CCMDOC,

The 470 has shot well with all bullets and seating depths. It was my 500 that didn't like the long seated bullets. The 2 band bullets shot really good in the 500.

Sam

quote:

Originally posted by CCMDoc:

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Doc

So far in the B&Ms and the 500 MDM I have just been seating the 3+1 bands where they fit in the magazines of the Winchesters, and they have shown no issues with that. I did have an issue with the 50 B&M and the first run of .500 solids with 4 even spaced bands--seated deep I needed a second band to straighten them out going in the bore, accuracy was horrible. Seated long, and no jump into the forcing cone they did fine. But that is not the 3 top and 1 bottom band version.

I am doing some shooting this week, I will seat some long, some short and some all sorts of ways and we will try them and see.



Cross

In the 416 B&M I think I would still go for buff with the 325/350 NonCon/Solid versions. Plenty of velocity in those, and the NonCon has just as much penetration as the larger 370.

M

Hmmm...
could that have been the problem in the 470? That when they were seated long and since the 470 is a tapered case the "three plus one" bands didnt provide enough concentric tension to keep the bullet straight in the case, thus similar results as the 500?

Probbably wont be a problem in the 600 since it is nearly straight walled case but we'll see ...

Paul

The problem I had in the 50 B&M was with the first run of 500 gr solids I did, with the WIDE band spaced even. When seated deep, they entered the barrel skewed, and no band behind that to straighten the bullet up. Seated long, they had less JUMP into the barrel and they did fine. This is the only run of 4 bands like that--we got it changed before any more were done and all are 3 top and 1 bottom band now--and there are NO issues with those at all, anywhere I seat them in the B&Ms they do well. Having the bands up front keep things lined up, even if they have a longer jump.

Maybe I did not explain that well enough. Current 3+1 is no issue at all, at least so far in everything I have shot.

Michael

Got it
Thanks Sam and Michael

FYI

Here is the 416 Caliber Solid chart that has been updated.

There are a lot of us getting ready to go to the field this year. I can't emphasize enough, get ready early. I leave in June, so I am starting this coming week finalizing my loads for the 500 MDM and the 50 B&M. Just thinking of the bullets, 500 CEB BBW #13 Solid and the 460 CEB #13 NonCon, 450 gr North Fork CPS and the 375 North Fork CPS all these in the 500 MDM and 50 B&M. Which loads, powder and so forth. I have picked the English 500 MDM and the Maple 50 B&M to go with on this trip. Man, I wish I could find a way to take the English 458 B&M as well, but taking 3 these days, and associated ammo starts to be a weighty issue! Would love to give the 458 a workout with the new 450 CEB#13 Solid and it's 420 NonCon!

It's never too soon to start getting things together. I start next week!

Michael

Is it possible to have a .458" 500 grs BBW#13 solid/ 470 grs Non con made?

quote:

Originally posted by buffalo:
Is it possible to have a .458" 500 grs BBW#13 solid/ 470 grs Non con made?

Buffalo

Of course it is possible! And in 458 I always had a plan to do a 500 #13 Solid and NonCon. However, I since getting the 480s I have to question, Why? What will that extra 20 grs of weight buy? A few inches maybe in the test medium, not much however, and I think very little more in the field that can be actually counted.

Yes, we can do a 500/470, but I have to wonder is it worth it, and what will it gain that the 480/450 does not already accomplish?

M

Buffalo
Let's take a quick look, re-visit the 458 Solid chart for a second.






We know that the #13 likes velocity. In a larger case capacity and a tad more velocity, the 480 CEB BBW #13 is going to keep a tight pace with any of the 500s. Even at 2200 fps tested in the 458 B&M the 480 is high on the penetration scale, and already in the "More than Adequate" column, way past the "Adequate" part. In your 458 AR, the 480 will do anything you can ask of it, and be very reliable doing it.

My opinion--that's all.

M

I see - You R absolutely right Michael.. No more is needed..

