quote:

Originally posted by Ralfboy:
I wonder what the relative penetration of an BBW13 turned from aluminium instead of brass might look like.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerard:
If the experimenting I did is anything to go by, penetration will not be good. The 46gr bullet below ran almost 4000fps out of a 30-06 and, although fouling was low and accuracy was good, it virtually fell out of the sky at anything over 100m. It was as long as was prudent from a 1:10" twist so, in jacketed lead it would have been about 180gr and in copper it would have been about 160gr. It had a hollow base as well and that was to accept a tungsten dart. It was intended for a special application and the funding of the department and manufacturing permits were not forthcoming so I shelved it.

quote:

Originally posted by frankinthelaurels:
How come no new posts, this was one of the best threads ever !

quote:

Originally posted by 416Tanzan:

quote:

Originally posted by frankinthelaurels:
How come no new posts, this was one of the best threads ever !

Yes, it is.

Here is a technical article from another thread that pretty much explains everything that Michael was discovering and observing, and does so with physics and a useful summary table and some simple formulae for additional loads.

http://ammoguide.com/myag/arti.../penetration0802.pdf

I highly recommend saving this article for future reference. Something mentioned but not developed in the article is the increased destructiveness of the flat-nosed solid over round-nose, besides the straighter and deeper penetration.

quote:

Originally posted by aephilli:
this is not a sticky?????

Jim
"Life's hard; it's harder if you're stupid"
John Wayne

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:

quote:

Originally posted by aephilli:
this is not a sticky?????

It was, apparently no longer...

quote:

Originally posted by medved:
found the link

h t t p ://ammoguide.com/myag/articles/hunt/penetration0802.pdf

quote:

Originally posted by para-frame:
I clicked on this thread, having just bought a CRF model 70 .375 H&H, excited to see how some good .375s do...303 pages later and now I have to get a .458. Boo, granted I never intend to hunt DG, but the ability to do so is something I wanted.

...Takedown switch barrel .375 H&H/.470 Capstick anyone?

quote:

Originally posted by Bret Ittel:
michael458 ok out of all the testing two questions what round load bullet ? gives the most penetration? and what round load bullet gave the best and largest bullet wound size? thank you ?

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Todays test work! I was spurred on a bit to do a couple of tests, actually repeat some with 458 Lott, and add some with the 458 B&M. The goal was to use some big bore solids at different velocities, which we did, but really did not prove a whole lot, except once again to confirm some prior data gathered on these particular bullets anyway.

I wanted to test a 500 gr Woodleigh from 458 Lott--was hoping for 2200 fps or so, but only got 2100 fps with the load I used. I wanted to also compare this velocity to a lower velocity in the 458 B&M. Not as low as I wanted, but 1827 fps was what I got. In addition the 500 gr Barnes Banded FN Solid in 458 Lott at 2209 fps and the same bullet in 458 B&M at a reduced 1815 fps. In addition to these tests I wanted to test the new Barnes 330 gr Solid made for the 458 Socom in the 458 B&M. POI for this solid is the same as all 350 gr bullets I use in the 458 B&M and would make a good addition for those loads.


The rifles used are shown below.


The shooting was done at the 25 yd bench, actual impact was 22 yds. Velocity was recorded at the front end, and then again at impact.



The test medium was fresh and soaked well, 62 inches of mix in the box.

First up was the 458 Lott with the 500 gr Woodleigh FMJ and the 500 gr Barnes Banded FN, both loaded with 82/RL 15. Muzzle velocity was lower with the Woodleigh at 2100 fps and 2051 fps impact at 22 yds. Muzzle Velocity was 2209 fps with the Barnes, and 2160 fps at impact.

If you see the phone books on top of the box that is to prevent the Woodleigh from leaving the top of the box when it veers off course. Yes, I already know what the Woodleigh is going to do, as I have tested them before. Maybe I can prevent damage to the range!

As expected the 500 Woodleigh started to veer off course at 31 inches exiting the medium to the side of the box at 35 inches as you can see below.



The 500 Barnes Banded FN zipped thru the entire 62 inches of test medium and exited the back of the box, 2X6 and into the impact berm not recovered. Penetration was straight through and through.


Now for the reduced loads in the 458 B&M. the 500 gr Woodleigh with 63/AA 2520 gave 1827 fps at the muzzle and at impact 1776 fps. It went to 24 inches before it started to veer off course, it found a void down the side of the box and out the top at 35 inches, hitting the target behind the box sideways.


The 500 Barnes Banded FN at 1815 fps at the muzzle and 1780 fps at impact once again drilled straight completely through the 62 inches of medium, exiting the back of the box and into the berm behind, not recovered. I was somewhat surprised, I expected it to come up a bit short, but was wrong. I do believe that had velocity been lower it would have stopped in the box, as it was just making it's way through with little disturbance at the end.

The last test was in the 458 B&M with the 330 Barnes Banded FN solid. With 72/RL 10X it started at 2331 fps and impacted at 2281 fps. They drove straight and true to a total penetration of 50 inches. Not bad for a little bullet and far better than the 500 Woodleigh FMJ.

Now what did this tell us? Something most of us already know, once again--Nose Profile is everything! The 500 Woodleigh becomes unstable, veers off course, and penetration is severely effected. We also learned that the lower velocity it penetrated much less, before going off course, a little more velocity kept it going a little further. Proving that with this RN design, more velocity will keep it stable longer. With RN bullets this challenges the "garrett" tests seriously.

Of course the 500 Barnes Banded FN far exceeded the 500 Woodleigh FMJ RN, this comes as zero surprise and has been repeated many times. The 500 Barnes fired from the 458 Lott hit with far more authority at 2209 fps than from the reduced load in the 458 B&M at 1815 fps. Both penetrated straight, both exited box. It is my belief that even lower velocity that the box would have contained it. I will most likely attempt lower velocity in the near future to also challenge the "garrett" tests. I am pretty positive that if I can get down in the 1500 fps range the bullet will be recovered in the box, and for sure putting the nix on garrett.

Of little surprise, but none the less pleased with the results is the 330 Barnes banded solid. At 2331 fps it did far better than the 500 gr Woodleigh. With a small Sectional Density of only .225 as compared to the mighty 500 Woodleigh FMJ RN with an SD of .341 the little Barnes exceeded the Woodleigh by an easy 35-38% increase in penetration. What is the most important aspect of SOLID PENETRATION? NOSE PROFILE---NOSE PROFILE---NOSE PROFILE! All other factors including Sectional Density--Velocity--barrel twist--construction and materials, are in the back seat, being driven by Nose Profile!

Michael