Micheal,

Concerning "Trauma Transfer"

Barnes states the 338 Win. Mag with the 160 TTSX at over 3300 fps.

Why test so slow?

Part of the appeal of the 160 TTSX is its velocity/windage drift and its destructive impact in the vitals for quick knockdown at 3350 fps

Corey

Yes, you are correct. I did not work up or take time to work up a load in 338 Winchester or 338 Ultra. To be honest I had not shot these before, and wanted to get some tests done, with comparison to the other bullets only. I did not and probably won't mess with trying to work a load up to that velocity.

I used the exact same charge of powder in 338 Winchester with the 160 as I did the 185. They nearly gave the same velocity, with the 185 just a tiny bit more than the 160.

If you look at the same tests with the 338 Ultra, I once again used the exact same powder charge with both 160 and 185. The 160 gave 3113 fps and the 185 gave 3200 fps! Same amount of powder for both.

Since I probably won't use the 160 in either of these cases I won't take the time to sort it out.

If you increase the velocity in your 338 Win to 3300 fps or so, yes, you will get more trauma transfer, but penetration will decrease depending on range and impact velocity and so forths and so ons.

Time and effort is why I tested at those velocities! Sorry that I did not get up to specs!

Michael

Incorrigible?
Badge of honor
To get 577 NE performance in a 3" magazine would be freaking amazing!

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:
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.

I wonder if the 3"oal 577 B&(oo)M could break 2000 fps with the 750 woodleigh softs????

.

Alf

Trauma Transfer--is for my lack of another term, energy transfer to target. Not kinetic, not meaning anything except just what I said.

Now I have to differ somewhat with you concerning this trauma transfer, energy transfer, momentum transfer, or what ever you want to call it. But I have seen many many times in animal tissue, muscle, organs, meat whatever, an enormous difference in damage, and transfer of energy, trauma whatever, with some bullets as opposed to others. Much of this, lower velocity vs higher velocity, but also with bullet construction. This is also a very noticeable reaction to when the animal takes the said bullet.

To give a recent example, bullet for bullet, difference is velocity.

50 B&M 470 gr Copper HP at 2150 fps. Good penetration on Australian buffalo, hits them hard, kills hell out of them.

500 MDM 470 gr Copper HP at 2425 fps absolutely knocks the shit out of them where they stand, knocks big holes, damages far more tissue, makes a mess of meat, muscle, bones, organs, far more so than the same bullet 300 fps less!

Take the same bullet in 45/70--put it in a 458 Lott, and there is a world of difference in wound channels, trauma the works!

No Alf, with all due respect I don't buy into that one! Yes I most definitely infer that the 3000 fps bullet will most definitely cause more damage than the 2500 fps bullet! As long as penetration is there and enough, and as long as the bullet does not break up! Yes! I also infer that bullet construction can to a point do the same thing!

Michael

Boomy

I have news for you, I think Jim is nothing but a slightly older version of YOU!

Both of you are Incorrigible!

M

quote:

You guys are forgetting or omitting one very important part of the picture and that is what the target does with the energy it recieves from the bullet.

ALF, I have to know something before I forget or omit it. And I don't know much of anything. Seems like the more I learn, the less I know.

Seriously, thanks for the illustration ALF. That's interesting. So it sounds like the cavitation might be proportional to the energy to some degree.

Michael, the main thing I have learned in this field of study is how non-conventional the whole thing is! And when you add non-conventional to non-conventional...Well, you get the idea.

Lemmee ...

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Michael 458:

What do you mean by "trauma transfer" ?

Think of that as "energy transfer" and energy has the ability to make trauma of various sorts in various tissues and test media.

If you take two 338 bullets of same construction say a Barnes X and fire one at 2500 fps and the other at 3000 fps both expand to maximum same diameter.....

Not necessarily! The faster bullet may expand to a maximum diameter and then fold back to a smaller frontal diameter with higher velocity. Mike Brady showed this to happen with his excellent North Fork softs. It also may happen that the petals of monometals may flatten tighter against the shank or even break off and become secondary missiles. That energy transfer produces trauma!

... do you infer that the the 3000 fps bullet will cause more damage than the 2500 fps bullet?

Yes.

No it's not true! not for Muscle at least.

GEEZ! Not all tissue encountered by a bullet is your beloved visco-elastic semi-solid!

... if its brain or Liver it's another story all together

See! You have refuted thyself.
And thou hast forgotten to mention bone, cartilage, hide, aerated lungs, blood filled hearts and great vessels (where resistance decreases with velocity "shear thinning") guts and the cud they been chewin', and the crap they been makin', etc.
Sometimes the elastic limit of an organ is exceeded and it bursts, etc. Thank the temporary cavity sometimes.

The faster bullet will not go as deep as the slower bullet whilst the faster bullet will have a larger TC than the slower bullet.

It is possible for some bullets at higher speed to go deeper AND make a larger TC too, than they would at lower speed.
Especially a NonCon, or a solid shanked North Fork soft, or a TSX or GSC HV ... yada yada ...

The TC is not a measure of the atual trauma in muscle..... only that part of the muscle contacted by the exapnding bullet is damaged.

Ho hum, thou dost refute thyself.

One of the most interesting things I got out of reading Duncan MacPherson's book BULLET PENETRATION was the concept:

Sectional density drives bullet expansion.

Consider two same-caliber bullets moving at the same velocity, one heavy, one light.

They will both have the same resistance to entry of the target,

The greater momentum behind the heavier bullet will make it sustain the force causing the expansion of the bullet for a longer interval, a greater integral of df/dt.
The heavier bullet of same impact velocity will open wider than the light bullet.

And ...

RIP

Thank you, very well said, and I concur 110%, but you said it much better than I!

One of the great things I learned from you, that you learned from Duncan

SD Drives bullet expansion!

Yes!

I kept seeing this with the .500 Copper HPs. Started at 380 grs,petals stayed on to higher velocity, went to 426 Petals started shearing at lower velocity, went to 470 and petals sheared at even lower velocity than the 426s. SD driving that force! Interesting! Things to Ponder!

Michael

quote:

I wonder if the 3"oal 577 B&(oo)M could break 2000 fps with the 750 woodleigh softs????

Actually QL indicates that using 18” barrel @63.3K psi will get you 2065fps and 7103ft-lbs. Same setup gives 1901fps and 6021ft-lbs @ 63.4K psi using the 750gr Barnes BND Solid bullet.

However, if you think of this as a jumbo diameter 50 B&M and utilize 700gr FN and 650gr HP copper bullets profiled after Michael’s SST or JDJ bullets, this would be a very deadly cartridge out of a very short overall length rifle. I would think the bullet performance would be somewhat similar to this:

We Band of Incorrigibles

Michael,
Thanks for picking up where I left off when the string got slack.
Also why that champ .338/225gr TSX at 3177 fps broke off a petal while the lighter bullets at same or higher velocity might not.
Now, if you push that TSX even faster, it might lose all petals and make a greater wound volume AND penetrate deeper despite being a higher velocity soft.
NonCon.

The 500 Jeffery shoulder height is 2.3" and that is perfect for a 3" magazine.
It seems that a cut and stuff could be all you would need to do to form the case. May e use the 500 jeffe reamer and a 577 reamer could be used to chamber.
Would be interesting to get some calipers on the neck area on a 2.3" case to see neck diameter.

quote:

One of the most interesting things I got out of reading Duncan MacPherson's book BULLET PENETRATION was the concept:

Sectional density drives bullet expansion.

Now, what if you have two bullets of the exact same sectional density and velocity, but are differently constructed and are of different materials? Are they going to expand the same or differently?

Of course whether two softs or two solids are being compared,
it will depend on
nose design and materials strength of the two bullets,
all else being constant ...
is this a rhetorical question for which you already know the
answer?

Letter Rip

quote:

Of course whether two softs or two solids are being compared,
it will depend on
nose design and materials strength of the two bullets,
all else being constant ...
is this a rhetorical question for which you already know the
answer?

It was a semi-rhetorical question. I couldn't say "I know" so much as "I suspect." But you pretty much summed up what I was thinking: nose design, materials strength, etc.

Maybe Alf could expound upon
static versus dynamic sectional density
effects upon bullet expansion?
He is good at breaking this down to the fundamentals, just does not get the big picture that michael458 is showing us.
Letter Rip

quote:

5. Only tissue directly contacted by the bullet is damaged.

Would it be possible that tissue can be damaged by tissues displaced violently enough to act as a "secondary" projectile, resulting in a larger than primary projectile permanent cavity?

quote:

He is good at breaking this down to the fundamentals, just does not get the big picture that michael458 is showing us.

I just like to look at the pictures, RIP.


Seriously, I don't want to crap on the thread any more than I have with my ciphering, etc. It was just that the idea about sectional density driving expansion didn't seem to always agree with what I've been observing. It would be nice if it did, but I just don't see it.

