3 shots and observing the keyholing, or lack thereof, has been very enlightening.

I will concede that the difference between one more board bumped by a tumbling bullet is not significant, whether it is 10 or 11 compartments traversed.

What is important is the board where the bullet keyholed. After that it is worth diddly squat anyway. It may or may not get through the next water bag to smack the next board depending randomly on how it happens to be gyrating across the barriers in question.

New rules: Iron Buffalo score is merely the board number where the bullet is obviously keyholing. After that matters not.

All with North Fork .475/500gr FPS, Results:

A. 26" .470 Capstick, 10" Twist McGowen, reduced load (78.0 grains IMR-4064 for 2142 fps at 5 yards), estimated 25 yard impact velocity 2067 fps: Definite keyhole in the 10th, stopped sideways on 11, light indentation.

B. 25" .470 Mbogo, 16" Twist Pac Nor, reduced load (110.0 grains H4831SC for 2170 fps at 5 yards), estimated 25 yard impact velocity 2095 fps: Definite keyhole in the 10th, stopped sideways on 11, light indentation.

C. 25" .470 Mbogo, 16" Twist Pac Nor, moderate load (110.0 grains of RL-15 for 2558 fps at 5 yards), estimated 25 yard impact velocity 2483 fps: Definite keyhole in the 10th, but hit 11th board nose on leaving a deeper small round indentation from nose first (or base first?) impact: RANDOMNESS!!!

So, when the .470 NE at 2100 fps beat the .470 Capstick at 2300 fps, by one board only, for one shot only of each, it may have been insignificant RANDOMNESS in those keyholing last two compartments.

The splash and the smash of the .470 Mbogo was something to behold! The innertube bound entry board was folded up and flung 5 yards back uprange. Water went 5 yards into the sky and it seemed to be raining for a spell afterwards.

With the new Flat Nosed Monometal solids, higher velocity is not a detriment to penetration. The .470 Mbogo will penetrate as well as the slower rounds, and do a lot more damage along the way, with softs AND solids, no doubt.

Once upon a time, when the old round nose solids ruled, higher velocity could make them fishtail erratically after shallow penetration.

No more. Only a fool would use those old round nose solids now.

Remember the A-Square Monolithic round-nose brass solid, of .475/500gr persuasion? Under the new rules it scores a 3 compared to the North Fork FPS, which is a 10.

I have video of the three shots today and will see if I can get it posted eventually.

I did see some nose expansion of the 2500 fps .470 Mbogo FPS bullet. It expanded uniformly from about .40" to .43" at the meplat, and that was the only deformation of the bullet, and it did not hurt penetration.

Speed kills.

BTW, this is more evidence that twist matters not after impact with the game animal. It just matters for external ballistics, not terminal ballistics.

The .470 Mbogo is a Terminator with a capital "T."

Yes, Gerard, I am borrowing phrases from you. You are the father of this bullet. North Fork FPS and GSC FN are interchangeable. If the GSC FN is good for elephant, then the North Fork FPS is too.

Unless there is a big difference in the copper alloy used, that is. So ... Gerard, do you heat treat or use a different alloy on the HV versus the FN? Trade secret?

I'll be looking for you when I get back to RSA. I could use just about any of your bullets on hand when I show up with a suitcase full of packing peanuts, to be packed to the weight limit.

So far it seems that the GSC FN .375/300gr FN penetration topped out at close to 2500 fps MV, and going up to 2700 fps did not get any more penetration, just more splash and better splintered boards.

The .375gr/270gr GSC FN at 2900 FPS penetrated less than the above two. Does this suggest something about that handy old Figure of Merit, Sectional Density???

Similarly on repeated trials now, the .475/500gr North Fork FPS seems to top out around 2100 FPS and get the same penetration at 2500 fps, but sure throws more water and wood higher and farther with the faster bullet.

All of this is predicated on use of Flat Nose Solid bullets.

Maybe it is just shoulder stabilization that is the self righting tendency that keeps them flying nose first? Any supercavitation tendency doesn't hurt a bit either.

I will shoot no more round nose solids forever. Round nose soft points are O.K., of course.

At the 2100 fps velocities with .475 and 2500 fps with .375, the splash is pretty anemic. The faster velocity loads with both bullets are much more visually impressive on target and penetrate as well as the slower ones.

A .45/70 just won't cut it in the Hurt&Hurt department, I am sure. But I guess I need to see how slow I can go before the penetration falls off. I think I am there right now. I expect any slower and the tumbling will start sooner.

Iron Buffalo Rules: The number of the first board with a keyhole is the score.

