Why doesn't the manufacturer send some samples to be tested ...???

That is a very good question...Sure makes you wonder why they don't!

Concerning the hammerheads, Jeffe bought a box of those things and was going to set up some test parameters with them. I think he was pulling some to load in 458 Lott to test at various velocity. I am sure he is working on it and we should be hearing something shortly.

I have in the meantime a couple of things I am working on. Have to get them set up, possibly this morning, most likely tomorrow.

I did set up a 470 Capstick this week and will be looking at it again with a couple of new tests. Also it won't be long before I have some other samples sent from Macifej in .510 caliber, and we will visit that next week.

I had some questions concerning the Capsticks for RIP, but seems he is very busy being a Doc this week, but sure he will get back with me when he can. I have never been very happy with my Capsticks.

Been doing mostly load data this week playing with the 50 B&M SA. Seems there is some interest there from several sources, don't know why but there is, so I had to get busy with some new data for it. Other news is that two 458s are almost done, 458 B&M SA--semi version, and the tiny little 458 B&M Super Short, but both are subject to Hornady dies, so that is still about 3-4 months out because of the dies.

Michael

To heck with pulling Hammerheads to load in a 458 Lott. I want to know how the factory Garret stuff works in a 45-70 in this test medium.

Received some of the Hornady Solids yesterday for my 470. I hope to perform some tests this weekend. Work and other things have kept me occupied for the last two weeks.

quote:

Originally posted by sharpsguy:
To heck with pulling Hammerheads to load in a 458 Lott. I want to know how the factory Garret stuff works in a 45-70 in this test medium.

Yep, I am with you, I would like to see too!

quote:

Received some of the Hornady Solids yesterday for my 470. I hope to perform some tests this weekend. Work and other things have kept me occupied for the last two weeks.

quote:

Mike
Excellent. Stamp and measure meplat while you are at it on those. If you do the 470 Hornadys, I will put the 458 Hornadys thru the ringer. I did not have good success with the 480 Hornady, but that was only 1 test in the 458 B&M? So I must revisit those in the Lott.

Michael

You've got the hardest hitting AR cartridge in the friggin world and you dont know why anyone would be interested!!!!
GEEEEZZZZZ

John

Crap!
Dear, I think you forgot to use a coffee filter. . . . . .

It's alright, give me sumthin ta chew on

The factory velocities of the hammerheads are not the issue. That is well documented. What would be interesting is the penetration with the slow twist lever actions vs the faster twist 1 in 12 Lott at the same velocities.

Garrett claims penetration is best at his "Magic envelope" of about 1600 fps.

so fast and slow twist at 1600 then fast twist at 1,800, 2,000 and 2,200 fps

THAT would be interesting.

His hard cast bullets should hold together @ 2,200 I think.

Hi Doc M,
My friend had a Custom Shop Big Five M70 in 470 Capstick and had problems with oversized rifling and a patch of damaged rifling inside his barrel, near the muzzle end.
I verified it as 1:10" twist.
I have a .416 Remington Big Five, last of the 5, IIRC, and I have found no problems with it yet, but have not fired it either!

My 470 Capstick is a custom-made-by-local-smith with a McGowen barrel of 1:10" twist on an M70 Classic.
It did have a tendency for the next round in the magazine box to sometimes "porpoise-up" when the bolt is slammed back.
I replaced the box and follower with those from a .300 RUM M70 and that seemed to fix it, in my rifle.

I think everyone simply copied Art Alphin's 1:10" Twist for the 470 Capstick.
That is a good thing.
All the rest of the crap cannot be blamed on that.

Yes I think those Winchester Custom Shop 470 Capsticks had bad barrels!
Oversized and even missing patches of rifling sometimes!
Need to be rebarreled! What a shame!

I have been busy FAT FINGERING the information on solids into Excel. My purpose is so that I can sort the data several diffenet ways.

