I found this bullet while reading a history of an Australian bullet maker. These bullets were apparently ordered by in the early 1950s by an American who frequently hunted in Eastern Africa at that time. Apparently he had approached Barnes previously to make the same bullet, but they had declined.

It was described by the manufacturer as a full metal jacketed round nose, boat tailed "bore runner" bullet. They were made in 375, 350gn, and as far as I know, only available in that configuration.

Apparently, the intention of the boat tail and the the shoulder at the front of the bullet was "reduced recoil, reduced fouling and higher velocity". I believe the customer was very happy with the product, but since it is not an enduring design, it doesnt seem like it added enough value to survive as a product.

Anyone ever seen anything like this before?

In all my tests, round nose and pointed FMJ bullets are the worst performers when it comes to penetration.

They hardly ever go straight.

A small flat point makes all the difference it seems.

Have a loot at my penetration test.

Hi Saeed

Yes, I have definitely been following you testing thread. We have come so far with bullet technology in the last 30-40 years. We are lucky to have so many good options today.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana_500:
...
Apparently, the intention of the boat tail and the the shoulder at the front of the bullet was "reduced recoil, reduced fouling and higher velocity". I believe the customer was very happy with the product, but since it is not an enduring design, it doesnt seem like it added enough value to survive as a product...

How would it reduce recoil?

The reduced diameter might lower pressure from the friction of some longer engagement, which could have lifted velocity and recoil unless the charge was reduced; but then, if the charge was reduced, the ejecta would also be slightly less, resulting in slightly less recoil.

quote:

Originally posted by sambarman338:

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana_500:
...
Apparently, the intention of the boat tail and the the shoulder at the front of the bullet was "reduced recoil, reduced fouling and higher velocity". I believe the customer was very happy with the product, but since it is not an enduring design, it doesnt seem like it added enough value to survive as a product...

How would it reduce recoil?

The reduced diameter might lower pressure from the friction of some longer engagement, which could have lifted velocity and recoil unless the charge was reduced; but then, if the charge was reduced, the ejecta would also be slightly less, resulting in slightly less recoil.

What they said was nothing but pure bullshit!

quote:

What they said was nothing but pure bullshit!

I think the world runs on bullshit.

Dave

More Koolaide to add to the overflow in the gun business..

I wonder how they flew at distance. Round noses do surprisingly well for accuracy. I wonder how this did at 300 yards?

And that RN "Solid" FMJ has a "pinhole meplat."