quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
Hornswoggled.

It seems the only agreement on this is that it originated in RIP's backyard.

1. hornswoggled: deceived. The term comes from the traditional image of cuckolded husbands wearing horns. óEditor

2. We do not know the origin of hornswoggle. It belongs to a group of “fancified†words that were particularly popular in the American West in the 19th century, words exhibiting the frontier skepticism toward educated speech. "Hornswoggle" first appeared in print in Kentucky in 1929. Other words of this ilk are "stick-to-it-iveness," first appearing in 1867, "skedaddle," which appeared in 1861 somewhere in Missouri, and "discombobulate," in 1916. "Bamboozle" first appeared in England around 1700, indicating an earlier tradition of such concocted words. (Many thanks to Susan Ash for reminding us that English also contains lexical concoctions.)

3. HONEYFOGLE, HONEYFUG(G)LE - "to cheat, deceive, 1829; then to flatter, cajole, especially in order to gain a woman's favors; 1858. Honeyfogle and hornswoggle were both first recorded in 1829 as Kentucky words and could be forms of the same fanciful coinage. From"Listening to America" by Stuart Berg Flexner (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1982).

4. Peter Watts argues in A Dictionary of the Old West that it comes from cowpunching. A steer that has been lassoed around the neck will “hornswoggleâ€, wag and twist its head around frantically to try to slip free of the rope. A cowboy who lets the animal get away with this is said to have been “hornswoggledâ€. A nice idea, but nobody seems to have heard of hornswoggle in the cattle sense, and it may be a guess based on horn. Nobody else has much idea either, though it’s often assumed to be one of those highfalutin words like absquatulate and rambunctious that frontier Americans were so fond of creating. It’s sad to have to tag a word as “origin unknown†yet again, but that’s the long and the short of it.

good work gerard! i think the cowboy version is correct it kinda fits in to what my dad said...it is a fun word to use and i have only heard him say it untill now. my grandpa heard it on like i said watching black and white cowboy t.v. and one of the charecter would yell out "well i'll be hornswaggled" maybe it is a hollywood made up word to sound western. pretty funny stuff. sorry for the thread hijack

Alf,

quote:

the sudden volume displacement which is velocity dependent

To which we must ad that the volume displacement is not only velocity dependent but also relies on the nose shape of the bullet as it deforms to it's final shape. Deformed nose shape will determine what the primary wound chnnel as well as the temporary wound channel looks like.

You cannot deny that, as speed increases, the temporary wound channel adds increasingly to the size of the permanent wound channel. You commented on this in your experience with the 7mmSTW where, at closer distances, pigs were "turned into soup". When the temporary cavity volume exceeds the size of the organ it strikes, or the body it strikes, the body or organ is destroyed. (Red haze on a woodchuck) In comparative testing on springbuck with the same bullet from a 223, 22-250 and 220 Swift, this is also clearly seen. Penetration depth may vary but wound channel volume will always rise as speed rises. This is not linear to speed and increases seemingly in line with stagnation pressure. Some tissue types survive the increasing speed better than others and this is good, because meat is not destroyed unneccesarily. Lungs are destroyed very comprehensively by a high velocity impact from a cylinder shape and the increased damage on bone tissue at increasing speed is testimony to the fact that more speed results in more damage.

Chris Bekker

Gerard,

RIP says .... "The 300grain GSC FN worked better than the 270 grainer in the Iron Buffalo."

Rip says ... "I do agree that sectional density is a Figure Of Highest Merit when it comes to penetration. I will no longer call SD a FOM, it is now a FOHM, IMHO. The whole reason for the Iron Buffalo was to prove to myself whether a .375/300gr GSC FN would penetrate better than a .375/270gr GSC FN in a reproducible test medium that was as consistent as possible from shot to shot."


Q1. Gerard why would this be .... higher SD or any other reason?

Q2. How does the higher stability factor (SF) of the 270 gr bullet benefit it over the 300 gr bullet?

Your explanation please.

Tanking you
Chris Bekker

.