If anyone wants a copy on the Excel file, PM me with your email and I'll send it via email as an attachemnt. I added a couple of calculated columns for my own fun.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
The factory velocities of the hammerheads are not the issue. That is well documented. What would be interesting is the penetration with the slow twist lever actions vs the faster twist 1 in 12 Lott at the same velocities.

Garrett claims penetration is best at his "Magic envelope" of about 1600 fps.

so fast and slow twist at 1600 then fast twist at 1,800, 2,000 and 2,200 fps

THAT would be interesting.

His hard cast bullets should hold together @ 2,200 I think.

The reason he claims best penetraion at 1600 FPS is because the bullet is a Hard Cast and will not stand up well at higher speeds, unlike a mono metal solid. In the handguns since they can not utilize a bullet as large for caliber 1200 to 1400 FPS is optimal, start appraoching 1600 FPS and the bullet compresses and shortens wthout increaseing velocity, use a Punch Bullet and the bullet can be driven faster for more penetration. Since they big Bore flat point hard cast in the big bore handguns will out penetrate most of the big bore rifle round nose solids, I see no need for more penetration in the handguns on 95% of the game hunted. The Handguns do not out penetrate flat point mono metal solids, no way, no how.

Phatman

Still busy with the 50 B&M SA, looking at different powders. It's a hammer, lot's of fun, just not much use to me? It is a bit interesting however.

Boomy

I don't know if any Cast Bullet is up to 2200 fps, and not shear, or deform during terminals. I suspect that is why Garrett likes it down around 1600, does not deform? I suppose we will see. Of course, I am no expert, still just learning.


Hi RIP

I thought as much about the Capsticks! I have several of the others and they are great rifles, 416s, 458, 338s, but the 470s have been an issue from day one. I used the 416s a good bit, they have been great.

Really surprising about the 1:10, but too bad about the bad barrels, I think mine are not so good either and have had suspicions about them for some time.
I know at least one of mine is oversized, when recovering bullets a couple of years ago and there is ZERO engraving on the bullets? Yeah! Not good for solid terminal penetration I would think. I have some things I am going to try this week with them. We will see what's up maybe.

Thanks for the info, confirms exactly what I thought!

IBT
Man, I can't believe you can't open a pdf file? Everyone can open pdf!

FYI for you guys, I run apples here, that is the issue IBT has, but I can convert to pdf or even jpg!

Keep us posted on what you come up with IBT.

Michael

quote:

IBT
Man, I can't believe you can't open a pdf file? Everyone can open pdf!

FYI for you guys, I run apples here, that is the issue IBT has, but I can convert to pdf or even jpg!

Keep us posted on what you come up with IBT.

I can open th pdf file but as I don't own the complete Adobe SW I can't modify it - i.e. - sort, add columns etc. same way with the jpg - open O.K., modify, no.

You guys have a long ways to go to even come close the famous Matchking thread.

That was 140 some pages when the pages were 40 some post long.

Keep

quote:

Originally posted by I Bin Therbefor:

quote:

IBT
Man, I can't believe you can't open a pdf file? Everyone can open pdf!

FYI for you guys, I run apples here, that is the issue IBT has, but I can convert to pdf or even jpg!

Keep us posted on what you come up with IBT.

I can open th pdf file but as I don't own the complete Adobe SW I can't modify it - i.e. - sort, add columns etc. same way with the jpg - open O.K., modify, no.

IBT

OK I got ya! Well, keep up the good work? Which is? I am sure you have something up your sleeve that will dazzle us!

pds

Matchking Thread? I suppose that was before my time? I can pretty much sum that up in a sentence or so. Sierra Matchkings, jacket and core separate during terminal penetration. Ok I guess that's it.

Michael

I thought this was worth posting here for us, as it does have some relevance to what we have been working with!

G'day Mike.

Firstly, thank-you so much for providing me with access to the results of your hard and intensive research ( that which must take you a lot of time and expense to achieve ).

I know you, and know that it would be "work" that you live for and enjoy doing, but non-the-less I very much appreciate your generosity in sharing the results.

I've spent the last week or so reviewing your results and referring them to how I have witnessed performances in the field.