Other tests to add to general knowledge:

1. a) Cylinder versus b) FPS-type meplat
of same weight, caliber, and velocity: which penetrates farthest?

2. a) Bridger .505/550gr Brass Flat Nose solid versus b) A-Square .505/525gr Monolithic Round Nose solid at same Mo/XSA, since I do not have same weight bullets for those two, but that stacks the deck according to sectional density. Too easy. Another nail in the coffin of the round nose solid. Nah, not worth doing at all. I almost forgot, I will shoot no more round nose solids forever. I'll just do the Bridger at low to high velocity, from way low, maybe 1500 fps, then 2000 fps, then to 2500 fps and see if I get a difference.

RIP,

One point on the 45/70.

I think to get a true comparison you would need to load the hard cast bullet at the 1500 f/s because that bullet will be much shorter than the same weight in solid copper/brass.

Another consideration might be twist. Not sure, but I think Marlin 45/70s are 1 in 20.

Mike

Mike,
Twist doesn't matter for terminal ballistics, except it might help those tippy roundnose solid bullets go a few inches farther before tumbling ... maybe.

Have I not demonstrated this most definitively with shots from a Merkel with 18 " maybe 21" twist (I cannot reliably measure this one for some reason, but 21" is the traditional H&H twist IIRC) ... with shots from 10" and 16" rifles at same velosity ... well, the data is small, but it is growing.

I do agree that the denser lead may be more stable in penetration, but it is not even as hard as copper, even the "hard cast" lead.

I see I must definitely add a .45/70 SuperPenetrator to the mix before I am done. .458/550gr hard cast lead flat nose at 1500 fps, eh?

It is on the list. Variety is the spice of life.
As for scientific significance ... later.

Ron,

"hard cast" while not as hard as copper might for all practical purposes be as hard given the combination of 1500 f/s and your test box.

Perhaps some keen 45/70 advocates could send you a couple of projectiles in the interests of science

Mike

I wonder if the A-Square round nose bullets would penetrate deeper if loaded backwards, with the round nose facing the powder. That would give a nice meplate up front. Might not feed well, but it would be interesting to be able to report to A-Square that their bullets penetrate 20% deeper if loaded backwards.

HI Ron,
Souds like you've had some fun again. The 470 Mbogo downrange impacts have always been spectacular to say the least. I'll bet some of the Bridger 540 grain flat nose solids with the large meplate at 2400 fps would show some good results also. After reading all the Garrett write ups I tried shooting the heavy for caliber bullets at different velocities into plywood and found the faster you drove the bullets the deeper they penetrated. I loaded my 470 Mbogo with 540 grain Bridger solids at 1550, 2100 and 2400 fps. I figured that was as close as I could get to the 45/70 garret loads.
Take good care,
Dave

500,

If you start loading bullets backwards then you might end up heading down in line feed avenue and that in turn could lead you to those crappy Weatherbys or perhaps HS Precision or even Rem 700s with HS Precision magazine

Not only that but you might have to have calibres with big case diameters compared to bullet diameters.


Mike

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
I wonder if the A-Square round nose bullets would penetrate deeper if loaded backwards, with the round nose facing the powder. That would give a nice meplate up front. Might not feed well, but it would be interesting to be able to report to A-Square that their bullets penetrate 20% deeper if loaded backwards.

have you tried the 380 gr rhino bullets? i know we are on a solids only diet, but it would be neet to see the north forks up against the rhino bullets

I have some .458-.459 diameter 540gr gas check bullets cast out of Linotype alloy. This is a very hard cast bullet with a large, flat meplat.

I would be glad to donate as many as you might need for testing. I would love to see how a heavy cast bullet at 1500fps or 1700fps fairs against the big boys.

These are not perfect castings. They have some minor flaws that shouldn't affect you test.

"hard cast" while not as hard as copper might for all practical purposes be as hard given the combination of 1500 f/s and your test box.

Mike[/QUOTE]

If RIP is interested I could send him some HARD Cast--500gr and 530gr LFNGC,in the 475 CALIBER.He could load these in any of his 470 rifles as a test .You should hsve NO problem with leading up to 2100-2200 fps.


Sean

Rip!

Since you have gotten the Iron Buffalo up and running have you tried to compare round nose solids to flat nosed solids. I know you don't like RN solids but either I missed your results or you haven't revisted the issue with the new test medium. I for one would like to see such results. Thanks for your experiments.

465H&H

RIP,

again very interesting results.