Hi Chris,
Thanks for the email. The Specific Gravity of our brass Solid is 8.49 and the length of the .416 cal 400gr Banded Solid is 1.477", the Ogive Length is .720" and the Meplat Width is .277" I would like to hear how the debate works out and what the final numbers are. We test these bullets in a 1 in 14 twist barrel.
We Aim to please, reloading is a great hobby, enjoy it.
Ty Herring
Barnes Bullets
Customer Service Director
P.O. Box 215
American Fork
Utah 84003
Tel 801-756-4222
1-800-574-9200
Fax 801-756-4222
Email: email@barnesbullets.com

I received the above letter from the Barnes company. The SF value with a std twist rate of 1 in 16.5 turns out to be 1.53 at 2,400 fps. In fact it stays practically level at this value between 1,600 fps and 3,000 fps. This clearly indicates the minute role that velocity plays - the stability in air is largely dependent on the twist rate.

So we now know the SF value of this bullet is not more than 3 and certainly not above the magical 2.5

Chris Bekker

Alf,
If you are saying that deformed nose shape plays no role in the size of the permanent and temporary wound channels, you are ignoring the observations of field results. All you need to do is shoot several animals with a round nose solid and an FN solid of the same weight and speed. The higher the speed, the more apparent the difference in size between a RN and an FN.. We used 145gr FNs and RNs on springbuck and blesbuck (about 80 animals) and compared 308 Win and 300WM. A 145gr FN at 3480fps is pretty spectacular on a small animal like a blesbuck.

quote:

Daniel RA. in 1944 ( Surgery; February 1944 ) published his observations on experimental shots into the lungs of live dogs.

What calibres at what speeds and what kind of bullet?

.

Alf,
As I understand this then, you agree that higher speed from rifle bullets (as opposed to handgun bullets) and certain nose shapes, cause more trauma in animals. It is just how this fact is explained that that you want to set right. OK.

Chris, we had 13mm of rain yesterday and overnight.

.

Gerard,

You are a liar and a cheat and will try to bamboozle your way through all the arguments. Time to play games with you is up. Rather appologise to Rhino Bullets for the shit that you were spreading about them - the dark cloud of suspision that you brought over them. Your style to discredit people by creating doubt, confuse the issues and then putting another spin on it and in the end lie your way out of it.

Chris Bekker

quote:

For hunters this is a very difficult issue or concept to accept cause most of us are "bullet diggers" and take interest in what our bullets do. What we observe in the field is exactly what you report. There is nothing wrong with what we are seeing, where the problem lies is in the interpretation of what phyiscally happens to cause what we are observing.

Alf,

Alf, you are mistaken. The only person in the world that can interpret bullet performance is Gerard. I am not capable ... Mauritz is not capable .... Gregor Woods is not capable and perhaps 99% of people that inhabit this planet hasn't got the foggiest.

Take care
Chris

.

quote:

If you wish to attack his theories by all means do so but leave the interjections and personal name calling out of it. Play the ball and not the person.

Alf,

If you study the record carefully on AR, you will notice how Gerard tried to belittle me and especially the namecalling that you refer to. I was compelled to retaliate.

Regarding Rhino Bullets, I will leave this matter to Kobus van der Westhuizen who felt offended - this is not just my perception. I will not go into details now, but I am sure you have not read the last on this. Gerard is known for personal attacks and that will be better decided by the powers that be.

In my books Gerard has proven to be a liar and a cheat and I want nothing to do with him. But he must know one thing, he will not bully me like he bullies other people and nor will I tolerate his shit.

You have always been very fair with your views but I am also sure you would have told him to piss off if you were me. Unfortunately our debate has decended into unnecessary personal remarks on both sides in the heat of the moment.

I now wish him well in his future endeavours and hope he never finds it necessary to ever refer or talk to me, but if he does I will be there to meet him.

Regards
Chris

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:

Regardless of what others may think, GSC will always base a reccommendation on practical and field experience first and theory second. Samples of one or three or even 20 are not reliable until proven so with much bigger samples. When we find ourselves on unfamiliar ground, such as with the new (only been working on it for two years now) long range SP bullet series, we actively enlist the help of people who are experts at what we are trying to learn ourselves. It is great fun and the people involved are incredibly interesting to meet.

Gerard,
You totally ignore the results of Saeed with 300 grain Barnes X-Bullets, solids, and Walterhogs: All 300 grainers. That would add some statistics, and a pretty good batting average for the .375/300gr bullet whether soft or solid.