Ulrik

Is it not safe to say the hunters of the day used what was available AND the newer technology? They used black powder but when the better smokeless powder came and better bullets they used that also single shot to double to bolt action.
With the reliable penetration these bastard bullets are getting it would seem you could go down to .270 SD in the solid and frangible nose petals unless you are going for elephant. A 400 grain 458 in solid and non con seems like a reasonable weight and more may be overkill or overpenetration. The added velocity should give you a better wound channel.
What say you?

I did not exactly plan to spend most of the day on the range, but it worked out that way! Like I said earlier I like to get started planning ahead for a shooting trip, so I started today doing PTs on loads that I intend to take on the June shoot. Both 500 MDM and 50 B&M, all .500s. Buffalo on the menu, then later thin skinned anything I see within range and stands still long enough!

I had not really played much with the 375 North Fork Cup Point that I had made for the 50 B&M Super Short, not in the 500 MDM anyway! I must share this with you "Speedy" sorta chaps. Started out with a mere 100 grs of RL 10X for a slow and safe start, 2692 fps at 45971 psi. Business picked up some at 106/RL 10X for 2813 fps and 51520 PSI. All the way to 112/RL 10X for a rather fast 2917 fps at 590058 PSI. 2917 fps with a 375 gr .500 caliber bullet, still not to 65000 PSI yet, but I run out of time. I think I must see if I can break 3000? Getting a little tight in there however, not much room to play with.

Just FYI, Nothing big!

Michael

Crackle crunch!!!!!!

michael and sam

guess what arrived on my doorstep today, yes yes yes.

the 12 bores and they are beautyfull, and no ass residue at all michael, thank you, now to get the time to test, i will start to load a few of them and start from the start again, but all i think of is shooting something big with them.

will let you know about the progress.

peter

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
Crackle crunch!!!!!!

Hey, NO Damned Fillers to worry with!!!!!

HEH HEH

M

quote:

Originally posted by peterdk:
michael and sam

guess what arrived on my doorstep today, yes yes yes.

the 12 bores and they are beautyfull, and no ass residue at all michael, thank you, now to get the time to test, i will start to load a few of them and start from the start again, but all i think of is shooting something big with them.

will let you know about the progress.

peter

Very Very Excellent---Lucky I cleaned the ass res off! HEH! Hosed them down good you know!

Do keep us posted! I wished I could have tested some here against known depths in known materials! But I am sure we can come up with something.....after you get going with them!

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
Is it not safe to say the hunters of the day used what was available AND the newer technology? They used black powder but when the better smokeless powder came and better bullets they used that also single shot to double to bolt action.

With the reliable penetration these bastard bullets are getting it would seem you could go down to .270 SD in the solid and frangible nose petals unless you are going for elephant. A 400 grain 458 in solid and non con seems like a reasonable weight and more may be overkill or overpenetration. The added velocity should give you a better wound channel.
What say you?

Boomy

I would say that you have an excellent understanding of what is now going on. In fact, in all honesty, and not sure I will admit this in public (HEH), but even for elephant you can go to a lower SD than even .270, even less than .250! The penetration is there I tell you.

Here is the problem TODAY. It will be YOUR generation that will push the envelope, based on the work we and many others have done. My generation, many of us, we are willing to go part way, even though we KNOW what will work, but the conventional has been ingrained in us too long. While many in 465HH generation understand the jest of what is happening with new designs, that generation is not willing to give much at all on SD in most cases. So what I think you will see is that your generation will be more accepting and more "Non Conventional" that even mine. Even as late as 2009 as I took the 500 MDM for Australian buffalo, using the 470 Lehigh in .500 caliber (light for .500) and even though I had used this bullet on other animals in the 50 B&M, I had convinced myself before the first shot was taken that I would have to do a 500 gr bullet as soon as I got home! After that first shot, all concerns about a heavier bullet went away of course. But I still let "Conventional" creep in on me! Times change, 5 yrs ago I would have never bought into the NonCon--"How do you loose weight and gain Penetration"--even 6 yrs ago, I did not care if I shot a round nose solid, in fact that's what I was doing and had done. Now I would not "Contaminate" a rifle of mine with a filthy "Round Nose" solid! HEH

Michael

.