I think you are confirming my former assumptions:

With modern FN solids common wisdom about SD, Mo/xarea is still valid.
Penetration is limited by the stability of the supercavitation bubble, which is not influenced by velocity in certain limits. (this was not analyzed by me before ).
All parameters the same, higher velocity causes only more destruction (splash, wounding).

Especially for the modern long monometal bullets, shoulder stabilisation is not possible.

I think, I should prepare a post on this matter, evtl. boring some forum members.

RIP,

Thanks for keeping the data coming.

As for RNs vs. FPs, I don't think I've yet seen any test data comparing penetration between the classic Woodleigh steel jacketed RN solids vs. one or another of the monometal FP solids.

IIRC, the Woodleighs did very well in 470Mbogo's plywood penetration tests.

I think that proves my therory that 2400 to 2600 FPS or better with any bullet of .300 SD and proper construction is the best route to go for knock'um, sock'um calibers......but the others work on my hanging elephants well enough..

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I think that proves my therory that 2400 to 2600 FPS or better with any bullet of .300 SD and proper construction is the best route to go for knock'um, sock'um calibers......but the others work on my hanging elephants well enough..

Ray,
You got that right! As usual.

MR,
I tested a Woodleigh .423/400gr FMJ "solid" at 2401 fps MV, in the 5 gallon water bucket train, and compared it to a North Fork .423/380gr FPS at 2525 fps MV. 25 yards to the impact. Buckets were end to end along the ground.

The Woodleigh keyholed through the bottom of the third bucket, spun like a propeller through the 4th bucket and stopped with a light bump in the bottom of the 5th bucket. The base of the Woodleigh was flattened by collision with water in 5 gallon buckets!!! It was a regular fish tail!!! Spinner bait for suckers!!!

The North Fork FPS did not keyhole at all and went straight through 8 buckets, sticking nose first in the lid of the 9th bucket.

THAT IS SOME FREAKY RANDOMNESS!!!

And the A-Square bullet keyholed in the third board of the Iron Buffalo.

In Real Buffalo or Iron Buffalo, no round nose solid is worth testing anymore.

I will shoot round nose solids no more forever.

quote:

Originally posted by Norbert:
RIP,

again very interesting results.

I think you are confirming my former assumptions:

With modern FN solids common wisdom about SD, Mo/xarea is still valid.
Penetration is limited by the stability of the supercavitation bubble, which is not influenced by velocity in certain limits. (this was not analyzed by me before ).
All parameters the same, higher velocity causes only more destruction (splash, wounding).

Especially for the modern long monometal bullets, shoulder stabilisation is not possible.

I think, I should prepare a post on this matter, evtl. boring some forum members.

Norbert,
Please feel free to be a big bore, after all, this is the big bore forum. I am wrapping my mind around this "same penetration but bigger wounding" concept.

Really the Iron Buffalo has served its purpose. It has proven beyond a doubt that Flat Nosed solids are better than Round Nosed solids, which are turning out uniformly laughable, A-square or Woodleigh.

The Iron Buffalo has proven that you can use higher velocity and not lose penetration, you just get a surer and quicker one-shot kill.

The Iron Buffalo has proven that a .375/300gr at either 2500 fps or 2700 fps beats a .375/270gr at 2900 fps.

Now I want to see how low the velocity must be to really decrease penetration seriously.

I propose to do this with the Bridger Brass Flat Nose solid .505/550gr at 1500 fps to 2500 fps. That ought to make a difference.

A .416/370gr cylinder is in the works to compare to same weight and caliber FPS.

Hi Ron,
Are you ready to take your 470 Mbogo to Africa for Buff with a bit of confidence on your side?
Take good care
Dave

Ah, RIP, but it is not wise to draw universal conclusions from such limited data.

How many elephant were slain before the first flat nosed solid ever managed, through human ingenuity, to rear its wide, flat head?

What is failure outside a laboratory? I am willing to concede, based on what data I have seen, that flat is better than round in solids, but how much better?

Theoretical degrees of betterness are not enough. I want more empirical data . . .

quote:

Originally posted by 470 Mbogo:
HI Ron,
Souds like you've had some fun again. The 470 Mbogo downrange impacts have always been spectacular to say the least. I'll bet some of the Bridger 540 grain flat nose solids with the large meplate at 2400 fps would show some good results also. After reading all the Garrett write ups I tried shooting the heavy for caliber bullets at different velocities into plywood and found the faster you drove the bullets the deeper they penetrated. I loaded my 470 Mbogo with 540 grain Bridger solids at 1550, 2100 and 2400 fps. I figured that was as close as I could get to the 45/70 garret loads.
Take good care,
Dave

Dave,
I really think you need to add some water or ordnance gelatin to your boards, so as not to mislead MR about the round nose solids in game.
Shooting into plain lumber can sometimes make a Woodleigh RNSP "Weldcore Soft" look like a hard nosed super penetrator.