You know I'm not a "scientific", or regulated, recorder of bullet performance.

Sure, every now and then, or when requested by a hunting client, I'll trace a bullet in an animal to see where it went, how it performed and how it finished up, but that's as far as it goes with me.

Up till meeting you I had two measures of assessing the performance of a projectile.
Firstly, did it achieve the penetration I need/expect it to,
secondly, what was the physical reaction of the animal.

You need to remember that my primary objective and perspective is in terms of stopping/veering a buffalo.

Therefore I require two main functions from my bullets.
1 ) They must exhibit generous penetration ( therefore I know that in the mix of situations/positions/distances/angles/adrenalin levels of the animals that I may have to stop/veer ) the projectiles I am using will do their job from any angle.
2 ) They must show a physical impact on the size of the animals I hunt ( therefore under stressful situations, should I slightly misplace a shot, I'm still going to physically effect the animal to veer, or to present another shot opportunity.

Of course, to some extent, when loaded in the Lott, almost all bullets commercially available exhibit most of these required traits to some extent.

In 90 out of 100 situations, MOST bullets will complete the task.

It's that other 10 times when research such as yours will help see me through to retirement age !

You may remember that I am currently using the Hornadays factory loads, with the large front meplat. I have now been using them for 3 years ( about 14 packets in the field, on buffalo & wild Oxen etc ).
When I started using them I noticed a significant visual difference in their impact performance.
They seem to have a much higher impact "effect' than anything else I've used previously.

The reason your research is so interesting to me as it gives a "measuring" tool for "performance-to-be-expected", I guess.

I see that the Hornadays don't rate as well as some other bullets tested, but I cannot get some of them over here in aus.

After seeing the results of your M.D.M and B&M cartridges in Aus last year, I place a high level of credence in your penetration tests as legitimate indicators of bullet performance, therefore would like to ask if you have tested any that are available to me in Aus.

Have you tested the new Woodlieghs available yet ?
Can't remember what they're called but they've got a real blunt nose on them.

I've been corresponding with various P.H's in Africa, who like me, have witnessed a definite visual impact benefit in using flat nosed solids.

i am very keen in pursuing the use of this type of bullet as they have increased the already magnificent performance of my Lott, particularly up close.

Keep up the great work, look forward to more research.

Cheers,
Paul.

Good post... WHich bullet are you going to recomend?

I've got to run but want to get this post off before I confuse myself any more.
These penetration tests are about bullets NOT about calibers. We concentrated on the above 40 calibers because we have got reasons to prefer using them as was stated when this series of tests was first started.
Given that we are using 40 and above calibers, penetration appears to be a valid indicator of expected field performance.
What maybe be hiding behind that statement is that flat nose bullets appear to give penetration and ALSO the effect on the animal that the above PH wants. Penetration and serious damage during penetration.
MAybe flat nose bullets are a two for one.

I believe this is the bullet referenced by the PH (from the sheet)
400 Wood Mono 2312 fps 1:14 twist 50 inches penetration - "hydrostatic stabilized projectiles"

I Bin Therbefor, micheal458 has also tested down to 338 caliber

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
I Bin Therbefor, micheal458 has also tested down to 338 caliber

"I shoot mostly big bore cartridges from 416-.500 caliber, and have paid a lot of attention to 458 and my own .500 caliber cartridges over the years. In particular the .500s in which proper dangerous game bullets had to be designed, as there were none available on a commercial basis. I dabble in other calibers from time to time, mostly .338, .358 and recently .366. Very little but some work done in small bore under .338 caliber."

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
Good post... WHich bullet are you going to recomend?

JWP

Well shooting can sometimes be a compromise based on sets of factors involved. Here we have an issue of what is available to Paul in Australia to begin with. Not everything is quite as easy to get ones hands on there as it is here. It can be had, just a little more difficult.

Another compromise to be made is "what will feed in Pauls rifle?" It's a CZ 458 Lott, and a bit difficult, I doubt very seriously it would feed Barnes Banded Solids reliable.

I will see if he can get his hands on some of the NEW WOODLEIGH Monos to give them a try.

But when it comes down to it, really what he has been using is a good bullet in my opinion, the 500 gr Hornady DGS.

I only gave the 480 DGS a test, and it was only a couple of bullets. It did not do well and did veer off course, I attribute that to the meplat not being of sufficient size at the time of testing. I have on order now and will be in this week DGS 500 gr 458s, 500 gr 470s and 570 gr .510 that we will be testing in the coming couple of weeks. We will give them a proper go.

Now we also must keep in mind what we are doing here with the test work, it's a comparison between different bullets and how they perform in the same mix. While it is true, that if it is a success or failure in this test, it will most likely perform this way in the field, UNTIL YOU GET TO THE SOLIDS!!!!!!!!!!! Then we are working with a bit different dynamic. Yes, if it is successful and penetrates straight in the test medium, then it will be successful in the field on animal tissue and the mission in which a solid is made for! But, if a particular solid bullet does not do well in the test as another solid bullet, that does NOT mean that it will for sure FAIL in the field! What it does mean is that there is a POTENTIAL that it will not perform as well as another bullet that performed better in the test work! Big difference.

Since Paul is working with buffalo then we need to keep that in mind too. Almost any solid can perform good enough with buffalo, with the exception of a North Bound buffalo and taking a shot from the South End! There is a lot of buffalo to penetrate in a shot like that, and I dare say that not all Solids are quite up to the task 100% of the time!

If Paul had no limitations on what bullet he could use and had available to him and that would feed in his rifle, what would I recommend? A 450 or 500 gr Barnes Banded, 450 or 500 gr North Forks, GSC .458 solids, New Woodleigh Mono solids, 500 gr Nosler FN Solid. Maybe not in that exact order either.

But since we live with limiting factors and sometimes have to compromise I will recommend to Paul that he should see if he can get his hands on some of the New Woodleigh FN solids, see how they function in his rifle. If by chance they do not function 100%, then he already has good success with the 500 Hornady DGS and he need look no further!

But if there were no limitations in life, I would tell him to run as quickly as he could and find a good Winchester M70 and use any bullet he wants to use from then on! That just took some of the limitations and compromise out of the issue!

Michael

Michael,

Very nice post from Paul; it’s nice to hear that your efforts are having an impact with the PH’s which is a good thing.

quote:

Originally posted by I Bin Therbefor:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
I Bin Therbefor, micheal458 has also tested down to 338 caliber

"I shoot mostly big bore cartridges from 416-.500 caliber, and have paid a lot of attention to 458 and my own .500 caliber cartridges over the years. In particular the .500s in which proper dangerous game bullets had to be designed, as there were none available on a commercial basis. I dabble in other calibers from time to time, mostly .338, .358 and recently .366. Very little but some work done in small bore under .338 caliber."

IBT

Correct on all counts! It was 2005 before I used the first Barnes Banded solid on buffalo in Tanzania. I had shot a few buff with RN bullets in years past and elephants, so I knew what I was seeing was real. Although on that trip I only shot 3 buffalo I can tell you this the 500 Barnes Banded in the 458 Lott hit them like the hammer of Thor! There was very very visible reaction to taking the Flat Nose solid as opposed to the RN solids! Night and Day difference! The FN hits with authority compared to a RN.


As for testing it is true, I lean towards the bigger bores and have more interest there than anywhere else. But since I dabble once and awhile in smaller bores, I also do some test work there. But if I have interest in something then I also test there, for instance Tanzan wanted some 338 tests done, it's something I had put off for some time, but had slated to do myself, so we gave 338 caliber a hell of a workout and tested a lot of bullets in just a few weeks. I have also given 9.3 a decent workout since I have developed my own 9.3 B&M and have great interest in it. With that little 9.3 B&M I doubt that I will ever go to the field with anything in 358 or 338 caliber again. It will now serve in the place of anything that I would do in 358 or 338. Another little cartridge that I play with is a 6.5 WSM and I have done some work with it, and .257 caliber. The 6.5 WSM is my new baboon buster.

