Since we want them to sheer anyway it would seem to me that to err on the side of thin petal/low velocity would be the correct approach.

SSR

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
Since we want them to sheer anyway it would seem to me that to err on the side of thin petal/low velocity would be the correct approach. I perceive that it just might be a delicate balance between the thin petal and the bullet’s ability to perform correctly against its intended game. Plains game would require a thinner petal than that required for buffalo (Michael’s intended target). Now if Michael and Sam can identify the optimum petal thickness to correctly work on the latter as well as the former than all is well in our world. If the .500 caliber CEB BBW #13 Brass HP works properly at low velocity then it should work properly on both ends of the spectrum. Then perhaps the mathematicians could work on some HP petal thickness projections for the other calibers.

Oh yes…I believe that the petal thickness of the .620 caliber HP is less than that of the .500 caliber HP…it will be interesting to see the results of your tests with the .620 caliber NonCon.

SSR

Comments above in RED.

Leave the petals thick where they will blow at 2100 fps for maximum killing effect. Then it you shoot one at longer distance running away you have got a solid. Just a thought.

Jim,

Agree with all your comments,
with the addition of part of the design paramiter is that no matter what you still have an effective, deep pen bullet as a failsafe. shear or no shear the deep pen slug goeas on

SSR

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
Leave the petals thick where they will blow at 2100 fps for maximum killing effect. Then it you shoot one at longer distance running away you have got a solid. Just a thought.

Interesting thought.
But in a double you would want a non con and a solid in each barrel right?

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
Leave the petals thick where they will blow at 2100 fps for maximum killing effect. Then it you shoot one at longer distance running away you have got a solid. Just a thought.

Sam,

That’s a very interesting thought… I pulled this from the Kynoch Ammunition website for the 450 NE:
MV= 2150 fps (28” barrel), 50yd Velocity: 2050 fps, 100yd Velocity: 1960 fps

I know that DR guys are typically “up front and personal” with their shooting yardage but I would think they’d want the BBW #13 HP NonCon to perform properly beyond 25yds – perhaps down to at least 2000 fps which is approximately 75yds – but as I don’t own a DR this is pure conjecture on my part.

On the flip side, knowing that the BBW #13 HP NonCon would stay together at 100yds (at NE velocities) might not be all that bad is it does provide excellent penetration (though slightly less than the FN solid) when the petals do not expand or shear.

Good food for thought and an excellent talking point. Perhaps this should also be posed over on Michael’s DR thread for their consideration and comments.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
Leave the petals thick where they will blow at 2100 fps for maximum killing effect. Then it you shoot one at longer distance running away you have got a solid. Just a thought.

Interesting thought.
But in a double you would want a non con and a solid in each barrel right?

IN each barrel???

SSR

Dan and I talked a lot about some of the broach sizes yesterday, of course I have forgot some of that by now, and Sam is probably more familiar with those anyway. We did a lot of "ciphering" on the phone and sorta, almost, probably got the thickness of the blades we need sorted out, although I can't quite recall that number?

I will be doing some lower velocity with the .500s this week, along with some other goodies!

June I will be hammering some critters with the 460 gr NonCons at both 2500 fps and 2250 fps, we will see how they do. Will be shooting some thin skinned critters as well, I want to use a few of those very DEEP cavity bullets we did at higher velocities in the 500 MDM to see what happens and trauma transfer.

I have been trying to come up with a downside of the NonCons! Here are a few scenarios to consider.

1. High Velocity to medium velocity--shears 6 blades going away from center rough estimation of penetration of these blades in animal tissue--10 inches. Center bullet continues to penetrated straight, being the largest of 7 projectiles. Penetration--3 ft + . More velocity, more penetration, more trauma inflicted.

2. Blades too thick, uneven shearing---Blades are too thick, shear is uneven, sending larger blades and pieces off from center, but remaining close to center. Remaining slug continues to penetrate, but somewhat unstable. Total penetration still more than any conventional bullet.

3. Low Velocity No Shear--Penetrates straight, more or less 80-90% of the penetration of a normal BBW #13 solid.

Just no real downsides because of the "Penetration". Even if it FAILS--however one would define that, the penetration is still there, so has it really "Failed"?

There are 3 main factors I see in the bullet being successful, in this order;

1.Penetration
2.Penetration
3.Penetration

That should sum it up I think! Gotta get there first and foremost!

None the less, I want that shear! I want those 6 blades shearing at 2-3 inches inside the body cavity, those 6 blades continue to penetrate away from center, tearing through vital organs causing trauma, blood flow, severing arteries, puncturing lung tissue, all the while that center slug continues to move forward like a broken beer bottle, ripping, tearing tissue, pulverizing flesh until it exits the far side allowing air in, and blood flow out, causing more trauma.

I normally get what I want too! I am selfish that way you know!

M

Michael458,

Penetration and sheer ...

You need to get to Victoria's Secret - they may have just what you want ...