I've noticed certain deforming bullets of low sectional density expand better than those of higher sectional density. I've even noticed certain FMJ bullets deform, even in ballistic gelatin. (The military's 5.56 mm comes to mind.) I have noticed in general that bullets of higher sectional density tend to retain weight better, but even this is not always reliable.

But one thing I've noticed which occurs more regularly is that bullets with greater kinetic energy per bullet area tend to deform (mushroom or expand, lose mass, etc.) Now, I know this might be agreeing somewhat with the above statement, but I also think that the velocity squared is the other thing that's important.

I've been running a fever today. Hope I made sense.

Boom,

Here’s the CIP 05/15/2002 update data for 500 Jeffery:
Chamber Mini: Length to Shoulder = 57.48mm/2.2629in
Cartridge Maxi: Length to Shoulder = 57.61mm (-.20mm)/2.2681in (-0.007874in)
So unless you have access to basic brass the Jeff case will need to be straightened out in the shoulder through shoulder/neck junction before the case is cut to 2.3” length.

Ok, re-ran the QL data using the new 2.3” case length and using the basics of 18” barrels, max-load of H322 powder, and 700gr SST FN Copper Solid you’ll pick up 40fps and 262ft-lbs @ +2.2K psi.

Here’s the cartridge comparisons:
577 BooM (138.71 overflow case capacity): 2148fps and 7179ft-lbs @ 59.7K psi
585 B&M (135.46 overflow case capacity): 2108fps and 6917ft-lbs @ 57.5K psi

Hi Michael. When it suits you - will you try to test the .416" 400 grs Barnes Banded FN solid at 2500-2600 f/s from your 416 Rigby? Just to compare with the 410 grs GS Custom bullet already tested...
Thanks.

Ulrik

Maybe the Barnes .416" 400 grs FN at B&M velocity too - at 2100-2200 f/s, - again just to be able to compare performance with the 410 GS FN..

quote:

Originally posted by buffalo:
Hi Michael. When it suits you - will you try to test the .416" 400 grs Barnes Banded FN solid at 2500-2600 f/s from your 416 Rigby? Just to compare with the 410 grs GS Custom bullet already tested...
Thanks.

Ulrik

Well, those of us using 'non-conventional' bullets also need to compare the 350 grain Barnes FN solid. The one stable thing that we have learned is that mono-metals can function well at one notch lower weight.

Now if one uses an expanding non-con, it is only consistent that one would consider a solid at the same weight. And I would expect that a 416 Rigby 350 grain FN at 2700 or 2800 fps in 16.5" twist or faster will get more than 40" straight penetration, if not 50". More than enough for anything currently on the planet. And the 400 grain TSX 416 may push 60".

PS: And would someone send Michael a couple 250 TSX in 338 to complete the 338 tests? He shouldn't need to buy a box for this, but it would be a shame to leave these monometal tests unfinished. Yes, the 225 TTSX and TSX are amazing bullets (probably a candidate in the running for allaround Alaskan-Canadian 338 bullet or anything short of 400 yards) and probably with 'smack' enough on top of 250 Barnes solids in 338 even for a chance buffalo, but it would be nice to see what the 250 might do.

PWS

Like a bone splintering off and doing damage? Yes, I think so. I can't remember what animal it was, some years ago. But when doing the autopsy a 4 inch long piece of shoulder bone about as big around as a finger, was found stabbing straight in the top of the heart like a dagger! I would say that had some bearing on the situation?

Glenn

Concerning your statements, there are many many factors involved, and have to be taken into account too, other than just the SD. Construction, materials, velocity, and many many others I can't even think of. Lot's to ponder!

Boom and Capoward

Hmmmm? What will that 585 B&M Fit into boys? I need a dummy of that! Hmmmm? Awfully fat! Retain? Winchester? Single Shot M70? Maybe 2 shooter if could get 1 to retain down? Hmmmmm????????

You two are real trouble when put together! One encourages the other I think!


Ulrik

Thanks for the reminder. A good bit ago I thought to get some of the 400 Barnes. I have been so tied up in the 416 B&M the last few years, and the 350 Banded I have not put effort in the 400 because of the length of the bullet, and the 416 B&M. Recently however I thought to replenish, get a box to see what happens at 2200 or so and POI with my other loads in 416 B&M. But, I forgot that on my last order with the 338s order!

