The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Big Bores Using only solids in your big bore?Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
One of Us |
Jines, I think your little petty ass Pop Quiz shows us enough, I don't think it can get any more trifling......  I am not going to add to it, its just not worth the effort, want to have a beef with me, fine, you sure have gone the distance, chased every avenue possible over the last few months and seems have spent a good bit of time doing so. Sorry I have better things to do than to play little games with you, facts are there for everyone, everyone can choose and pick whatever they want to do. It is of no consequence at all to me if one chooses to go in a different direction than I do. I do enjoy hearing of the success of others in their endeavors in the field, and happy I could help them be successful in some small way.... Sorry you can't seem to grasp that, but that is fine with me too, neither here nor there. Your input is well noted, and the appropriate value has been placed on it....... http://www.b-mriflesandcartridges.com/default.html The New Word is "Non-Conventional", add "Conventional" to the Endangered Species List! Live Outside The Box of "Conventional Wisdom" I do Not Own Any Part of Any Bullet Company, I am not in the Employ Of Any Bullet Company. I do not represent, own stock, nor do I receive any proceeds, or monies from ANY BULLET COMPANY. I am not in the bullet business, and have no Bullets to sell to you, nor anyone else. | |||
|
| one of us |
Why not use an FN with less protrusion instead of changing to RN? That would be the logical thing to do.  | |||
|
One of Us |
My point has been and remains a simple one. There are choices to be made in selecting bullets. Those choices involve trade offs. Different people will make different choices based on their consideration and evaluation of the trade offs. For some to suggest that one choice over another is archaic or uninformed is disingenuous. Mike | |||
|
| one of us |
This is true, without any doubt. My choices, based on the fact that I was a gunsmith from '79 to '04, have been making bullets since '82 and turning bullets since '92: When a DG rifle feeds any ammo you put in the magazine and is totally reliable, use FN bullets when a solid is required. When a DG rifle is selective what ammunition feeds from the magazine and is not totally reliable, work around the problem by using ammo that feeds most of the time. | |||
|
| One of Us |
“Some years ago, the only bullets available for maximum penetration on heavy, dangerous game were conventional solids - that is, lead cored bullets which were (generally) encased in a steel jacket with a copper wash on the surface. Such bullets were supposed to keep their shape no matter what, and penetrate to great depth. Such performance was needed, especially on elephant if the bullet was to reach the brain or other vital organs protected by massive bones and resilient tissue, hidden right in the depths of a huge animal. The trouble was, they didn’t always keep their shape. Solids were prone to a variety of failures such as fishtailing, rivetting, bending, splitting or even breaking up completely. Such misbehaviour led to very erratic penetration or even none at all, and was termed as “sick leave material” by National Parks personnel of yore. This, of course, was due to the likelihood that if a solid pulled such a stunt on a heavy, dangerous and irate animal that you, the shooter, would shortly be spending a considerable time flat on your back in hospital listening to your bones knit. If you were lucky.” Charlie Haley, 'Solids vs Mono-metal Bullets - Which is Best?' “The other very note-worthy fact to come out of La Garde's book is just how often round nosed bullets push organs out of the way without damaging them. From both the Spanish American war, and Anglo-Boer wars he documents several hundred instances of 7mm Mauser bullets whistling straight through men without causing any damage. Arteries and intestines were frequently moved aside, but also the heart, liver etc. La Garde estimates that 30% of the abdominal wounds received by American troops in the Spanish American war actually failed to perforate the intestines ... (Colonel Louis La Garde, United States Army Medical Corps. It is a book every hunter should read, and it certainly opened my eyes. The colonel was in charge of the Army medical school and professor of surgery, and his work spans the period from 1860 to 1916)” Ganyana, 'Bullet Wounds On Game: How Survivable Are They?' See more at: http://www.shakariconnection.c...sthash.ZNi8INtr.dpuf