmiths, including the Kruger National Park armourer (a 458 Lott specialist) but I still have occasional feeding problems with the GSFN, particularly when operating the bolt very fast. The gun feed reliably with all others bullet shapes.

Regarding 2) I carry the rifle a lot while guiding in the bush and an heawy gun is not very practical for me. At the moment I keep in the magazine 400 grains GSHP loaded at 2300 feet/sec, a load that I trust will give enough penetration and zero bullet failure at point blank range.

Regarding 3) Strangely, in a very informal test of bullet accuracy trough foliage, the most accurate came out the military 223 round, followed by the 458. The medium calibres were in between. Any explanation?

Regarding 4) I'm interested in overstabilizing the bullet to secure straight in line penetration at point blank range. If the the bullet will become unstable at 100 yards it is not my concern.

Regarding 5) I agree that round nose solids tend to tumble but large meplat bullets like the SuperPenetrator, the GSFN and the CS Game Ranger have a reputation of straight in line penetration, that is a very desirable feature.

Regarding 6) The most 458 fragile bullet that I know of is the CS Game Ranger, a South African made copper plated lead slug, locally sold as a premium bullet for dangerous game.

Regarding 7) The size of the permanent wound channel is directly depending on the size of the frontal area of the bullet and inversely depending on his aerodinamics. A FMJ spitzer bullet will create the smallest permanent wound channel and a full wad cutter the biggest.

If you shoot an animal trough the hart with any adequate calibre while the hart is full, you will normally destroy the organ and there it will be also a good chance of the animal dropping dead by brain hemoragy.

If the hart is empty you will just puncture a hole. In both cases the animal will die swiftly. With hart shots the calibre it is not an issue. It is a known fact that elephants have been poached in South Africa by shooting them in the hart with .22 rimfire at point blank range.

Regarding 8) The topic regards the most effective bullet for elephant and buffalo. Being a pragmatic person, if I will have to shoot a buffalo in the middle of an herd, I will use a soft, avoiding frontal shots.

Thanks for the wet newspaper protocol. It is really too complicated for my taste. In the past I've been using old telephone directories, soaked in water overnight and sligtly pressed in order to remove excess water, but it is difficult to find them in Phalaborwa in any meaningful quantity.

Have you ever tried wet sawdust? I may obtain a good supply from the local mill. Nylon buckets are unfortunately too expensive for me at this moment.

To emulate a bradside shot I can also obtain fresh cow hide from the local abattoir. It may be messy but is definitively more representative than rubber. Do you think that 1/2 inch chipboard can meaningfully represent a buffalo shoulder bone?

Regards

Will,
I'm sorry, I didn't mean that it's rare that I agree with YOU. What I was trying to say is that it's rare that I agree 100% with anyone's ideas. Perhaps I could have worded it differently. BTW I too am an avid Taylor fan.

Geronimo

Andrea,

I am glad the wet newspaper data was useful to you.

The Alaska bullet works (who make the excellent bonded core Kodiak bullets) told me they use the wet sawdust recommended by Bob Hagel in his book, Game loads and practical ballistics for the american hunter," which was published in 1979.

I have this book somewhere but cant find it.

Maybe someone on this thread could look up the composition of this for you.

I would "regulate," or correlate whatever Mr. Hagel used to bullets you have recovered from game animals yourself as I did with Mr. Hoffmans collection of 416 bullets.

The Canadian Mounted police tried installing large pork shoulder bones into gelatin some years ago and found it was not necessary, the gelatin was already calibrated or dense enough, to simulate autopsy results from numerous police shootings and thousands of battle field injuries. So it may not be necessary to use a hard layer inside the wet sawdust or a water filled container.

What I do like about this proceedure is that is "shocks" the bullet by providing a phase chamge or change of density. It will certainly be hard on an un-bonded soft point. And it may make the bullets "tumble," or pitch an yaw.

I shot 375 caliber bullets into a stack of 30 gallon drums of water 20 years ago from 400 yards trying to recover bullets and made the mistake of putting a 1/2 inch thick peice of plywood in front of the 30 gallon drums to use as a target stand. All of the bullets tumbled after going through that 1/2 inch plyboard and except for the Bitterroot looked like a handful of shrapenal.

You could try it both ways and then compare it to bullets in your collection.

Regarding your questions, if you have a custom barel made for your 458 I would recommend the 1-10 twist.

But be warned the increased rotational velocity will be hard on a conventional (unbonded) soft point even while helping keep a monometal or FMJ straight.

I cant explain why your informal test resulted in the 223 being superior to a 458. In my tests at Quantico the 12.7mm was the penetration champ! And the 7.62mm was surprisingly effective. (It had ten times the richochet range as a 223).

Perhaps it was your test media. I used the LaGrange stop box as a light foilage simulator, 4 x 4 inch pressure treated posts 8 inches apart for a medium foilage simulator and rail road ties for a heavy. The 223 would perforate one rail road tie and we increased this to four posts bound together to simulate a mature forest in central europe.

I also did some similar testing in Singapore and just hosed down jungle foilage, putting targets far enough back to just barely see the firing position.