I do not claim statistical significance, but I have shot over 1 dozen of your 270 grain and 300 grain FN's into varying setups, with 1, 2, and 3 of the ~1/2" plywood boards per compartment with water bag of 7 to 8 inches thick per compartment.

In every test, the 300 grainer went farther and straighter before tumbling. I did have to get down to 1 board instead of 2 or 3 per compartment in order to stretch the penetration out to the 10th compartment for "resolving power" between the two bullets. The witness boards do not lie. The 300 grainer was better every time. AND IT WILL BE BETTER IN GAME EVERYTIME TOO. I used the 300 grain X-Bullet on everything in the Tuli Block, because GSC did not have a 300 grain HV and FN back then when I could have used them. Happily GSC has come out with them since.

This was supposed to be a close horse race.

The whole point is that the 300 grain monometal copper solid is not unduly long and not prone to instability in a 12" twist by any means.

Drive a 300 grain monometal HV or X-Bullet fast enough and the little bit of extra SECTIONAL DENSITY will help the expansion. Sectional density drives softpoint expansion as well as the penetration of a nondeforming solid.

You and Alf both go back to the copies of Duncan MacPherson's book that I mailed to each of you, and you will find words to those effects.

The Iron Buffalo is not game, but it is consistent, and a good, tough test of any bullet soft or solid.

And, no, the "splash" really is not all that "jolly" to me.

Chris,
The only bullets that have gone farther than Gerards's .375/300gr FN are the slightly higher SD .475/500gr FP by North Fork.

Of course I do not have enough data to be statistically significant ...

My final impression is just common wisdom: Use a sectional density of 0.3 or just over, not under, but as close to 0.305 as you can get.

As always: IT DEPENDS, and I don't mean Ray's underwear!

Too long a bullet wastes powder space and may be prone to instability in air or animal.

The more velocity the better, as long as the bullet construction and the rifleman's abilities can handle it.

There is one ABSOLUTE here however: NEVER USE A ROUND NOSED SOLID!!!

.

Alf,
TRUE! I was pulled into that just to point out the unitless unreality of the SD number based on a square bullet cross-section.

It is indeed a Figure of Highest Merit when it comes to driving solid penetration and softpoint expansion.

FOHM now, not just FOM.

I still think it is silly to worship at the altar of ever higher SD numbers.

Get a bigger bore and keep the SD around 0.305 and up the velocity and use a bullet of proper construction for the job at hand, and we will have a jolly good show, splash or no.

If you feel I have slighted you somehow, my apologies. I really am not impressed by splash. It shows the potential for better wounding though.

I am middle of the road on all of this:

SD .305 or a little more, but not much
Velocity 2400 to 2800 fps, no more
Caliber .375 to .510 and no more.

However that is for big game rifles.
Varmint rifles require a different set of parameters sometimes, but IT DEPENDS, and I don't mean Ray's underwear.

RIP,
I hear what you say and agree. I do not doubt that the 300gr .375 FN goes deeper than the 270gr FN or 265gr HV. From my point of view we see in practise that the lighter bullets are capable of reaching the vitals of a Cape Buff on a going away shot. They give sufficient penetration and I would rather have the additional temporary cavitation brought on by the higher speed, than the extra couple of inches of penetration the 300 may be capable of.

In a calibre that generates more speed than the 375H&H, the 300gr FN or HV is a good choice (the speed is present), and that is why those two bullets are configured for the bore and groove specs of those calbres and the drive bands optimised to deal with the additional spin up torque. The 300gr HV and FN can be used in a 375H&H, but do not expect significantly more speed than conventional 300gr bullets. The advantage of an optimally configured drive band set for a 375H&H is not complete.

quote:

Sectional density drives softpoint expansion as well as the penetration of a nondeforming solid.

Only at equal speeds would there be an advantage to the heavier bullet. Deformation is dependent on stagnation pressure as well as Sd and SP is speed dependent. But we are splitting hairs.

On another topic, PH Francois Strydom stopped a charge from a wounded ele bull with the 320gr HV and it performed to perfection. He uses a 425 Express and speed is just over 2600fps. You should have no problem with pesky sheep from any angle.

Chris, we have more rain forecast for the EC for Monday and Tuesday.

