Hey Guys

Just a heads up, I have been too tied up in the office today to get anything worth while done. Have not even had time to load test loads, nothing! I think the best I am going to be able to do today is maybe get the test loads sorted out, and maybe get a mix ready for first thing in the morning? That is my new goal now. I don't see getting any tests done today, sorry! I have been trying to fire myself all morning in the hopes of hiring myself back by Tuesday or so, just has not worked out that way!

Michael

As suspected I got no shooting in today! I am just now getting around to getting some of the test loads worked up! Maybe in the morning! This work thing is getting in the way of doing real things!

Michael

Alf,
Your reference to penetration instead of resistance
changes with velocity is misleading in some phrases above.
Also, how about addressing water-soaked newspaper instead of just newspaper?
Yes, blood is thinner than water at high speed.
It is about 50 percent by volume of nano-packets of your beloved viscoelastic protoplasm that are suspended in a fluid with many other surfactant-type, thinning substances. If it did not "shear thin" it would not circulate very well, eh?

quote:

That could be compared to the S&H .510/535gr S&H brass FN at 2700 fps, if Macifej ever gets off his ass and makes those ...
which would also be excellent in 500A2, 500J, 50BMG, and some other "special" applications.

Workin' on that ... and a few other goodies!

Jay,
Heh, heh ... I was hoping that would goad you out of the lurk.

http://www.bigbore.org/images/...re_Journal_23_LR.pdf

Facinating article on the European view on expanding bullets.

The 338 results are in!

Testing of the last 3 bullets in both 338 Winchester and 338 Ultra were completed this morning. Will start with the 160 gr Barnes TTSX. Flat base, blue tip thing! Overall, I was not that impressed with the 160 in the 338 Win and the 338 Ultra. It's a bit strange, I used exact same load in both cartridges, for the 160s and 185s. In both cases the 185s gave the higher velocity, with the same charge as the 160s.


Also in this series I made photos of the 4 inch witness cards. It is rather interesting to see the difference in "trauma transfer", for lack of a better term on my part.

Here is the Barnes TTSX, blue tip bullet.

As you notice, no difference in total penetration with either the 160 or 185 in both cartridges! But a big difference in trauma transfer to target.

I think I am a big fan of this particular bullet, for either 338 Winchester or 338 Ultra!
225 Barnes TSX

Well there it is boys! This concludes my current tests with 338 caliber. I was pretty impressed with what we accomplished. Some surprises, but very little disappointment, and really there was no failures with anything we tested! All bullets really performed well, performance is measured many ways, not just penetration alone. Trauma transfer is also part of the equation, and ALL dependent upon the mission at hand! A bullet chosen for Moose, will most likely be different than one chosen for impala! Of course there are bullets that accomplish both missions with ease. But there are some bullets that are far better on impala, and might not be so good on moose! Choose wisely!

Great fun guys, great fun!

Now I have a few days off, I have about a ton of chewed up wet print in the floor, this must be taken care of before the next round of tests. What's next?

Heres what I have on schedule now.

First, before I pick up all the chewed up print, might do some T'Rex skull tests, just for fun! Of course it means what it means! Maybe something, Maybe Nothing, but I am curious now! So that might be this week, depending.

I still have some 45/70 bullets I want to test, 330 Barnes FN Solid, 400 Barnes Buster, 305 Brass HP NonCon, those are first on the list, and probably a 325 Hornady flex tip too. Although I did test it in 458 B&M with excellent results.

When we get to a point, we will conduct a complete 358 caliber test with all bullets I have available for 358, which is substantial. Will do this in 358 Ultra and 35 Whelen. That should be fun too!

Requests still being taken!

Thanks
Michael

Thank you, Michael.

this is all excellent stuff.

On the 225 gr 18" penetration you were able to knock off a few petals.
Congratulations.
And the 225 gr 15" penetration in the WinMag isn't bad for anything short of dangerous thick skin. I think I'll keep some of these 225 up the spout of the WinMag.