Now, I am behind schedule now about two days. I had hoped to get some things done today, but have not been able to. I have a couple of tests that I want to report and that will be about all I get done on these things this weekend. I had hoped to get a box of medium made up for Monday tests, but that is not going to happen. It will most likely be Tuesday before test work kicks back in.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
But since we live with limiting factors and sometimes have to compromise I will recommend to Paul that he should see if he can get his hands on some of the New Woodleigh FN solids, see how they function in his rifle. If by chance they do not function 100%, then he already has good success with the 500 Hornady DGS and he need look no further!

Michael

Ah but remember, there are some very good to superb Aussie 'smiths that can easily take care of any feeding issues Paul might encounter without ruining the rifle for other bullet shapes.

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:
Michael,

Very nice post from Paul; it’s nice to hear that your efforts are having an impact with the PH’s which is a good thing.

Jim

Yeah, I thought that was pretty good, so that's why I decided to share that with everyone. I get a lot of that from most of the guys I hunt with. It's very satisfying to me to help out when I can. A lot of the guys I hunt with in Africa are the same.

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
But since we live with limiting factors and sometimes have to compromise I will recommend to Paul that he should see if he can get his hands on some of the New Woodleigh FN solids, see how they function in his rifle. If by chance they do not function 100%, then he already has good success with the 500 Hornady DGS and he need look no further!

Michael

Ah but remember, there are some very good to superb Aussie 'smiths that can easily take care of any feeding issues Paul might encounter without ruining the rifle for other bullet shapes.

GET A WINCHESTER M70! Then it's NO Worries Mate!

I was looking around in some of my bullets this week and came across a couple of bullets I thought might be of interest. With the big success of the little tiny 6.5 round nose I found some old .308 caliber 220 gr Barnes sorta round nose solids that I had for years. Not sure what I had ever planned for these bullets as it's rare I shoot anything in .308 caliber, in fact I can't tell you that I have even shot one in 10 yrs or more? But I must have been having some sort of vision when I got these, or maybe just curious and never got around to them since they are small bores.

Anyway I noticed the odd looking nose profile, and it does look like the 6.5 profile we tested last Saturday. So I did some up in a 300 Winchester, had to look hard for a rifle that was already set up, just happened to be a POS Remington I have owned for 20 or more years. So decided to give it a go.



Well I have no report on this as whatever twist rate the "R" thing has, it's not fast enough to stabilize at all. It's starting to tumble on paper long before terminal begins. So terminals were out of the question, even though I tried it anyway. The bullet hit sideways and went to the bottom of the box after about 8-10 inches. So need something with a faster twist than what I have to even come close.

quote:

came across a couple of bullets

Hmmmm ... even I'm not old enough to remember those ... look like valve stems for faucets ...

Digging around in my stash of 338 caliber bullets when testing the 338s a few weeks ago I came across an old box of 200 gr Barnes Spitzer Solids. Now once again, I don't know why I have these or what sort of plan or vision I was having at the time, but there they were anyway. I had never tried any. Somewhere someone mentioned something about the spitzer solids and how they penetrated. I told them they will tumble end of story and could not possibly stabilize during penetration of anything substantial. So I decided to put them in the box and confirm other things I had done and seen.






This one was of course a no brainer and they indeed tumbled and had minds of their own. One thing I will say, there was mass destruction of test medium! It was torn all to hell!

Michael

OH Boy! It was like Christmas here yesterday when I received a box in the USPS from our boy Macifej or just J as I call him! Maybe "Agent J", I don't know. But I have to share something with all of you. J sent me a surprise bullet to study. It's so big, I did not even know what it was. It's so far above and big all I knew to do at the time was do the measurements on it and call it whatever the measurements were. Only just a short time ago did he give me details on even what it was! So I measured, and took photos. Now none of my scales will even weigh it, so I put it on my package scales that only go to 1/4 lb increments, this went to 1/2 lb. How precise that is I can say, I just called it an even 3500 grs!

Now it's been said that my cartridge designs are designed somewhat different than other folks. This was brought up recently and I had not really thought about it. I designed all the B&Ms and the MDM around the rifle I wanted, then designed a cartridge to work in that rifle to accomplish what I wanted. The normal way is to design the cartridge first, then find it a home or a platform! I have the platform I want already, now I do the cartridge.

Well that might change today, Now I have this bullet, now I need a cartridge for it to work in, then I have to design a CANNON with wheels for it to shoot?????




I do have some concerns about proper penetration with this bullet, do you guys think the meplat is big enough for good penetration?????????

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:

quote:

came across a couple of bullets

Hmmmm ... even I'm not old enough to remember those ... look like valve stems for faucets ...

I suppose I have had those for a very very long time J???? Like I said, I don't even ever remember having them, and I know I have done nothing with a 30 cal in years and years, hell I don't even like 30's, have no use for them. I suppose I had something in mind at one point but don't recall. I loose interest very quickly when we drop below a certain caliber!

Michael

quote:

this went to 1/2 lb. How precise that is I can say

3500 Grains +/- .2 grains ...

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:

quote:

this went to 1/2 lb. How precise that is I can say

3500 Grains +/- .2 grains ...

J
I reckon that is close enough then, for our purposes here! But I think from now on I might just refer to that one as the "HALF POUNDER" ! That just has a "bigger" nuance let's say!

M

Wow, how long is that sucker?

Jim
The 30 220 Barnes is 1.5065 inches long!

Doc M,
Surely Remington used a 1:10" twist in the 300 WinMag rifle that could not stabilize the Barnes .308/220-gr RN solid?
Or was that a sub-caliber .307" diameter bullet?
Whatever, I won't be trying to find any of those bullets anyway. LOOOOOOOOONG for caliber and weight indeed!

"Agent J" ... Is "J" for "Joker?"
Dropping half-pounders on you like that is funny!

Here is that much anticipated bullet from Agent J of S&H:









USPS "Mail Woman" knocked lightly on the door and took off before anyone could answer, leaving only a note in the mailbox today, saying I could pick up the bullets come Monday at 8am!!!
This would never do.
I raced to main post office by 10am this fine Saturday.
Got supervisor of "Mail Woman" to make her return to my house and deliver packages.
I met her there at 1130am.
She had only 3 of 4 boxes.
I signed and raced back to main post office and got supervisor in person at 11:59am ... Noon closing time and she had been ignoring my phone calls ... cornered her in person to go look through package trucks for missing box. Found on another incoming mail trailer, like a quadruplet separated at birth from the other three!
Whew!
Just lucky first trailer out of 60 possible to begin searching!!!
I finally could stop pestering "Mail Women."

Agent J sent 4 tracking numbers. If I had not known that I would still be wondering.

I weighed 10 of the bullets and by my scales they are all 534.47 grains (average of 10: low of 534.3, high of 534.6)
534.5 grains
Yup close enough to call it a 535-grainer.

Length is 1.404" on all.
Diameter is 0.510" on all.
Very precise!

Stamping technique for meplat: .385" = 75.5%
Including the radius makes it (imprecisely) about .390" = 76.5%
which is a very sharp corner radius on the nose of this FN.
If you shoot it backwards, the base becomes a nose-heavy meplat of 91% to 93% (.465 or .475, more rounded edge), with a long boat tail!

Much better percentage for FN than this one:

quote:

USPS

Priority Mail - Super Fast Guaranteed but actual delivery too inconvenient for the carrier apparently. Missing DHL in a serious way. FedEx ... uh ... NO! Gotta revisit Brown I guess. Too much weight for a single box in the world of USPS.

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
Jim
The 30 220 Barnes is 1.5065 inches long!

Geez, even the GreenHill software tool notes a 1:9" twist is required for this bullet length. But I'll bet that wouldn't provide within mass stability for this bullet; will take faster than 1:9" twist for that.