As you know, the farther apart you place your "forest" the more the bullet will tumble. So I would try and simulate the diameter of trees and tree limbs you are encountering, and the distance between them.

I would be curious to hear a description of your test with the 223, medium calibers and 458.

I certainly enjoyed reading your reply. You sound like a gentleman and sportsman.

Sincerely, Andy

"2) A DG cartridge need to be reasonably accurate on follow up shots within about 2 seconds interval (at 36 km/hour a charging animal in 2 seconds covers 20 metres on the ground). My absolute limit for rapid fire is a 500 grains bullet at 2200 ft/sec, and I feel far more confortable with a 500 grains at 2100 ft/sec."

Andrea: Anyway you could get a 3 inch, or is it 3 1/4 inch,
450 Nitro Express? The Kynoch round is a 480 grain round nose, at 2180 fps, IIRC. Seems to me, at the lower pressures of the 450 Nitro, this would be ideal for you.

Also, keep in mind, that my gunsmith states as fact that the larger area to the bullet, the more energy transfered.

I recently gave him some 458 Impala 300 grain solids, he's going to try on bison. Perhaps the higher velocity, lighter recoil, and the larger bullet size, might be the answer to the problem you are facing?

Besides, Impala bullets are avaliable in SA, unlike here.

Good hunting

s

Andy,

So the sawdust idea is workable after all! Great!

As you immediately picked up, the purpose of the change of density in the media is to "upset" the bullet simulating the dynamic effect of smashing trough a mayor bone, a well know cause for bullet failure.

After many years of satisfactory results I stopped using the extremely accurate Sierra bullets (I used to shoot eggs a 300 metres) on my 270 because once one totally disintegrated on a springbok leg at 500 yards.

As all the springboks that I had shot previously had died on the spot via hart/lung shots I never had before the chance to realize the shortcoming of that particular bullet.

Later I found out that the A frame shoot almost as accurately on my pet rifle.

I've used now the 270 A frame bullets even on gemsbok and the performance have always been more than satisfactory.

On gemsbok I always avoided shoulder shots but once I tried the A frame on a frontal neck shot at about 70 yards.

The bullet smashed his way trough the neck and it was not recovered. The gemsbock died on the spot. I'm a believer of strongly constructed bullets.

Regarding my very empirical test of the foliage penetration ability of 223, 270, 308 and 458 I used one lifesize impala target at 100 metre.

The target was positioned in tall grass, that was covering the area between the target and an improvised shooting bench.

The grass was not so thick to make impossible to identify the outline of the target, so the aiming was reasonably accurate.

All rifles were scoped. The accuracy previously obtained shooting on the same target without obstruction was of about 4/10" for the 270, 1/2" for the 223, 2/3" for the 308 and 1" for the 458.

Shooting trough the grass I obtained the following results:

223 about 2/3", 458 about 1,5", 308 about 2" and 270 more than 2".

Going back on the original topic, I based my quest on the following assumption:

1) To kill an animal you must destroy a vital organ and/or cut the blood supply to the brain.

2) If you reach the vitals any 458 bullet will kill any animal on hearth.

3) In order to reach the vitals a strong bullet construction and straight in line penetration are highly desirable features.

4) Straight in line pentration is enhanced by particular bullet shapes (SuperPenetrator etc) and by over stabilizing the bullet (1/10 twist).

5) Long bullets with parallel sides at moderate velocity have a good reputation for straight in line penetration.

6) Bullet that expand too much tend to thumble and they may also fail to produce an exit wound. Most of them (Barnes X in particular) tend to capsize and to travel with the expanded part acting as a parachute brake.

7) If you miss the vitals there is a good chance that the animal will walk away. In this case a good blood trail is higly desirable.

8) Non expanding solids will zings trough the animal leaving a small exit wound and fully expanded softs will fail to exit most of the time. The ideal bullet must be in between those two extremes.

9) Penetration is directly proportional to the momentum (mass x velocity) and inversely proportional to the frontal area of the bullet. Aerodinamically shaped bullets penetrate more than blunt noses.

10) Temporary cavitation play no meaningful role in the killing or incapacitating of large mammals.

11) Permanent cavitation depends on calibre and bullet shape and not particularly by the velocity of the bullet. Bullets of the same calibre and shape will produce almost the same permanent wound channel at different velocities.

12) The larger is the permanent wound channel the more likely it will be to cause internal and external bleeding.

13) A spitzer FMJ bullet will cause the the smallest permanent wound channel and a full wad cutter shape the biggest.

14) In a bullet to be eventually used to stop a charging animal I'm not concerned in the flatness of trajectory because the bullet will be always used at a very short distance.

!5) A tighter twist than usual will prevent fish tailing at the shorter range (test your 375 H&H at 5 yards to believe) and will increase penetration.

16) In a hunting bullet the flatness of trajectory is the last of my concerns.

All my rifles are sighted at 75 metres (about 83 yards) and I aim always for the hart. The further is the animal the more I will raise istinctively may aim, so automatically compensating the bullet drop. It works for me well up to 200 yards.