Your 185 grains were intriguing, though. They looked pretty good for longrange medium game, holding together 'up close'.

It's a shame someone can't send you a couple of 250 gr. TSXs for a final comparison at the heavy end of 'X' bullets. (I would if I could, but international laws suck.) The solid tests have convinced me to carry a clip of 'buffalo rounds' in a back pocket for the 338. Since the banded solids are 250 grain, I was thinking of the 250 TSX on top of the clip.

Michael those are interesting results.

Going back 30+ years and the 225gr was at the lower end of the bullet weight spectrum for the 338 magnum cartridges and the TSX performed as one would perceive that it should in the WinMag as well as the larger RUM case.

My perception is that the 160gr and 185gr TSX/TTSX bullets were created for use primarily in the 338 Federal and similar small capacity cases and to a lesser extent the larger case capacity 338-06. One would think the witness card trauma would have been substantial due to the much higher velocities that the bullets were driven in the magnum cartridges; which definitely was not the case.

Keep up the good work!

quote:

Your 185 grains were intriguing, though. They looked pretty good for longrange medium game, holding together 'up close'.

I understand your premise but I've quite often read that the TSX/TTSX bullets have an issue with reliable expansion at lower impact velocity. Do you know perchance know what the minimum velocity for reliable expansion range of the 185gr bullet is? Barnes does not indicate this information on their website nor in their monthly email newsletters.

Tanzan

I like the 225 TSX also. For all around use I think it would be very difficult to beat! I liked the 185 much better than the 160. Jim is right of course, the 160 and 185s were most likely done for the smaller capacity cases for sure. I have a 338 WSM, and I am thinking the 185 would do pretty good for it, medium size game say.

I can't believe I let the 250 X slip my mind. The reason being is because I have not been to the field with a 338 since 2002. Since then, I have been playing on occasion with a couple of 338 WSM rifles I have, both with 22 inch barrels. So in the back of my mind if I went to the field with a 338 it was going to be my most recent one built by SSK. 338 WSM is at it's best with 225 gr bullets! A friend of mine had one done also, and uses it for deer and such too. I just have not replenished my 250 weight bullets in some time now. I like the big Ultra, but it's too big a rifle for me to take on a trip anymore, too long! And now with my 9.3 B&M it will be a long time before the 338s are taken out, if ever.


Jim

On the Witness cards I should have put a ruler next to them or something. The 160 and 185 in the Ultra gave good trauma transfer, but not compared with the 225! The Witness Cards have really done well for showing trauma transfer with the expanding bullets. I am pretty much down to just using the one card for these tests at 4 inches. Really not much point in 8 or 12 just poking a hole. Sometimes with the bigger bores we still see trauma transfer and 8 inches, I am keeping those cards, but not many at the 12 inch mark.

For all the 338s the only card worth looking at, in the respect of trauma transfer, is the 4 inch cards.

Once again, thank you RIP, this really was a great idea!

Michael

Tanzan

One more thing. Should you choose to go with say a 225 TSX, I would almost bet that POI at 50 yds or less you would not have an issue with the 250 Solids, I bet they will be close.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Tanzan

One more thing. Should you choose to go with say a 225 TSX, I would almost bet that POI at 50 yds or less you would not have an issue with the 250 Solids, I bet they will be close.

Michael

I like to 225 TSX it hammers game IME

quote:

Requests still being taken!

If you get back to the 458s please consider trying the Rhino again. I'm interested if it will repeat an upward exit.

Thanks

quote:

Originally posted by I Bin Therbefor:
http://www.bigbore.org/images/...re_Journal_23_LR.pdf

Facinating article on the European view on expanding bullets.

IBT,
Thanks for posting that.
That entire issue is fascinating.
Thanks.
I got down to the .400 Tembo article and had go do something else ...
I would subscribe to that journal if it did not require a wire transfer of funds ...
Good stuff ... I especially enjoy the Southern African perspective on Americans!

