quote:

Quit F*****G thinking, and come over here and start cutting these 2" branches! While you are at it, trim the bitches down on the bottom two inches to only 1 inch wide so they fit in my slots on the "Stick Holder" as well!


"I was Thinking"--- I was thinking I might have to "Bitch Slap" You! That is what "I was Thinking

Damn near wet my pants when I read that response.

Sam

I was going to start loading for the Stick test with 458s, but I am looking hi and lo for a round nose solid in .458 and there is NOT ONE OF THEM on the entire compound! Do you have any?
If so, how about send a few for the test!

Until then, I suppose I will start with .474 as I found some of those out dated old RN bullets stuffed in a box outside on the range!

Just starting the planning and loading process for this, don't all of you get too excited, there are still terminal boxes to prepare, loads to do, brass to prep, the works.

Michael

Michael,

I'll check and see if I have any. Like you I don't use the bloody things anymore. I can probably come up with two or three.

Sam

I have a box of .458 500 gr Hornady Interlocks if y'all could use them in anyway for comparisons.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I have a box of .458 500 gr Hornady Interlocks if y'all could use them in anyway for comparisons.

Thanks Lane, I have some of those left over. Best Big Bore bullet Hornady has ever done that I know of, should have stayed with the Interlock!

M

OK, I hate to do this, normally I have plenty of stock from years past. Currently I am TOTALLY and COMPLETELY depleted of any and all Round Nose Solids in .458 Caliber. I have no Barnes, No Woodleighs, No Nothing ROUND.

I have nearly everything else for the Up Coming Stick Tests, but No RN Solids.

IF ANYONE---WANTS me to test these in the stick tests in .458 caliber, you can send me a few if you want. I plan on 2 each in every test. I would like to have 4 each for that "Just In Case" issue should it arise.

I can run the tests without them, I have plenty of everything else--It's really up to you guys if you want to see that included or not. This time, I am not going to buy any for this, as I will never personally ever need or use them for anything.

I have .474s, and .510s left over, and probably .416 Barnes, I have no RN .416 Woodleighs FMJ.

Only speaking of SOLIDS above, nothing else.

Michael

Michael
If the rounds lose stability before hitting the test media maybe it will save you from repairing the box from all those wayward round nose bullets . A sideways bullet makes for horrible SD lol. Someone please donate some RN 458s. We certainly do not want to encourage Barnes to make more by purchasing any that would give Barnes the wrong idea lol.

I have not bought a round nose solid since I discovered GSC FN solids in 2001.
A .416/380-grain GSC FN at 2506 fps passed straight through a 16" diameter tree trunk,
and then another tree of similar size about 40 feet behind the first,
in a straight line, no deflection, and kept right on going,
even though both trees were not perfectly on-center hits.
Umbrella thorn trees in Botswana are not soft wood.
Same loading passed through a cape buffalo like a laser beam also, both one kill shot and one insurance shot.

I predict a RN solid might out-penetrate any FN solid (of same caliber, weight and velocity) in a stack of flat, dry wood
with straight-on hit by bullet traveling perpendicular to board surface.
Is that a zero-degree angle of attack or incidence?

Any different angle of attack than that, as on a slanted, angled, or off center on a curved surface,
will make the RN-solid go squirrely, as will any aqueous or non-linear medium.

Please let Doc M test just a few of the RN solids he already has.
They will all give the same results.
We do not need to burden him with more Round Nose Solid bullets to test.
All y'all dispose of those RN-solid bullets safely!

.395-Caliber: Not Dead Yet!

quote:

Please let Doc M test just a few of the RN solids he already has.
They will all give the same results.
We do not need to burden him with more Round Nose Solid bullets to test.
All y'all dispose of those RN-solid bullets safely!

Thanks RIP--Actually, I am all for what you stated above. Pretty much, monkey see, monkey do, and what I test in .474 in the 475 B&M will be indicative of all. They may actually do better than some may think, I don't know. It's only 3 pieces of 1 inch wide board 20 ft in front of the target. I know the BBBW#13 Solids will burn straight through, straight to target and straight in the medium as if nothing happened. If they can burn through a 4x4 Post and drives straight to target, then straight through medium, from 20 ft, not much else is going to stop them.

What I am more looking forward to is the various Softs/Expanding , and NonCons and how they react to the sticks!

Hopefully I can get us a couple of terminal boxes full of medium and ready to test some this week.

Michael

I have some Barnes 458 Round nose solids and I believe a box or 458 Lott with the hornady round nose prior to the DGS flat nose.
Michael; do you want some of these?

EZ

Hi EZ

Long time! Hold on to those RN for now. I am starting this project with 475 B&M, I have a few left over RN Woodleighs and Barnes, from a life prior to this one. I will start with these and work through .474 caliber and see what we come up with.

Currently my plan is to start with .474, go to .458, .500, and .416. Completing these 4 different calibers and a range of bullets we have here should give all of us a good idea what happens as bullets pass through sticks.

You can mark this down and remind me when we finish. I believe that we will learn that it is best to avoid brush and sticks if we can. We can't always do that in the field. I have at least 4-5 incidents that I can recall that I hit a stick, got deflection and at times caused an issue. I don't believe that we are going to find ANY BULLET that is TOTALLY IMMUNE to brush, even the mighty BBW#13. I believe that Brush Will screw things up on all of them. I believe that some bullets will do better than other bullets--this is what we wish to identify. We will find out.

I have two terminal boxes ready to begin this work this week. I am still working out exactly how to conduct the entire test so as to be consistent as possible and gather enough data to be able to make a determination or come to some conclusions.

Currently I think I will begin this way.

First Test.
Of course all the bullets I will be shooting I am not going to sight my scope in for each bullet so it hits dead center every time. So the first two shots of each test will be to get a Point of Impact for each bullet. Then I will proceed to shoot 3 rds through the sticks. Knowing each bullets POI one would measure how much deflection there is from shooting through the sticks.

After those three rounds and measuring the deflection or no deflection, then proceed to the "Terminal Tests" of which will consist of two bullets each.

Entire test for each bullet will require 7 rounds minimum, hoping that I don't screw anything up.
So it will be fairly time consuming, but I think this will really give us some good information.

I plan on both solids and expanding tests in each caliber.

This is the plan thus far.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by srose:
Esskay,

"Yes I think you are right on the money with making a non conventional bullet to match your slow twist. So what if it weighs less than normal we are talking non cons here and they will out perform any conventional lead cored soft point." Sam

"Yes I think you are right on the money with making a non conventional bullet to match your slow twist. So what if it weighs less than normal we are talking non cons here and they will out perform any conventional lead cored soft point."

Sam[/QUOTE]

Exactly Sam, let the weight fall where it may..somewhere in the region of 270-300 grns...if there could be a cup n core bullet of 300 grns way back in the day, think how much more effective a non-con of that weight would be

Esskay,

Why not shoot for around 325 to 330 for the solid and 300 for the non con. Slow twist should handle both.

Sam

Michael

Here's an idea for measuring divergence from the point of aim after passing through sticks. You may have already thought of it or something similar, but here's my idea.

Because your aiming mark will be hidden by the sticks, you need another type of target.

Use target sheets behind the sticks that have a dark horizontal line and two dark vertical parallel lines crossing the horizontal. You can then put the sticks in front and line up your scope crosshair to overlap the horizontal line and bisect the two vertical lines. This will put the centre of the scope crosshair over your intended POA even though you can't directly see it.



Stick Test Target



Target with stick frame set up in front.

Regards

Daryl

Interesting news

quote:

02/23/2012

New 6.5mm 155gr Dangerous Game Solid Copper bullet
Wow, we are way behind in news.

The new DGSC G155 BBW#13 Dangerous Game solid Copper bullets are now released for sale. This bullet is the bullet that Craig Boddington and Bill Jones used to shoot animals in Africa with up to and including buffalo. There is an article in the March issue of Guns and Ammo about the rifle they used and they actually did not know whose bullet they were using other than it was a CEB bullet. At that point they did not know who CEB was. They do not condone  shooting buffalo with a 6.5mm rifle but if you read the article you will see why they did it.

Yes the article is in March 2012 Guns & Ammo. I loved the quote "The report was mild and the WHAP of the bullet hittingwas an unfamiliar slapping sound". Now I guess they are saying they have never heard the thwop of a bullet or maybe they are saying they never heard a small bore do that.

They need to shoot more flat nose bullets

Just come off the range today. Yes, I did some STICK TESTS.

#1 Revelation-- NO .474 Caliber SOLID IS IMMUNE TO HITTING STICKS!

#2 Revelation-- I will NOT BE doing Terminal Tests on ALL of these Solids!

#3 Revelation-- Some Bullets did Better Than Others--However ALL WERE EFFECTED.

My procedures worked 100% Perfectly. I chose a different target than what I normally shoot, turned it "Long" way so that I could see each side of the target for elevation at 25 yds, lining up with the top target above for windage. I shot 2 rounds top target for POI at 25 yds, dropped to the bottom target that was lined up perfectly with the sticks installed. Center up, shoot, replace sticks, shoot again, replace sticks, 3rd shot.

So 2 in the top for POI--3 in the bottom for deflection going through X3 sticks, 1 inch wide.

I have tested the following;

450 BBW#13 Solid
500 BBW#13 Solid
500 Woodleigh FMJ
500 Barnes RN
500 Barnes Banded FN
425 North Fork FPS
500 OLD Sledghammer
500 Hornady DGS

I will be working on the data and get it to you when I finish.

Michael

Michael,

When you test the .458 caliber NonCons how about running a few shots with the BBW#13 HP NonCons through the stick test using one of your slow twist rate lever guns? I'm just wondering if the NonCon performance will overcome the slow twist rate just as the FN Solids do.

If they perform as expected, perhaps that'll give the users of factory slow twist rate barrels something to think about.

Thanks,

Jim

I can do that! Right now working the 475 B&M and .474 solids. I am also going to do the 475 B&M Super Short, and it's bullets as well.

Then fall in with expanding and Noncons in .474 caliber. Tests are going very good right now, some real surprises, some disappointments, and some expectations met.

I did everything at 10 feet, and everything is effected, some more, some less. 20 feet would have been a disaster and resulted in RANGE DAMAGE by some bullets.

Michael

Would be interesting to see how velocity plays in. Say testing at 1,600 and 2,200 FPS. Lever gun impact velocities to moderate DG impact velocities.

Any hope for solid round ball testing?

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
Any hope for solid round ball testing?

I am with boomy on this one, Levergun calibers 45 colt, 44 mag, Would be interesting to see a comparison.

As you all know, a solid round ball cannot lose stability but only deflect. Will a round ball penetrate more than an unstable bullet? Is a fast round ball the best "brush busting" projectile?

I visited your website to catch up on the .474 solid results…not totally surprising. Nice grouping with the 450gr CEB BBW#13 FN Solid! While there was deviation it was a nice grouping not far from the POI.

I think you need to have someone build you a round metal containment that you could slide around your bullet box(s) so you could capture the erant bullets trying to escape the box…direct them downrange to the bullet stop. Might save your walls and ceiling!

quote:

Originally posted by Seasons44:
I am with boomy on this one, Levergun calibers 45 colt, 44 mag, Would be interesting to see a comparison.

I would not mind to do a 45 Colt test. I have a little 16 inch Winchester 94 that I have shot extensively over the years! It's even been to Africa several times in years past. When I finish with the "Main Events" 416-458-475-500s then I can look at other projects to continue. But not until I finish the main agenda.

Boomy, No I won't be shooting balls! They have no relevant place in the field. Only bullets we use or might potentially use in the field. Anything else is a waste of time. I already have a rather large agenda with this, an it will most likely take months to work through.

Jim

OK, I just put the work on the B&M Site last night--You caught that quickly I see! Yes, I feel like this is a fairly important study, I have been effected by brush in the field, recently we saw LionHunter hit a branch in front of his elephant, could have been a disaster, many many others have had the same issues. So I devoted a page on the B&M site to the study, like much not directly related to a particular B&M, this can be found under "Additional Research" Main Page on the left side, scroll down until you see "A Study In Brush Deflection" I think I called it? Direct links;

http://www.b-mriflesandcartrid...rush-Deflection.html

Michael

OK, let's actually look at some "Brush Deflection".

Procedure;

#1-- 2 rounds at 25 yds NO Obstructions for Bullet Point of Impact.

Target is kept as POI to measure Deflection on Target two.

#2-- 3 rounds with each bullet tested at 25 yds with Sticks set at 10 Feet in front of target. Each bullet striking 3 sticks along it's path to the target.

Each Bullet on Target two is measured how far it struck from it's own POI from Target 1. 3 entries are made for each bullet--then those are totaled for a Total Deflection of the 3 bullets--then an average deflection of the 3 listed at the end.

Some of these bullets become unstable, some hitting completely sideways, noted at the end.

Here is the document thus far--and this can be downloaded from the B&M site in pdf format if you want.




Michael

As you now can see my 425 North Fork FPS did very well in the test, right along with the BBW#13s. I had a few 500 gr BBW#13s left over from some of the first ones we did. While a little heavy for the 475 B&M which is far more suited to 450 grs than 500, it did very well, better than any of the other 500 gr bullets.

Here are the North Fork POI and Deflection Targets; For some reason the first round dropped a bit low, I had to shoot 3 for a POI.

As you can see two rounds were nearly POI, and hardly deflected at all. One went a bit astray.






Next best in line is the 450 BBW#13 Solid. Rifle is sighted for this bullet. I was pleased with how consistent the deflection was, never straying too far from POI.






The 500 gr BBW#13 Did rather well too. POI on all the 500 gr bullets was hi and slightly right.

I have to admit, I got a couple of real surprises with the two different Barnes Bullets--One some old Round Nose blue coated bullets I had left over from days long gone. They did not do so bad in the test. As you can see two are very close to POI, one went astray by 3 inches.






To my disappointment the 500 Barnes Banded was not nearly as effective as I would have thought it would be. While it is a very excellent nose profile for the hard stuff--T'Rex tests, and it is a proper nose and meplat size to drive straight and deep, it just did not do so great in the Brush Deflection test. It shows no consistency.

I had some really old Sledgehammers-- They did not do so well either.

And the two worst of the entire lot of them, 500 Woodleigh FMJ and the 500 Hornady DGS. These don't do well in brush at all. The Hornady clearly showing sideways on one, nearly sideways on another. Woodleigh going all over the place, one even missing the target by a bullet hole at the bottom.

I am quite sure I am getting ready to be crucified by the Woodleigh Cult, and of course the Hornady fans as well. I am sure there will be reasons the test is not valid, and is meaningless, as it is not real branches only flat cut sticks! I am sure there will be plenty of excuses thought of, and made up as to why ones favorite bullets did not perform well, once again. Well I am sorry to tell you this, but I am just the messenger, they fall where they may. All bullets were effected. Flat Sticks have to be far easier test than round harder branches. If a bullet can't get through these flat sticks, it damn sure is not going to go through any sort of brush! AS YOU CAN ONCE AGAIN SEE CLEARLY--ALL FN SOLIDS ARE NOT CREATED EQUAL---ALL RN SOLIDS ARE NOT CREATED EQUAL. End of Story!

I will not be doing very many Terminal Tests with most of these, maybe a few, but those that cannot stabilize and cannot remain with any sort of consistency are not going to be tested on my range, I don't feel like spending time to do the repairs, which takes away time from doing test work.

That's it guys, that is what I have thus far.

Michael

Helpful work.
Now the questions.

1. Did the bullets with wider, dispersed results, have different patterns on the wood slats?
E.g., did any of the slats snap off at POI?
Or did any of the impacts get close to the edge of the slat?

2. Could there have been any movement of the slats in the later tests?
E.g., did the slat trolley change position and angle ever so slightly?
Or did the slats start to bend forward or backward a little bit?

3. Are these tests repeatable?
E.g. will the same results occur?
Or will they occur when performed in a different order?

Repeatability is important for data confidence and determining influences

.

Tanz

quote:

1. Did the bullets with wider, dispersed results, have different patterns on the wood slats?
E.g., did any of the slats snap off at POI?
Or did any of the impacts get close to the edge of the slat?

No. Yes. Sometimes.

quote:

2. Could there have been any movement of the slats in the later tests?
E.g., did the slat trolley change position and angle ever so slightly?
Or did the slats start to bend forward or backward a little bit?

No No No

quote:

3. Are these tests repeatable?
E.g. will the same results occur?
Or will they occur when performed in a different order?

Yes No ?? Different order???

Very repeatable. Will not get the same results--No telling where a bullet might strike after being destabilized?

Order?? Not sure what you mean. I think if we repeated the same exact test over again that the order of results--Best bullet to the worst bullet would not change position very much. Next time the BBW#13 might do better than the North Fork--Very close. Next time the Barnes FN might do Better than the Barnes RN. But at no time with the Hornady or Woodleigh do better than the North Fork or BBW#13. They may all strike different than this test, but overall results in order will be close.

M

I wonder if the dry lube coated barnes bullet helped limit deflection.
Thanks for a great test!
Seems in the thick stuff some bullets are better and could make the difference between a dead animal and a wounded dangerous animal.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
Seems in the thick stuff some bullets are better and could make the difference between a dead animal and a wounded dangerous animal.

I think that would be a 100% correct assessment!

M

"Deflecting" off topic a bit. I noticed this thread will soon have 200,000 views!
People love to learn the truth about bullets.
Can any tell us how the views are counted? For example are non member vews counted and repeat views ect.

quote:

Yes No ?? Different order???

Very repeatable. Will not get the same results--No telling where a bullet might strike after being destabilized?

Order?? Not sure what you mean.

By order I meant doing a test starting with some of the 'bad' and proceding to the good. I know that this shouldn't make a difference, but it would be good to check repeatability. That would rule out things like fouling build-up.

However, it might be that some bullets are more unstable at different muzzle velocities. You have already noted how the POI moves around. That often fluctuates with velocity and powder because of barrel harmonics. What we want to do is to remove the influence of bullets that leave the muzzle 'not yet ready to sleep' vs. bullets that leave at the right harmonic and 'ready to sleep'.

It may take a little work and experience to get a handle on the factors, just like with meplat and 13-degree, rounded edges.

Fouling buildup isn't a factor in Michael's guns. HE NEVER CLEANS THEM!