That water just gets harder and gets flung higher, the faster the bullet goes, and overall penetration is not increased in the Iron Buffalo.

AND ...

Thanks to all for the offer of .45/70 Hard Cast Lead Bullets. I do not want to go there just yet, but will consider it when I get as old as Ray.

quote:

Originally posted by 470 Mbogo:
Hi Ron,
Are you ready to take your 470 Mbogo to Africa for Buff with a bit of confidence on your side?
Take good care
Dave

Dave,
I think your cartridge is tops for a killer of the largest of beasts, no doubt, as it seems to be a little bit better than anything else out there, no matter how you look at it. I will take it and the Merkel on the next one so as to have a ".470 Safari."

I am saving a stash of GSC .475/500gr HV bullets to try on plains game at 2700 fps out to 300 yards or more.

quote:

Originally posted by mrlexma:
I am willing to concede, based on what data I have seen, that flat is better than round in solids, but how much better?

About 20% on game.

from american handgunner


This is a test. Rank the following in order from that offering the deepest to the shallowest penetration: .500 Nitro Express, .458 Win. Mag., .45-70, .500 Linebaugh and .45 Colt. If you're like most shooters, you would probably say they are already in the right order -- and you would be wrong. The true ranking is neither a guess nor an opinion, but rather fact gained under controlled conditions. I have just returned from the first annual Big Bore Sixgun Seminar hosted in Cody, Wyo., by custom gun-maker John Linebaugh.

Most -- make that all -- seminars I have attended in the past have been presented by firearms manufacturers with the express purpose of showcasing their products. This seminar was quite different. Over 100 of us gathered to discuss big bore sixguns, how they work, why they work and, most importantly, why they are so effective on big game. No one was selling anything except truth.

We spent the first morning discussing big bore sixguns with Linebaugh and then the afternoon was spent doing actual penetration tests with the biggest sixguns and rifles available.

For any cartridge to be effective -- whether it's fired from a sixgun or rifle -- the "Four Ps" must be in place. Those are Placement, Power, Performance and Penetration. We define these terms as follows.

Placement: where the bullet strikes the intended target.

Power: the muzzle energy or TKO value.

Performance: whether the bullet expands, holds together, or comes apart.

Penetration: how deeply the bullet travels in the target medium, especially in a large animal.

Certainly a solid bullet, whether hardcast or jacketed, can be expected to penetrate much deeper than a jacketed hollowpoint or soft nose. That is a given. The wise hunter decides, according to his intended quarry, whether he needs ultimate expansion, deepest possible penetration or a combination of both.

As a shooter of big bore sixguns for well over four decades, and also one who knows how effective sixguns can be on big game, I must say I was surprised at how effective various sixgun cartridges proved to be during the penetration tests. For the shooting and experimentation, the standard bundles of newspaper soaked in livestock watering tanks were used. No guess. No golly. No opinion.

Going back to the five cartridges mentioned at the beginning the results were most interesting. Randy Garrett's .45-70 Hammerhead 530 gr. hardcast at 1,550 fps went 55" into wet newspaper. A 495 gr. hardcast .500 Linebaugh fired from a 5.5" sixgun with a muzzle velocity of 1,270 fps was right behind it at 52".

The .500 Nitro Express with a solid weighing 570 grs. came in third at 48", followed by the .458 Win. Mag. with a 500 gr. solid traveling at a muzzle velocity of 2,260 fps and 47" of penetration. Finally, the .45 Colt with a 350 gr. hardcast bullet at 1,400 fps gave 43" of penetration, or only 5" less than the .500 Nitro and 4" less than the .458.

Of course, the .45 Colt load tested is only for use in the Freedom Arms .454 or custom five-shot .45 Colt revolvers.

Other Cartridges

The .44 Magnum was not really given a thorough testing as the only load on hand was a 250 gr. Keith bullet at 1,200 fps which went 27" into the wet newsprint. At next year's seminar, hopefully we will have a larger variation of .44 Magnum loads to test, especially with 300 gr. bullets at muzzle velocities from 1,200 to 1,400 fps.

We also had only one load for the new .480 Ruger, Hornady's factory offering of a 325 gr. XTP at 1,350 fps. This round is not designed for deepest penetration but did expand well and travel 17" into the newsprint.