Michael,
I have glimpsed the latest "witness cards" on the iphone, on the fly, good stuff as usual.
Will go study them on the big screen when I can.
Regarding my build of a .458 B&M,
I feel like Forrest Gump's buddy, Bubba, contemplating all the varieties of B&M's.
Bubba likes to call them "BAMs" for "B And M."

Lesssee ... you gots yer
9.3 BAM,
.416 BAM,
.458 BAM
and then
.500 BAM in several flavors to boot!
Bubba may be needin' a .395 BAM,
even if nobody else does!

RIP

BAM BAM BAM!!!!

Then reload, BAM BAM BAM!

LOL


IBT

I can do it pal! But I am more concerned about those being a tiny bit undersized in .458 than anything else! They come in a .456 and I think that is an issue with stability! Not sure it will do anything but that again. Try it on the T'Rex Skull?

OK OK OK---Rhino--not "Super Penetrator" OK I am back on course now, sorry, the Rhino was fine, I think it did well did it not? Yes, just checked it on my data. But I can do it again I think. I wanted to put each and everything we have done in the T'Rex skull, just to play and see what happens!

Sorry off track there for a bit

Michael

Michael...
A .500" on a Rigby case like the 500 Mbogo would fit in a Winchester gun

The 416 Rigby already has a .500" neck and you could keep the shoulder in the same place so you do not have "Unsightly bulges" like the ones we dont want to see on the ladies

Boomy

Where you been boy? Been missing you and your ideas! No, rigby too big for a Winchester, yes can probably be done by someone, but even still it would not be an easy, simple conversion, and only hold two down. Twos a plenty, but 3 is better! I like to shoot lot's you know! Also I can't see needing anymore than what the 500 MDM can do, and would have to have even more barrel to burn all that powder, now I can burn in 21 inches just fine in the 500 MDM. Getting too much gun with the Rigby case! I am old, can't carry all that big long muskets anymore. Like em short and handy!

OK how about the new 500 MDM look? No comments on that? It's above here somewhere, maybe page 16 or somewhere????

Michael

Just saw the new 500 MDM
I kinda like the long neck version for ultimate neck tension but having to iron out shoulder wrinkles is a P.I.T.A. so I understand it is a lot more practical and in this world that means a lot.

"Needing" lol

True... A straight neck up would be easier on a 416 rigby conversion or a .500" A2 AKA 499 A2 on the Wby case.

Just having fun with ideas

I think the short and handy is the cool B&M niche.

Now all you "Need" is the 577 B&M!!!

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Boomy

Where you been boy? Been missing you and your ideas! No, rigby too big for a Winchester, yes can probably be done by someone, but even still it would not be an easy, simple conversion, and only hold two down. Twos a plenty, but 3 is better! I like to shoot lot's you know! Also I can't see needing anymore than what the 500 MDM can do, and would have to have even more barrel to burn all that powder, now I can burn in 21 inches just fine in the 500 MDM. Getting too much gun with the Rigby case! I am old, can't carry all that big long muskets anymore. Like em short and handy!

OK how about the new 500 MDM look? No comments on that? It's above here somewhere, maybe page 16 or somewhere????

Michael

michael 458 have been reading this thread off and on for a while and have learn a lot. thanks and if i send you some of my cast bullets will you run them in your 45/70 -485bm testing. i have been using them in a 450mar bolt gun at 2100 and am just wandering how they will do thanks Clint

Boomy

OK Smartass "Needing" lol", thank you for bringing me back to reality! Who needs a hundred Winchester Rifles eh? OK OK. Yeah, I don't need 4 50 B&Ms either, so I gave two to my sons, one each! That way I can now build another on this new maple stock I am having done. But then, what will I do with the new English Walnut stock that is coming? Maybe a second 9.3 B&M? But wait, who needs 3 500 MDMs? Well, have this fine stainless action sitting at SSK now, being converted to 500 MDM, and another English Walnut stock coming for it! Yes, what does need have to do with anything, eh?

Michael

Hey Clint

Sure, be glad to, and I am in a 45/70 testing mood, or getting close to it anyway.

