Nice work as usual!

Might have to load some up in the 45/70 and 450 Marlin Guide Guns for the very dangerous, man-eating, unpredictable Allegheny whitetail population this December.

Thats im sure by design close to top supershort speeds in the 325 and 295 so I'm hoping to see some good post mortem shots on buff for terminal documentation of the best mini 458 out there. Go Michael!

Almost convinced him to take a "Big Bore" but he decided to stick with his "Mediums" in 458 and 500.

I'm sure he will get some "strange" looks when he wips out his itty bitty rifles.
They look more like 308s than DG rifles, but they sure work!!

I hope he gets his best one yet.

Cheers, John

quote:

Originally posted by CCMDoc:
Nice work as usual!

Might have to load some up in the 45/70 and 450 Marlin Guide Guns for the very dangerous, man-eating, unpredictable Allegheny whitetail population this December.

Sam

Yep, poor 450NE--he is up to his ears now in B&Ms, it's sorta like when guys visit, they can't leave without one. Of course, I think you know this eh? HEH HEH HEH....... I think every home should have a "dozen" or so. Hey, you know that GunKote 500 MDM--I think I decide to keep that gun! Also, got a new South Carolina Win M70 9.3 B&M in yesterday, gunkote--I am in a "Gunkote" stage I think. I don't know, the SC gun looks pretty good to me! Handles good, feels good, smooth, even with the gunkote. I think maybe they are going to do fine. I have 4 more I am going to build something on?



Doc

quote:

Almost convinced him to take a "Big Bore" but he decided to stick with his "Mediums" in 458 and 500.

I am just a sissy I suppose! LOL



Way past my bedtime! Gotta go

M

quote:

450NE and I did some test work with the 400 and 325 BBW#13 Solids in the 458 B&M. Increased velocity over the 45/70 work we did a few weeks ago. However, we did not really gain much, if any in penetration with the added velocity, which surprised me some, as this is greatly contrary to what we have experienced "to a point" with the other BBW#13s.

I'm still trying to understand why the solids lost stability in the way they appeared to have done.

Glenn

It is not uncommon for many of the solids in this test medium to loose stability right at the last inch or two of penetration. It's rare that the BBW#13 does that, but is not of much concern to me honestly. What I get concerned about is any solid that looses stability 1/2-3/4 of it's total penetration, and moves off course.

What one does have to remember is the makeup of the test medium I use. It's rather ugly in a way and for sure is very tough on bullets as far as stability goes. By inserting these magazines and catalogs this adds some inconsistency to the medium, like having some bindings on the catalogs get in the way, in some spots slightly thicker than others, sometimes hitting staples along the way as well. While one can argue concerning the consistency of the medium on a pure scientific basis, I feel like by these slight inconsistencies it manages to separate the good from the bad. It manages to add extra stress to the bullet beyond what a perfect medium would represent. This is why in many cases you see where in a test of two bullets side by side that you see 1 bullet penetrate an inch or so further than the other. Or where one might have hit the binding on a thicker magazine right at the end of penetration, causing some instability. It's always interesting when you get one that has hit a staple in the backing, it puts an impression in the bullet of the staple. If a solid can overall penetrate this medium straight, and stable, then it's a damn good bullet.

Michael

I am sure that many of you might start to consider that I have become somewhat prejudiced in my opinions concerning bullets, and in particular the BBW#13s and North Fork. You would not be totally incorrect in that line of thinking. I am only human, and we tend to have certain tendencies. When you do this and watch time after time, caliber after caliber, weight after weight all doing the same, performing the way you desire, rare failures, then you lean to developing some prejudices. The same can be in reverse, when you watch a certain bullet fail time after time, and become able to predict where, when and how it will fail, same story, you develop prejudices either for, or against a bullet.

We have been on a very long stretch of doing test work in all sorts of calibers on the CEB and North Fork bullets for some time now. Well, we have tested about everything worth testing of other solids, and conventionals, and with the new CEB BBW#13s solids and NonCons, some of the new North Forks, then we have diverted a lot of attention in these areas, and will probably continue that for some time into the future as these new bullets come available to us.

However, I do wish to let you know I have not been totally corrupted, and when a bullet other than CEB and North Fork does a good job, then it will get reported as such, and here is one of those bullets.

