The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Medium Bore Rifles Aagaards .30cal & .338cal penetration tests====with Nosler Part.Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Aagaards .30cal & .338cal penetration tests====with Nosler Part. | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
Reading some article of Finns I found his penetration results of the Noslers in .30 and .338 interesting, .30/06-200NP 2634mv = 21" penetration .300Win-200NP 2843mv = 21" .340WBY-250NP-2934mv = 21.5" I really thought the legendary powerhouse 340WBY-250NP would have trumped the .30cals by a much greater margin and interesting the extra velocity/momentum .300mag did not result in more penetration than .30/06 NOTE: these tests were done in telephone books to simply compare penetrative ability, and not to accurately simulate the amount of penetration those bullets would achieve in game. | ||
|
one of us |
I did a lot of the same type of testing of bullets when Finn was doing it and found the same thing. The 200 Partitions were great penetrators and the 220's even better. I even had enough faith in our test to try them on our big bears and the 220 Partitions from a 30-06 will penetrate every bit as well as a 300 gr 375 Partition.  Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship Phil Shoemaker Alaska Master guide FAA Master pilot NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
.458win, What have you found with Nosler Part. penetration (vs) A-Frames in same weight/calibre...? In the past Ive reading various conflicting reports, some say the NP goes further them others indicate the AF goes further..  | |||
|
| one of us |
Partitions tend to penetrate quite a bit deeper, mainly due to the fact that they don't expand as much, or if they do they quickly loose it, so they end up with a smaller frontal surface area. Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship Phil Shoemaker Alaska Master guide FAA Master pilot NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
That would tell me [according to the laws of Physics],..that AFs at much lower velocities (below 2000 FPS impact) is where they may have the penetration advantage over the NP, i.e; similar or lower frontal area at low vel. impact - but far more weight retention. but at the higher velocities the AFs tough thick bonded jacket works to better maintain maximum mushroom/parachute effect [better than the thinner unbonded jacket NP does] Nosler vs AFrame cross-section | |||
|
| one of us |
In my experience the Partitions tend to open up easier than the bonded front end of the A-Frames no matter what the velocity. Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship Phil Shoemaker Alaska Master guide FAA Master pilot NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com | |||
|
One of Us |
In physics we get what we pay for. If the penetration of the 340 and 300 and 30-06 NP's were approximately the same, then you can assume that the destruction by the extra energy was probably greater in each, but not (accurately) measured. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| one of us |
Assuming equal penetration here is no doubt that larger bores have a greater impact. But on the other hand, so long as you have adequate penetration and place the bullet in the correct place the caliber is of secondary consideration. Caliber size is no substitute for placement or penetration. Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship Phil Shoemaker Alaska Master guide FAA Master pilot NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com | |||
|
one of us |
 As usual just my $.02 Paul K | |||
|
One of Us |
Amen and Amen. Nice photo of that sleeping bear to prove it. Pretty rifle too! "The liberty enjoyed by the people of these states of worshiping Almighty God agreeably to their conscience, is not only among the choicest of their blessings, but also of their rights." ~George Washington - 1789 | |||
|
| One of Us |
This makes sense; expansion of diameter is the biggest inhibitor of penetration due to more resistance that the bullet encounters. Penetration is a function of momentum apllied over diameter - this ratio is basically the key to the question, but there is another complicating factor in that momentum cannot be made up with higher velocity with a lighter bullet in a particular caliber, as resistance goes up to the square of velocity in tissue as it is a visco-elastic medium. This is why at magnum velocities the energy is expended too quickly due to increased drag, and so penetration suffers. Naturally weight loss also affects momentum negatively, which is the driving force and this will vary between bullet types with different constructions. Pieter | |||
|
One of Us |
You sure are getting a lot of mileage out of that photo Phil. You should have Rocky frame that blue shirt. Jim fur, feathers, & meat in the freezer  "Pass it on to your kids" | |||
|
| One of Us |