I sold years ago my 378 Weatherby and the 460 G&A and I'm now down loading for hunting purpose the 9,3 x 62 to perform as a 9,5 x 57 and the 458 Lott to 458 W.M. velocities.

Getting closer to the animals represents the best part of my hunting and now that I'm viser I do not want to spoil the fun just because I can shoot from far away. In addition slow bullets do not spoil the meat and I'm a biltong hunter.

Talking about Weatherby I had 2 years ago a good friend of mine charged and almost killed by an impala ram that he had shot on the shoulder with a 300 Weatherby from about 30 yards distance.

My friend got the ram with a neck shot almost at point blank range, never realizing how lucky he had been.

The post mortem did show that the ultra fast Wheatherby bullet totally disintegrated on the shoulder bone without penetrating. Had he used a 30-30 the ram was going to be killed by the first shot, that was properly placed.

Will
Your right of course, I am not too old to learn from you, but I am too smart!! Gotcha!

Andrae,
my comment to the phrases of your last post:

1) to 5) Right,
6) expanding bullets normally do not tumble, but they fail to produce an exit wound, the expanded part acting as a parachute brake. Not to produce an exit wound means, there is less energy dissipation in the vitals. (Drag function in the body!)
7) and 8) Right
9) Momentum density ( momentum per area ) is the key figure for penetration, Aerodynamically shaped bullets penetrate more than blunt noses in air, but in tissue they loose penetration because their penetration is not stable and they start to tumble in short.
10) and 11) partly right, but to many variables cause a complex behaviour.
12) Righr
13) No, a spitzer FMJ immediatly starts tumbling, turns over causing a big permanent wound channel. see Fackler�s
study on M16 cartridges.
14), 15) and 16) very right.

Norbert,

Thanks for you contribution.

Regarding the FMJ propension to tumble I have mixed experiences.

Definitively the 174 grains military cartridge for the 303 have terrible a reputation for tumbling but I noticed a straight in line penetration propension in the Eley-Kynoch 9,5 x 57.

The entry and exit wounds were always very small in diameter but they were in line most of the time. Wound channel and meat damage were minimal.

It may be that, beside shape, bullet stabilty at the moment of the impact play a significant role in keeping the direction.

I also believe that slower and heavier bullets stay on course better than lighter and faster bullets.

Maybe the twist rate of the hunting rifles is normally optimized to secure stability at the maximum range with the consequence that at normal hunting distances the bullet is not properly stabilzed and tend to capsize.

I also have a gut feeling that by overstabilizing the bullet, not only the penetration at the shorter distances will be improved but also the propension to stay on course.

Any experience in this direction?

Regards

The difference in your experiences may be from the fact that most soft nose bullets will turn over one time as they loose momentum and come to rest on the off side skin, this is not uncommon at all, but it really does not have much to do with anything, it is not a bullet failure at all as it turns over at the end of its journey...A lot of folks think that the bullet tumbled when it did not, it performed perfectly and flipped, that's all......

From the Nickudu Files:
Killing Mechanism Myths

Andrea,

Has anyone found Bob Hagels recipe for a sawdust filled stop box for you yet?

The .303 was designed to "tumble," so as to increase the frontal area of the bullet and increase the volume of the wound.

All spitzer bullets, especially a spitzer flat base, move the center of gravity behind the center of form. This makes it more likely to turn over 180 degrees.

A FMJ RN is more stable because its center of gravity is very close to its center of form. But they still turn over 180 degrees. A 6.5 mm manlicher, which has a 1-8 twist I recall, will penetrate nearly one meter before turning over.

Some WW I era 303 british ammo had either a wood, ceramic, or aluminum tip in the ogive on top of a lead core to make it tip over sooner. Probably the best anti personnel ammo of the Great War. But even the lead core still tips over rapidly. Ask the Russian Spetsnaz soldiers killed with it in Afghanistan!

Andy

Andy,
Going back some 50 years and a memory that is failing...

He used a cut out water heater; a thick piece of leather over the entrance, and mixed sand and potting soil 50-50 and quite damp with water, near mud..and a piece of plywood? every 12 inches..

I think that was his mixture, if not it was one of those old guys recipe...

I don't know Bob H.'s recipe for a stop box, but I have a sawdust box that I use for catching bullets. I use the finest sawdust I can find or create. Add a couple gallons of motor oil (I prefer used oil, but others have suggested there could be problems with this - hard on your skin if you handle it directly?).

My box is 8 ft long and 1 ft square. The end is closed by a piece of plastic from a garbage bag which is replaceable as needed, and another wooden cover screws on over that for storage.

Make the box with wood and screws, but glue all joints. Then remove the screws when the glue is dry so that you can use a metal detector to find the bullets.

Keep the top cover on when you fire, or you will have sawdust everywhere.

Stand back enough that you don't start the dust smoldering.

Store it outside, where it will not be a hazzard. Be warned that some oily materials like rags can spontaneously ignite. I don't know if this stuff can, but if mine does, it will hurt nothing where it is stored.

Properly done w/o chips you can get pure lead bullets in near perfect condition.

Brent

Andy,
Potting soil that I refer to is Pete Moss...