What bullet is it? I could have some, never know, I have several varieties of Cast Performance on hand? Also some True Shot 430s, and some other things. If not send a few samples to me. PM and I will get you the info.


I always thought a 450 Marlin would make a cute little bolt gun, about 16 inch barrel or so?

Michael

Glad you got my humor
Hard rock maple?
What about hickory?
Furniture grade plywood?
Stainless and kevlar and mercury reducers?

Are you going to do some TC pistols in the B&M line up? conversion of a TC in 500 S&W to 500 MDM will be eeeeaaasssyyyyyyy...

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Boomy

OK Smartass "Needing" lol", thank you for bringing me back to reality! Who needs a hundred Winchester Rifles eh? OK OK. Yeah, I don't need 4 50 B&Ms either, so I gave two to my sons, one each! That way I can now build another on this new maple stock I am having done. But then, what will I do with the new English Walnut stock that is coming? Maybe a second 9.3 B&M? But wait, who needs 3 500 MDMs? Well, have this fine stainless action sitting at SSK now, being converted to 500 MDM, and another English Walnut stock coming for it! Yes, what does need have to do with anything, eh?

Michael

Boomy

Yeah, you get the picture!
""Hard rock maple?
What about hickory?
Furniture grade plywood?"""


I don't do TCs or Encores. JD loves the 50 B&M AK in the Encores and TCs, they have done a lot of those for folks in the last couple of years!

If mine don't say Winchester on them somewhere, I DON"T NEED THEM!

M

michael458 the cast i use are 457122 330gr hp home castout of lyman#2. if you want some to try pm me and i will get them out asp. i load them a little funny what i do is set a GC dome side up in a sized and belled charged case then set the bullet on top then seat. this way the GC is tight to the base of the bullet.the marlin is a fun round to play with but my rifle went somewhat different the your idea. started with a Savage 110lh action a Douglas 1/22 barrel cut to 25"homemade qtr rib, banded swivel,banded front sight, reshaped the stock and painted it. my first go at building a rifle for myself. it weighs 10.25 lbs with scope thanks Clint

quote:

Jim

On the Witness cards I should have put a ruler next to them or something. The 160 and 185 in the Ultra gave good trauma transfer, but not compared with the 225! The Witness Cards have really done well for showing trauma transfer with the expanding bullets. I am pretty much down to just using the one card for these tests at 4 inches. Really not much point in 8 or 12 just poking a hole. Sometimes with the bigger bores we still see trauma transfer and 8 inches, I am keeping those cards, but not many at the 12 inch mark.

Michael, No no I was able to see good trauma transfer with just the bullet comparison.

It’s just that… eh…well…eh…um…how do I say this... well…eh… it’s just that your test mule sucks at replicating a correlation to bullet performance against medium-weight light-boned game at long distance impact…say at 400yds!!
It’s just too darn tough!!!! You have to have some kind of wimpy test media for that!

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I think the short and handy is the cool B&M niche.

Now all you "Need" is the 577 B&M!!!

Michael already has the cartridge and reamer specifications; it’s called the 585 E&M!

Clint! That's too much gun for cartridge! Those ratios don't compute?

OK, no I don't have a 330 HP home cast. WIll send pm and you must send instructions!


Jim Jim Jim! What am I going to do with you? I can't believe you would talk to me this way!

I can't see 400 yds--so I don't need to be shooting nothing at 400 yds!!!!!!!!!

OK, let me think of some "sissy" test medium, for "sissy" bullets?



I suppose a fellow could always slow things down??? Is that what you need for that?

Boomy

Don't worry, Jim is correct, he now keeps me in all sorts of cartridge ideas and drawings, and specs, and I don't have to do anything anymore, hell I don't even have to think about it, like magic it appears in my email? Damn voodoo I tell you! Yes, have drawings and specs on 585 H&M! Just don't have a rifle just yet! I think I might leave that one for Jim to work on?