Dang! That there is big!! Bet it eat about 165lbs in a single sitting. | |||
|
| one of us |
the milage keeps getting better because every few months someone come on wonderig how well it works. But I have a lot of other photos of even bigger bears I have used my 458 on. And since I can't seem to wear out that old blue Patagonia poly long under wear top you are likely to see more of it in the future. Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship Phil Shoemaker Alaska Master guide FAA Master pilot NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
just for the record: Mr. Aagaard did measure and state expanded diameters & retained weights, I simply didn't include them. IT would be almost automatic logic to conclude the .338 NP has larger frontal area on expansion. However, how much real world effect/advantage that offers is debatable. 200NP punching through an Elks vitals isnt going too make the beast any less dead than being hit with 250NP. Both would be just as lethal with correct shot placement...as would 175NP from a 7mmMag. Ive had guides try and tell me on AR that a modern loaded .375 is marginal at best on large DG, yet Saeeds extensive success with .375cal results tell me different, then there is the PH who had 52 one-shot-kills on a cape buff cull, using .338cal 200gn monos. I think that helps point out that -- one can't stress enough the primary importance of proper shot placement. BTW some additional bullet test information: 30/06 -200NP .51" expanded dia, 65% WR, (21" pen.) 300Win-200NP .58" expanded dia, 67% WR (21" pen.) 340wby-250NP .69" expanded dia, 74% WR, 21.5" pen 350RMag 250speer .61" expanded dia, 68% WR, (18.5" pen.) 375HH-300Sierra .80" expanded dia. 79% WR ,(18.8" pen.) | |||
|
One of Us |
This^^^^^^ _____________________________________________________ A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill | |||
|
| one of us |
A 338 caliber slug makes a pretty big hole.  | |||
|
One of Us |
 458. How far behind that bear are U squatting?  rogerOld age is a high price to pay for maturity!!! Some never pay and some pay and never reap the reward. Wisdom comes with age! Sometimes age comes alone.. | |||
|
| one of us |
My knees and hand are resting on it. Here is another view with the hunter, who is around 6'3" and 250#'s, attempting to lift the head. He wisely stayed out of the pucker brush until he was sure the bear was dead.  Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship Phil Shoemaker Alaska Master guide FAA Master pilot NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
Destruction channels are different than bullet expansion. This is nicely illustrated by the moose heart in Chuck's picture. The hole and destruction are massive and several times larger than the expanded bullet. My point was that the bullets with higher energy can be expected to produce more destruction (e.g., 300 over 30-06, 340 over 338 and both over .30), assuming similar penetration. In general, one gets what one pays for in physics. Of course, any wound that crosses a threshhold to produce a kill is good or adequate, but the speed of putting an animal down will differ on average with more vital tissue damage. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
one of us |
From my reading, not practical experience mind you, something magical happens with bullets of SD .300 or better at 2400-2500 fps or a bit faster - but not too fast. I've shot 180 grain Barnes X or Federal Trophy coppers from a 30-06 broadside, pass through on both a caribou and pretty big black bear (separate events of course), and at some distance also. I did recover one from the caribou - looks like advertised mushroom from Barnes (similar to the photo above). If you are going to carry a big stick, you've got to whack someone with it at least every once in while. | |||
|
| one of us |
In my experience the only magical thing that happens when some gunwriter writes about the wonders of a slight increase in SD, bullet weight or caliber is that they get paid for it! Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship Phil Shoemaker Alaska Master guide FAA Master pilot NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
Indeed they are different, and volume/dimensions of destruction channels achieved in the phonebook tests are NOT a true and accurate measure of the dia. or length of destruction channels, one would achieve in live tissue. Paper can display larger dia. channels and exit wounds that would not be displayed in living tissue, or even ballistic gel. Paper will clump-up and form a big wad travelling in front of the projectile, creating A larger dia. permament wound channel and exit wound model, comnpared to flesh. Sheer and Tensile factors for paper are very different, as such the paper reacts differently. Mr.Aagard could have measured the width of destruction channels created in the phonebooks, but it wouldn't really relate well to those in animals.