Tanzan

I have been pushing the 350 Barnes Banded .416 at or around 2400 fps in the 416 B&M, and have in fact used it in the field on a few things. It has been tested several times, and other than a couple of anomalies, it averages from 55-58 inches. Always dead straight in the mix. But! I have not used it enough in the field yet to be perfectly happy with it. I can't really put a finger on it either. The one time on buffalo it was probably the angle of the shot, not the bullet. If it is what I think, longer bullet won't help, but actually hurt. But I still need to try the 400 Banded in the 416 B&M.

When I get those ordered I will get some 250 TSX too, I need some on hand for the 338 Ultra probably, but I am not sure why? Can one ever have too many bullets?

Michael

Michael, believ it or not, there are options other than the Model 70 to use for this proposed cartridge......you know, something substantially sized like a CZ 550........

quote:

Michael, believ it or not, there are options other than the Model 70 to use for this proposed cartridge.

Blasphemy!!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

Tanzan

I have been pushing the 350 Barnes Banded .416 at or around 2400 fps in the 416 B&M, and have in fact used it in the field on a few things. It has been tested several times, and other than a couple of anomalies, it averages from 55-58 inches. Always dead straight in the mix. But! I have not used it enough in the field yet to be perfectly happy with it. I can't really put a finger on it either. The one time on buffalo it was probably the angle of the shot, not the bullet. If it is what I think, longer bullet won't help, but actually hurt. But I still need to try the 400 Banded in the 416 B&M.

When I get those ordered I will get some 250 TSX too, I need some on hand for the 338 Ultra probably, but I am not sure why? Can one ever have too many bullets?

Michael

Thank you for the 350 gr penetration figures. I think I can be confident with an 18" TSX penetration backed up by 55"+ of solid penetration. Worst case is that the TSX 'shears' and penetrates even more than 18".

On numbers of bullets, the only time one gets 'too many' is on an airplane ride or going through customs.

Thanks Michael. Looking forward to it..
You are truly amazing putting all this effort into this..

For sure the best thread ever on AR...

Tanzan

In 416 yes, I use the 350 TSX and the 350 Barnes Banded together in the 416 B&M. The 350 TSX is fantastic!!!!!!!! My boys used it on several critters in 2008. The two bullets shoot to same POI. All my 400s are too from from POI with the 350s, in the 416 B&Ms. But if windage is good, one can play with the velocity to bring them a little closer.

Airplanes and Customs! Yeah, forgot about that! In that case one never has enough!

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Michael, believ it or not, there are options other than the Model 70 to use for this proposed cartridge......you know, something substantially sized like a CZ 550........

But does CZ offer a short action designed around the WSM cartridges? Looked at their website and couldn't find one.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael458:
Boom and Capoward

Hmmmm? What will that 585 B&M Fit into boys? I need a dummy of that! Hmmmm? Awfully fat! Retain? Winchester? Single Shot M70? Maybe 2 shooter if could get 1 to retain down? Hmmmmm????????

Don’t know, Boomy wanted the cartridge...I was just helping a fellow proud member of We Band of Incorrigibles.

Perhaps a M70 in the standard WSM configuration would hold two down and with a bit of proper smith work retain and feed both properly. I don’t own one so don’t know their stack dimensions.

Edited to Add: Of course Duane has that nice 6MX floorplate assembly designed for the M98 that holds three down with the 500 Jeffery. Maybe he’d gin up an equivalent SA M70 version were there sufficient interest for a special run of 10 pieces should there be that much interest in either the 577 BooM or the 585 B&M. Yep, that’d eliminate he magazine issues; just need to work the feeding out.

Hummmm 6MX on M98…yep could make a nice 585 MDM out of that combination…Yep that’d work, nice looking cartridge too it is!

When the fat 577 B&(oo)M lady sings that will be the end of the show!

Yeah two down single stack in a WINCHESTER WSM would be right and from what I hear easier to feed than staggered. Hell the double rifle only gets two shots before needing a reload. one in the pipe and two down below is a +1 advantage over a 577 double

If there is a slight shoulder expanding needed it would not be bad because of the shallower shoulder wont leave much of a wrinkle to iron out.

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:

quote:

Originally posted by Michael458:
Boom and Capoward

Hmmmm? What will that 585 B&M Fit into boys? I need a dummy of that! Hmmmm? Awfully fat! Retain? Winchester? Single Shot M70? Maybe 2 shooter if could get 1 to retain down? Hmmmmm????????