I repeat-go thinner for lower vel shear--more explosive at higher velocity and you still have the core to penetrate.

SSR

Doc

sheer 1 | sh i(ə)r|
adjective
1 [ attrib. ] nothing other than; unmitigated (used for emphasis) : she giggled with sheer delight | marriage is sheer hard work.
2 (esp. of a cliff or wall) perpendicular or nearly so : the sheer ice walls.
3 (of a fabric) very thin; diaphanous : sheer white silk chiffon.
adverb
1 perpendicularly : the ridge fell sheer, in steep crags.
2 archaic completely; right : she went sheer forward when the door was open.
noun
a very fine or diaphanous fabric or article.



shear | sh i(ə)r|
verb ( past part. shorn | sh ôrn|or sheared )

2 break off or cause to break off, owing to a structural strain : [ intrans. ] the derailleur sheared and jammed in the rear wheel | [ trans. ] the left wing had been almost completely sheared off.



Hmmmm? Thinking I like your version better! I could not post the official definition of "Penetration" here, family type site and all you know!

Now what did I do with todays catalogs, there is always a Victoria Secret in the stack somewhere????

HEH HEH.........

M

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
I repeat-go thinner for lower vel shear--more explosive at higher velocity and you still have the core to penetrate.

SSR

YES YES YES YES--

OH, I found that catalog, what were we talking about?

Michael, only YOU could start a thread that now runs 141 pages!!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
Michael, only YOU could start a thread that now runs 141 pages!!!!!!

Oh ok, now you are with Mike---Now I am long winded eh? I do type rather well, I have to admit. Wonderful skill you know! HEH HEH.....But we sure are having some fun eh?

Biebs, it's time you got with the program and get yourself some CEB BBW #13s and NonCons--Or did I already send you some?

141 pages? Wow, that's a lot, I think we have looked at near every big bore bullet ever made, and some that have not been? In 141 pages we should have done so anyway! And here I thought a year ago that no one but me was interested in bullets? Seems I was wrong!

I thought we would have run out of things to do a long time ago, but we keep on digging, finding something else to look at! I have some laid out now for testing. Picked up 1 ton of material a few weeks ago, so here we go again!

Ya think we will go 200 Pages? JHC--what a beast!

Well, ya know it's dark here, time for me to roost! So Ya'll carry on, I will catch up on the morrow!

Biebs, I think that is a compliment! Thank You!

HEH

Michael

quote:

Michael, only YOU could start a thread that now runs 141 pages!!!!!!

All it takes is eloquence.

As they say:

If ya cant dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.



SSR

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
As they say:

If ya cant dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.



SSR

And to think, I was going to do something nice for you today! Like test and get pressures on a 325 North Fork and a 340 Woodleigh PP so you could shoot elk and things with those, I was even going to put some in the box--oh well........................

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
As they say:

If ya cant dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.



SSR



And to think, I was going to do something nice for you today! Like test and get pressures on a 325 North Fork and a 340 Woodleigh PP so you could shoot elk and things with those, I was even going to put some in the box--oh well........................

Yikes!
Cross, it's okay if you tell Michael you were talking about me. That's a lot to lose there.

But, as for me, I'm usually dazzled by bullshit and baffled by brilliance.

Actually it was an auto-biographical statement



SSR

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
Actually it was an auto-biographical statement



SSR

Oh how quickly that story can change! HEH HEH HEH............

Yes my man, I have shot both of these bullets, have good data on them, and terminals as well. But never put these on the pressure traces, and in fact consider them top notch in 416 B&M.

To be honest, that 340 Woodleigh I used in a 416 Remington at 2500 fps in Tanzania in 2005 and was so impressed with it's performance that I figured if the only thing I could shoot in the 416 B&M was the 340 Woodleigh for thin skinned game, then I would need nothing more! I think the 325 North Fork may be even better for that purpose, and most likely pressures are lower, velocity higher with the North Fork. Have loads ready, intend to test today if all goes well.

M

quote:

Originally posted by someoldguy:

quote:

Michael, only YOU could start a thread that now runs 141 pages!!!!!!

All it takes is eloquence.

Glenn

HEH.......that's the same thing Mike said the other day as well!

M

Michael,

It would be interesting to see if the thick nose non cons would shear if you shoot them into a water jug. I know you don't go outside much but I also know you wouldn't shoot a water jug in your range. I really think those bullets would work in flesh at lower velocity.

Sam

Sam

I can set that up and do it on the range this morning. Not a problem.

M

Good thing the 416 isnt here- I am teaching 2 cousins, 21 and 24 how to use a deer rifle today. Not sure i could resist the fun of giving them the 416 even though I know better.



SSR

quote:

non cons would shear if you shoot them into a water jug

Yes, they will.

Check out RIP's IWBB thread from 2007. Lots of buckets were killed.

quote:

Originally posted by Cross L:
Good thing the 416 isnt here- I am teaching 2 cousins, 21 and 24 how to use a deer rifle today. Not sure i could resist the fun of giving them the 416 even though I know better.



SSR

Too bad, always fun. And some good lessons can be given. I let a friend's 110 lb., 13-yr-old son shoot our 416 from a bench a couple of years ago. His reaction, "It shoves a little but it's manageable." Loads were reasonable, 350 grain at 2650fps, so they were not downsized for him. The good news from all of that is that he learned that recoil is in the mind, a rifle doesn't hurt the shooter when rockn-n-rolln. He won't be intimidated by anything in NA anymore. Let him shoot coyotes with a 375.

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:

quote:

non cons would shear if you shoot them into a water jug

Yes, they will.

Check out RIP's IWBB thread from 2007. Lots of buckets were killed.

No They Won't!

No they won't? I guess this means you tried!

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:

quote:

non cons would shear if you shoot them into a water jug

Yes, they will.

Check out RIP's IWBB thread from 2007. Lots of buckets were killed.

No They Won't!

You're right! Your bullets is moving too slow.

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
No they won't? I guess this means you tried!

Yep, gave it a good run! Had a milk jug full, 22 yds, in the box covered with phone books on top to contain the splatter. Test medium behind it. Had about 40 or so inches of wet print behind the jug, and then a bundle of dry print and dry phone books to catch. The dry bundle of print caught it something past 40 inches. No shear at all. I did not get impact velocity--did not want to take a chance of dousing the down range chrono. Muzzle velocity was 1940 fps. 450 CEB NonCon. Thin those blades!

M

quote:

Thin those blades!

Affirmative ...

WELL I thought it would work. Thanks for trying.

Thin blades=explosive trauma + penetrating core

SSR

Michael,

Is the range still drenched or have you already sent the .500's down range?

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
No they won't? I guess this means you tried!

Yep, gave it a good run! Had a milk jug full, 22 yds, in the box covered with phone books on top to contain the splatter. Test medium behind it. Had about 40 or so inches of wet print behind the jug, and then a bundle of dry print and dry phone books to catch. The dry bundle of print caught it something past 40 inches. No shear at all. I did not get impact velocity--did not want to take a chance of dousing the down range chrono. Muzzle velocity was 1940 fps. 450 CEB NonCon. Thin those blades!

M

next time try red Jello! The "carnage" will be impressive.

Picture you in your black rain coat - er I mean lab coat, dark glasses and hat ...

Red goop dripping in clumps from all surfaces ...

Bwahahahahahaha ...

OK -save that for Halloween ...

quote:

Originally posted by CCMDoc:

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
No they won't? I guess this means you tried!

Yep, gave it a good run! Had a milk jug full, 22 yds, in the box covered with phone books on top to contain the splatter. Test medium behind it. Had about 40 or so inches of wet print behind the jug, and then a bundle of dry print and dry phone books to catch. The dry bundle of print caught it something past 40 inches. No shear at all. I did not get impact velocity--did not want to take a chance of dousing the down range chrono. Muzzle velocity was 1940 fps. 450 CEB NonCon. Thin those blades!

M

next time try red Jello! The "carnage" will be impressive.

Picture you in your black rain coat - er I mean lab coat, dark glasses and hat ...

Red goop dripping in clumps from all surfaces ...

Bwahahahahahaha ...

OK -save that for Halloween ...

Paul you're having way to much fun at the hospital…might have to send someone to check on you!!

Jim,

You're right - just had two staffers come in and ask me if I was OK.

I said "Yeah, just reading some stuff on a gun website ..."

and left me poste haste ...

quote:

Originally posted by CCMDoc:
Jim,

You're right - just had two staffers come in and ask me if I was OK.

I said "Yeah, just reading some stuff on a gun website ..."


and left me poste haste ...

They must be gunshy.



Or you read them some of my posts.

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:
Michael,

Is the range still drenched or have you already sent the .500's down range?

Nahhh, did not have time to get to those yesterday. Was running PTs on the 416 B&M with the 325 North Forks and 340 Woodleighs, 458 B&M and the 400 North Fork, 458 B&M Super Shorts and the 350 North Forks. Did manage the water jug test with the 450 CEB 458 NonCon. Along with terminals for .416 325 North Fork and the .458 400 North Forks.


Before we get to those terminals I have something to show you guys and get your opinions on. For about a year now JWP475 and I have been battling over scopes on the B&M rifles. He wants me to get one of thos Schmidt and Benders, and I keep telling him they are too big for my rifles! Nice piece of work, no doubt, but they are just TOO BIG for a B&M. But he don't listen, hard head you know! So I thought I would take a photo of one of my B&M rifles and one of those BIG SCOPES and let ya'll decide on this issue.

Now on the scope issue, I have to admit, for a year now I have been telling him, about once a week, that the scope is bigger than the rifle! Well, of course that is not quite true, and may have been a slight miscalculation on my part, maybe even a little embellishment on my part. As you can see the scope is only about 1/2 the size of the rifle.