quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
From 4sixteen's link:

BUSTER BULLET
DEEP PENETRATING HUNTING BULLETS HANDGUNS & LEVER RIFLES
Barnes offers new heavy-for-caliber handgun and lever rifle bullets intended for hunting bear, wild boar, moose, bison, buffalo and other large—even dangerous—game. The bullet features a thick copper jacket and a heavy lead core, resulting in deep penetration and maximum weight retention.

This premium hunting bullet combines bone-crushing power with pass-through penetration. Unlike conventional expanding bullets, the Barnes Busters track straight without deflection. These tough bullets are specifically designed to deliver maximum penetration, even in large and dangerous game. In one field test, a Barnes Buster fired from a .45-70 T/C Encore drove completely through an American bison, anchoring it on the spot.

These cannelured, heavy-for-caliber bullets drive deep through dense muscle and bone. Bullets remain intact—jackets won’t separate from the core. Great for hunting hogs and tough, heavy game; it’s the ideal bullet for those who carry handguns for protection against bears in Alaska and other wilderness areas.

4sixteen has brought up a very interesting bullet that is sort of in a class by itself,
not quite a North Fork Cup Point "Solid" but indeed more of a soft....Rip ...

Based on field experiences with my .45-70 Marlin and lack of penetration using soft nose bullets on heavy game, I decided to go with a solid-type bullet. The Barnes 450gr might do except it's way too long for .45-70 Marlin loads. The 400gr .45-70 Barnes Buster fits the bill.



I load the 450gr Barnes at 1900 fps in my .45-70 Ruger No.1. OAL is restricted only by throat length. Being heavy 45 caliber bullets these don't have to expand much if at all to tear long and wide holes.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Ah the ballistic pendulum and Benjamin Robin's description of it in Benjamin Robins: The New Principles of Gunnery 1742

He fires lead balls into blocks of oak.... only problem is the balls deform !

Leonard Euler translates New Principles and he come up with...... wait for it ......

Energy density !


Robins:
Penetration depth (P) = V squared

Euler:

P = TE / D squared
P = penetration depth
T = constant for the material target
E = kinetic energy of the projectile
D = diameter of the projectile

So Euler is likely the first scientist to recognize that energy is important and so is the representative surface area

Ie energy per unit of surface area.
Euler described this interaction as

P = T E / d squared
Or if you wish

P = T ½ MV squared / A

From this we see the relationship between a projectiles mass divided by it’s ortrhgraphic surface area
m/A

This was not just theory, it was derived from experiment !

Shooting musket balls at known velocity into targets and deriving calculation of energy deposited in the target.

The heavier ball loses less energy during penetration than the light ball

The heavier ball penetrates deeper than the light ball

Velocity is a very strong predictor of drag . So by doubling velocity we actually quadruple force of retardation

Does this suggest energy transfer correlates with bullet diameter and/or expansion?

Exactly !

But there is a caveat ! A projectile may shed all of its energy at or after impact and have little left to penetrate with.

Examples of these are certain types of non fatal munitions used in crowd control. These are often extremely low SD projectiles that do not meet the threshold energy density to breach human skin.

Exactly why SD is a dynamic entity with the bullet in motion and not static.

We must also consider that missiles are not necessarily symmetrical ogival bodies, they are often asymmetrical as in shrapnel ( chunkey fragments ) or even secondary missiles such as those we see with bomb blasts. ie stones or simply random solid materials

These BTW are often launched in the hyper velocity range and their injuries classified as high energy injuries

quote:

Exactly why SD is a dynamic entity with the bullet in motion and not static.

I don't believe anyone here has argued against that. Dynamic, indeed - the SD changes the moment the bullet mushrooms - different diameter, length, changes the math results.

Just because the SD is not static is not a negative thing. Any mushrooming bullet is designed for the specific purpose of changing its SD, drag, push, in order for Newton's law of opposite reaction to be hyped, rather than prolonged.

Also, I never considered bombs, rocks, crowd control, hyper velocity when thinking about bear defense rifles and bullets, but I have thought about high energy injuries.

Interesting.

quote:

Originally posted by 4sixteen:



I load the 450gr Barnes at 1900 fps in my .45-70 Ruger No.1. OAL is restricted only by throat length. Being heavy 45 caliber bullets these don't have to expand much if at all to tear long and wide holes.

Midway shows that 450 gr Barnes solid as discontinued.

https://www.midwayusa.com/prod...-flat-nose-box-of-20

But they show these 450 gr available:

Barnes Triple-Shock X (TSX) Bullets 458 Caliber (458 Diameter) 450 Grain Hollow Point Flat Base

https://www.midwayusa.com/prod...-lead-free-box-of-20

Swift A-Frame Bullets 45 Caliber (457 Diameter) 450 Grain Bonded Semi-Spitzer

https://www.midwayusa.com/prod...mi-spitzer-box-of-50

Since you're loading for the single shot and not restricted to FN, why wouldn't you use one of the expanding bullets for bears, like the two examples shown above?