Don’t know, Boomy wanted the cartridge...I was just helping a fellow proud member of We Band of Incorrigibles.

Perhaps a M70 in the standard WSM configuration would hold two down and with a bit of proper smith work retain and feed both properly. I don’t own one so don’t know their stack dimensions.

Edited to Add: Of course Duane has that nice 6MX floorplate assembly designed for the M98 that holds three down with the 500 Jeffery. Maybe he’d gin up an equivalent SA M70 version were there sufficient interest for a special run of 10 pieces should there be that much interest in either the 577 BooM or the 585 B&M. Yep, that’d eliminate he magazine issues; just need to work the feeding out.

Hummmm 6MX on M98…yep could make a nice 585 MDM out of that combination…Yep that’d work, nice looking cartridge too it is!

Second thought Michael - when testing 400 grs Barnes banded FN solids in .416 then also please try a velocity of around 2300-2350 f/s (besides the 2100 f/s and 2600 f/s). Would be interesting to see where max penetration is found. With the GS FN the faster (around 2550 f/s) was better than the slower one. But would be interesting to see what happens in between the two ie around 2300 f/s...

If you want I can send you some Barnes 400 grs Banded solids in .416"??


Ulrik

Glenn,
Your statement:
"Seriously, I don't want to crap on the thread any more than I have with my ciphering, etc. It was just that the idea about sectional density driving expansion didn't seem to always agree with what I've been observing. It would be nice if it did, but I just don't see it."

I think you just have not routinely gotten the heavyweights up to the same speed as the lightweights.
Also differences in bullet construction can obscure the fact, if all is not constant except bullet weight:

The heavier bullet is going to expand more and shear petals off more frequently than the lighter bullet,
if both have the same speed and construction, and impact the same target medium.
Michael has proven that repeatedly.

The heavy bullet has the same "velocity-squared" as the light bullet, just more mass, so the KE and Momentum are both directly proportional to mass of bullet in that case.

It is not counter-intuitive.
Just counter to conventional practices.

A second class of NonCon?
Heavy bullets as fast as the conventional light bullet loads?
Might require a .395 BeeGee for that NonCon.

Tests...Yes We Want Tests!

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
It is not counter-intuitive.
Just counter to conventional practices.

That is almost the perfect defination of a NonCon...

quote:

Originally posted by PWS:

quote:

5. Only tissue directly contacted by the bullet is damaged.

Would it be possible that tissue can be damaged by tissues displaced violently enough to act as a "secondary" projectile, resulting in a larger than primary projectile permanent cavity?

PWS:
I am sure you are right.
Stretch some tissues enough and they are going to be affected.
Nerves may be severed or stunned. Vessels large or small may be injured, meat gets bloodshot.
Secondary missiles of bone, already mentioned.
Tissue around that permanent cavity may not be completely devitalized, so may not need to be completely debrided by our combat surgeon, ALF.
Just depends on where the temporary cavity is forming, as to how much mischief it can do.
Secondary missile damage is obvious.

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:

Tests...Yes We Want Tests!

Holy Cow Boys, you have had me shooting nearly every day for 2 weeks now! Or at least it seems so! Whew...............about worn out!

I just came off the range! No I did not do "terminal Ballistics" today, I did that yesterday!!!!!!!!

Yesterday afternoon I received the Mrytle 500 MDM back from SSK with it's new chamber! And in addition the "Black" DPMS in 50 B&M SA! Did I mention feeding issues? Yes, a little bug needed to be worked out. I thought take a grinder to the damn thing, but fortunately I had enough sense to send it back to Brian at SSK. Well he said it was 100% and he monkeyed around with the lips on the magazines! I was not so sure, how long is that going to last! Well today it lasted 100 rounds so far, and is 100% reliable with damn near anything reasonable you put in it. Today I only used the 385 Remingtons at 2100 fps and 1500 fps, worked like a charm! So 100 rounds, 100%! I may make it official and allow it to enter the family!

I shot the myrtle gun in 500 and it's good to go, and along with the SS/Claro gun, now I am happy with the shorter neck on the 500 MDM! All is great in the world of 500 MDM. HEH! Yippie! Saying that, there are currently 3 new 500 MDMs being built as I type this! One I am keeping you know, everyone needs at least 3 500 MDMs! I can't see a household without one myself. But the other two will go to some lucky chap that wants one. Not advertising by any stretch, but if someone happens to want one I will have two, and you can have it for exactly what I have in them, not a cent more! I am not in the gun selling business, and don't want to be!

Michael