http://www.shakariconnection.c...sthash.6HhVK1sH.dpuf “...my experience was that the solid bullet thrown by the .470 was not quite so sure as that thrown by the .465, for example. I repeat, this may merely be an illusion because I didn't like the shape of the solid .470 bullet, and was looking for faults when using it. But I had to give three big bull elephant a second shot after bringing them down with frontal head shots which I couldn't help feeling ought not to have been necessary. Admittedly, I killed a number of elephant with similar frontal brain shots when using the .470, and the one bullet was sufficient; but I could have sworn that my bullets were perfectly placed on the three occasions mentioned. Unfortunately, circumstances prevented me tracing the course of those three shots, so that I cannot say with any real degree of certainty if it was indeed the shape of the bullets that was to blame. (The dissecting of an elephant's head is a big job, take a look at the photo of one that my friend Jamieson cut open).” John Taylor, African Rifles and Cartridges “The newspaper test was a total failure period. Wet paper was tried and dry paper was tried but whether I tried to put 9 shots or 3 shots into the 12 by 12 area we constantly lost bullets. After lining up the barrel for left/right and up/down a shot into the center of the 12 by 12 area exited the box within the first 28 inches. This was a common occurrence and many of the shots would wonder (sic) 4 or 5 inches and follow the track of a previous shot. The paper was changed after every three shots and we still had problems gathering information that would relevant.”  Bullets From Left to Right: 416 Rigby | 458 Win/ 450 Nitro | 450 Ackley | 470 Nitro | 470 Mbogo | 470 Mbogo ( TBS) | 470 Mbogo (Woodleigh) | 505 Gibbs | 500 Jeffery | 500 Nitro | 500 A-Square http://www.470mbogo.com/BigBores/BigBores4.html Documented personal experience: The bullet below was recovered from a young hippo cow, shot on land by a game ranger and our crew in Problem Animal Control. It penetrated the zygomatic, 1.2” thick at the point of entry, tumbled, hit the base of the skull, where it probably got its banana shape, swerved and ended somewhere in the neck.      The hippo went down, probably only from the concussion since neither the brain nor the spine were touched, and never got up again because of various subsequent AK47 rounds interfering with its inside. The bullet is a .375 Trophy Bonded Sledgehammer, 300gr, loaded in Federal Premium ammo, fired from a Winchester Mod. 70, at approximately 20-25 meters You will notice two things: - It’s a round/flat-nosed bullet. Obviously not of the proper shape, as the results indicate - It’s a modern “premium” solid bullet, not an old thin-jacketed bullet Now, will I trust this particular bullet if I ever have to deal with an elephant coming in fast? Or any other critter with big thick bones and a bad temper? You bet no! All the above to say that yes, bullet shape can mean a “miss” from a hunter, and a “score” from the critter shot at. Do I know why that .375 failed (and it failed, notwithstanding the young hippo’s demise: this bullet is meant to hold it together under much harder circumstances)? Obvious, because it tumbled. But why did it tumble? Well, I did not do the long, tedious and expensive tests that would allow me to compare various bullet shapes and their behaviour in test media, and to obtain data, interpret them, and draw conclusions. I simply do not have the means to do so, nor the necessary access to components and equipment. Other people did, over years and in various countries, and gained an invaluable insight into the subtleties involved in bullet shapes in relation to their terminal ballistics. The development is not “revolutionary”, it just helps reducing the odds of a cockup - and there remain plenty of opportunities for fate to screw you up. But it does represent a significant step forward in our general understanding of bullet design. I’m grateful to these people, because they certainly helped me into learning and understanding more about a topic that ultimately may involve my humble self staying alive or not. Now, that’s me. You’re free to take advantage of all that, or go and have a beer instead. Do I have facts, figures, date of death, forensic reports? No, not really. I did not compile data on how many people exactly got killed while hunting in Africa in the last 100 years. I do not know how many of these got killed because they “missed” a vital spot on an animal that ultimately killed them, nor do I know how many of these “misses” were actually perfectly well placed shots where the bullet veered off-course. But I’m ready to bet 1000 to 1 that this happened in a statistically significant number of cases. I’m not going to ask you to prove the contrary, because that would be silly. But don’t make spurious arguments when all it takes is a pinch of common sense, a smidgen of integrity, and the goodwill to check the results of countless tests, experiments, and real-world use that are published for everyone to read - feel free to repeat the tests and attempt to invalidate them with your own repeatable results if you’re so inclined. Philip | |||