Being a bit heavier to get enhanced 400gr .45-70 Barnes Buster / heavy cast performance -

...bone-crushing power with pass-through penetration...to track straight without deflection...to drive deep through dense muscle and bone.

Swift A-Frame's recovered from Elk at impact speeds noted. Less expansion more penetration.

In your opinion, how do these compare with similar weight flat-nose hard cast ?

quote:

Originally posted by 4sixteen:

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
From 4sixteen's link:

BUSTER BULLET
DEEP PENETRATING HUNTING BULLETS HANDGUNS & LEVER RIFLES
Barnes offers new heavy-for-caliber handgun and lever rifle bullets intended for hunting bear, wild boar, moose, bison, buffalo and other large—even dangerous—game. The bullet features a thick copper jacket and a heavy lead core, resulting in deep penetration and maximum weight retention.

This premium hunting bullet combines bone-crushing power with pass-through penetration. Unlike conventional expanding bullets, the Barnes Busters track straight without deflection. These tough bullets are specifically designed to deliver maximum penetration, even in large and dangerous game. In one field test, a Barnes Buster fired from a .45-70 T/C Encore drove completely through an American bison, anchoring it on the spot.

These cannelured, heavy-for-caliber bullets drive deep through dense muscle and bone. Bullets remain intact—jackets won’t separate from the core. Great for hunting hogs and tough, heavy game; it’s the ideal bullet for those who carry handguns for protection against bears in Alaska and other wilderness areas.

4sixteen has brought up a very interesting bullet that is sort of in a class by itself,
not quite a North Fork Cup Point "Solid" but indeed more of a soft....Rip ...

Based on field experiences with my .45-70 Marlin and lack of penetration using soft nose bullets on heavy game, I decided to go with a solid-type bullet. The Barnes 450gr might do except it's way too long for .45-70 Marlin loads. The 400gr .45-70 Barnes Buster fits the bill.



I load the 450gr Barnes at 1900 fps in my .45-70 Ruger No.1. OAL is restricted only by throat length. Being heavy 45 caliber bullets these don't have to expand much if at all to tear long and wide holes.

Living in bear country I have given consideration to a choice in a protection arm.

Because of the ban on Grizzly hunting Grizzly encounters have increased dramatically. in fact where we hunt every year the black bear numbers have decreased dramatically and . Grizzly encounters have seen a dramatic rise.

It is now not uncommon to have a bear on a gut pile within 12 hours of shooting a moose .

The last hunting season I encountered and photographed at least 6 different bears

As it is Canada handguns are off the table and for the most it is my wife that has had the most run ins with bears.

To that end I bought a 45-70 Marlin but given our prohibitive gun laws on storage, having loaded guns in vehicles etc found it impractical. For my wife to unlock the gun, then load ammo into the loading gate would simply not work.

So I bought a short barrel 12 gauge side by side. We shoot bear bangers from it for the most and they seem to scare away bears and when things get serious I have LG ( 000 Buck) at hand.

My dilemma came when I read a scientific article by researchers for Alaska Fish and Game which looked at options for bear protection for work crews working in the bush .

To my suprise the 12 gauge ranked quite low and looking into it now it makes a lot of sense why it would not be a adequate option.

In lieu of I now have a 416 Ruger guide gun on hand .... for obvious reason

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ldmay375:
In your opinion, how do these compare with similar weight flat-nose hard cast ?

Similar meplat diameter so about equal performance. Without the lead fouling and phiddly phuckin around to make hard cast.

I have 416 Ruger and 375 Ruger in Alaskan models. Factory rifles with exceptions of the stocks and triggers. I "feel" as confident as I ever will with either rifle in close quarters with a bear, when its attention is on me. Or when the possibility of bumping into one at close range when in the tangles / brush.

I will admit, maybe a little more at ease with the 416. The 375 and 416 Rugers are my main moose rifles, with a 338 Win as a third. The 338 Win is also a Ruger rifle, but with 24" barrel instead of 20". These three cartridges and rifles in have confidence in.

I mostly camp and hunt alone. I normally have a grizzly in the area, as evidenced by trail cams placed about 100 yards from the tent, and tracks on the trail, near the tent. I eventually hope to connect with one my terms.
The 338 Win has 225 TSX, 375 has 270 TSX, and the 416 has 350 TSX.

I also have a 325 WSM with 200 TSX. I used it a few days 1 year. But, after walking out due to a mechanical failure, I returned with my 338. Purely a personal confidence thing.
If I hunted / camped in more open areas, I am sure the 338 and 325 would see much more use. I am definitely a fan of the 338 Win and 375 Ruger / 375 H&H.

But, the 20" 416 Ruger is nudging to the top of heap. This is a very handy rifle for the terrain that I hunt. I find the recoil with 350 grain bullets very reasonable. Particularly when shooting from awkward positions, that I would be hesitant to fire larger bores. I also feel the same regarding the 416 Rem, but my Ruger is in a bit smaller package than my 22" M70.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Living in bear country I have given consideration to a choice in a protection arm.

Because of the ban on Grizzly hunting Grizzly encounters have increased dramatically. in fact where we hunt every year the black bear numbers have decreased dramatically and . Grizzly encounters have seen a dramatic rise.

It is now not uncommon to have a bear on a gut pile within 12 hours of shooting a moose .

The last hunting season I encountered and photographed at least 6 different bears

As it is Canada handguns are off the table and for the most it is my wife that has had the most run ins with bears.

To that end I bought a 45-70 Marlin but given our prohibitive gun laws on storage, having loaded guns in vehicles etc found it impractical. For my wife to unlock the gun, then load ammo into the loading gate would simply not work.

So I bought a short barrel 12 gauge side by side. We shoot bear bangers from it for the most and they seem to scare away bears and when things get serious I have LG ( 000 Buck) at hand.

My dilemma came when I read a scientific article by researchers for Alaska Fish and Game which looked at options for bear protection for work crews working in the bush .

To my suprise the 12 gauge ranked quite low and looking into it now it makes a lot of sense why it would not be a adequate option.

In lieu of I now have a 416 Ruger guide gun on hand .... for obvious reason

I am in the .40 to .50 camp.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Living in bear country I have given consideration to a choice in a protection arm.

for the most it is my wife that has had the most run ins with bears.

So I bought a short barrel 12 gauge side by side. when things get serious I have LG ( 000 Buck) at hand.

My dilemma came when I read a scientific article by researchers for Alaska Fish and Game which looked at options for bear protection for work crews working in the bush .

To my suprise the 12 gauge ranked quite low and looking into it now it makes a lot of sense why it would not be a adequate option.

I have looked for such article, or other info re AK fish and game, but haven't found anything lately.

But, anyway, you talked about buckshot, then in the same post talked about the inadequacy of the shotgun per some scientific report.

All you had to do was ask me. I would have informed you that buckshot is not a good idea.

What you didn't say in your post was what the scientific report said about slugs. I don't want to assume that the report pertained to buckshot only.

So, would you please clarify as to whether the report also included slugs as being inadequate, and if so did it mention specifically the Brenneke?

quote:

Originally posted by 4sixteen:
Being a bit heavier to get enhanced 400gr .45-70 Barnes Buster / heavy cast performance -

...bone-crushing power with pass-through penetration...to track straight without deflection...to drive deep through dense muscle and bone.

Swift A-Frame's recovered from Elk at impact speeds noted. Less expansion more penetration.

As you probably know by now, I favor expanding bullets, like the Swift or other bonded bullets or the Barnes TSX.

I hear the argument "less expansion and more penetration". In my sensibilities, that's exactly what the Swift does, for example. Since it's bonded, that limits the expansion, thus increasing the penetration, while holding onto its weight.

To use the term "less expansion" re a solid is a misuse of the term, IMO. The correct term is NO expansion. Thus, with no expansion, it's bound to penetrate more.

Advocates if the solid tout the deep penetration as the prime desirable factor. Yet the expanding bonded or mono-metal bullets are proven to penetrate plenty.

Like I said before, my first shot on a brown bear, broadside, through the shoulder, but most likely not the bone, passed completely through. The bear went down and didn't get up, apparently couldn't get up. The rifle was a custom FN Mauser in 9.3x62. The bullet was the 285 gr Lapua Mega.

http://www.lapua.com/en/reload...ponents/bullets/mega

"Lapua's Mega bullet is a soft point hunting bullet with a protective brass jacket. The Mega is a traditional lead core rifle bullet suitable for all kinds of European and North American game, particularly large game hunting. The mechanical bonding locks the lead alloy in place, keeping the bullet structure together at point of impact."

If the traditional mega will penetrate like that, then surely the bonded bullets will do better, also mushroom and evoke Newton's law promptly and emphatically upon entering the vitals.

I don't want to be too critical, but I really believe there is something wrong with using solids for big bear, or any bear, hunting or defense.

Of course it could be argued that I violate my own judgment by advocating and hauling around a shotgun loaded with Brenneke slugs, which are basically solids.

I justify it with knowledge that they will penetrate enough, plus that huge almost flat nose will obey Newton. The firearm itself counts in the decision. It's reliable, quick to deploy, reasonably light, and provides fast follow-up, and off the shelf ammo is readily available, and perhaps most importantly it's not for actually hunting bears, but serves as a defense weapon, last resort, close up, only.

I think there's a big difference in 600 gr FN .690 solid at 1500 fps, and a big bore (up to .458) solid at 1500 fps, or even at much more velocity. For one thing, the Brenneke slug will most likely expend its energy inside the bear, where the heavy .416 and up solids are likely to exit, especially at velocity over 1800 fps.

One may argue that with solids, then the shooter should try to break some bones. I say that precise shot placement in a defense situation is a dream made on the lazy boy or at the keyboard. It's no more difficult to place the shot in vitals, forget the bones, just shoot for mass, than it is to target spine or shoulder bones, maybe less difficult.

If I was shown a "scientific" study that placed the Brenneke slug low, then I would likely change my mind. I don't need to be shown about buckshot. I already know that.

quote:

So I bought a short barrel 12 gauge side by side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVa8e4rJ13g

I've fancied the coach gun for as long as I can remember.

The CZ is cylinder bore, both barrels. Two quick Brenneke 600 gr slugs, point and shoot - does anyone think it's NOT a stopper of a charge?

Plus, what a home defense weapon it would make with buckshot!

A solid wouldn't be my choice either unless it's a heavy high speed 40+ caliber solid. Insufficient cross-sectional area for efficient energy transfer and inadequate shock transmission otherwise.

http://www.rifleshootermag.com...y-cast-bullets/83683

Bear's are susceptible to shock, but you still need bone breaking penetration. I like the A-Frame but there are lots of good bullets out there these days.

Shock ? Shock Transfer ?

What is this ?

quote:

Originally posted by ldmay375:
I have 416 Ruger and 375 Ruger in Alaskan models. Factory rifles with exceptions of the stocks and triggers. I "feel" as confident as I ever will with either rifle in close quarters with a bear, when its attention is on me. Or when the possibility of bumping into one at close range when in the tangles / brush.

I will admit, maybe a little more at ease with the 416. The 375 and 416 Rugers are my main moose rifles, with a 338 Win as a third. The 338 Win is also a Ruger rifle, but with 24" barrel instead of 20". These three cartridges and rifles in have confidence in.

I mostly camp and hunt alone. I normally have a grizzly in the area, as evidenced by trail cams placed about 100 yards from the tent, and tracks on the trail, near the tent. I eventually hope to connect with one my terms.
The 338 Win has 225 TSX, 375 has 270 TSX, and the 416 has 350 TSX.

I also have a 325 WSM with 200 TSX. I used it a few days 1 year. But, after walking out due to a mechanical failure, I returned with my 338. Purely a personal confidence thing.
If I hunted / camped in more open areas, I am sure the 338 and 325 would see much more use. I am definitely a fan of the 338 Win and 375 Ruger / 375 H&H.

But, the 20" 416 Ruger is nudging to the top of heap. This is a very handy rifle for the terrain that I hunt. I find the recoil with 350 grain bullets very reasonable. Particularly when shooting from awkward positions, that I would be hesitant to fire larger bores. I also feel the same regarding the 416 Rem, but my Ruger is in a bit smaller package than my 22" M70.

That's quite a recommendation for three of my favorite calibers.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
From 4sixteen's link:

BUSTER BULLET
DEEP PENETRATING HUNTING BULLETS HANDGUNS & LEVER RIFLES
Barnes offers new heavy-for-caliber handgun and lever rifle bullets intended for hunting bear, wild boar, moose, bison, buffalo and other large—even dangerous—game. The bullet features a thick copper jacket and a heavy lead core, resulting in deep penetration and maximum weight retention.

This premium hunting bullet combines bone-crushing power with pass-through penetration. Unlike conventional expanding bullets, the Barnes Busters track straight without deflection. These tough bullets are specifically designed to deliver maximum penetration, even in large and dangerous game. In one field test, a Barnes Buster fired from a .45-70 T/C Encore drove completely through an American bison, anchoring it on the spot.

These cannelured, heavy-for-caliber bullets drive deep through dense muscle and bone. Bullets remain intact—jackets won’t separate from the core. Great for hunting hogs and tough, heavy game; it’s the ideal bullet for those who carry handguns for protection against bears in Alaska and other wilderness areas.

4sixteen has brought up a very interesting bullet that is sort of in a class by itself,
not quite a North Fork Cup Point "Solid" but indeed more of a soft:





2400 to 2500 fps from the .458 WIN (SAAMI or LongCOL) might make it expand better than it does from a .45-70 ...
You would not even need to drill the pinhole in nose to a bigger hole size.









Pinhole at thick copper base too ... soft lead core inside a copper tube that is pinched closed at both ends.
Is this good for bear or too tough?
Or not tough enough for use in a .458 WIN?

Rip ...

Looks like a great replacement for the discontinued/banned Barnes FlatNose brass solids.

I suspect that the dimple is irrelevant, although the squash in the picture of one of the bullets suggests that a thicker jacket would be best for use in dangerous-game rifles.

quote:

"The reason why game animals drop instantly with chest shots that do not directly strike the CNS, is due to hydrostatic shock transfer to the spine which passes through to the brain. A high velocity cartridge well matched to game body weights imparts over half its energy..."

No does not happen and the word Hydrostatic or hydrodynamic nor the term shock applies !

There are two types or pressure phenomena at work in ballistic trauma caused by bullets.

The first is a series of pressure waves caused by the temporary cavitation phenomenon.
These are a series of trailing pressure waves that follow the passage of the bullet. The wave form and velocity of propagation is subsonic thus does not qualify as a shock wave. These waves transport tissue and have ability to do damage through shear.

This is the pressure wave that puts the animal down when spined.

The second wave type is a true shock wave, it is a acoustic wave ( ultrasound wave) that is propagated through the tissue ahead of the bullet. It is a true shock wave with a sharp wave front, It is supersonic ie velocity greater than speed of sound in the tissue. It does not transport tissue and thus does no structural damage. There is some conjecture as to its ability to alter cell function through alteration of cell wall function.

That Alf sure likes to dot his T's and cross his eyes, or what?

416Tanzan:

Never fear, plenty of 450-grain "real solids" around by CEB, and North Fork, etc., monometal brass or copper.
It is hoped that the Barnes Buster is actually more of a soft than a solid when fired at .458 WIN almighty-enough velocity.



Rip ...

A .730-caliber lead round ball I have here weighs 590-grains on average.
I am wondering if I could cast them in harder alloy
and have them come out a few thou bigger and a few grains lighter.
Then load two of them in a 12ga-3.5" plastic hull and shoot them at 1500 fps: BEAR BALLS
Over a thousand grains at 1500 fps would be over 5000 ft-lbs.
Might even be able to slow them down a little and still be effective.

Use a sxs double or pump with cylinder or skeet choke.
Or even a fully rifled barrel.





All for close-range, defensive use only, of course.

I say this because the Mossberg Ulti-Mag 835 with 24" fully rifled barrel can get 1400-grain Darwin slugs up to 1400 fps from 3.5" plastic hulls, no problem.





2 balls of +500-grain weight at 1500 fps,
or Darwin slug of 1400-grain weight at 1400 fps?
Or maybe the brass No-Bozo homage to the lead Darwin?



1085-grains at 1500 fps.
Yeah! That's the ticket.
Over 5000 ft-lbs and less recoil than with the 1400-grainer.
No worries about that one needing to expand in order to transfer energy OR momentum to Mr. Bear.
No worries about it breaking up on Mr. Bear's skull either.

Rip ...

RIP
Massively effective

only problem in Canada is that in BC at least it is illegal to hunt with Solids.... the law is somewhat archaic in that the intent was for people not to hunt with military FMJ's when in fact FMJ's are in some instance as effective at creating big deep wounds

Shotgun slugs and large diameter buck are a problem because not all slugs are created equal
They all suffer from poor SD extremely so so retardation is high,
Some brands do not hold up when fired into Gelatine, they break up

Buck on the other hand, 6 round lead balls to an ounce, each of caliber .36 doing a 1350 or so FPS..... on a hard target intent on eating you..... false security ! , some would and do argue a single bullet fired from a 30-06 would be more effective

From a ballistics perspective the Brenneke is the best however it has accuracy and effective distance limitations

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
A .730-caliber lead round ball I have here weighs 590-grains on average.
I am wondering if I could cast them in harder alloy and have them come out a few thou smaller and a few grains lighter.
Then load two of them in a 12ga-3.5" plastic hull and shoot them at 1500 fps: BEAR BALLS
Over a thousand grains at 1500 fps would be over 5000 ft-lbs.
Might even be able to slow them down a little and still be effective.

Use a sxs double or pump with cylinder or skeet choke.
Or even a fully rifled barrel.

All for close-range, defensive use only, of course.

I say this because the Mossberg Ulti-Mag 835 with 24" fully rifled barrel can get 1400-grain Darwin slugs up to 1400 fps from 3.5" plastic hulls, no problem.

2 balls of +500-grain weight at 1500 fps,
or Darwin slug of 1400-grain weight at 1400 fps?
Or maybe the brass No-Bozo homage to the lead Darwin?

1085-grains at 1500 fps.
Yeah! That's the ticket.
Over 5000 ft-lbs and less recoil than with the 1400-grainer.

No worries about that one needing to expand in order to transfer energy OR momentum to Mr. Bear.

No worries about it breaking up on Mr. Bear's skull either.

Rip ...

Effective, but seriously not practical.

quote:

only problem in Canada is that in BC at least it is illegal to hunt with Solids..

So, all the talk about solids is just hypothetical, re Canada?

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
From 4sixteen's link:

BUSTER BULLET
DEEP PENETRATING HUNTING BULLETS HANDGUNS & LEVER RIFLES
Barnes offers new heavy-for-caliber handgun and lever rifle bullets intended for hunting bear, wild boar, moose, bison, buffalo and other large—even dangerous—game. The bullet features a thick copper jacket and a heavy lead core, resulting in deep penetration and maximum weight retention.

This premium hunting bullet combines bone-crushing power with pass-through penetration. Unlike conventional expanding bullets, the Barnes Busters track straight without deflection. These tough bullets are specifically designed to deliver maximum penetration, even in large and dangerous game. In one field test, a Barnes Buster fired from a .45-70 T/C Encore drove completely through an American bison, anchoring it on the spot.

These cannelured, heavy-for-caliber bullets drive deep through dense muscle and bone. Bullets remain intact—jackets won’t separate from the core. Great for hunting hogs and tough, heavy game; it’s the ideal bullet for those who carry handguns for protection against bears in Alaska and other wilderness areas.

4sixteen has brought up a very interesting bullet that is sort of in a class by itself,
not quite a North Fork Cup Point "Solid" but indeed more of a soft:



2400 to 2500 fps from the .458 WIN (SAAMI or LongCOL) might make it expand better than it does from a .45-70 ...
You would not even need to drill the pinhole in nose to a bigger hole size.

Pinhole at thick copper base too ... soft lead core inside a copper tube that is pinched closed at both ends.
Is this good for bear or too tough?
Or not tough enough for use in a .458 WIN?

Rip ...

Looks like a great replacement for the discontinued/banned Barnes FlatNose brass solids.

I suspect that the dimple is irrelevant, although the squash in the picture of one of the bullets suggests that a thicker jacket would be best for use in dangerous-game rifles.

Some specific terms and words used in the quote:

"For handguns and lever rifles" --- What handguns use the .458 bullets?

"pass-through penetration" - "deliver maximum penetration" -- again with the emphasis on penetration - pass through at that.

"it’s the ideal bullet for those who carry handguns for protection against bears in Alaska" ---- handgun bullet??? What handgun?

"These cannelured, heavy-for-caliber bullets" --- Yes, heavy for caliber in a handgun. Cannelured??? I see in the picture there are two cannelures on one of the bullets. Does that mean that one needs a special tool so that this bullet can be seated out and crimped?

The "squash" indeed suggests that it does not serve as a true solid at velocity higher than available in handgun or lever rifle. That may be a good thing, however if it's going to mushroom, then there are better choices designed to mushroom correctly. Also, this is not a bonded bullet, It's got a soft pure copper jacket, which fouls the crap out of a barrel.

I think they are hyped in the ad, purely for sales to wannabe dragon slayers with solids, and are of very limited use. Used within their design intent, probably okay, but why even dream of drilling out the in hole for expansion, or cutting another cannelure for seating in 458WM, or fretting that they mushroom, when there are bullet selections that solve all those issues, right out of the box?

The meplat pin hole on the 400gr .45-70 Barnes Buster is probably there to make it a legal hunting bullet in jurisdictions where FMJ bullets are outlawed for hunting. There's another manufacturer of punch bullets (forgot which??) that does that and states this explicitly in their product literature.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
only problem in Canada is that in BC at least it is illegal to hunt with Solids.... the law is somewhat archaic in that the intent was for people not to hunt with military FMJ's when in fact FMJ's are in some instance as effective at creating big deep wounds

IMO, that's a spin on the facts. But I'll get back to that. First - some incidents/experience which I have specific knowledge.

In the village where I lived for several years in Alaska, we had a police chief who was an Okie. Nuff said. Especially from about mid-August till about mid-October, there were many bear incidents in town. Mostly it was young bears, say three to five years old, who were driven out of the forests by the big boars (breeding season) plus they were hungry and inexperienced, and thought those chained dogs, smokehouses, garbage was just great. They owned the night. The locals sometimes shot one, wounded of course, and paid little attention to the backdrop, such as a neighbor's bedroom window. There were many incidents of wounded bears laying up in some cluster of bush right in the city limits.

So, it was our Okie Chief who was tasked at bear control, the wounded ones and the fresh ones. He brought to the job his collection of ARs, including the 308, which is what he used, till later. He used the FMJ bullets. I know for sure, because he told me and showed me. He shot one bear, a young boar who wasn't much of a menace, yet, but was just at the wrong place at the wrong time, which was on my lot before it was cleared of brush and trees. Ole Chief shot him in the head, and while he was flopping around, shot him several more times about the head and neck. DRT. That was just one time out of many.

Then Okie Chief got the bright idea of an AR15 in one of three cartridges, I can't remember which, but is was not a .458 SOCOM. It may have been 450 Bushmaster, or 45 or 50 Beowulf. I'm pretty sure was the latter. But in terms of performance, they are practically the same. Short story is that he shot one of those young bears, at least 400 lbs, probably closer to 500 lbs, in the head like he did with his 308 FMJ. The bullet made a huge wound but failed to penetrate enough to put the bear down. It went into a rage, throwing its head slinging blood. Chief's subordinate backup finished the job with his 300 Mag.

Then there was my experience with the 480 Ruger with Buffalo Bore hard cast on that poor Sitka doe. Hit through both lungs, she ran about fifty yds in that thick bush before falling over. Very difficult retrieval. Now, I could have had a lot more experience with that pistol, IF I had wanted to keep doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results.

Now, you say the reason the law is prohibiting people from using FMJ military ammo on game animals, but you don't really say why such law exists. It's the same in the States, as far as I know. The reason is that there are a lot of pure idiots out there who either don't care or are too stupid to know how to make the right choices. Bluntly said, in the hands of yahoos the FMJ wounds too frequently, and the animal dies, but gets away and is lost. So, this is an example of the government having to tell folks what is the right thing to do, because many will not self-inform and/or have no conscience about WTF is the "right thing".

So, I'll say it bluntly - the FMJ, solid, hard cast, will wound game animals enough to kill, but not DRT or close, far more frequently than expanding bullets. I'm sure there has been one of your "scientific studies" on that. I know for sure what a solid or FMJ can do from the experience of the Chief and from my own experience, and knowledge of why such laws exist prohibiting their use on game. It's a matter of statistics and ethics.

And all that is not even mentioning that the FMJ military type bullet is very easy to become unstable with a slight bend of the nose, like hitting a rib, and start tumbling.

.458 Lott with the 400gr Barnes Buster (as an alternate to the 300gr TSX currently loaded at a mild 2600 fps). Could load the Buster mild at about 2300 fps. Way more range than my .45-70 Marlin with the same bullet at 1800 fps.

Heavier-weight thick-jacketed 45 caliber bullet impact speed around 1800 fps provides ample shock transmission and straight through penetration on heavy game from what I've seen. The ghost shoulder should hold the bullets in the rounds in the magazine in position under recoil.

quote:

The ghost shoulder should hold the bullets in the rounds in the magazine in position under recoil.

Maybe. At that speed/recoil level.

When I was loading the 400gr Swift, stout loads, I couldn't get them to stay in place (in the magazine) from the recoil. They would slam up against the front of the magazine and defeat the roll crimp, no matter how tight I adjusted the die to the shellholder. I got a lee crimp die which solved the problem. I had to replace the original magazine because it bowed out from the recoil. I got a factory 416 Ruger magazine, which is apparently much stronger, since the problem seems remedied.

Also, I shot the 400 gr Barnes original some - enough to know that it washes the bore in copper. I learned a lot about getting copper out of the groves with that bullet. I'm sure that FN buster is the same.

The TSX, in my experience is different. With the groves cut in like that reduces the fouling, but they still foul with copper. I've found that accuracy is less than desirable after shooting the TSX, followed with other bullets such as the Hornady 350gr. Before switching bullets, a thorough cleaning with copper solvent restores the accuracy.

About the only instance I've seen bullets not staying in place under recoil is in the tube magazine of my .45-70 Marlin without an adequate crimp.

Sweet's 7.62 Solvent works pretty good for removing copper fouling.

Hornady .458 350gr RNSP bullets recovered from Moose at the impact speeds noted that struck heavy bone. Not exceptional penetrators.

I swear that I ruined a Lilja barrel once with that damn Sweets. I forgot and left it in the barrel overnight. It has not shot (as) accurately since.

After that I only use some of that blue foam stuff. I point the muzzle down, but not blocked, and shoot some in through the chamber end. Then let it sit for a while muzzle down in a box with some rags in there. Then I take some carb cleaner spray and wash it out. then run a patch or two through. Then inspect with a flashlight at the muzzle at an angle. If I see any copper, repeat until none seen. No scrubbing, no wire brush.

Of course the carb cleaner ought not get on anything plastic or wood finish. If concerned, use the electronics cleaner which is much milder. I remove the barreled action for cleaning.

Other things I remember learning from the 458 handloading.

With the stout loads, when I started using compressed loads that helped with the bullet setting back, but I still used the Lee crimp die. With the reduced loads of course those were not compressed. But the Lee crimp was not necessary. The simple roll crimp was enough. So where I ended up was full blast loads, and then dropped to reduced loads 1800 fps approx. or less. Nothing in between.

It seems to me the 458 will have the advantage over the Lott, re the compressed loads, say with 400 gr bullets. Some have complained of the case capacity of the 458 and thus compressed loads, but I found them to be no problem and actually useful, since the bullets were setting back, not forward.

As I recall, initially I had a front sight hood that slid on from the front, and I kept losing them. I thought I was knocking them off in the bush, but it turned out to be the recoil would cause them to slide off. As I recall, I changed the type of front sight to one that has an indent pin - problem solved.

With this rifle, considering what I was going to use it for, I learned to load a full magazine when testing at the range. Most of the time I just slide a round in the chamber and leave the magazine empty. But I figured this rifle needed a thorough test, just like it would be in the bush. That's how I discovered the bullet setback and the bowed out magazine. Things like that are best discovered at the range.

I used a 1x4 Leupold until it broke. The recoil just gutted the thing. I was really surprised, because previously I had used a 3x Leupold on another 458 rifle and it held up. Of course I sent it to Leupold with an explanation of what happened to it. They fixed it and sent it back no charge. But I quit using a scope with the stout loads.

I use the term "stout loads" because I don't know if they are max loads or not. I wasn't loading for max. Of course I was loading to not exceed max. But I was loading for all I could stand or max, whichever came first.

As I recall, the threshold was all I could stand.

That's the pleasure of hand loading for the 458. It is very flexible and offers a multitude of possibilities. I even used some of that fluffy cowboy action powder, (Trail Boss) for sub-sonic loads. It worked good. As I recall, absolutely no compression allowed. With that rule obeyed, it's impossible to get too much of that powder in there, considering where the base of the bullet will be when seated, and don't put more powder in there than naturally comes up to that level, or slightly below, with no settling and certainly no compression.

Somebody opened a can of worms, 8 pages of bear killers..I would bet a dollar more Alaskan bear have been killed with a 30-06 than any other caliber, not saying its a good pick..just saying. But if someone wanted to pay my expenses with that stipulation, I would hunt any animal on the planet with a 220 gr. premium bullet in my 30-06, and if I had the option to use either a solid or soft as I saw fit...

quote:

Somebody opened a can of worms, 8 pages of bear killers..I would bet a dollar more Alaskan bear have been killed with a 30-06 than any other caliber, not saying its a good pick..just saying. But if someone wanted to pay my expenses with that stipulation, I would hunt any animal on the planet with a 220 gr. premium bullet in my 30-06, and if I had the option to use either a solid or soft as I saw fit...Ray AtkinsonAtkinson Hunting Adventures10 Ward Lane, Filer, Idaho, 83328208-731-4120rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com

Really a bucket of worms. It started about defense from bears while fishing and ends up about hunting bear.


Having grown up in the Deep South, and now just over in E Texas, it is rather unlikely at my age that I will never fish or hunt bear, although black bear seasons do exist in some parts of the south.


Being the proverbial gun nut with plenty of experience at 73 years old, in the fishing situation my preference would be a short Marlin 45-70, your choice of open sights, whatever works best for you. Just make sure it cycles the ammo you choose with extreme reliability. Those Barnes "solids" look good, although I suspect any standard 405 gr load would be fine at defensive ranges. I choose the Marlin because I grew up shooting a couple of them starting with the 39a and then Dad's old 336 SC in 35 Rem.


As far as hunting, I agree the 30-06 has probably taken it's share and I would not feel undegunned with mine, although if I were hunting the really big boys I would choose my .375 H&H which is at this point a fun gun only, although it is big enough and heavy enough that recoil is not as bad as my 30-06 so I know I can handle it quite well without worrying about flinching.


Bottom line is use the most gun you can handle and be comfortable with.

Yes, it just seems a natural part of human nature to me that there is a lot of fascination and fantasy over the largest land carnivore in the world. Of the two big bears the polar bear is the largest, the brown bear is 2nd. But the polar bear is classed as a marine mammal, so that makes the brown bear the largest, and also brown bears are omnivores.

And we are all herein because of our interests in analyzing guns, bullets, performance, etc.

It could be said we are all here because we're not all there.

No problem here.

I have no intention of ever shooting another bear or moose, and hope I don't have to. I like reminiscing. I do still occasionally go into bear country, and when I'm in Alaska in summer, I always see lots of bears, and sometimes they come onto the property. They roam through frequently.

We had a wounded bear laying low right across the street, near where I pick high bush cranberries, two years ago, discovered by the neighbor's dog who went into a barking frenzy and drove it off. We also had one get into the smoker the same summer, at night, right next to the cook shack.

If anything I say helps keep someone from doing something stupid re bears than that's good.

I wonder if a .308 solid is even made, and why?

You say you Have confidence in the 30-06 with 220 gr. I have confidence in the 308, with say a 200gr bullet. An AR10 is a real beast of a rifle. A custom 358 Winchester upper wouldn't be too difficult to build. Or 338 Federal.

There are plenty of good tough bullets for both the .358 and .338, designed for much higher velocity than the non-magnum case can deliver.

They ought to satisfy the solids freaks, and penetrate with minimal expansion. But for those who want expansion, there's bullets for that too. There is no deep void if solids in .358 or .338 do not exists.

quote:

Originally posted by xausa:
This is my dangerous game rifle of choice. .505 caliber, 570 grain bullet at 2150 fps., 5850 ft/lbs of muzzle energy, 22 inch barrel, weight 8 3/4 pounds. Given my age and infirmity, I will never make it to Alaska or the Yukon, but if I could, this is what I would carry:



The cartridge is the one in the middle.

Nice rifle. Next time I go hunting brown bears I'm going to bring my 500 Jeffery. Not because I need to, but because I want to

The regulations are the day to day rules as dictated to by the Act .
This is the Law ! and just to add the Game Cops in BC have no sense of humour at all !






As to the behaviour of pointed Solids and FMJ's
They don't tumble because they hit bone and the noses bend

They tumble because of the density of the tissue and the loss of gyroscopic stability

The key to tumbling behaviour of military FMJ's
Axial (transverse )moment of inertia and longitudinal moments of inertia

quote:

I wonder if a .308 solid is even made, and why?

Yes, they are made.

Hemingway shot a rhino with one, IIRC.
O'Connor's wife shot an elephant with one.

Solids are for guaranteed penetration, even in .308".