Photos like that never fail to impress people, and no doubt Gail Selbys 7mm solid would have made no where near as big a hole. not that it really mattered.....  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Phil, Looking at Finns results for .30/06 200NP we see a .51" expanded diameter and .300Win .58" expanded dia. and 340wby .69" now lets reflect on the fact that Harry Selby for 41 yrs used .416" dia solids for everything. Selby has atested .416" solids did everything he ever asked of them through his PH career from backing clients to culling, and burning out a barrel in the process,....all this despite them being smaller in diameter that an expanded .30cal NP of course; the important advantage .416" solid offers over .51"or .58" expanded 30cal NP ,...is its impressive ability to PENETRATE Selby didn't find .416" lacking up close, in fact, saying the cartridge never failed him in any situation, while also offering distinct advantage [over larger bore doubles] for the longer distance shots. " There appears to be a trend today that 'bigger is better' regarding big game rifles how little one hears about correct shot placement, and learning to shoot a rifle well the idea seems to be get the biggest cannon you can and 'blast it into the bag'...... If not hit right it won't wind up in the bag!!! " - Harry Selby "There is nothing magical about the 7X57 or .275 whichever you wish to call it. Any 'strong jacketed' solid bullet with a good shape and sectional density at a reasonable velocity should reach an elephant's brain if properly directed there" - Harry Selby Considering Selby for decades drilled elephants,rhino,cape buffalo,lion, bull eland... with non-deforming .416" diameter makes me chuckle people will then debate 340wby .69" expanded will kill game 'better' than a .30/06 at .51" or .3oowin at .58" Since .416" will bring down all kinds of large and DG in Africa Im then not going to concern myself too much whether its a .46" expanded 7mmmag exiting an elks chest, .58" expanded .300mag exiting an elks chest, or, an .69" expanded .340wbY exiting an elks chest. .... Id even gladly try a .416" solid exiting on an elks chest. Q./ Does the larger bore .416 Rigby 'hit harder' than the 30/06, .300win or .340wby? In the case of a .416 solid exiting an elks chest vs the 200NP .51" and 250NP .69" doing same, the answer is ...NO! the smaller .416 frontal area results in less resistance, which means its actually spending less energy and doing less work than the others. The Rigby .275 bore Mauser that Bell purchased in 1923 and then was gifted to the Selbys by Ruark, has been used by Harry himself, his son ,his daughter and his clients, using the 173gn SOLID to kill ele,buff,zebra,kudu and various other plains species. Selby has no criticism, stating it performed well for all those people. PENETRATION and SHOT PLACEMENT being the key.... | |||
|
| one of us |
I have found the 210 gr. Nosler partition in the 30-06 will out penetrate any soft nose 375 bullet that I have tried, same for the big 300s...I think part of the reason for this it the the 300 magnums produce higher velocity and high velocity is counter productive to penetration up to a point and with expanding bullets. The .375 has a broader cross section and that can reduce penetration, but all this is has been hashed out over many a campfire and the validity of any of it is at question..I just happen to be a believer!  The other factor is the 30-06 is magic! I truly believe this to be fact! Ray Atkinson Atkinson Hunting Adventures 10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328 208-731-4120 rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com | |||
|
| One of Us |
Ray, as a matter of interest, in the Rathcoombe penetration tests, the .375 solid in some cases out penetrated the .416 solid by a decent margin! .375 300 Hornady RN solid 2570fps ... 49" .375 (same bullet) at 2790fps.............53" .416 400 Barnes RN solid 2400fps......33" .416 400 Hornady RN solid 2400fps....45" .416 Kynoch FMJ solid 2400fps............53" thats just the variation one can expect with some non-deforming solids, so just imagine the variation one can expect with the numerous types of soft points at various velocities...  eg; Just look at these .30/06 pen. test results from Rathcoombe: Im sure some people will be a little surprised by them.... 165 Failsafe 26" 180NP 16" 200NF 15.7" 200 Aframe 18.5" 220NP 20.5" 220 Woodliegh weldcore 11.7" If one tried to sell someone the idea the 165FS would be the better bullet for deep penetration, the bonehead luddites wouldn't believe you..  BTW: .300mag really did no better than the .30/06 and: .338win 210tsx did 23.6", 250NP 19.5" .340wby 275 AFrame 21.7" | |||
|
| One of Us |
I'll take a flatnose 416rigby, loaded hotter than above, thank you. I prefer consistent, repeatable deep, straight penetration to anomalies all over the board. The Rathcoombe tests have been very helpful, though he, too, mentioned that some things needed re-testing. (For example, his 338 200 gn Speer patterned like the heavier 338's. Anomalies happen.) Michael's "terminals" thread was excellent in terms of finding consistent 0ver-50" straight-line penetration. For that matter, Eastegaard (470 Mbogo fame) had to switch to wood boards just to keep everything moving straight and I seem to remember Aagard losing a few half-dome Barnes and A-Square solids. Repeated testing helps us see the big picture. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Michael is obsessed with peddling his 'Non-Con' promotional nonsense hype. He first should have done some study in base physics before embarking on such since,bullets whether they be CEB,NP or TSX, all operate around the same 'MODEL' in the science of physics. (i.e. an intact rear section with frangible front section.) as such theres nothing non-coventional about CEB bullets. and, As far as his wet phonebook large dia. wound channels and impressive Exit holes go, bear in mind, they are NOT a true and accurate represenatiion of what would take place in living tissue. Unfortunately, Michael once again did not do his physics pre-testing homework to know that wet paper has different sheer and tensile mechanical properties to living flesh, and as result displays very different dimensions of wound and exit holes to living flesh. If you ever see exit wounds and large masses of animal tissue blown-out onto the ground from your Big-game animals, like we see from Michaels 'massive trauma' telephone books,......do let me know!!! This kind of crap is just too funny!...and sadly good number of naive types on AR are easily fooled by it...  