Gerard,
I did not realize that anyone was using anything other than the standard .375 H&H type lands and grooves on any of the .375's. I am whistling in the dark on that one. Throating difference of the various chambers is all I was aware of. I don't suppose my crude calipers could tell any difference in your 265, 270, and 300 grain HV's and FN's?

Anyway, the rest of what you say is the way I think about it too, and why I like the .375 Weatherby and the .375 Lapua, which will do more with a 300 grain bullet than a .375 H&H will do with a 265 or 270 grainer. Ditto Saeed's .375/404 and the unfortunately rebated .375 RUM.

Well then, if I get hold of some of your .423/320gr HV's I will be all set for sheep or elephant, especially if I am moving them along at +2700 fps from a .404 Jeffery, or +2800 fps from a .423 Dakota-Lapua, just to be different.

I would still rather have a .423/380 grain FN or FP solid at 2500 to 2600 fps for the ele, of course, but your PH's use of the .423/320 grain HV for a stopper is an encouraging stunt.

On the "Three Step Swindle" technique that a certain party is wont to use ... here in Kentucky we call that debating technique the TRIPLE HORNSWOGGLE.

RIP,

There is a partial list of CIP and SAAMI specs here.

One wonders how some of those bore and groove specs were decided upon. In some cases where groove specs are the same but bore specs differ, the object could have been to cause shallower engraving and thus less force required to get the bullet through the throat and fully engraved. Some of the others are a mystery.

Frontal brain shots with an FN is the way to go but when you are between a rock and a hard place, you use what is available. I have sketchy details on the incident but the charge came from such a short distance that he had to avoid the falling ele as it came down.

"Triple Hornswoggle" - A phrase is coined.

PS. Don't allow Alf to pressure you into denouncing the new found view on Sd. For each situation there is an optimum set of circumstances around the whole issue of mass, frontal area, impact speed, bullet construction and a host of other variables. Sd maintains it's masquerade of apparent value but it will be accepted for what it is in due course.

The following was pointed out to me a while back by Jagter and bears considering:

The False-Truth Principle
Acceptance of even one false concept as true, effectively blinds one's mind to recognition and acceptance of a wide range of related concepts that actually are true.

The Advancement Principle
The advancement of physics always involves the destruction of the majority opinion.
- Samuel Ting - 2003

The Six Stages Of Truth
Stage 1: The truth is revealed.
Stage 2: The truth is ignored.
Stage 3: The truth is ridiculed.
Stage 4: The truth is violently opposed.
Stage 5: The truth is tolerated while awaiting a general changing of the guard.
Stage 6: The truth is accepted as logical and self-evident.

Stages 1, 2, & 5, Ethan Skyler - 2004
Stages 3, 4, & 6, Arthur Schopenhauer - 1850

Gerard,

You lied to me about the BC of a bullet (imaginary bullet that does not exist) and you have lied again to me about the SF value of the Barnes Solid bullet. You defended both till it became an embarrassment for you. It was hilarious to watch you swindling your way out of this to protect your lies. Also the multitude of excuses for non timeous delivery as pointed out by various people. Nothing has gone bad for me and I am not cornered in anyway ... this is only a perception in your own mind and an attempt to save face on AR.

For the record, I am not privy to any info, but I heard a bird singing, vaguely in the background. We live in a small world. You have made personal attacks on various people right here on AR, I do not have to mention names. The best being that I was as thick as a brick. You have thrown countless daggers at me.

Regarding BASA, I would be delighted (and so will Mauritz be) to attend your lecture about your theories and all the drawbacks of the .375/380 grain Rhino bullet. Be prepared that many people are awaiting you to oppose your views with hard facts. The doubt that you raise about SA Reloaders would be interesting to know and I will bring it up at our executive meeting on the 11 th October and will demand a clarification from you.

Regarding my apparent loss of the argument on the issue of SD, it is quite fascinating and reassuring that RIP sides now with me on this issue after he did some extensive tests. He told you clearly that all his tests were numerous and repeatable enough to draw conclusions from. Regarding the my apparent loss of the argument on the stability issue of the .375/300 gr solid bullets, RIP also proved conclusively that they are stable in a standard twist barrel of a 375 H&H (1-in-12"). Gerard you are the one that were creating the doubt and confusion on these issues. Would you then admit that it was rather flawed logic on your part than a deliberate attempt to support the theory on which your philosophy rests.