|
| One of Us |
I had one of those Sledge Hammers out of my 470 turn sideways on a buffalo shoulder and stop on the far side hide. It looked just like a banana too. | |||
|
| one of us |
The TB sledgehammer is a flat nose bronze solid.The likely cause of screw-up IMO,is the stableizing issues with bronze bullets.I would never use a bronze solid.Had you used a Woodleigh or Hornady DGS you would not have this happen. | |||
|
| one of us |
Why did it turn sideways? From what you tell us FN bullets dont turn sideways.If it does not turn sideways it wont bend,no? IMO,it turned sideways because it was not stable in flight to begin with. | |||
|
| one of us |
You are wrong. TB stands for Trophy Bonded. Lead is bonded to the jacket.  | |||
|
| one of us |
No I am not.Read here.It is a bonded BRONZE solid. TB solid This is not copper.It is much harder. | |||
|
| One of Us |
They turn sideways because the meplat is too small. Makes it act like a RN. | |||
|
| One of Us |
My buddy on the trip that I had the sledgehammer bend was using Woodleigh solids and they turned sideways and were bent on buffalo to. He was using a 450NE double. Took he and his PH 13 shots to kill the buffalo at about 25 yards. Those RNs were doing little to no damage. His PH was also using a 450NE with Woodleigh solids. They recovered two banana Woodleighs in the hide. | |||
|
One of Us |
But, they managed to kill the buffalo with RN solids, so proves the point that they work... eventually.  | |||
|
| one of us |
Shootaway,
To what is the bronze bonded? | |||
|
One of Us |
Gerard, I appreciate your observations and input. However, I must encourage you not to try and hold an intelligent, rational discussion with the idiot from the north, AKA Shootaway. It serves no purpose and only frustrates those with experience who are actually concerned about the debate. MJines, Still awaiting your clarification of the correct number of Ele? Did you forget? Mike ______________ DSC DRSS (again) SCI Life NRA Life Sables Life Mzuri IPHA "To be a Marine is enough." | |||
|
| One of Us |
No, just ignoring you. Hope that clarification helps. Mike | |||
|
| One of Us |
If you actually read this post you can answer your question........
The Sledge Hammers we tested here had a 52% meplat of caliber........Some more we had in .458 were 60% Meplat of caliber. 470s we tested were 58% Meplat... Some serious inconsistencies..... http://www.b-mriflesandcartridges.com/default.html The New Word is "Non-Conventional", add "Conventional" to the Endangered Species List! Live Outside The Box of "Conventional Wisdom" I do Not Own Any Part of Any Bullet Company, I am not in the Employ Of Any Bullet Company. I do not represent, own stock, nor do I receive any proceeds, or monies from ANY BULLET COMPANY. I am not in the bullet business, and have no Bullets to sell to you, nor anyone else. | |||
|
| One of Us |
MJines, So then the posted claim that "Mike has killed over 30 elephants..." is something you choose to ignore? Are we then to presume that your silence and lack of clarification of the number of elephants you have actually killed amounts to a tacit approval on your part of that claim? Just asking. Perhaps you would feel better by admitting that the fallacious claim of your having killed "...over 30 elephants.." is exaggerated by close to 33%? Or not. But then maybe you have never had your DR double on you while hunting elephant either? Mike ______________ DSC DRSS (again) SCI Life NRA Life Sables Life Mzuri IPHA "To be a Marine is enough." | |||
|
| One of Us |
Lion Hunter, What is the relevance to this topic of how many ELE he has shot??????? Is a minimum quota required before our opinion is relevant????? How many have you shot????? Just asking cheers Nick | |||
|
| One of Us |
Philip, Thank you for responding to my request for information. I do know of one case that has been proven of a veering RN solid causing a death. That occurred on a cull in Hwange NP. A 458 RN solid veered out of an elephant and hit an observer in the chest killing him. Without much doubt, others have probably have occurred but they are very difficult to prove. Of course the same may hold true for FN solids. It might be well to remember that there have been well over 1000 RN solids for every FN solid fired at DG. Consequently, the RN solids have had a much greater opportunity to fail than the FN has. It remains to be seen if there is a significant difference between the two nose shapes when it comes to veering. Tests in non-animal tissue media indicates that the FN may well have an advantage when it comes to more consistent straight line penetration. Only time well tell if this is true or not. As you correctly pointed out, not all FN solids are of the best design for straight line penetration and not veering or bending. The same holds true for RN solids. They are not all created equally either. The first steel jacketed solids were produced by Rigby in the early 1930s for the 400/350, 350 No2 and the 416 Rigby cartridges. They had an enviable reputation. After WWII, Kynoch introduced steel jacketed solids for most calibers. Unfortunately, the jackets were way to thin so they did not perform as well as the Rigby bullets. In the 60s they strengthened the jackets but had further problems with using too brittle of steel which led to bullets breaking up. Steel jacketed solids got a not very good reputation from those two problems. when Winchester and Hornady came out with their blunt RN and heavy jacket designs things changed markedly for the good. While Winchester had problems with getting consistent velocities, the bullet themselves were held in high regard. Elephant hunters such as Paul Grobler, Ron Thomson and Richard Harland used them with great confidence. I'll pass on your suggestion to test bullets in media as I think that has been done by people much more qualified than I am. I also don't think that we have an artificial media that duplicates animal tissue for all bullet types. I have had a fair amount of experience with the field evaluation of various types of solid bullets on elephant and buffalo. I have also used both FN and RN steel jacketed solids on elephant. I have posted my evaluations both on here and in articles in African Hunter magazine. So, I think that I have done what you suggested. 465H&H PS. In your quote by Taylor he said that the problem was with the 470 in comparison with the 465. Remember, he was also using RN solids in the 465! | |||
|
| one of us |
465H&H, FN solid bullets are a fairly recent design to be widely used, given the design of bullets overall. What time do you think would be good to start trusting the design as superior (or not) compared to RN solids? I am not talking about testing in all sorts of building material, wetpack or gelatine, but actually using the design in the field. For how long should one keep gathering results before making a choice? 5 Years? 10 Years? 15 Years? Or should one use it for longer? | |||
|
| One of Us |
Well Nick, if you had actually read the entire thread, you would see where two gunmakers, apparently solicited by MJines in an attempt to bolster his antagonism towards Michael458, made statements intended to support MJines position re: RNS v. FNS. One of those gunmakers made the statement in support of MJines that he, MJines, had killed over 30 elephants. It is a blatantly false claim, not a mere exaggeration. MJines knows this, I know this and a lot of other experienced African hunters also know this. That is why it is relevant. I fail to see why MJines refuses to correct what may have been an honest mistake. As to how many ele MJines has killed, I really don't GAF. Nor do I GAF what solid bullet shape MJines or anyone else uses. But I do believe in veracity and truth in advertising on AR. And Michael458 is a friend of mine. Mike ______________ DSC DRSS (again) SCI Life NRA Life Sables Life Mzuri IPHA "To be a Marine is enough." | |||
|
| one of us |
The perversion of logic ( science) continues: 1. On nose shape: Stability is not conferred by nose shape ! It is conferred by mass distributed within form ! As proof I would submit that the most stable projectile in a target is in fact a round ball i.e. a hemispherical RN, It is Always stable ! A pointed javelin is deemed stable, it does not require a FN to attain stability. 2. Pertaining to gyroscopic stability: If FN projectiles are deemed stable why then bother with twist rate ? fact is all oblong projectiles irrespective of nose shape are deemed statically unstable. 3. As to bullets passing through targets and doing no damage ? really are we now into voodoo bullets ? 4. Lagarde: mostly relegated to the archives of ballistics science long since discounted for failure in scientific methodology. Just to clarify: I shoot FN's and I believe them to be the superior option if deep straight line penetration is required. What I do not support is the pseudoscience as to why they do what they do nor that old RN's are totally useless. What most here have done with their tests and observations is to describe and report on projectile behaviour, where all of this fails is that the biological effect i.e. death and incapacitation or the target reaction to insult cannot and has not been satisfactorily correlated between the various projectiles. | |||
|
One of Us |
maybe "mass distributing within form" would be a better description, since rotation is occurring with bullets. also, in American baseball they have a pitch called a "knuckleball". It is throwing the spherical baseball without spin and letting the resulting instability move the ball unpredictably in its path towards the batter. The catcher uses a bigger mitt to catch the pesky little spheroid. Of course, the ball is not a perfect sphere, nor uniformly composed, nor travelling in a uniformly homogenous gas. And a roundball is a double hemispherical RN in all directions, not a single hemisphere. And golf balls have little dimples to aid their flight through vague gases. It seems that a little protective turbulance can be a good thing in our imperfect world. Airplane wings now have little turbulance dispersing tips on their wings. And when I was a bowhunter we attached fletchlings to our little flying spears. And it does appear that flat nose solids with appropriate rotation have a more stable path through semi-aquous media while roundnoses do fine in solid boards. I'll go with the gelatin and soaked-paper testing in our current imperfect world. So flat nose for me, too. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| one of us |
Hi Alf, Thank you for adding to the discussion. Can you explain why the FN nose shape is preferred over a RN nose shape? Who said that RN solids are 'totally useless'? Quite correct. I think it is accepted to test, then observe under actual conditions to see if the outcome fits the theory. Often the outcome is as predicted but the theory is wrong and the outcome is the result of a different theory. What is the correct theory, according to your information? I think that the outcome is what it is required? | |||
|
| One of Us |
Lion Hunter, There is a lot of supposition in your last post! I have read the entire thread thanks very much! Secondly,in your innuendo that somehow persons have recruited others into posting comments on this thread to reinforce their position. I must say that IMO this hypothesis seems quite unrealistic, considering the persons posting are professionals in the firearms trade/field.The opinions that they express I am sure are their view.the fact that it may be contrary to some other views , so be it. Now back to these bloody ele!!! MJines has never made any claims as to how many he has shot in this thread . The relevance on the amount that he has shot has nothing to do with the contents of this thread, ie flat nose solids vs round nose . MJines hasn't made any claims , and frankly doesn't need to answer to you or anyone about the number he has shot. If the winner of this argument is the most ele killed, then clearly it goes to the RN solid. This isn't what this thread is about. It's about the pros and cons of each type of projectile,and the " best" performer on game. The venom in some of the posts I find a little disturbing. We all have an opinion, and should respect each other's even if it isn't what we ascribe to. Cheers Nick PS I am on safari in later this month in ZIm with 2 ele on the menu . Will be using RN WOodleighs on one and FN CEB's on the other . I will report back on my field experiences. I think there will be 2 dead ele though!! | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gentlemen.......... There is far too much animosity going in both directions, far too many little games being played and distracting from the jest of the discussion.. I find it disturbing that one side continues to attack the other, but this has been going on since my first post on AR, and mostly by the same old crowd.... with the same old tired excuses and reasons.... Now, no doubt, I have dished out my share, and will do so when attacked, normal human nature, Much of the animosity is directed to me for one reason or another, and that is fine, most of the time I can take it, but expect