Repeated tests are valuable, thats why I take Bells extensive field tested word for it that the small bore solids are well proven giant killers. and its a lot more valuable data than a pile of 'dead' wet-phonebooks.
What ever makes you happy, just keep in mind some great PHs, well known accomplished game wardens and ivory hunters got through their professional elephant busting duties/careers with.416 RN solids at 2400 fps. Selby, Blunt and Daly are three that come to mind. The 410gn RN solid at 2400 was used by those guys to solve all kinds of problems that recreational hunters today likely will never ever encounter, or ever have to deal with, on DG. then theres ivory hunter Manners, who busted 1000 ele in the job, then went on to carry the same trusty .375 to his yrs as PH. So i just think its funny you think you need more thump than they ever did. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I see you still have serious english language comprehension problems.  "The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane." Mark Twain TANSTAAFL www.savannagems.com A unique way to own a piece of Africa. DSC Life NRA Life | |||
|
| One of Us |
-Paper is made of fibres woven together. Its sheer and tensile properties are not consistent with that of living tissue structure. -The water in the phonebooks is Newtonian in nature, water does not change its viscosity when disturbed. whereas, - Blood in living tissue is Non-newtonian-speudoplastic, it changes its viscosity when disturbed. Theres a lot physics to consider & understand when testing bullets in different types of media. Just trying to impressively call bullets 'Non-Con' and showing dramatic photos of large wads of wet confetti pushed out the exit hole is just plain distractive smoke and mirrors. and further ignorance can be seen below.....
again we have M458 using more nonsense terms like "hydrostatic shock" A basic understanding of fluid dynamics physics, would tell a person that a bullet passing through an animal is far from a static occurrence or reaction. Hydrostatic [def.] -relating to fluids that are at rest/ not in motion, or under pressure. -pertaining to a liquid in a state of equilibrium or the pressure exerted by a stationary fluid. The term "hydrostatic shock" itself, is an oxymoron. "hydrodynamic shock " would be the far more appropriate term to describe the theory. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Trax I think Micheal is in agreement that living tissue is different from a wad of paper, unless he has stated so that bullets would react the same way in both mediums. Clearly the state of matter is very different as Alf has pointed out many times. The other thing is that he did go testing his bullets on live game and on elephant. Numerous buffalo and water buffalo were shot as well. His solids work well, but the main lesson I think is that he contrasted FN with RN solids and how they penetrated in wet paper. Some people use water tanks to test their bullets, and all one can tell is the way the bullet deforms and/or fragments. There is no reference to wound creation. I do not think the so-called "non-con solids" (a new word for the dictionary) will attract a following amongst meat hunters due to the mess it creates. Just look at Woodleigh's funny design called the Hydro-solid, but it kills too. Every one that makes mono-metal solids make them differntly and with different material - none look the same, and everyone believes that his design is superior and their advertisemnets will confirm it. So in the end it is up to anyone's judgement which solid is best: CEB North Fork GSC A-Square Barnes PMP Dzombo Rhino Etc. Pieter | |||
|
| One of Us |
A test medium really needs to have a uniform character of reaction when attempting to compare different type of projectile, In other words one really needs a standardized medium-- paper does not exhibit such character like other reliable test mediums do [ballistic gel, etc] The paper wad that forms in front of a projectile also becomes a projectile, thus will give distorted results. As such, the wound channel and chunks of material thrust out, is not indicative of what would be displayed in live tissue or ballistic gel. ...you also then have the combined drag of the bullet and wad, rather than typically a bullet alone. | |||
|
| One of Us |
A couple clarifications: Michael uses 'non cons' for the 'CEB raptor' noses that blow petals and push them away from the central wound channel. A solid is not a 'non con', unless someone wants to call a 'flat nose' a 'non-conventional'. Secondly, Michael reported that penetration in live animals was typically about 30% deeper than in his wet-newspaper tests. Both animals and newspaper showed extreme trauma when a 'non-con' raptor blew its petals in an outward star pattern. In many hunting cases the petals would be found in the far side of the chest cavity, with the central slug always exciting. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I agree save for that ballistic gel also does not give the correct wound profile, but yes ballistic gel is much better than paper, just more complex and costly. Paper wounds is not representative by any means - agreed. Pieter | |||
|
| One of Us |
No one is disputing that a traditional solid is not a "non-con solid" - non con is criptic in its description - non-con solid is more descriptive. Non con is just a term for the lack of having a better descriptive word. It is like adding a new word to a dictionary - in this case Michael's own dictionary. That these non-con solids can kill and making a mess is not disputed - we have seen the shredded lungs of the 6 petals that is going wider than the prime wound that the remainder of the bullet (the now shortened sylinder) is making. Pieter | |||
|
| One of Us |
If someone wants to see the Raptors in ballistic gel, check out the CEB website. There are some useful pictures. As for 'solids', that term is normally used for a non-expanding bullet. The 'non-con's are expanding. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| One of Us |
The question as to the effectiveness of the non-con solid bullet is still questioned because in lightweight bullets the petals are also lightweight. For example in a .458 vs .308 bullet there is notable difference in the weight of the petals that become secondary projectiles which translate to much lower momentum for the lighter bullet. It stands to reason that the petals of the 458 bullet will penetrate deeper but also inflict more damage. Are there examples of how .308 non cons have performed on game to evaluate the tissue and lung/heart damage. The other question is why should a meat hunter opted for a non con bullet instead of saying a Swift A-Frame or a North Fork bullet that creates a bigger primary wound tract (bigger mushroom? Pieter | |||
|
| One of Us |
CEBs are just yet another variation of controlled expansion bullet. - monometals are nothing new - brass construction is nothing new - segmented design expanding nose sections are nothing new, - petals blowing off is nothing new - plastic tips are nothing new - pressure/contact relief grooves in the body are nothing new. They are all features adopted from various other previously established bullet companies. Even Mr.Nosler could have called his evolutionary design Partitions non-cons if he wanted to, just to add spice to his marketing....but the company got to where it is without it. Instead he kept it simple honest and straightforward by giving it a name, 'partition', which directly relates to its unique at the time, internal physical design feature. Like in the days when tire companies just called the newly developed advanced design just what it physically was,.....eg: a tubeless steel-belted-radial. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Things I've learned from 30 consecutive years of black bear hunting: > bigger IS better assuming appropriate bullets for the task. > penetration is often overblown. > a big-bore flat point in soft or solid works faster than a spitzer or spire in a lesser bore, unless it's a CNS hit. > momentum counts more than KE alone. > a larger permanent wound cavity kills faster than a smaller one assuming body shots. > a .458" cal will drop a good size bruin in its tracks with a lung shot; a .35 cal will not usually. > assuming equal ability with a Big Bore and a Medium, as well as appropriate bullets in each, I have more confidence that a mature bear will not travel as far when vitally hit with a single 465gr/.458 at 1750 fps impact than with a single 286gr/.366 at 2500 fps, even though KE is more for the 9.3 (.366). Physics would suggest that should be true, and my experience confirms it. This experience was separated by 6 years. The location was separated by 50 yards, and the range was almost identical -- 70 yards and 68. Both bears were 6-foot males, and both took shots under the chin. Both were facing me directly on. The first was flattened on the spot by a .458- cal hardcast FP (3162 ft-lbs impact), and the other took the 286 NP at 2510 fps (4000 ft-lbs) and went 20 yards before falling another 20 down an escarpment. The 465gr was never found, and the 286 NP was found in skinning in the fur of a flank. It retained 211 grs (73.8%) after 3-feet of penetration! Other similar experiences have sold me on .458-cal, though my 9.3 X 62 is also a favorite. But there IS a difference that matters! Bob Mitchell www.bigbores.ca "Let every created thing give praise to the LORD, for he issued his command, and they came into being" - King David, Psalm 148 (NLT) | |||
|
| one of us |
You are corret - tubeless steel belted radials kill a lot of deer and moose every year Anyone who claims the 30-06 is ineffective has either not tried one, or is unwittingly commenting on their own marksmanship Phil Shoemaker Alaska Master guide FAA Master pilot NRA Benefactor www.grizzlyskinsofalaska.com | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Medium Bore Rifles Aagaards .30cal & .338cal penetration tests====with Nosler Part.
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia