quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
J

Well all I got to say about that is "Colin's got some big Balls"

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

Peter

Nice Photo of the cartridges and Balls! That looks interesting. The lead balls, how fast do you run them? Soft lead? Hardened? I am sure that can be duplicated with smokeless?

M

http://www.facebook.com/pages/...ifle/146722612017963

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
Some of the reasons round balls would interesting is that if the depth of penetration at old school velocities and high velocities with non deforming brass or copper. A round ball is pretty much an expanded mushroomed soft. A 12 gauge ball could resemble the expanded 458 at the same velocity and weight. Will the non deforming balls path in the test medium go straight? Tumbling a non issue.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/...ifle/146722612017963

quote:

macifej

i saw that tread is he is quite a craftsman, but i must admit that both him and ed must be buildt more sturdy than me as my personal recoil border lies around the 8 and 4 bores

best

peter

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
The bulls' larger heads and generally harder and tougher bone in their heads, even the honey comb bone, is where the RN shines and provides more reliable performance than the malliable FN's.

Moreover, the vast, vast majority of elephants killed by professional ivory hunters or sport hunters since the advent of smokeless powder have been bull elephants, and the vast majority of those have been killed by RN solids. Facts, 100% contradictory to you assertions.

JPK

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

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:
The idea that Cup & Core bullets whether RN or FN are in any way comparable to FN monometal solids is utterly laughable. Hunting elephant with them is the equivalent of entering a Model T in a Formula One race. The only reason to use them other than they're cheap is nostalgia. Then there's the ignorance (or ignoramus) factor. Here's what happens when you shoot a semi-hard target with a RN C&C bullet and a Monometal FN. Same velocity, same load, same gun, same target.

quote:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

quote:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

quote:

Does empirical evidence bow to anecdotal evidence?

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

quote:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

Does empirical evidence bow to anecdotal evidence?

Free 500grains

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

quote:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

Does empirical evidence bow to anecdotal evidence?

I let you answer you

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
465H&H,

FYI, about 50% of my Woodleighs exit on broadside shots on cow elephants. 100% of the NF's. On bulls, the Woodleighs don't exit, and the NF's exit most of the time.

The beautiful thing here is that I do not have to select just one bullet, I can select two, and use the one most suitable for the circumstances. A useful feature of double rifles.

JPK

Take the elephants that 465H&H and I have shot, or for that matter that either of us have shot, and it isn't ancedotal evidence. Between us, there have been several hundered bullets fired into elephants. Many, also several hundred, recovered. RN steel jacketed solids, FN steel jacketed solids and FN copper solids.

How many times did you need to watch the sun rise in the east before you realized that the sun rises in the east?

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

465H&H

quote:

JPK Take the elephants that 465H&H and I have shot, or for that matter that either of us have shot, and it isn't ancedotal evidence. Between us, there have been several hundered bullets fired into elephants. Many, also several hundred, recovered. RN steel jacketed solids, FN steel jacketed solids and FN copper solids.

quote:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

465H&H

quote:

JPK Take the elephants that 465H&H and I have shot, or for that matter that either of us have shot, and it isn't ancedotal evidence. Between us, there have been several hundered bullets fired into elephants. Many, also several hundred, recovered. RN steel jacketed solids, FN steel jacketed solids and FN copper solids.

OK, 465HH and his "lapdog"

To begin with this is my thread, I started it. The title of the thread is "Terminal Bullet Performance". If covers a lot of material. It is not an "I shot more elephants than you Thread"! If you want a "I shot More Elephants Than You" thread, take it up to the African Forum that is full of useless threads like that, and plenty of people that can be in "Awe" of both of you.

465HH

quote:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

What? I thought you had a little more class than that to be frank. Again, this is a shooting forum, not "I shot More Elephants than you" forum or thread. If you want to know the honest to god truth, I will let you in on something. Most of the guys here, don't give a flying F%&K about how many elephants anyone has shot. The number of elephants you have shot means nothing here, no one cares, it buys you not one thing. It does not buy you respect, it does not give credibility, and it makes you no expert on anything. To say what you said, is cheap and to be honest rather common if you want to know. Common, just pure Common!

The difference here is compared to going to the SCI Show in Reno, to going to the Shot Show. That's how I look at it, and I think is a good analogy. Have either you or your lapdog been to either? If so, then you will understand, or should.