Tanz mentioned the other week about that blue tipped 300 gr Barnes TSX type bullet in .458 caliber. I have some, I think I got them to work in the 458 Super Short, but they ended up being a bit to long for that case, so I had not messed with them at all. When loading up for the 325/295 BBW#13s, I loaded a few of these 300 Barnes to put to the test as well. Results were very good, and I am very pleased with the performance of this bullet, it's a hammer of a bullet. Great BC for it's caliber I would think, and gives all 458 guys a good alternative for a little longer range. We were testing in an 18 inch 458 B&M.







I don't have to say much, the results speak for themselves.

Enjoy

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
I am sure that many of you might start to consider that I have become somewhat prejudiced in my opinions concerning bullets, and in particular the BBW#13s and North Fork. You would not be totally incorrect in that line of thinking. I am only human, and we tend to have certain tendencies. When you do this and watch time after time, caliber after caliber, weight after weight all doing the same, performing the way you desire, rare failures, then you lean to developing some prejudices. The same can be in reverse, when you watch a certain bullet fail time after time, and become able to predict where, when and how it will fail, same story, you develop prejudices either for, or against a bullet.

We have been on a very long stretch of doing test work in all sorts of calibers on the CEB and North Fork bullets for some time now. Well, we have tested about everything worth testing of other solids, and conventionals, and with the new CEB BBW#13s solids and NonCons, some of the new North Forks, then we have diverted a lot of attention in these areas, and will probably continue that for some time into the future as these new bullets come available to us.

However, I do wish to let you know I have not been totally corrupted, and when a bullet other than CEB and North Fork does a good job, then it will get reported as such, and here is one of those bullets.

Tanz mentioned the other week about that blue tipped 300 gr Barnes TSX type bullet in .458 caliber. I have some, I think I got them to work in the 458 Super Short, but they ended up being a bit to long for that case, so I had not messed with them at all. When loading up for the 325/295 BBW#13s, I loaded a few of these 300 Barnes to put to the test as well. Results were very good, and I am very pleased with the performance of this bullet, it's a hammer of a bullet. Great BC for it's caliber I would think, and gives all 458 guys a good alternative for a little longer range. We were testing in an 18 inch 458 B&M.







I don't have to say much, the results speak for themselves.

Enjoy

Michael

Thank you, Michael.
That is helpful for evaluating the bullet,
and the data help to correct the BC stats put out by Barnes. They list this bullet with a .236 BC. The data that you present would produce a BC of approximately .400 (.426 for the specific program and temp/humidity data that I plugged in.) That is definitely a potential long range bullet (200-400 yd), though further testing and averages would probably drop that BC somewhat into the .350 range.

The resulting shape is distinctive, as well. The smooth mushroom seems to mimic a lead-core bullet instead of the petals that are typical of the Barnes TSX. apparently this bullet is not 'scored' inside into order to form petals and the copper must be very malleable.

I think an impala or hartebeest would be honored at such a dinner invitation if watching from across a large/long open area. And 15-16 inches in your medium is reliable penetration, though on the low side (just minimal) for buffalo.

Of course, some of the larger capacity 458s (probably Lott, certainly Rigby, Weatherby, maybe the B&M at 2800) would be able to push that bullet to 2800 and 3000 fps.

The question for this thread: would it still hold together at those higher velocities? The question needs to be asked of any bullet that is so pretty at 2500 fps.

quote:

The data that you present would produce a BC of approximately .400 (.426 for the specific program and temp/humidity data that I plugged in.) That is definitely a potential long range bullet (200-400 yd), though further testing and averages would probably drop that BC somewhat into the .350 range.
...
The question for this thread: would it still hold together at those higher velocities? The question needs to be asked of any bullet that is so pretty at 2500 fps.

I redid the BC, after assuming that your first velocity reading is probably 4 yards from the muzzle, leaving an 18 yard trajectory. The BC came out to a more expected .349.

For a quick projection over 200-400 yards, such a bullet at 2900 travels the following arc:

Barnes Tipped TSX .458, 300 grain,

--------- fps -- ftlbs. - height (in.)
muzzle 2900 5604 -1.5
50 yds 2783 5159 +0.8 (within Michael's comfort zone)
100 yds 2669 4743 +2.0
150 yds 2557 4354 +1.9 (still cruzing)
200 yds 2448 3990 +0.5 (zero is at 212 yards, 2422fps, 3906 ftlbs.)
250 yds 2341 3651 -2.3 (effective point blank limit)
300 yds 2237 3334 -6.7 (not too shabby! easy to hunt with)
350 yds 2136 3039 -12.9 (needs accurate ranging from here and farther)
400 yds 2037 2765 -20.9 (recommended energy limit for eland)

The above can be flattened out if using a 3.0" max arc (2.7" sight-in at 100yd):
50:+1.1 (not bad), 100:+2.7, 150:+3.0, 200:+1.9, 250:-0.6, 300:-4.6, 350:-10.4, 400:-18.1. (This flatness is approximately a 338WM with 225 grain bullets at 2800, but producing a much bigger hole.)