In summary:

a) Effective SD = Mass over area (where area = wetted area = meplat area)
b) Distribution of mass around COG point
c) Shoulder stabilisation to dampen out yaw

All of the above reduce drag in target.

Warrior

quote:

Now I would not "Contaminate" a rifle of mine with a filthy "Round Nose" solid! HEH

The charts are really helpful, Michael. Thanks for putting them up for us!
I've noticed a trend, I think. Bullets with larger bearing surfaces tend to penetrate less. I would think this means more surface area than the meplat alone would indicate and this would reduce penetration.

Someoldguy,

I don't think bearing surface on the sides of the bullet has anything to do with penetration. While testing a number of bullets Michael and I noticed that where I had written on the sides of the bullets with a magic marker was not rubbed off after penetrating 60 or more inches of wet news print. You could wipe this writting off with a swipe of a finger. I think this shows that only the meplat is bearing the media. I have noticed on bullets with smaller meplats do show more signs of the sides bearing more toward the nose.

Sam

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

Someoldguy,

Here is a photo showing the writting on the side of the bullet after firing.

Sam

quote:

I don't think bearing surface on the sides of the bullet has anything to do with penetration. While testing a number of bullets Michael and I noticed that where I had written on the sides of the bullets with a magic marker was not rubbed off after penetrating 60 or more inches of wet news print. You could wipe this writting off with a swipe of a finger. I think this shows that only the meplat is bearing the media. I have noticed on bullets with smaller meplats do show more signs of the sides bearing more toward the nose.

Aha, I see what you mean. Thanks for pointing that out.

P.S. added:
But you're still observing that about 65 percent meplat is best for penetration, right?

Alf

quote:

So the true and effective SD of the FN bullet is not mass divided by surface area as designated caliber but rather mass divided by the surface area of the meplat.

So in effect the SD numbers for all the FN bullets in the above tables are wrong, the FN's have huge SDs compared to their RN counterparts.

If this makes you happy, then I am happy!

quote:

By blunting the tip into a flat meplat the effect of drag reduced by having only the meplat contact the target.

but in the case of the FN the bullet remains stable longer than the RN or ogived bullet , penetrating deep and true mostly coming to a stop in the target before showing instability.

Your tests actually show it !

Yes, we know this already. Thank you for pointing it out, once again.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by someoldguy:

quote:

Now I would not "Contaminate" a rifle of mine with a filthy "Round Nose" solid! HEH

The charts are really helpful, Michael. Thanks for putting them up for us!

Glenn

All these are also available on the B&M site in pdf. Under terminal performance, then by caliber. As they change I will also add new ones in their place.

M

Of interest to the carts of moderate capacity to size of bullet it would be interesting to compare say a 458 win mag with a top load with a 400 grain BBW #13 to say a 500 grain Barnes solid bullet at top load to compare penetration and wound channel

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
Of interest to the carts of moderate capacity to size of bullet it would be interesting to compare say a 458 win mag with a top load with a 400 grain BBW #13 to say a 500 grain Barnes solid bullet at top load to compare penetration and wound channel

Now you have done it! I simply must reply to this in quite a different manner than what you intended! First, which "Barnes" bullet are we talking about? Perhaps the "Old" version, that had a proper nose profile and 65% meplat on average that was a superb performing solid? Or, the new 2011 Round Nose, antiquated banded solid made so it would feed through "CHEAP" rifles? Of course if it is the NEW 2011 Model--most anything will penetrate straighter than that, even a NonCon! So there can be no reasonable comparison, of course the 400 CEB BBW #13 with a proper designed nose profile and 67% meplat will by far do much better both in tests and in the field.