as much as you give....... Nick I find it disturbing as well, something you might also need to understand, its been going on for many years beyond just this particular thread, so animosity has built up on both sides of the issue, many times with just cause, and both sides accuse the other of starting the same old troubles....... While I do my best to attempt to not get caught up in the same old bullshit, honestly it is hard to take the crap laying down every time.... For that, those of you out there that is just as sick of BS as I am, my apologies, I know I should ignore it and move on to doing far more productive things..... But it is difficult at times..... Good luck with your hunt, I am very sure you will have great success, regardless of your choices...... Michael http://www.b-mriflesandcartridges.com/default.html The New Word is "Non-Conventional", add "Conventional" to the Endangered Species List! Live Outside The Box of "Conventional Wisdom" I do Not Own Any Part of Any Bullet Company, I am not in the Employ Of Any Bullet Company. I do not represent, own stock, nor do I receive any proceeds, or monies from ANY BULLET COMPANY. I am not in the bullet business, and have no Bullets to sell to you, nor anyone else. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Gerard, You pose an interesting question. First of all, none of this would be considered scientifically valid results. It is at best, opinion based on observation. I guess it will depend on how strong a proof the hunter needs to make him comfortable with his decision. The longer a bullet is used the stronger its reputation becomes. RN solids have been used over a long period and history gives us some good clues as to what to expect. FN solids are still in the proving stage. Another consideration for the hunter in making his selection, is fully understanding what we currently know about penetration and straight line stability. I have tried to provide my observations on what I have seen when using both RN and FN solids. It can be difficult for a hunter to separate a good observation from the hyperbole put out in some cases. Here are a couple of instances to illustrate what I mean. Statement: "FN solids penetrate deeper than RN solids." I would question that statement. Do they penetrate deeper than RN in all types of media? From my experience, the answer is yes for soft tissue but not for elephant heads. Some RN solids have shown the ability to penetrate as far as FN solids even in soft tissue. The 9.3 320 grain Woodleigh and the 550 grain RN Woodleigh are two examples. "FN solid are more likely to cause feed problems than RN solids". Is that true for all FN and all RN? Is it true for all action types? It surely isn't for doubles and lever actions seem to use them quite efficiently. I have tried to give helpful info on my observations and to caution others to be careful when someone over generalizes. Hope that helps! 465H&H | |||
|
| One of Us |
you know good and well he wasn't referring to the 9mm or other small pistol calibers, rather large revolver rounds used for hunting. Bob | |||
|
| one of us |
When figures are quoted specifically, one does not assume the person meant something else or was referring to something else. When I state that something is 123, I do not expect anybody to assume I meant 124. If I made a mistake and it is pointed out, I should correct it. A 9mm pistol develops around 350 ft-lbs energy and that is what the writer intended. It is a correct statement and must stand as his opinion. Had he said that a 9mm pistol = 2300 ft-lbs energy, one must question the statement and ask for a correction. Assumption of meaning leads to incorrect conclusions being made instead of original incorrect statements being corrected. | |||
|
| One of Us |
gerard, I believe this is what shoot away was responding to (he posted immediately following it). it seems he made the leap from pistol hunters to 9mm Bob | |||
|
One of Us |
You're correct. I have him on ignore which is why I didn't point out the a 9mm is not a traditional hunting handgun hunting cartridge in the USA so a somewhat nonsensical response. H, Valid comments as always. Gerard, Something we need to remember. The RN FMJ bullets were designed by Rubin in 1882. Elmer Keith designed the his FN (73% meplat size) handgun hunting bullet - popularly known as the Keith semi-wadcutter style bullet - in 1928. Although designed to use hard-cast lead rather than FMJ it as a non-obliterating bullet (for its velocity range) that is still used today in .40 caliber through .50 caliber handgun cartridges in all hunting situations where an optimum combination of wound trauma with deep penetration is required to assure killing shots are delivered a lower pistol velocities. So one could truthfully say that properly designed non-expanding FN hunting bullets have been in use for 86 years. Rifle guys are just late into the game.  Jim  "Life's hard; it's harder if you're stupid" John Wayne | |||