Good evening gentlemen! It's dark here on the east side, and about an hour past my bedtime, let's see, yes, it's past 7:30 PM in the middle of the night!

I must get my rest now, and dream what I might be shooting in the morning!

Michael

quote:

Jim Jim Jim! What am I going to do with you? I can't believe you would talk to me this way!

I can't see 400 yds--so I don't need to be shooting nothing at 400 yds!!!!!!!!!

Dude!

quote:

OK, let me think of some "sissy" test medium, for "sissy" bullets?

I suppose a fellow could always slow things down??? Is that what you need for that?

I think slowing things down is only half the issue. But yes you need some “sissy” test medium for “sissy” bullets.
Maybe something like a big batch of jello!!

That Lyman 457122 at 2100 is not going to penetrate very well. The nose will blow off and leave a 180 to 200 grain base to try to tumble through. It is devastating on deer and antelope but often won't get through the shield on a large boar.

We quit using that bullet on deer years ago because it tears up way too much meat, leaving bullet fragments and a lot of bloodshot tissue.

Michael...I've been thinking and even bugging you about a 577 in a short action for a while... Is it a Gibbs case or a 500 Jeffery case????
What length?

Having now gotten the string tight between the two tin cans
of my internet connection,
I have been able to download all the latest pictures:

No doubt about it,
the .338/225gr TSX at 3177 fps MV
is a most impressive bullet.
Fast enough to lose a petal
yet still giving good penetration
and a broad wound channel cross section
as per the witness card.
Now, will ALF say this is meaningless?

Boom you’re incorrigible! So you’ve been pestering Michael for a short action 577! Sorry, the 585 E&M is designed for the 3.4” magazine and it uses Jeffery brass.

Since Michael shy’s away from anything larger than the 500 MDM I ran up a short action derivative of the 585 E&M for you. So here goes, using an 18” barrel and 2.930” cartridge overall length…QL indicates you’ll get 2156fps and 6710ft-lbs @ 58.4K psi using the 650gr Woodleigh SN Weldcore 3A bullet.

Rip...Yep.

One item from the 338 tests confirms a conventional wisdom about non-conventional bullets. Basically, a person should step down a notch in bullet weight for comparison with leadcore bullets. But only one notch.
Did people notice that the 160 TTSX and the 180 Accubond both did 10"? the 200 Accubond only did 9".
The 210 Noslers at 11" and 12" (slower!) were down around 11" with the 185 TTSX. (As was a 250 grain Interlock--not to be recommended for plains game)
The various 225 bondeds at 10-13" were like the TSX 210 at 11" and 13" (slower W.M.).
However, the Swift A-frame 225 at 14" and 15" clocked very close to the TSX 225. (The Swift A-s are excellent bullets. They and the 'X' types are about equal in reliability and a person could be happy if either one shot well in a rifle. The X might have a bit extra downrange over 300 yards.)

The 225 TSX at 15 and 18 was around the 250 mark for nosler (16") and A-frame (18").
One might predict that a 250 TSX would be like a 275 leadcore, though the 275 A-frames were 'only' getting 17".

In addition, there was some correlation between highvelocity and stunted penetration. Some of the higher loads were an inch shallower in conventional bullets or didn't get extra penetration in the 'X'. Which raises the question about what will happen down at the 2200 fps level, around 300 yards for the 'X' type. Do the X's outpenetrate? (They shouldn't have a problem expanding, that tends to be an issue under 2000fps.)

What was reassuring was that the 'X' bullets hung together at high velocities.

The only missing piece of data is what happens at around 2000-2200 fps. Those are typical velocities in the 338Wm at 300-400 yards.

quote:

In addition, there was some correlation between highvelocity and stunted penetration. Some of the higher loads were an inch shallower in conventional bullets or didn't get extra penetration in the 'X'. Which raises the question about what will happen down at the 2200 fps level, around 300 yards for the 'X' type. Do the X's outpenetrate? (They shouldn't have a problem expanding, that tends to be an issue under 2000fps.)