As I write this, I am angry! This thread about terminal performance is by far and large mostly concerning Big Bore bullets made and used for dangerous game. This is basically it's purpose of existence. Now it can also as a side note be about dangerous game rifles. Our basic off the shelf DGRs from most all manufacturers are not to be trusted to feed and function with actual DG bullets that are designed with the most important aspect of proper terminal performance! These DGRs are made to compete in a "Common" market place. I don't trust any of them, until they have been thoroughly ringed out hard on the range! Even my beloved Winchesters! Even my beloved B&M series, each rifle gets a very hard workout on the range before even considering it for field use. Now if you are poking shots at whitetails then no big deal, but going to the field for DG is another story--feed and function are mandatory regardless of make, as is Terminal performance of the bullet--you must have both to be successful!!!! If you sacrifice one for the other, either way, you may very well sacrifice your chances of success! I am NOT willing to compromise on EITHER issue, and I won't! On this, I don't negotiate!

Barnes has by choice "Sacrificed" OUR terminal performance so they could sell more bullets to those with CHEAP rifles, that for the most part will never go on a DG hunt! Because ignorant people complained the flat nose solids won't feed in their "CHEAP ASS RIFLES", instead of spending a $100 or so to get it to feed proper, these people won't even be going to the field with these. If they do, then they are even more ignorant than I can imagine.

Barnes has sold us out, true performance has gone out the window for nothing more than more sales to people who have cheap rifles! A traitor to performance! Now they have an inferior bullet in an inferior rifle--Now that is real progress eh?

Who's fault is this? Is it the rifle manufacturers? The large bullet manufacturers? NO! NO! No! It is OUR FAULT! It is our fault as shooters! We keep demanding lower prices, cheaper rifles! Shooters have to be about the cheapest bunch of folks I know! I love em, but damn we have pissed in our own hat on this one! We pass up the $1200 proper rifle, for an $800 rifle that won't feed or function, because it's $400 cheaper! Now, if we want it to feed and function, we have to spend $500 on the CHEAP rifle now! What sort of logic is that? OK, on whitetail rifles I don't care. But we are talking DGRs! If a rifle manufacturer chooses to build a DGR, then BY GOD it ought to feed, function and at least shoot decent at 50 yds! Not only that, but it ought to feed and function with PROVEN Bullet designs intended for extreme terminal performance on DG. End Of Story---No Compromise! We have sold ourselves out on this issue! The rifle manufacturers are only responding to WHAT YOU DEMAND! Instead--YOU SHOULD DEMAND A PROPER RIFLE for Dangerous Game--feed and function with DG bullets at the top of the Demand List! Yes, it will cost more, but we are not talking about deer--you want to take a cheap rifle that won't feed and function with cheap ass bullets on your next elephant hunt? Lion Hunt? Brown Bear? Buffalo? Not me--I don't negotiate on this! Shame on other shooters for bringing us to this point! Shame on the damned rifle manufacturers for folding under to it! Shame on Barnes for selling performance out the door!

Now, I have a confession to make! Some years ago, when Barnes first introduced the Flat Nose Banded Solid, I bought some in .510 caliber. They would not feed in my big dumb ass Ruger 510 Wells! Being ignorant and stupid myself, I did not realize the important performance features of this bullet, and I too bitched about the Flat Nose not feeding! Barnes did little to explain about the performance difference in RN and FN either! Had they done a better job of that, maybe I would have not been so ignorant! Now, here I am bitching about yet another change, but the difference now, I ain't so ignorant anymore! Most everyone who actually takes these rifles and bullets to the field, for real DG, knows the difference in performance. It's not like it was 5-6 years ago, hunters are more educated now, and this includes me at the top of the list!

As far as I am concerned Barnes is a traitorous bunch to proper DG performance and don't care one way or the other! They have sacrificed our performance to sell more bullets for cheap rifles. So on that point, I myself, and speak only for myself, I can do well without a Barnes bullets. For any conventional bullet needs I can replace Barnes with either North Fork or Swifts. For solids they are easy replaced with CEB and North Fork. I won't support a traitorous bunch of $*%&^# like that, you do what you will, but leave me out. In fact don't even talk to me about Barnes anymore, I have no use for them!

Michael

Amen

Michael:

I have been away for awhile and was very confused about your comments about Barnes Bullets. I know the Banded Solids don't work in the 9.3 but is there something wrong with the other Banded Solids. I just went to the Barnes web site and the Banded Solids still look the same. I had thought that your tests were showing good performance. What has Barnes done?

Doc M, MIB,
The Black Labs will be on the way to you tomorrow.
I forget, does MIB stand for "McCourry Institute of Bullets" or "Myrtle Institute of Ballistics" or what?

Thanks for the good work.
Doin' good ain't got no end.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Michael:

I have been away for awhile and was very confused about your comments about Barnes Bullets. I know the Banded Solids don't work in the 9.3 but is there something wrong with the other Banded Solids. I just went to the Barnes web site and the Banded Solids still look the same. I had thought that your tests were showing good performance. What has Barnes done?

Dave

As you know, I have always supported the Barnes Banded profile, used them in the field, tested all of them, and it WAS an extremely good solid. I say---"WAS" as in Past Tense! A few weeks ago there was a rumor that Barnes will discontinue the Flat Nose Banded, and all new bullets in 2011 will be the ROUND NOSE banded solid! I checked the website this morning, and under 2011 new products, New Banded Solids are all ROUND NOSE--there seems to be NO options for the FN. On bullets for sale they still have pictured the FN Banded. So it would seem they are discontinuing the FN for the RN, and according to the rumor because of complaints they would not feed in some rifles!

Therefore, my rant!



RIP

I CAN"T WAIT! Thank You! As for MIB---You made that up, not me? I suppose it could be either way! HEH

Thanks again--WIll proudly show that off!

Michael

Michael:

I need to ask a question and I hope you won't think this is silly. I have often wondered if we even need solid bullets anymore since the Barnes TSX bullets are so good.

I hope Barnes keeps the flat nose banded solids in the double rifle calibers at least since feeding from a magazine is not a problem in a double.

I guess someone like CEB could reproduce the barnes banded flat nose with slightly altered bands. Call them Barney banded flat nose solids for those who want them. Brass is brass. There are no labels on bullets.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Michael:

I need to ask a question and I hope you won't think this is silly. I have often wondered if we even need solid bullets anymore since the Barnes TSX bullets are so good.

I hope Barnes keeps the flat nose banded solids in the double rifle calibers at least since feeding from a magazine is not a problem in a double.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I guess someone like CEB could reproduce the barnes banded flat nose with slightly altered bands. Call them Barney banded flat nose solids for those who want them. Brass is brass. There are no labels on bullets.

Dave,
There’s no need for BBS bullets now for use in your double rifles with CEB manufacturing the BBW #13 FN and HP Brass and Copper Solid bullets. You can continue to use your TSX bullets though should you desire.

Boomy,
Why on earth would CEB want to produce BBS replica bullets when they’re currently working with Michael and Sam to expand the BBW #13 FN and HP Brass and Copper Solid bullet lines in expanded DR calibers?

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Michael:

I need to ask a question and I hope you won't think this is silly. I have often wondered if we even need solid bullets anymore since the Barnes TSX bullets are so good.

I hope Barnes keeps the flat nose banded solids in the double rifle calibers at least since feeding from a magazine is not a problem in a double.

Dave

No my friend, what you ask is most certainly an excellent question and not silly at all. In fact valid.

While our "Conventional Premiums" are better than they have ever been in our history, and now even the new NonCons are showing extreme performance, I personally think today there is more of a need for solids, good, proper designed solids, than ever before in our history as well. Now we have the best of all worlds, the very best of Conventionals, the best of NonCons, and the very best solids that we have ever gone to the field with. Each and every one, an essential tool for a particular job at hand.

Now, besides the obvious, elephant and hippo, most definitely a "Solid" choice, you might say! Yes, we need solids still for both of these enormous animals.