I am sure this is quite a revelation for you and I am sure you are not quite used to this, but while this thread encompasses many many aspects of bullets, elephant shooting is a very minor part of and of little consequence. I am growing quite tired of this useless going on for two years that I have been here. I am going to tell you something that very well may hurt some feelings. You don't have the experience you need to talk "down" to anyone on this thread, and you will never in the rest of your life have enough experience to "Speak Down to Me".

Do not think for a second that I miss as much as I may let pass! But this is enough!

As for your "Lapdog" JPK, he is little more than the village "idiot" and requires no more words spent on him than that.

Yes, we test elephant shooting bullets, buffalo shooting bullets, solids, expanding, Non Conventional, and if someone wanted me to I would test some varmint bullets for them. Do you think anyone would challenge someone else on just how many prairie dogs they have shot? Some arguments or discussions are relevant and do have meaning, we have discussed some of these matters, but this is truly absurd after two years of it, bordering on comical at this point.

Whatever in this world gives you and the "lapdog" the right to say such, and how is it that by shooting elephants that possibly means anything? I have shot elephants, not near as many as you two of course, only being 6 to this point, but who cares? I don't care? I rather shoot buffalo if you want to know the truth of the matter, I think they present much more fun than elephant. But guess what, that's just my opinion, and it's not an argument. I like hunting lions too, I have shot 3 lions. So what? Who Cares? I don't. I like shooting lions too, I think they are about 10 times more dangerous than elephant! But guess again, so what, Who Cares? This is not a thread about shooting lions or elephants or buffalos, it's about bullets and how bullet perform on a range of different things and mostly being compared between themselves and including animals, including elephant, but not compromised 100% of elephant shooting.

And the entire stupid argument is over test medium and Woodleigh FMJ bullets! How ludicrous does that sound?

You nor the "lapdog" jpk can find anywhere here where anyone says the round nose bullets don't kill elephant. I have explained my position several times. And this stupidity and senseless argument continues and it's all from your side of the pond, instigated by your "lapdog" and you fall right in line. There is no point to argue on this matter, even the both of you state that a flat nose solid penetrates deeper. Oh yes, you have posted it, and your idiot "lapdog" posts it regular.


You know something, I have already wasted more time in this post than it was worth.

Good Day to you!

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by capoward:

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:
The bulls' larger heads and generally harder and tougher bone in their heads, even the honey comb bone, is where the RN shines and provides more reliable performance than the malliable FN's.

Moreover, the vast, vast majority of elephants killed by professional ivory hunters or sport hunters since the advent of smokeless powder have been bull elephants, and the vast majority of those have been killed by RN solids. Facts, 100% contradictory to you assertions.

JPK

Two fairly ridiculous statements. I’ll address the second statement first.

Regarding your second statement, perhaps you need to just lay this statement to rest. Properly designed FN monometal bullets have only been readily available to the hunting world for approximately the past ten years while RN C&C FMJ solids have been readily available for at least 120 years. And yes I’m aware that the early variants performed very poorly but then so did the RN C&C FMJ during their early years of introduction.

Then throw in the fact that elephant hunting during the past ten years has been subjected to closely monitored annual limits compared to unlimited annual limits enjoyed by professional ivory hunting during the first 30+ years of the smokeless powder/RN C&C FMJ bullet era. Now throw in the many thousands of elephant killed in government sponsored culling hunts during the middle of the 20th century and this statement becomes even more of a ridiculous of a comparison.

Here’s the question that you must answer before your second statement could have any validity, “just how many future years of elephant would be required…solely utilizing modern properly designed FN monometal solid bullets by all shooters of elephant…for a numerical comparison to be valid?” Would it be 100 years? 200 years? 300 years?

Now to your first statement.

This statement is your perception; to date I’ve read no scientific proof to support your perception. Proof would be full-path dissected elephant tracking the paths of your beloved RN FMJ solid bullets vis-à-vis properly designed malleable and non-malleable FN monometal bullets. Photographs of all work presented as well as the condition of the recovered bullets. I do not believe any such tests have been scientifically performed and today it would be very expensive endeavor to undertake.

Perhaps this is endeavor that you should conduct. You could spend the next five years say killing 5 elephant per year, 15 in total annually all of approximately same size, for each bullet type. That would be 5 elephant killed with Woodleigh RN FMJ solids, 5 elephant killed with malleable FN solids (of proper meplat size), and 5 elephant killed with non-malleable FN solids (of proper meplat size). Full dissecting of the elephants with full photographs would be required and would give all of us the results benefits of 25 very closely sized elephant killed by the three specific bullet types, all results closely recorded and photographed.

As a side note you could perhaps publish a book stating the results in an effort to recover some of your costs.

Anyway, that my 2¢. Have a nice day.

Free 500grains

quote:

Michael, I am not sure you are being fair here. I understand that this thread is about terminal bullet performance but the point is to extrapolate from tests to the field. Shouldn't field experience with actual animals be equally is relevant?

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I don't think anyone is saying RN bullets wont kill an elephant but to ensure straight line penetration does anyone think a RN is better?

Free 500grains

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

quote:

Michael, I am not sure you are being fair here. I understand that this thread is about terminal bullet performance but the point is to extrapolate from tests to the field. Shouldn't field experience with actual animals be equally is relevant?

RN bullets kill elephants.
Nobody says they don't.
This thread is to discuss the performance of bullets. If one penetrates better and straighter why would one take it so personal. Kill elephants with whatever you want. If I ever shoot an elephant I will chose the best. Information I have read here makes the decision easy. A closed mind will never grow.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

quote:

Michael, I am not sure you are being fair here. I understand that this thread is about terminal bullet performance but the point is to extrapolate from tests to the field. Shouldn't field experience with actual animals be equally is relevant?

RN bullets kill elephants.
Nobody says they don't.
This thread is to discuss the performance of bullets. If one penetrates better and straighter why would one take it so personal. Kill elephants with whatever you want. If I ever shoot an elephant I will chose the best. Information I have read here makes the decision easy. A closed mind will never grow.

Free 500grains

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
I don't think anyone is saying RN bullets wont kill an elephant but to ensure straight line penetration does anyone think a RN is better?

No for body shots in muscle, yes in elephant heads through bone.

FN's provide more penetration in muscle and other soft tissue. Not neccesarily straighter, but deeper. RN's provide more reliable penetration through heavier bone, and since the head may include heavier bone, they are more relibale in elephant heads.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:

quote:

Michael, I am not sure you are being fair here. I understand that this thread is about terminal bullet performance but the point is to extrapolate from tests to the field. Shouldn't field experience with actual animals be equally is relevant?

RN bullets kill elephants.
Nobody says they don't.
This thread is to discuss the performance of bullets. If one penetrates better and straighter why would one take it so personal. Kill elephants with whatever you want. If I ever shoot an elephant I will chose the best. Information I have read here makes the decision easy. A closed mind will never grow.

Here lies the whole issue and the whole problem, BoomStick's quote: "Information I have read here makes the decision easy."

The only information on this thread, save one example, shows reliable penetration on elephants by RN steel jacketed solids. One bullet cited on this thread veered, the rest did not.

The wet paper and ad hoc media tests provide consistent contrary, but irrlevant results.


The information on this thread shows TWO examples of FN copper solids veering/deflecting, but otherwise reliable performance.

The wet paper and ad hoc media tests provide consistent contrary (in that it shows no veering or deflection with FN's,) but irrlevant results.

What in the world on this thread shows superior peformance by FN solids on elephants? Nothing!

But there is a ream of information that FN's sure do penetrate paper well.

So, were all those damn elephants irrelevant to bullet performance and the wet paper and ad hoc media rellevant?

Are those elephants all F'dU and providing inconvenient results contrary to the media.

Jeezuz, those elephants sure need fixing, so they provide the same results as the wet paper, eh?

Maybe, just maybe, bullet performance ought to measured by performance in the real thing, eh?

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

465H&H

quote:

JPK Take the elephants that 465H&H and I have shot, or for that matter that either of us have shot, and it isn't ancedotal evidence. Between us, there have been several hundered bullets fired into elephants. Many, also several hundred, recovered. RN steel jacketed solids, FN steel jacketed solids and FN copper solids.

OK, 465HH and his "lapdog"

To begin with this is my thread, I started it. The title of the thread is "Terminal Bullet Performance". If covers a lot of material. It is not an "I shot more elephants than you Thread"! If you want a "I shot More Elephants Than You" thread, take it up to the African Forum that is full of useless threads like that, and plenty of people that can be in "Awe" of both of you.

465HH

quote:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

What? I thought you had a little more class than that to be frank. Again, this is a shooting forum, not "I shot More Elephants than you" forum or thread. If you want to know the honest to god truth, I will let you in on something. Most of the guys here, don't give a flying F%&K about how many elephants anyone has shot. The number of elephants you have shot means nothing here, no one cares, it buys you not one thing. It does not buy you respect, it does not give credibility, and it makes you no expert on anything. To say what you said, is cheap and to be honest rather common if you want to know. Common, just pure Common!

The difference here is compared to going to the SCI Show in Reno, to going to the Shot Show. That's how I look at it, and I think is a good analogy. Have either you or your lapdog been to either? If so, then you will understand, or should.

I am sure this is quite a revelation for you and I am sure you are not quite used to this, but while this thread encompasses many many aspects of bullets, elephant shooting is a very minor part of and of little consequence. I am growing quite tired of this useless going on for two years that I have been here. I am going to tell you something that very well may hurt some feelings. You don't have the experience you need to talk "down" to anyone on this thread, and you will never in the rest of your life have enough experience to "Speak Down to Me".

Do not think for a second that I miss as much as I may let pass! But this is enough!

As for your "Lapdog" JPK, he is little more than the village "idiot" and requires no more words spent on him than that.

Yes, we test elephant shooting bullets, buffalo shooting bullets, solids, expanding, Non Conventional, and if someone wanted me to I would test some varmint bullets for them. Do you think anyone would challenge someone else on just how many prairie dogs they have shot? Some arguments or discussions are relevant and do have meaning, we have discussed some of these matters, but this is truly absurd after two years of it, bordering on comical at this point.

Whatever in this world gives you and the "lapdog" the right to say such, and how is it that by shooting elephants that possibly means anything? I have shot elephants, not near as many as you two of course, only being 6 to this point, but who cares? I don't care? I rather shoot buffalo if you want to know the truth of the matter, I think they present much more fun than elephant. But guess what, that's just my opinion, and it's not an argument. I like hunting lions too, I have shot 3 lions. So what? Who Cares? I don't. I like shooting lions too, I think they are about 10 times more dangerous than elephant! But guess again, so what, Who Cares? This is not a thread about shooting lions or elephants or buffalos, it's about bullets and how bullet perform on a range of different things and mostly being compared between themselves and including animals, including elephant, but not compromised 100% of elephant shooting.

And the entire stupid argument is over test medium and Woodleigh FMJ bullets! How ludicrous does that sound?

You nor the "lapdog" jpk can find anywhere here where anyone says the round nose bullets don't kill elephant. I have explained my position several times. And this stupidity and senseless argument continues and it's all from your side of the pond, instigated by your "lapdog" and you fall right in line. There is no point to argue on this matter, even the both of you state that a flat nose solid penetrates deeper. Oh yes, you have posted it, and your idiot "lapdog" posts it regular.


You know something, I have already wasted more time in this post than it was worth.

Good Day to you!

Michael

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:

quote:

haven't you read the bible? a jaw bone of an ass will little anything that walks... theres no need for improvement

speaks of the jawing of luditte asses, where were we?

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:

quote:

Ghee! Exactly how many elephant have you shot with either type?

Hilarious. "Dude" - you'll have to do better than that if you propose to gain some credibility here. Clue - you and JPK are the laughing stock at this point. I'll make you the same offer I've made to every other stooge wannabe engineer who posts mountains of horseshit on AR. You design the test and I'll provide the bullets.

Free 500grains

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
Guys, I hate to see this (for lack of a better word) bickering. I think Michaels bullet tests have been very enlightening. I have done this and those of us that have realize how freaking much work it takes. We are lucky to have this and field results are equally important. RN or FN, shoot what you prefer but I am inclined to think that the FN bullets provide more straight line penetration but in most instances, the RN steel jacketed solids work pretty well too. I don't have near the experience of most guys here but my limited experience with bison says they work great. Anyway, shoot what you want but let's not kill the messenger.

Michael, I am working on getting you some .458 .065 bullets from Hawk. Those are the ones I really want to see tested. I have shot some Hawk bullets with an .035 jacket in my .470 but haven't been able to really test them. I would love to see how the Hawk "dead soft" bullets with the heavier jacket work. I might be wrong and maybe someone here knows but with respect to a herd animal like a buffalo (or a bison) where you have to worry about over penetration and wounding an animal beyone the one you are shooting that the Hawk bullets might be a good thing. There is such a thing as too much penetration sometime

quote:

Originally posted by JPK:

But mostly, rather than criticize someone for using bullets for what the hell they were designed for - and that isn't shooting wet paper or hardboard - and reporting results, maybe you ought to shut up, pack up and go hunting and find out first hand what happens with solids in real elephants, on real hunts, in the real world.

JPK