read some interesting info on the post about homogenous bullets potentially damaging the barrels on original double rifles... is this possible on, say, an original 1895 winchester? or any other type of rifle made 50+ years ago? thanks

That is a good question.

The Winchester "Nickel Steel" for "Smokeless Powder" may have been fine for nitro but not for brass bullets.

Reminds me of the warning on ammo boxes:

"This ammunition was manufactured for use in modern arms in good condition." Or words to that effect.

I would think that a hardness test for the barrels of such arms would be a good idea.

I'm a duffer when it comes to metallurgy of gun steels.

However, it has been written by trustworthy sources in the literature, that pre-WWII steels were both heavier, weaker, and softer than the modern steels that were developed as a neccessity for the combat weapons of WWII.

The gun manufacturers since then have of course used the stronger stuff and more uniformly heat treated, without the artful surface-only hardening in old actions like the Mauser.

I would use driving-banded monometal copper FN/FP solids only in an antique rifle (pre-WWII), whether single barrel or double barrel.

I gave the remainder of my GSC FN loaded ammo in .416 Rigby (380 grain) to Ronnie McFarlane in Botswana when I left. He was happy to get that one shot killer of cape buffalo, for use on elephant from his original old .416 Rigby by John Rigby.

That was a pre-WWII rifle in original guise and good condition. It weighed about 9.25 Lbs on a Magnum Mauser action, and hefted for me like a CZ 550 Magnum Lux stocked rifle, though his stock was straight combed and had enough drop for iron sight use, as intended and practiced.

Ronnie was an old pro and he eschewed the brass solids and steel jacketed solids in his rifle, a gift from Papa Ian McFarlane, of the old school PH's.

Ronnie knew of the excellent reputation of GSC FN's from the country next door. He would not use anything but the best.

GSC or North Fork, FN, FP or Cup Point, just like for a double rifle.

The North Fork Soft Point is the best soft in the universe for "any velocity" including antique and modern rifles.

For the high velocity, long range numbers, the GSC HV or Barnes TSX take the more limited slice of the pie, for modern guns and high pressures. Of course the GSC HV has the same copper bands as the FN, and would be easy on rifle barrels too, for antigues, but then you get into the lower velocities and maybe unreliable expansion of the hollowpoint at other than close range. A hardness testing of the HV versus the TSX would be interesting for comparing those two copper monometal hollowpoints. Also the diameter and any internal scoring on the walls of the hollowpoint. Newer Barnes TSX's, XLC's, and X-Bullets have bigger hollows than the original X-Bullet.

Well that is a duffer's opinion. My 2 cents worth, free of charge.

a lot of good info here. the reason i asked is that i'm buying an original (not one of those damn jap knockoffs! ) model 1895 in 405. was wondering if hornady or even the kynoch offering would damage the barrel. thanks!

quote:

Originally posted by byf42:
a lot of good info here. the reason i asked is that i'm buying an original (not one of those damn jap knockoffs! ) model 1895 in 405. was wondering if hornady or even the kynoch offering would damage the barrel. thanks!

Personally I would not use a straight-walled solid of any configuration in an original 1895. Not a Woodleigh, not a Barnes, etc.

I would use a North Fork (www.northforkbullets.com) or a GS Custom (www.gscustom.co.za) flat nose solid as the driving band configuration will be very gentle on the barrel.

The other configuration I would use is a quality cast lead bullet.

Have fun with the .405!

500grains-

what about the factory hornady flat point semi jacketed bullets? will those tear it up too?