Hypothesis: Kinetic energy on impact contributes to bullet deformation, along with the strength and construction of the bullet. Deformation increases surface area, which retards penetration. IMO you still can't ignore momentum density (velocity times effective sectional density) if you want to know about penetration.

PS: You also can't ignore the bullet weight loss during penetration.

Jim

Jello! I am mixing a batch now just for you!

Boomy, Jim now answers all those sort of questions, as you see he has taken care of that quite nicely for me. As long as I keep him in "jello" he takes those sort of responsibilities off me.

RIP

The 225 TSX is a fine hammer for 338, no doubt. All the others did very well, but something about the 225 does the trick.



Tanzan

Couple of things to pay great attention to. First, overall in most cases, not all, with the increased velocity of the 338 Ultra, we saw less penetration because of more bullet upset, larger frontal area, and in some cases less weight, therefore less momentum to carry penetration, than those same bullets a tad slower in the 338 WIn. Easy to understand these things, and expected by most of us.

You are correct, impact velocity has everything to do with how the bullet is going to react. If you go back to the 275 Swifts you will see our test bullet and the bear bullet were very close in impact velocity, and they very nearly looked alike, and as far as I can tell correlates very well with what I received on the bear. Remember my correlation rule with conventional bullets--add 80% to 100% for an idea, or rule of thumb, for animal tissue.
Not always spot on, but rule of thumb in the neighborhood. Bone, elastic hides and all sorts of things come into play that there is no way I can duplicate. But looking at the other 275 Swifts you will see much different looking bullets, that gave much more penetration on animals because of impact velocities.

Yes, I would think that the 250X would be very close in penetration to the 275 Swift in most cases, I concur.

When comparing one bullet to another, if they are close and within an inch then I would not get too excited. The medium is as consistent as I can get it, I think it's damn near the same from batch to batch, but an inch difference I would not get too excited about. I can only get 3 bullets across, then I have to toss that batch, it's finished. Then I have to add another say 12-15 inches of new. Across the board, if you look at all the bullets together, I would say the mix was damn consistent, and showed us that the whole way thru, but for reality, an inch is not much difference either way. When 2 inches starts showing up, it's time to pay attention.

Penetration is not always what we need! Now I am a penetration freak! I will go with penetration nearly every single time if there is a choice. But there are times when you want more Trauma Transfer and can sacrifice deep divers for that. Take for instance "Leopard". Not a big animal, certainly no more than an impala across, or deer. Big one, 150 lbs. We don't need a deep diver for that, we need something that is going to transfer huge amounts of trauma to target, and adequate penetration of course. Of all the bullets tested there are several in 338 that I would qualify best for this duty. Of the 338 Winchester bullets we tested there are basically no losers in the mix. If I was choosing a Leopard bullet out of the bunch I would only eliminate the 200 Nosler Ballistic Tip, maybe the 180 Accubond because they lost so much weight. Now I know for a fact the 200 Nosler BT would do the job, if everything perfect, but I don't take any chances if I can help it. My top choices 338 Win for leopard of the bullets we tested, 215 Sierra, 225 Remington, 225 Woodleigh. Transfers Trauma, and adequate penetration, bullets holding together well at those velocities. Of course this is only terminal---other factors come into play too, accuracy being #1. If everything falls in place, good to go. Now one must reconsider these choices if the target is eland, or say moose?

What we had and tested was two different impact velocities, at the same exact range, and could compare bullet to bullet. Start adding range, different impact velocities, and other factors, things do change.

For instance, if you are long range shooter (I am not) then 338 Ultra is fantastic. But if your ranges are short, then there is little use for anything beyond your 338 Winchester! In fact, in some cases the Winchester cartridge would be preferable! Balance, it's all about trying to achieve some sort of balance between the factors involved. Hard to do sometimes!

Glen

The only time you must change your attitude towards bullet weight loss is with the NonCons!

Conventional, you are 100% correct--but don't forget the NonCons! We loose weight with them, we gain penetration!

Michael

.