All in all a great plains load. Something a little heavier would be preferable for Nyati, though pretty nice for Simba, too, and we won't discuss Chui here, but it sure would work.

Tanz

You pretty much hit the nail on the head I think with something around .350 or so. I should do more on BCs for you guys--most down range velocity I only collect for impact velocity. But it would not be such a big deal to get 50 yd downrange and work up some BCs on some of the bullets.

quote:

50 yds 2783 5159 +0.8 (within Michael's comfort zone)

Well that is getting a little far for me, glad you did not go to 51 yards, that would have been ultra long range stuff for me! HEH.........

BTW, I think, not 100% sure, but I think these have petals, but think they lost them during penetration leaving sort of a mushroom cap, I found some copper looking petal things in the mix.


Michael

quote:

BTW, I think, not 100% sure, but I think these have petals, but think they lost them during penetration leaving sort of a mushroom cap, I found some copper looking petal things in the mix.

Interesting.

It's pretty easy to check. You could do what we used to do with lead-core bullets: you weigh the recovered bullets to see how far below 300 grains they have dropped. We know for sure that the bullets' plastic thing is gone, but otherwise they look pretty much all there.

So I'll take a first guess--
#1-- 265 grains -- 88% retention, expansion 3/4" (160%)
#2-- 280 grains -- 93% retention, expansion .7" (150%)

With those smooth round frontals instead of a four-blade propeller they might even stay in an animal and provide a souvenir under the skin on the far side.

Tanz

Sorry, I forgot to get the retained weight on, 232 gr on one, 235 on the other.

M

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Tanz

Sorry, I forgot to get the retained weight on, 232 gr on one, 235 on the other.

M

Thanks.

I suppose that 78% retention isn't bad. A generation ago it was the benchmark. It certainly ranks as a premium bullet. And that does explain the penetration of only 15".

Tanz

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Tanz

Sorry, I forgot to get the retained weight on, 232 gr on one, 235 on the other.

M

Thanks.

I suppose that 78% retention isn't bad. A generation ago it was the benchmark. It certainly ranks as a premium bullet. And that does explain the penetration of only 15".

Tanz

Tanz

If I get a chance I will slow that velocity down a tad, and see what this bullet is exactly. I think it has petals, I think they sheared off at the velocity I was running the things--which I like that aspect of this particular bullet in the 458 B&M. But this bullet was designed for the 458 Socom, if I am not mistaken, and that is much lower velocity.

Michael

You have probably seen it - but I post it anyway.. This morning I was looking at Barnes website. I read some quotes from ph`s that amazed me. Among others from Harry Selby and Roy Vincent who I consider as experienced guys..

"For 2011, Barnes added the RN design back into the Banded Solids lineup. Why? It’s simple: feed and function in bolt action rifles. Hunters use these Banded Solids in larger calibers for dangerous game. The RN is a proven design that works in bolt guns, a very important consideration for this type of hunting. While the Banded Solid FN product is still available, they can only be ordered from the Barnes website.


“If you can’t chamber it, penetration is meaningless.”

Brian Bingham, D’Arcy Echols & Co. www.echolsrifles.com

“My feeling is that the flat nose solids currently in vogue is marketing hype. There are all kinds of supposed technical advantages touted for the flat nose, i.e. that it maintains direction better while penetrating, and greater tissue damage. The flat nose does reduce penetration to a degree.

“Over the many years since the advent of jacketed round-nose solids, who knows how many large beasts have been shot with satisfactory results. If the jacket had the integrity to withstand deformation forces, they worked very well (not all did – such as Kynoch and RWS). The flat nose creates more work for the gun maker, at least for those that ensure their product cycles rounds flawlessly.

“An interesting subject one could discuss endlessly.”

Roy Vincent, Professional Hunter & Gunsmith

“I have never noticed any advantage in penetration or holding a straight course with the ‘flat meplat’.

“I first encountered that design early on in my career in the late nineteen forties loaded in Winchester’s 300 gr.375 solid. I had numerous discussions on the subject when I accompanied John Wootters and Jack Carter on safari in Botswana as Jack’s ‘Sledghammer’ solid had a ‘flat meplat’.