I am totally flabbergasted with your turnaround on the stability issue that you defended so vehemently. Unstable bullets are bad penetrators as they tumble and veer off course, but now you write this to RIP .... "I hear what you say and agree. I do not doubt that the 300gr .375 FN goes deeper than the 270gr FN or 265gr HV. From my point of view we see in practice that the lighter bullets are capable of reaching the vitals of a Cape Buff on a going away shot. They give sufficient penetration and I would rather have the additional temporary cavitation brought on by the higher speed, than the extra couple of inches of penetration the 300 may be capable of."

I must say you are a sore loser. I take it that you concede to having made mistakes and you have failed to back up your theory about having an excess of 2.5 SF value for solids. You evaded the question numerous times, but instead created so much smoke that you almost fumigated us. Incorrect interpretations can still be corrected, as that is a learning curve that we all go through, except that you knew certain things before your birth. However, when a lie is defended over and over after it has been exposed, is the worst trait that I can think of and despise it.

I do not have those bullets that you referred to, and as a result, I cannot measure them - so I cannot calculate their SF values. The point that has been proven now is that the needed SF value in excess of 2.5 is pure fiction. I will write again to the Barnes company, and ask them to check the measurements, and publish them again in the name of being technically correct, as I do not have these bullets in my possession either. I will do the .375 caliber both for their brass solid and copper X-bullet and the same for the .416 caliber.

Chris Bekker

quote:

have shot over 1 dozen of your 270 grain and 300 grain FN's into varying setups, with 1, 2, and 3 of the ~1/2" plywood boards per compartment with water bag of 7 to 8 inches thick per compartment.

RIP, when you say .... "In every test, the 300 grainer went farther and straighter before tumbling", we should all believe you. However when I do it Gerard will either say it is not statistically representative enough or I massaged the figures, like he accused me of at the beginning when I did tests with the Barnes-X bullet into a wetpack.

I am glad that we have settled this issue now about the SD and SF by virtue of your tremendous effort in an attempt to see the truth for what it is.

There is no 3-step swinddle ... we must do the testing ... and report our findings without fear.

Take care
Chris Bekker

.

Come now Alf, you know what I mean. The new found view of Sd as in "it no longer has significance". What you are referring to, is the old view of Sd. I am sure you will come around to the modern point of view, given enough time. A hundred years before Benjamin Robins, the vast majority of people thought the earth was flat but it only took a generation or so to get over that. (Actually I lie. My grandmother thought the earth was flat too.) Today even Newton and Einstein are being challenged with lesser or greater success, depending on your point of view. As we evolved from the ballistic pendulum to the electronic digital chronograph with printer and a multitude of functions, so we will all eventually evolve beyond the limits of thought imposed by the old notion of Sd.


Chris, today brought no rain in the EC.

Gerard,
Thanks for the table link. It is an eye-opener I never paid attention to:



.375 H&H ... bore: 0.366" groove: 0.376"
.378 Wby ... bore: 0.367" groove: 0.375"
.375 Wby ... bore: 0.368" groove: 0.375"

and:

.404 Rimless NE ... bore: 0.410" groove: 0.418"

I do believe Alf's research has shown the correct .404 Jeffery barrel to be .423" grooved from original specs, but you did say "We have seen .404 rifles with .423 barrels as well as .418 barrels, 6.5 Swedish Mausers with .264 Win Mag barrels and so on."

As to the rest of the Triple Hornswoggle biz:

I am somewhere between you and Chris in my outlook, and cannot agree with either of you 100%.

It does seem that you have a lasso on his horns in the moral sense due to the initial unwarranted badmouthing agenda he adopted years ago, for whatever reasons.

He is free to push the old school to heart's content.

You are bound to push a new set of rules.

You might as well just agree to differ, cut the rope, shake hooves and go back to grazing the range.

Gerard,

You are making a fool of yourself when you say SD has no significance and that it could only have been created by someone with a macabere sense of humour (like you state on your website). SD has some significance - did you see that RIP mentioned that SD is a figure of highest merit (FOHM) - SD is implicitly there - nobody can argue it away. When I buy bullets over the counter and I ask for 200 grainers instead of 130 grainers for my 300 H&H, I am actually asking for higher SD bullets without mentioning the word sectional density. May be you should repeat the accronymn of FOHM 3 times so it can sink into your thick scull.