Now, back down to "Buffalo"! The old load out, Premium or NonCon up front and first, followed by good solids, to me is still viable, and almost essential for the "pros". Why, since premiums are so good, and NonCons are even better? Well, I never stop shooting until the problem is 100% solved, and then I still shoot again if at all possible. If you bust your buff with a great bullet and lets say it's not the best shot ever, a little too far back. Well even a great bullet might not do the job in that case. So what are you most likely looking at? The south end of a North bound buffalo, most likely. Even a NonCon that has a great deal more penetration than a conventional premium, might not get through all it has to get through to make it into the vitals? That well designed CEB or North Fork will give you that ability to crunch bones in the hip, keep on going and get to the vitals, and slow that boy down some! While that TSX is good, it might not be that good! Give me follow ups with CEB #13s or North Forks FPS Solids for this job! So yes, in my opinion, a good solid is an excellent tool to have for backup with buffalo! Very much needed I say.

Since 2006 I adopted an entirely new policy for all my load outs for all manner of critters. Now talking about animals like zebra, wildebeast, elk, moose, eland, the larger antelopes, and even bear. I use the same load out as I would with buffalo. Premium or NonCon up front and first, followed by solids. WHY you SAY? Same story, if I make a bad shot on a moose, or bear, or eland, I am most likely looking at the ass end of that animal taking off. Moose are big, as are eland and many other critters. I like to have the ability to go from end to end if I have to, and only a good solid can assure me of that. Last bear hunt I was on, I used a 470 SSK/Lehigh Copper at 2200 fps in the 50 B&M. Bear took that bullet right on the point of the shoulder, and it passed through exiting the rear flank. But it was still on it's feet. Now at that moment in time I thought I had made a perfect shot--but I was not 100% sure of that. As the bear turned I hit it in the same shoulder, only this time with a 485 gr SSK/Lehigh Solid! This bullet passed through the shoulder, exiting in front of the far shoulder. Bear was down and out for good. No, the second shot was not needed at all, however I am not willing to take a "Wait and See" attitude towards these matters, not if I can get another shot, or two, or three or more in. Had the bear turned ass to, then I had the capability of going the distance, and with a conventional premium that might not be the case all the time. So give me once again a really proper solid, CEB #13 or North Fork! Why take a chance?

I see many many good reasons for a good solid, and can't really think of a reason not to have one.

Now, second part (you really did not expect a short answer did you?)--HEH HEH, anyway talking about the Barnes banded in your doubles--Have you been following the research that Sam and I have been doing on bullet barrel strains and double rifles???? If not, might want to check that out.

Michael

quote:

Call them Barney banded flat nose solids

Put a Purple Dinosaur on the box too ...

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I guess someone like CEB could reproduce the barnes banded flat nose with slightly altered bands. Call them Barney banded flat nose solids for those who want them. Brass is brass. There are no labels on bullets.

Boomy

Go home quickly!!! Don't stop along the way! You forgot your meds this morning!

Why play around with the profile if you have a CEB #13 already and the North Forks? I know, we all slip once and awhile. Soon as you take your meds you will feel better. I know, I took mine this morning!

HEH HEH

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:

quote:

Call them Barney banded flat nose solids

Put a Purple Dinosaur on the box too ...

How much is the trophy fee on a purple dinasour??



SSR

Michael, on Barnes' page I've seen virtually nothing but flatnose bullets for the banded solids amongst the big bores.

http://barnesbullets.myshopify...ons/banded-solidstm/

Might they have simply omitted them from their catalogue rather than discontinue them?

quote:

Originally posted by someoldguy:
Michael, on Barnes' page I've seen virtually nothing but flatnose bullets for the banded solids amongst the big bores.

http://barnesbullets.myshopify...ons/banded-solidstm/

Might they have simply omitted them from their catalogue rather than discontinue them?

Glenn,

I just sent Barnes an email (3:16PM PST) asking whether the new 2011 RN BND SLD bullets are supplementing or replacing their existing FN BND SLD bullets. Hopefully we'll have a definative answer from the "horse's mouth" by tomorrow at the latest.