“Quite frankly I think the tendency for the ‘flat meplat’ to hold a truer course is mostly ‘theory’. It does undoubtedly have some feeding problems in some rifles.”

Harry Selby, Professional Hunter

“While my experience with flat nosed solids is limited, I have never noticed the difference between them and the round nose.

What is more important is the fact that the round nose construction feeds reliably always, and that the construction is sound as your Barnes Banded Solid is.”

Athol Frylinck, Professional Hunter"



Now were we KNOW that they are wrong its pretty sad to see that Barnes reintroduce the RN solid instead of the FN. Also sad to read such statements from PH`s I respect so much..

I wonder if Barnes would sell a mixed box to Michael for testing?
Michael would be on best behavior, Grey Gouse if needed.

For example:
5-- .338 250 grain, (longish bullet ought to turn to edge of box)
5-- .366 250 grain, (maybe the shorter ones will work reasonably?)
5-- .366 286 grain,
5-- .416 350 grain, (maybe the shorter ones will work reasonably?)
5-- .416 400 grain,
10- .458 450 grain, (will the shorter ones will work reasonably well?)
5-- .458 500 grain,
5-- .504 525 grain, (maybe .504 is less stable?)
5-- .510 535 grain,
_______
50 boolits

It would be good to know just how bad or how close to good these bullets are. My guess is that the shorter of the bullets in various sizes would provide adequate straight penetration to 30-40". A measured comparison would be useful. Let Barnes put its bullets where its ads are.

Ulrik

No, I have not seen that trash. Likely not to either. Don't think I could stomach that.

One thing that we must all keep in mind, or in fact, several things. Barnes has enlisted the help of extremely experienced--Hunters, even a Gunsmith or two as it appears. None of which I would consider Terminal Ballistics Expersts in the study of Terminal Penetration. Taking nothing away from their respective areas of expertise at all. Easy, first lets study the Gunsmith aspect;

Gunsmith puts the gun together, needs it to work proper, round nose bullets are easy. Of course said individual works with mostly Win M70s as I understand, and any M70 will feed and function with a 65-68% meplat, no special work required. Other rifles--not the case. I have Rugers here that will not feed a 50% meplat--Sacrifice terminal penetration for the sake of not having to work on the rifle? No way boys--I will have some work done to that rifle so it does work with proper bullets. Since I could care less about the ruger rifle, or any others for that matter, I have not had work done to mine, they won't see field operations anyway, just test rifles for real bullets. How much effort does the various gunsmiths around the country--most superb in their area of expertise--put into research of terminal performance???

quote:

My feeling is that the flat nose solids currently in vogue is marketing hype. There are all kinds of supposed technical advantages touted for the flat nose, i.e. that it maintains direction better while penetrating, and greater tissue damage. The flat nose does reduce penetration to a degree. “Over the many years since the advent of jacketed round-nose solids, who knows how many large beasts have been shot with satisfactory results. If the jacket had the integrity to withstand deformation forces, they worked very well (not all did – such as Kynoch and RWS). The flat nose creates more work for the gun maker , at least for those that ensure their product cycles rounds flawlessly.

JHC--I reckon what you see in BOLD RED pretty much says everything I need to know! ""FN creates more work for the gun maker""" Do I need to say MORE!!!!!! Less HOURS Spent working on feeding, more profit made in the end! Good God--Go ahead with that line please, explains my point in FULL!

PHs! Many of us have hunted with several wonderful, very knowledgeable, and very experienced PH's in Africa. I have several friends, several PHs, all much better hunters than I will ever be in a lifetime. Terminal Performance Experts? No. Ballistic Experts? No. They know what they have seen. Now how much test work, animal digging have the PH's actually done? Do you think that any of them go bullet digging after each animal? 50% of the Animals? 10% of the animals? 1% of the animals? How about the elephants and other game that mysteriously get away? Oh, that must have been a miss? Do PH's take the time to do a lot of study? None that I have ever hunted with, unless asked by me to assist. How many clients do they have that ask this of them? Very few, probably most of them are on this thread right now! 465HH, myself, Sam, Mike, probably a few more, but that is a mere drop in the bucket, and goes mostly unnoticed except by us!

Yep, I have said it a 1000 times if I have said it once, that old round nose bullet works for a good portion of the time, but I don't care what anyone says, the potential is there for it to not perform as well over the long haul as a proper flat nose solid, 65%-70% meplat. It is not possible and will never be possible over the long range look for the round nose to exhibit all the benefits of the flat nose. All bullets are subject to fail at some point during field operations--their are too many variables to consider, but if you take hundreds of cases against hundreds of cases there will be an advantage in the long run to the FN.

I take nothing away from Harry Selby, Roy Vincent, or any other well known PH or hunter. But that is their area of expertise. Their area of expertise is not Terminal Performance, terminal ballistics, nor anything of the sort. NO ONE IS AN EXPERT AT EVERY ASPECT OF THE SUBJECT!!! A PH is a hunter, his job to put the client in a position to take a shot at the proposed animal! End of story. Very rarely, do they have the time, energy, nor the funds, to do a complete study of such things. Experience, what they have seen, and we all already know that the old RN works, a good portion of the time, better than a FN--No, but which one of the PH's do you know, that have done test work, that is measuring inches of penetration, able to determine in animals straight line penetration to begin with and so on, so forth and whatever. BS BS BS!!!!---Barnes Solids or Bull Shit??? Or both perhaps?

Each one of the PHs mentioned;

quote:

noticed any advantage in penetration

quote:

I think the tendency for the ‘flat meplat’ to hold a truer course is mostly ‘theory’

quote:

“While my experience with flat nosed solids is limited, I have never noticed the difference between them and the round nose

quote:

What is more important is the fact that the round nose construction feeds reliably always

What do you see here??? Words like---Noticed? Mostly Theory? Again--Noticed? and of course Feeding reliably.

There is nothing definitive here. There is no evidence to the contrary. There is no basis for any of this, just conjecture. There is no one saying, I have studied this extensively, tested and dug bullets out of test medium, then studied this in animal tissue, and FN does not penetrate better, deeper, straighter than RN. There is none of that--A lot of "I think", I never really paid much attention, but I never really noticed a difference? I have a cheap ass rifle, I am in the middle of Africa, and I have no one to work on this cheap ass rifle, so feeding is more important to me than bullet performance! And on that point I would happen to agree with. If I was in Africa, and all I had was a cheap ass rifle that would not feed FN--then I would choose the RN myself! At least I can poke a few holes in something trying to bite me! Thank goodness I don't have to make that choice and I can have a rifle that feeds and functions with real bullets! Not some cheap ass round nose trash!

JHC--what a bunch of CRAP!

Respect your PH and your gunsmith for their area of expertise. One need not loose respect for these great individuals that have accomplished so much in their lifetimes, for us, for the sport, and for themselves. These individuals were seduced by a bullet company to make these remarks, that is out of their area of real expertise, to us it looks bad, as we know better, to 1000s of ignorant hunters out there, it looks great.

As stated from the very beginning on page one---You don't have to buy anything, I have nothing to sell, I do what I do for myself, and my success in the field. I done this LONG before I ever even heard of AR. And I am better, more knowledgeable, and more successful in the field because of it. Data is here to support, do as you please with it. I will be using a proper rifle that feeds, functions 100% of the time, with solid FN bullets with 65-68% meplats, and if I do my job proper in the field, I have ZERO concerns about my bullet doing it's job! At least as 100% confident as one can be and consider all the wild variables one might encounter. The rest can do as they please.

Tanz

No thanks--I don't wish to test anymore RN solids, I know what they are going to do, and they do too much damage to my range facilities to worry over, as they cannot keep a straight line. What do they do? Anything from 15-25 inches, veer off course, go up, down, sideways, there is no predicting after that. No test work needed--it's all been done and done again, in so many different calibers and weights that it is without doubt or issue a fact.

Michael

MM,
if possible, would you mind doing a test on thie little bluetip 300gr .458 at, say, 1400 and 1100 fps? 1050 would be better... would be very very interesting to see the results in this low and slow vels.

cheers
jeffe

Whenever looking at expert testimony, start by asking "what does this statement have to do with the subject at hand"? (terminal ballistics)Second, "what evidence is being offered to support the statement"? "Can that evidence be supported by independent testing"?

Watch out for disclaimers in the statement.

quote:

Originally posted by I Bin Therbefor:
I am not suprised at what Barnes did. Nor am I suprised with their ability to gather up a group of "popular experts" to put their names to the Barnes smoke and mirrors game. Had Barnes put as much money into terminal ballistic research as defense of their position I believe the the answer would have been different.

The way you play the smoke and mirrors game is to make statements that are true but don't apply to the question at hand.

I am somewhat disappointed at the experts who are willing to play in the game. Is Brian Bingham, D’Arcy Echols & Co., saying that D'Arcy will not work to make their rifles feed properly with flat nose bullets? Are they going to issue a statement with each rifle that says "Warning, this rifle feeds round nose bullets only"? Are letters going out to all current D'Arcy owners with the same warning?

Whenever looking at expert testimony, start by asking "what does this statement have to do with the subject at hand"? Second, "what evidence is being offered to support the statement"? "Can that evidence be supported by independent testing"?

Sad but not unusual in our times.

IBT

Yep, well stated!

I can tell you this, as much as a Echols rifle costs---THAT SOB better feed anything my imagination can come up with! If I want it to feed backwards ass rocks, that SOB better feed them!

M

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
MM,
if possible, would you mind doing a test on thie little bluetip 300gr .458 at, say, 1400 and 1100 fps? 1050 would be better... would be very very interesting to see the results in this low and slow vels.

cheers
jeffe

Hey Buddy! Yep, I will try and get this done before leaving. I will get to work this morning, have to be on the range for a bit, and see what velocities I can come up with.

M

Michael, thanks for the quote, I'm having trouble with my posts, so the original post now looks different. Everyone, I did post what Michael quotes and then tried at add the statement that now appears as my original post.

Sorry about the confusion.

Good Morning Everybody.

There is quite a lot of new information on this thread I need to read after being out of the country for 22 days and having to catch up at work.

First of all nothing shocking to report bullet wise from Africa.

A 180 Grain Partition from my 300 Win Mag was used in a one shot kill on my leopard. He was dead under the tree.

The first buffalo I shot was with my 375 H&H at about 75 yards. I was a little higher than the buffalo and he was quartering towards me. The 300 Grain North Fork soft traveled nearly the length quartering a big male buffalo. I thought for sure we would find the bullet but never did. I do not think it exited but must have fallen out when we field dressed it. There was a follow up the a CEB BBW 300 Grain Solid. That bullet passed through. The buffalo ran less than 100 yards and was dead when we found him. There was quite of bit of internal damage. I reaaly wish we found the North Fork.

I wrote a little about the second buffalo already. It was shot through the shoulders with a 500 Grain North Fork Cup Point from my 470 Nitro. It did not take a single step and was dead before it hit the ground. That bullet passed through and made a terrific (or horrific if you were the buff) wound channel. I followed up with a 500 Grain CEB BBW solid through the spine and out of the chest. Of course that was a pass through.

I plan to test some more Non Cons out of my 470. I lost some of my test data from the last test. After shooting I quickly found the bullets and did not make many notes. My lovely wife who loves to pick up messes that I make cleaned up all of the newspaper and I was unable to determine where the petal separated and so on. But there was some impressive damage even at low velocity. I do want to duplicate the test.

As far as the Barnes ad maybe D'Arcy will comment as he does post on AR from time to time. His reputation is good and I would hope a $15,000+ rifle would feed a flat nose bullet. My CZ with just $1000 worth of work will feed 100% of the time under any condition.

Keep up the good work Michael. You and Sam have even converted some of the Double Rifle guys. That is an accomplishment.

Now for testing some of the CEB in my 450-400. I had it for sale and received no serious offers. A couple of months later when I received the CEB bullets I changed my mind about selling it.

quote:

Originally posted by I Bin Therbefor:
Michael, thanks for the quote, I'm having trouble with my posts, so the original post now looks different. Everyone, I did post what Michael quotes and then tried at add the statement that now appears as my original post.

Sorry about the confusion.

It comes to me that the lawyers are going to love this. If my hunter/client was using round nose bullets, I'll sue that they didn't penetrate properly, if my client was using flat nose bullets, I'll sue that the rifle didn't feed properly. A true win-win.

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

I can tell you this, as much as a Echols rifle costs---THAT SOB better feed anything my imagination can come up with! If I want it to feed backwards ass rocks, that SOB better feed them!

M

hahahahhahahahahahhaaaa

MM -
trailboss is your friend!

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
MM -
trailboss is your friend!

Believe it or not, I am working on it, have data already. Getting ready to do one more test.

I don't have trail boss--but several lbs of 2400. I am using the 458 B&M Super Short--and I might add it's broken 2X Leupold! Seems to be working out however. I had a piece of data on 35 gr 2400 and a 300 Reminington at 1900 fps. So I went to 25 grs for 1377, 20 grs for 1075 fps, and 15 grs for 810 fps. Have the first two tests completed, getting ready to do the 810 fps test. Very interesting. Obviously you might guess that at 1075 fps the bullet continues to open up, or I would not be going to 810 fps. Now between me finishing this, and getting data posted, I will leave it to you guys to guess, and play around with what you think it did! LOL......

Michael

thanks MM ...
slow .458 bullets and night vision!

I like guessing, it makes the data more personal when it arrives.

.458 300 grain TTSX around 1000 fps.
9-11" is my guess, open petals, but not so much trauma. If it doesn't open up, then a few more inches.

i am guessing a foot to 14" .. and 100% (less plastic tip) weight retention, expanded to .650

You can go quite low with AA-5744 also.

My 50-70 Govt. load for Trapdoor is a 470-grain LRN with 25.4 grains of AA5744, gets about 1200 fps in my Sharps.
Lucretia Borgia, II, the 1867 original Trapdoor Needle Gun 50-70 is getting rejuvenated.
She will ride again, but maybe with BP.
Maybe with AA5744. Probably lower pressure with the latter.

I don't use no stinking fillers anymore.
Not supposed to use any with 5744 anyway, ever,
though I did some 1600 fps loads with 340-grainers and 310-grainers in the .395 Tatanka.

The 340-grain GSC HV copper HP/soft just barely opened, started peeling back the petals in water impact at 1600 fps,
and was loosing 2 out of three petals at 2600 fps,complete expansion and petal retention somewhere around 2300 fps IIRC.

The S&H 310-grain Brass HP/soft NonCon shed all petals similarly at 1600, 2100, and 2600 fps.
And it was a "one-shot-through-the-heart-and out the other-side" killer of anything up to Zebra, as long as I did not gut shoot the quarry. 2 gut shots, 4 heart shots.
What am I batting? 0.6667?


Sorry to read the Roy Vincent and Harry Selby comments on RN superiority over FN.
Seems like a sell-out to Barnes, maybe an endorsement fee?
You know they are, or were, highly exalted professional hunters of great experience ...
and neither one is senile, yet.
Why, Roy was hunting buffalo above 9000 feet last November.
Anoxic brain damage?

He did have considerable blood loss from a scope bite to forehead, late October 2010, and possibly a slight concussion,
from his 450 Vincent ... Hmmm ...
He was running after a fatally wounded departing buffalo when he let fly that Texas Heart Shot ...

Oh well! It's hard to sort out the exact pathophysiology of a brain fart sometimes!
Multiple insults to Roy's brain occurred in Tanzania in 2010.
Best wishes for a speedy recovery.

quote:

Brian Bingham, D’Arcy Echols & Co.

“ My feeling is that the flat nose solids currently in vogue is marketing hype. There are all kinds of supposed technical advantages touted for the flat nose, i.e. that it maintains direction better while penetrating, and greater tissue damage. The flat nose does reduce penetration to a degree.

“Over the many years since the advent of jacketed round-nose solids, who knows how many large beasts have been shot with satisfactory results. If the jacket had the integrity to withstand deformation forces, they worked very well (not all did – such as Kynoch and RWS). The flat nose creates more work for the gun maker , at least for those that ensure their product cycles rounds flawlessly.

This is the one that "aggravates" me the most I think! Mr. Bingham, and your qualifications to make these statements are exactly what?

We see "My Feeling"---Vogue Marketing Hype? "SUPPOSED TECH ADVANTAGE? Good one here, the flat nose has less penetration?

All these I wonder, show me your credentials please on these statements? I see a lot of My Feeling, and supposed and so forth. I don't see any statements to the effect I shot 10 buffalo with round nose and 10 buffalo with flat nose and the RN Penetrated deeper, and hit them harder? I don't see any such statements as that! I see "MY FEELING".

Of course what this all comes down to is this.

quote:

[B]The flat nose creates more work for the gun maker [B]

END OF THAT STUPID ASS STORY!!!!!!

This is sort of an ugly post, and honestly I don't like it much. But this person has spoken out as some sort of expert, and he is WAY THE HELL out of his area of expertise. So be it.

Michael

Doc M,
No it was Roy Vincent that you are most aggravated by:

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
“If you can’t chamber it, penetration is meaningless.”

Brian Bingham, D’Arcy Echols & Co. www.echolsrifles.com
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Roy said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
My feeling is that the flat nose solids currently in vogue is marketing hype. There are all kinds of supposed technical advantages touted for the flat nose, i.e. that it maintains direction better while penetrating, and greater tissue damage. The flat nose does reduce penetration to a degree.

“Over the many years since the advent of jacketed round-nose solids, who knows how many large beasts have been shot with satisfactory results. If the jacket had the integrity to withstand deformation forces, they worked very well (not all did – such as Kynoch and RWS). The flat nose creates more work for the gun maker, at least for those that ensure their product cycles rounds flawlessly.

“An interesting subject one could discuss endlessly.”

Roy Vincent, Professional Hunter & Gunsmith
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Roy is a gunsmith, and a hard worker at whatever he does, maybe even feed jobs.

Let us hope his flatulence of the CNS has resolved, or will soon.
To Roy's health!

Jeffe

Man, ask and I jump for my boy Jeffe! HEH HEH.......

Actually this happened to work dead in perfect and very easy for me while on the range today. So it was not too difficult to put together quickly. Fun too! My god, these were nothing but pop gun loads, Mercedes could shoot these like fat 22 lr. Nothing, I mean nothing! I really must investigate some of these loads further when I return for the girls to shoot big bore. Momma would like these, no recoil at all, no noise or muzzle blast either.

Anyway, let's get started, have several things to show you.

First starting at the bottom end and working up. I actually shot the other way around, starting at the top end, working down until expansion was very limited. I will post opposite of that.

Really did not know how this was going to work, but it did work rather well. Using the 458 B&M Super Short and 15 gr of 2400, Fed 215 primer. I already had primed cases just waiting for powder and bullet!




Now one thing to take note of is the velocity at the muzzle (actually about 5 yds) and the down range 22 yd velocity. First round was 826 and 825. I did not buy into that, so I did the second round as well, still only about 4-5 fps difference. Hmmmmm????

Ahhh,

Don't get aggravated.
People will believe what they want to believe and will say what they are paid to say.

The more those in the field use a product that works, the more it will gain acceptance.

The more FN solids are used, the sooner RN will fade away like bell bottoms and ruffled shirts. I'll keep some of each in the back of the closet for old times sake, though and for when Michael throws a party.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
Doc M,
No it was Roy Vincent that you are most aggravated by:

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
“If you can’t chamber it, penetration is meaningless.”

Brian Bingham, D’Arcy Echols & Co. www.echolsrifles.com
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Roy said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
My feeling is that the flat nose solids currently in vogue is marketing hype. There are all kinds of supposed technical advantages touted for the flat nose, i.e. that it maintains direction better while penetrating, and greater tissue damage. The flat nose does reduce penetration to a degree.

“Over the many years since the advent of jacketed round-nose solids, who knows how many large beasts have been shot with satisfactory results. If the jacket had the integrity to withstand deformation forces, they worked very well (not all did – such as Kynoch and RWS). The flat nose creates more work for the gun maker, at least for those that ensure their product cycles rounds flawlessly.

“An interesting subject one could discuss endlessly.”

Roy Vincent, Professional Hunter & Gunsmith
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Roy is a gunsmith, and a hard worker at whatever he does, maybe even feed jobs.

Let us hope his flatulence of the CNS has resolved, or will soon.
To Roy's health!

OK Thanks for the correction. Well, I don't know who Roy Vincent is. I suppose I should, but honestly I really don't. So my apologies to Bingham, I have spoken out of turn. Seems to me that if Roy is some sort of PH then he damn sure ought to know better than to make STUPID ASS statements like that. Any way you cut it, don't give a damn who said it, that entire line of crap is still a STUPID ASS STATEMENT, no matter where it come from!

Michael

Now on to more pressing matters, things that are real, not imagined, or "MY GD FEELINGS" or some such ignorant crap! Real bullet testing!

Stepping up the velocity on that little 300 blue pill to 1093 fps started showing some really decent results considering the low velocity. There was some trauma inflicted, not a lot, but it was a big step up from 800 fps for sure.

Positive opening of the petals, down to about level or even. No peeling back.

Yet another step up in velocity started showing some real trauma inflicted to the test medium. There was a good, reasonable amount of trauma at this velocity. I was surprised by this. Total penetration of both 1093 and 1377 fps were the same at 9 inches.

Barnes I think designed this for the 458 Socom, and at the velocity the Socom can achieve, this bullet works really well. At the very low end, it works very well too. Even at 1377 fps it's still nothing but a pop gun, the girls could shoot this EASY. And, get some pretty serious results out of it. Very Excellent!

You can also see we started peeling the petals back as well.

And so you don't forget;