The same goes for the stabilization issue - despite your specification, despite your theory, despite your wisdom, RIP has now proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the 300 grainer penetrate deeper and straighter than the lighter and faster bullet (270 grainer) despite a higher SF VALUE as well. You were dribbling the ball for quite a long time and it still seems hard for you to accept the evidence. No amount of smoke can wipe it out. Just confess.

I stand by what I have said, you will lie and cheat if you think it will help you.

Chris Bekker

.

quote:

Gerard my friend...... you should have been a politician in the old Nat party

Alf you must obviously be aware of how those NP politicians lied to us ... all the false promises, etc.

Chris Bekker

quote:

The new found view of Sd as in "it no longer has significance". What you are referring to, is the old view of Sd. I am sure you will come around to the modern point of view, given enough time.

Alf,

Gerard is hopefull that somehow someone somewhere will convince you that you were wrong all along and embrace the new set of rules defined by the guru himself and praise them at the GS Altar and hopefully a GOAT WILL BE PROVIDED with his horns stuck in a bush, so you won't have to be sacrificed.

RIP,

I think we agree when we say that SD has some value and not ABSOLUTE value. I have made this clear a thousand times, the record on AR is there for all to see what I said and how I qualified the use of SD and that it should never be used in a silly way.

Regards
Chris Bekker

Chris,
The Eastern Cape Toy Toy combined with the Triple Hornswoggle has made for some great entertainment value.

We must take things with a grain of salt sometimes.

Gerard has plenty of cross to bear with getting his bullets delivered to the needy. Please shake hands and agree to disagree.

Alf,

quote:

or as I call it the Eastern cape Toy Toy

Bad analogy. Very bad. The ToyiToyi is a form of dance employed by demonstrating masses and it has only one purpose: to intimidate and instill fear. It is something that is peculiar to the black races in South Africa and is as foreign to the culture of the whites of this country as ancestral worship. You know this. I do not care what you call me or associate me with, but never imply that I have any connection with that despicable form of expression or any other cultural form associated with the indigenous black races. I am a Boer so you know where I come from. That said, I am sure we can proceed with good conversation with no ill feeling.

RIP, you could not be expected to know.

quote:

He is free to push the old school to heart's content.
You are bound to push a new set of rules.
Please shake hands and agree to disagree.

This is not an unreasonable request and I will be quite happy to accept that Chris subscribes to the stagnated old school rules while I push for new innovation and technical progress. It about sums up the situation. I will make no further comment about his inability to accept progress as long as he does not criticise those of us who bring about that progress. Specifically he should refrain from criticising the concepts that are beyond his sphere of understanding. Very reasonable and accepted by me. (I am placing bets on the outcome of this.)

Chris, are you sure you do not require certified copies of pictures of my rain gauge?

.

quote:

Please shake hands and agree to disagree.

RIP,

You got it, as we have pretty much exhausted the road now and proven the futility to win each other over. The best way to look at it is as you say we have had some entertainment along the road as well.

But as expected, Gerard wants to leave the impression that the 'old rules' are actually redundant and the 'new rules' have superceded them instead of accepting that there is place for short range and long range hunting as well as the difference between large dangerous game hunting and antelope hunting (horses for courses).

It is not quite so simple to talk about old rules and new rules, as Gerard's advertising campaign tries to make it out. Furthermore Gerard makes the divide into 'Stagnation' (old rules) and 'Progress' (new rules) as if it is so simple.

I mean Gerard no ill will and grant him the right to differ with me and expect the same from him. The problem starts when one attacks the intellect of the other as Gerard is so fond of doing - he also did it with Jeffeosso. This is sad because Gerard makes a nice bullet (if you could get a box).

Even if I and Alf are the last two souls using bullets with high SD on this planet, then so be it - it is my perogative as to how I want to kill. It happens to work for me, is very effective imho and is very far from a stagnant situation as hinted by Gerard. In fact, in my books it has been proven over a century and works as well as way back then - the bullets just got better, so we are actually better off.

Alf has explained the insignificance of the temporary cavity ad infinitum in the hunting of animals, and if his views are archiac, then so be it, but I happen to agree with him.



Take care
Chris Bekker

Quote ... "Despite knowing about this record of several decades of lying by the NP in all its various guises, you still voted for them every time. What would one call that? Gullibility, stupidity, ignorance or any combination of these? Well done to you and all who helped to pass on the country to the new government who has promised all an improved, free and safe South Africa."

Gerard,

You are jumping to conclusions again and your psychic powers are failing you brother. I did not vote for them since 1974. You are a real asshole Gerard.

Chris Bekker

quote:

Originally posted by Hog Killer:
Rip,

Let me know if you need any cast bullets for your 45-70 testing. I have 2 different Lyman molds, 457125/525gr RN, and 457658/490gr Spitzer. Both are made of air cooled wheel weights, if you need some very hard cast I can make you some up.

Hog Killer

Hey Hog Killer, there's a real good 45-70 thread rolling right now.

quote:

Originally posted by truvelloshooter:
Even if I and Alf are the last two souls using bullets with high SD on this planet, then so be it -

Don't worry, you won't be. There'll always be me. I'm pissed my 240 grain custom 30 caliber bullets didn't show up in time for my upcoming elk hunt. Have to use little 200's....

Carry on....

Jon A,

Welcome to the club.

I have noticed on AR under the thread 'PH RIFLE CHOICE' that some people (465H&H) prefer the use of heavier bullets as well; even in the 458 Lott. A traditional 500 grainer already has a high SD of .341 but it seems that the 550 grainer (SD=.375) performs even better.

However, it does not mean that the proponents of lighter bullets in the 458, such as the 450 grainers, are no good or not adequate as the other most important element is shot placement. A heart-shot buffalo with a 9,3/286 grainer is better than a gut-shot buffalo with a .458/550 grainer.

I still have to try my 9,3/270 gr FN GS Custom bullets. They are certainly high precision bullets that are well made and all the various tests indicate that FN Solids are better than RN Solids. I got these bullets as I wanted to see or prove to myself how I could minimise meat damage on Impala and Blesbuck at a MV of around 2,350 fps. Then I want to compare it against my FN 286 gr custom lathe turned bullets that I have. Practically I do not expect to see any difference.

No doubt that GS Custom FN bullets can compare with the best solids out there. Others may say it is no better than other FN designs, as they are all essentially solids, but with the added benefit of the driving bands, the lower pressure and less fouling it creates over other designs, may just tip the scales in its favour. My custom turned solids have solid shanks and is bound to yield higher pressure, but as I am not a speedfreak, the pressure issue is a non event for me.

Take care
Chris Bekker

Jon A,

Well we, the proponets of higher SD bullets, are beginning to grow by the day - we just got Norbert also on our side.

Anyone else that feel the same way are welcome to express their solidaritiy - may be we can get up to 10 around the globe to become members of the SD-club.

Take care
Chris bekker

quote:

Originally posted by truvelloshooter:
Jon A,

Well we, the proponets of higher SD bullets, are beginning to grow by the day - we just got Norbert also on our side.

Anyone else that feel the same way are welcome to express their solidaritiy - may be we can get up to 10 around the globe to become members of the SD-club.

Take care
Chris bekker

Chris,
I will consider joining the club, just as long as I can insist on at least .300 SD and no less. More is O.K. if ...

Crap! I want to have it both ways!

I belong to Gerard's club too.

I want velocity and sectional density middle of the road: SD over 0.3, and velocity over 2500 fps ...

Crap! I can't go too fast ... no more than 2800 fps ...

Get my drift, minimized drift?

BTW, thanks for the kind words about the GSC FN, solids as good as it gets.

Those HV's are seductive too, just have to move them fast enough to expand reliably and turn themselves into stubbier FN's inside the critter.

The bonded lead nose core of the North Fork SP seems designed to obviate all worries at high or low velocity, and they work better the faster they go too.

If I am not allowed in the High SD club I'll happily remain in the Outer Circle, looking for the broken horn and broken tusk specimens, with a fast bullet of SD .300, or a little more.

RIP,

You have been accepted bud.
We will also appoint you on the committee.
Dual membership is fine.

Take care and keep up the good work.
Chris Bekker

Chris,
Thanks. Speak softly and carry a big SD Club, eh?

The Old School can apply New Rules in the Outer Circle.