How did the truly big bore sixguns compare, the Big Berthas, the .45 Colt, .454 Casull, .475 and .500 Linebaughs? For the .45 Colt, in addition to the already mentioned load, a 310 gr. Keith at 1,250 fps -- one of my favorite loads and safe for use in Ruger's Blackhawk or Bisley -- penetrated 36", while the 300 gr. LBT traveling at 1,180 fps penetrated 2" deeper.

Using Cor-Bon's 360 gr. bonded core at 1,500 fps in the .454 yielded 45" of penetration. Moving up to the .475 Linebaugh, a 420 gr. LBT at 1,335 fps did 47" while the same bullet at an easy-shooting 1,050 fps still penetrated to 40".

We have already mentioned the second-place finishing .500 Linebaugh load. Others from this category of the biggest of the big bores included a 480 gr. Keith-style bullet at 1,200 fps and 41"; a 435 gr. LBT at 1,270 fps, 38"; and a 435 gr. LBT at only 1,000 fps still went 34" into the test medium.

This tells me that for most of us, and the game we pursue, either a .475 or .500 Linebaugh traveling at a relatively sedate 1,000 fps will do anything and everything we could ever hope for.

Actually, we can draw the further conclusion that the .44 Magnum with a 250 gr. bullet at 1,200 fps or a 300 gr. .45 Colt at 1,250 fps will certainly handle any deer that walks -- but then we already knew that!

Now we know with actual experimentation why it is big bore sixguns perform so well on large or dangerous animals including Cape buffalo, elephant, lion and the big bears of Alaska.

The big bore sixguns in this case, from top left clockwise Ruger .44 Magnum Freedom Arms .454 and Ruger Custom .45 Colt.

Ruger Custom .500 Linebaugh and Freedom Arms .475 Linebaugh can actually out penetrate most rifles.

"Who says the .500 Linebaugh doesn't kick?"

Cartridge Bullet Velocity Penetration

.45-70 530 gr. hardcast lead 1,550 fps 55"
.500 Linebaugh 495 gr. hardcast lead 1,270 fps 52"
.500 Nitro Express 570 gr. FMJ solid 2,000 fps 48"
.458 Win. Mag. 500 gr. FMJ solid 2,260 fps 47"
.475 Linebaugh 420 gr. LBT SWC lead 1,335 fps 47"
.454 Casull 360 gr. honded core 1,500 fps 45"
.45 Colt 350 gr. hardcast lead 1,400 fps 43"
.500 Linebaugh 480 gr. Keith 1,200 fps 41"
.475 Linebaugh 420 gr. LBT SWC lead 1,050 fps 40"
.500 Linebaugh 435 gr. LBT SWC lead 1,270 fps 38"
.45 Colt 300 gr. LBT SWC lead 1,180 fps 38"
.45 Colt 310 gr. Keith SWC lead 1,250 fps 36"
.500 Linebaugh 435 gr. LBT SWC lead 1,000 fps 34"
.44 Magnum 250 gr. Keith SWC lead 1,200 fps 27"
.480 Ruger 325 gr. XTP 1,350 fps 17"


more inspiration to do a test of garrets 45-70 loads on the iron buff

p.s. is this an american or cape buff?

Penetration is one thing, but penetration plus "shock and awe" is another!

Cheers,
Canuck

hell lets just strap dynamite to the cape buffs and give up on the recoil

Rat's,

They guy that tested my 460 gr cast bullets out of the 480 a few years back wasn't there, as it managed 38" through the wet newsprint when launched at 1100 fps.

To be fair, the latest and greatest in big bore rifle loads should be tested, vs the 100 year old 500 nitro load. Me thinks the 500 Jeffrey or A-square with a 600 gr bridger @ 2400 fps would open up some eyes

Also what isn't included in these tests is the dia of the wound channel, which is just as important in terminal balistics as depth of penetration, unless one limits themselves to CNS shots.

Posted 05 August 2005 04:23
read this all the way please...

go to this web page foor the full disertation and graphs....if you dare

http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html#solids



6. Large-Bore Bullets

Of some interest is the compared performance of some notably larger calibers, presumed to be proportionately more effective, particularly in terms of penetration (see Table and Figure).

Observe that the potent 45-70 yields very similar penetration as compared to the .308 caliber bullets examined in detail and generally less than the medium bore loads described in the preceding table. Necessarily these .458 caliber bullets typically produce wound tracks larger in diameter than produced by smallbore projectiles, but not evidently than medium bore bullets when the effect of generally higher velocities is considered (and compare the .458-300 grain Barnes X-Bullet at 1930 fps with the .284-150 grain Swift Scirocco described earlier).

Although most of these loads produce similar velocities, the two 403 gr Trophy Bonded bullets (an old design very similar to Barnes copper tubing bullets) exhibit the same penetration with different impact velocities, consistent with the observed behavior of .308 caliber bullets. This is further borne out by the 350 grain Hornady FN bullets in my testing at velocities 500 fps apart, where similar depths of penetration are found although the cavities produced are quite dissimilar. In contrast, when there is little or no expansion they penetrate roughly twice as deeply.

Jamison indicates in the reference that the 350 gr Hornady RN soft points yawed during penetration and were recovered in a base forward orientation. This curious result (from 2 shots) differs considerably from the behavior of the slower (1765 fps) and faster (3000 fps) tests. Probably the jacket failed to deform evenly; the photograph seems to demonstrate this failure. Nevertheless the penetration is the highest among tests of this bullet and the cavity produced must have been of respectable dimensions, so it is difficult to characterize the result as a failure. Surprisingly, the Barnes Original 300 gr failed to deform at a very high (for the 45-70) velocity of 1992 fps; only the exposed lead nose was scraped away. Deep penetration and probably a larger wound path was created by the similarly non-deforming Remington 405 gr soft point, but this had an impact velocity of only 1103 fps.

In my own testing two bullets were recovered in a sideways or base forward orientation: the 300 grain Barnes X-Bullet at both 1400 fps (sideways) and 1930 fps (reversed) and the low velocity Hornady 350 grain Interlock FN. The latter bullet is a new design very similar to the older round nose bullet, apparently in response to the demands of Marlin users who were concerned about the round nose impacting the primers in a tubular magazine. This bullet must be seated below the crimping groove to feed in a Ruger No. 1, which is not Hornady's fault, but Ruger's for making such a short throat, a long time problem on that rifle. The high velocity load created a gigantic cavity that exploded outward toward me (rather like the .338-275 Speer semi-spitzer had done at high impact velocity), but the bullet retained 93% of its weight! I am surprised that the X-Bullet lost its petals at the relatively low velocity of 1930 fps, but its cavity is gaping and so the walls are unusually thin. It could be improved by a narrower taper so that the petals opened but held on. It did not penetrate as I expected but it made a respectable hole. This bullet will expand at very low velocities as evidenced by the second shot at 1400 fps, which performed very similarly to a magnum handgun bullet.

The Speer 350 gr. FN is billed as a high velocity soft nose for the .458 magnum, so I did not expect much expansion at the 1930 fps impact velocity out of the .45-70, but it performed well. It also performed well at a near muzzle velocity (from the .458 Winchester Magnum) of 2400 fps, but at a very low impact velocity of approximately 1400 fps it apparently did not expand or did so only to a very slight degree and unfortunately exited the test box (Incidentally, this is the sort of hole that would be made by a non-deforming hardcast flatnose bullet, hence the need for a very broad flat point). It is a good bullet in the .45-70 where deeper penetration is required but needs a minimum velocity probably closer to 1600 to 1700 fps for expansion. I was impressed by the 500 grain Hornady RN softpoint at the rather modest velocity of 2000 fps. It cavitated a surprisingly large hole yet achieved just over 20 inches of straight-on penetration.

In the .450 Ackley Magnum the 400 grain Barnes X-Bullet performs about as well as the 500 grain Hornady soft point, and the 500 grain X-Bullet penetrates significantly deeper. Observe that the 600 gr Barnes Original bullet fired from a .460 Weatherby Magnum penetrates less deeply than the Hornady 500 gr softpoint, despite its greater sectional density; here being a classic example of the misleading character of the calculated sectional density of an unfired bullet as applied to its terminal effect. The extremely high velocities of the .460 Weatherby Magnum (though these impact velocities are practical muzzle velocities, not reasonable field conditions) removes bullets of normally robust construction from consideration as projectiles of choice to be used against heavy game at close range, though their use at extended ranges is perfectly acceptable. Again, magnum cartridges do not necessarily provide more killing power, merely extended range (and in this case a potential close range non-engagement zone for some loads).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reported Data for Large-Bore Rifle Bullets
Caliber / Cartridge Bullet Type / Mass Impact
Velocity Expanded
Diameter Depth of
Penetration Retained Weight Ref
.444 Marlin 240 gr Remington Softpoint 2350 fps
13 in 204 gr / 85 % 5

250 gr Nosler Partition 2315 fps 0.627 in 20 in 242 gr / 97 % 5

265 gr Hornady FP 2253 fps
17 in 229 gr / 86 % 5

270 gr Speer Gold Dot 2240 fps 0.707 in 17 in 204 gr / 76 % 5

280 gr Speer Gold Dot 2310 fps
21 in 246 gr / 88 % 5

300 gr Speer Plated Soft Point 2201 fps
20 in 293 gr / 98 % 5

300 gr Hornady XTP HP 2205 fps
18 in 226 gr / 75 % 5

315 gr RCBS Cast SWC 2041 fps
32 in 301 gr / 96 % 5

335 gr Buffalo Bore Cast LBT FN 2078 fps
36+ in 318 gr / 95 % 5
.45-70 Springfield 300 gr Barnes Original FN 1992 fps 0.458 in 30 in 293 gr / 98 % 1

300 gr Hornady HP 2173 fps 0.710 in 11.5 in 208 gr / 69 % 1

300 gr Sierra HP 2001 fps 0.740 in 10.5 in 228 gr / 76 % 1

300 gr Federal HP 1653 fps 0.700 in 10 in 232 gr / 77 % 1

300 gr Remington HP 1868 fps 0.700 in 10 in 193 gr / 64 % 1

300 gr Winchester HP 1696 fps 0.670 in 15 in 264 gr / 88 % 1

300 gr Barnes X-Bullet 1400 fps 0.790 in 9.9 in 300 gr / 100 % 6

300 gr Barnes X-Bullet 1930 fps 0.635 in 13.5 in 222 gr / 74 % 6

350 gr Trophy-Bonded Spitzer 1750 fps 0.760 in 16 in 347 gr / 99 % 2

350 gr Trophy Bonded FN 1765 fps 0.852 in 15 in 336 gr / 96 % 2

350 gr Hornady Interlock RN 1942 fps 0.670 in 18 in 284 gr / 81 % 1

350 gr Hornady Interlock RN 1765 fps
14.5 in 215 gr / 62 % 2

350 gr Hornady Interlock FN 1400 fps 0.702 in 13.8 in 332 gr / 95 % 6

350 gr Hornady Interlock FN 1900 fps 0.871 in 12.1 in 327 gr / 93 % 6

350 gr Speer Hot-Cor FN 1400 fps NA 20.3+ in NA 6

350 gr Speer Hot-Cor FN 1930 fps 0.644 in 16.3 in 310 gr / 89 % 6

350 gr SAECO FN 2250 fps 0.458+ in 25 in
7

400 gr Speer FN 1758 fps 0.950 in 11 in 364 gr / 91 % 1

403 gr Trophy Bonded RN 1730 fps 0.850 in 15.5 in 401 gr / 99 % 2

403 gr Trophy Bonded RN 1900 fps 0.936 in 15.5 in 400 gr / 99 % 2

405 gr Remington SP 1103 fps 0.458 in 28 in 406 gr / 100 % 1

405 gr Remington SP 2000 fps 0.87 in 13.8 in 390 gr / 96 % 8

415 gr LBT LFN 1850 fps 0.458+ in 23 in
7
.458 Winchester Magnum 350 gr Speer Hot-Cor FN 2400 fps 0.721 in 14.5 in 256 gr / 73 % 6

500 gr Hornady Interlock RN 2000 fps 0.770 in 20.2 in 437 gr / 88 % 6
.450 Ackley Magnum 400 gr Barnes X-Bullet

23 in
4

465 gr A-Square Dead Tough 2340 fps
25 in 419 gr / 90 % 4

500 gr Hornady Interlock RN 2370 fps
23 in 425 gr / 85 % 4

500 gr Barnes X-Bullet

28 in
4
.460 Weatherby Magnum 350 gr Hornady Interlock RN 3000 fps
10 in 113 gr / 32 % 3

500 gr Hornady Interlock RN 2550+ fps 0.950 in 24 in 365 gr / 73 % 3

600 gr Barnes Soft Point RN 2300+ fps 1.265 in 22 in 440 gr / 73 % 3
.460 Weatherby Magnum 350 gr Hornady Interlock RN 3000 fps
10 in 113 gr / 32 % 3
.470 Nitro Express 500 gr Woodleigh RN 2125 fps
23.6 in 493 gr / 99 % 8
.500 A-Square 570 gr Woodleigh RN 2500 fps 1.625 in 14.5 in
7



1 -- Rick Jamison, "Big Power at Close Range", Shooting Times, May 1997.

2 -- John Wooters, "Premium Big-Bore, Big-Game Bullets", Guns & Ammo, December 1984, pp. 61,91.

3 -- Bob Hagel, ".460 Weatherby", Big Bore Rifles and Cartridges, Wolfe Publishing, Inc., 1991, pp. 328 - 332.

4 -- Independent testing by Øyvind Hannisdal

5 -- Brian Pearce, "The Underrated .444 Marlin", Handloader, Wolfe Publishing, Inc., No. 206, August-September, 2000, pp. 62 - 67.

6 -- Independent testing by the author

7 -- Kent M. Batchelor, "Penetration Test at the Linebaugh Seminar", http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/penetration_test.htm.

8 -- Independent testing by Michael Strandberg

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Legend - (L-R) Some tested .458 caliber bullet designs: (1, 2) 300 gr Barnes X-Bullet (unfired and recovered from 1930 fps), (3 - 5) 350 gr Hornady Interlock FN (unfired and recovered from 1400 and 1900 fps), (6, 7) 350 gr Speer Hot-Cor (unfired and recovered from 1930 fps)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Legend - (L-R) A range of .458 caliber bullets (recovered from wetpack tests): (1, 2) 300 gr Barnes X-Bullet (1400 fps and 1930 fps), (3, 4) 350 gr Hornady Interlock FN (1400 fps and 1900 fps), (5, 6) 350 gr Speer Hot-Cor (1930 fps and 2400 fps), (7) 500 gr Hornady Interlock RN (2000 fps)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV.c. A Model for Terminal Performance

Experiments described in the preceding two chapters demonstrate several things about the terminal performance of bullets:
Non-deforming bullet penetration and cavitation is described by a nearly linear function of velocity, mass and represented frontal area (or diameter)
Deforming bullet penetration is weakly dependent upon impact velocity and varies over a narrow range
Bullet deformation depends upon a critical upset velocity determined by material and design features
Bullet deformation generally occurs within a relatively short penetration distance
For increasing velocities above the critical upset velocity, penetration is more likely to decrease than to increase

Any model which attempts to predict bullet penetration and cavitation must account for these observations. An understanding of what is taking place is a necessary starting point for developing a realistic model. In non-hydrodynamic (non-deforming) penetration the depth of penetration and cavity diameter are a linearly increasing function of velocity, since bullet diameter and mass are constant (note that the tissue in the target is in hydrodynamic flow until penetration stops). For deforming bullets, there is an initial phase of penetration in which no deformation occurs. This is usually termed the upset distance. Deformation occurs suddenly due to pressures exceding the flow stress of the bullet. The penetration of the upset distance is a reflection of the resistive forces (molecular friction) within the bullet. The hydrodynamic (deforming) penetration phase is very brief and at the conclusion of this phase the bullet will have traveled only a short distance. The stronger the bullet, the longer a distance it will travel while it deforms. Correspondingly, at higher velocities a bullet will travel a shorter distance as it deforms due to more rapid deformation. The final phase of penetration is non-hydrodynamic, starting at the threshold critical velocity, and accounts for most of the penetration and cavitation of a bullet. This explains why a deforming bullet has a nearly constant penetration over a wide range of impact velocities and frequently a diminishing penetration with increasing velocity. Penetration terminates when the velocity reaches a point where the flow stress of the tissue exceeds the stagnation pressure of the penetration. Elastic penetration may occur at this stage, wherein the bullet travels forward some distance before the tissue returns to its original position. This is similar behavior to temporary cavitation but occurs in the axial direction and is most commonly recognized in a bullet being found "lodged under the skin" on the far side of an animal.

"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.

Hi Boomstick
First off you have to shoot totally comparable bullets ( shape, structure, sectional density, etc ) to compare penetration depths with different velocities. News paper sucks as far as a test medium period. It is very inconsistent as far as compaction and making sure that every page is soaked the same way. Round nose bullets will not penetrate as deep as a flat nose bullt in wet newspaper plus they will build up an unballanced wod of paper at the nose which will cause them to veer off course and lower the penetration depth. You also have to copare bullets with as close a sectionl density number as possible.
The high sectional density is only of value in solid bullets because the construction and expansion ratio for soft is totally unpredictable. The 600 grain bullet mentioned in the 460 Weatherby has obviously failed to do poor construction and over expansion.

I mentioned eartlier about taking my 470 Mbogo and loading it with heavy for caliber bullets ( 540 greain bridger solids with a .410 meplate ) and shooting them at 1500 fps, 2100 fps and at 2400 fps. The penetration increased proportionally with the increase in velocity.
You have to keep your test medium and bullet comparrisons equal for apples to apples.
Take good care,
Dave

it adds weight to the flat nose solid theory