|
| One of Us |
Just to add to this, we as hand-gunners have adapted over the years as well, finding better bullet designs like LBT's, even Ross Seyfried who took a cape buffalo with an SWC in 45 colt (without backup) moved to LBT designs(WFN,LFN,WLN) because of better would channel and greater terminal performance, today we have some of the best bullet designs ever created in both rifle and pistol calibers, so why not get the most out of your chosen cartridge. Simply, Elegant but always approachable | |||
|
One of Us |
Ross did not use a semi wad cutter on the Cape buffalo, he used a truncated cone. _____________________________________________________ A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill | |||
|
| One of Us |
actually, he did use a semi wadcutter. i have the article here Bob | |||
|
| One of Us |
It appears that my memory failed. _____________________________________________________ A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. - Winston Churchill | |||
|
| One of Us |
Jim Are you real sure about that? From another forum- "Using Stuart Otteson's book, The Bolt Action, Volume I, as a reference, it indicates that the Springfield breech/bolt/extractor were copied directly into the controlled round feed Model 54 and pre-64 M70. The Springfield was designed to be either single loaded (its design included a magazine cut-off to hold the loaded mag in reserve for specifically this purpose) or fed from the magazine. There was enough room for the extractor (made of spring steel) to snap over the rim of the case. The cams in the receiver do the work of driving the extractor over the rim on bolt turndown. The Winchester and the Springfield use a coned breech, which is also designed as a feature to help guide a loose ,non-controlled round into the chamber, and one of the main differences between them and the Mauser, whose breech is not coned. The Mauser 98, in addition, had an undercut tongue on the extractor which engaged with a matching inclined notch on bolt head which would absolutely prevent the extractor from moving outboard to accommodate snapping over the cartridge rim. While the M70 has a "mauser-style" extractor, it is not exactly the same and is more closely related to the Springfield which was specifically designed to accept rounds loaded through the port as well as the magazine." "The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane." Mark Twain TANSTAAFL www.savannagems.com A unique way to own a piece of Africa. DSC Life NRA Life | |||
|
| One of Us |
Sean, The CZ has trouble snapping over a rim and I only load by snapping a cartridge into the magazine, then pushing with a bolt. Can this be adjusted on a CZ easily? Is it adjustable on a Ruger? Out of habit I've taught my wife to always push a cartridge down into the magazine with a control-feed rifle. +-+-+-+-+-+-+ "A well-rounded hunting battery might include: 500 AccRel Nyati, 416 Rigby or 416 Ruger, 375Ruger or 338WM, 308 or 270, 243, 223" -- Conserving creation, hunting the harvest. | |||
|
| one of us |
You can rest assured that the Ruger will snap over anything. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Sean, I don't know that the coned breech facilitates single round feeding as much as does the radiused (angled) lip vs a squared lip (traditional Mauser) on the extractor. Using the same radiused lip on a Mauser extractor allows single feeding of a round without using the magazine. Considering that the US government lost a number of patent infringements lawsuits - Mauser patents - that were paid until Germany lost WWI it's just as likely that the coned breech was an effort to 'de-Mauser' the action in an effort to get around the patents. But, understanding that US military was of the mind that solders would needlessly waste ammunition - the rational behind the magazine cutoff and the single round feed require - it's also likely it was not done to avoid Mauser patents but was perceived as facilitating single feed. I'll go either way... What you posted is ok with me...  Jim "Life's hard; it's harder if you're stupid" John Wayne | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Big Bores Using only solids in your big bore?
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia